reAlpha Tech Corp.

Current report

We have a history of operating losses, and we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and sustain profitability.

Current report

We have not achieved profitability and have incurred losses since inception. For the quarter ended March 31, 2025, we recorded a net loss of $2,850,351. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we recorded a net loss of $26,023,028, which included a loss of $18,339,635 from discontinued operations related to our former rental business and operations of our subsidiary, Roost Enterprises, Inc., and a loss of $7,462,809 from continuing operations. As of March 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $41,110,855 and outstanding indebtedness of $5,949,708. While we have experienced some revenue growth over recent periods, we may not be able to sustain or increase our growth or achieve profitability in the future. We intend to continue to invest diligently in sales and marketing efforts. In addition, we expect to incur significant additional legal, accounting, and other expenses related to our being a public company as compared to when we were a private company. While our revenue has grown since our inception, if our revenue declines or fails to grow at a rate faster than these increases in our operating expenses, we will not be able to achieve and maintain profitability in future periods. As a result, we may continue to generate losses. Additionally, we may encounter unforeseen operating expenses, difficulties, complications, delays, and other unknown factors that may result in losses in future periods. If these losses exceed our expectations or our revenue growth expectations are not met in future periods, our financial performance will be harmed.

Current report

On November 1, 2024, we filed a lawsuit against GYBL in the Court (as defined above), pursuant to which we asserted two causes of action: (i) rescission of the GEM Warrants issued to GYBL pursuant to Section 29(b) of the Exchange Act due to GYBL’s underlying violation of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act for effecting the GEM Warrants as an unregistered dealer, and (ii) in the alternative, a declaratory judgment that the exercise price adjustment calculation of the GEM Warrants is governed by the terms provided in the GEM Warrants, rather than the terms of the GEM Agreement. Following a motion to dismiss filed by GYBL on January 17, 2025, the Court granted such motion to dismiss on March 14, 2025. On April 15, 2025, we filed an appeal of the Court’s decision dismissing our case to the Second Circuit (as defined above). The briefing schedule at the Second Circuit is being held in abeyance in order to allow two previously filed appeals, filed by two other public companies on identical issues against other similar investors, be resolved first. However, if and when the appellate briefing moves forward, there is no assurance that it will be successful.

Current report

Additionally, following the Court’s grant of GYBL’s motion to dismiss our lawsuit, GYBL filed a separate lawsuit against us, in which GYBL is asserting two causes of action against us: (1) breach of the terms of the GEM Warrants, and (2) declaratory relief concerning the validity and enforceability of the GEM Warrants. In addition to the declaratory relief, GYBL is seeking monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial, specific performance of the GEM Warrants and attorneys’ fees and litigation costs.

Current report

Given the ongoing disputes with GYBL, including our pending appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and GYBL’s lawsuit against us, the exercise price of the GEM Warrants have not been adjusted pursuant to the GEM Warrant’s terms while these disputes are pending, and, to the extent any shares of common stock are sold pursuant to an equity offering, for instance, at a price per share that is below the then-current exercise price of the GEM Warrants, we do not plan to adjust the exercise price of the GEM Warrants pending resolution of such disputes. A final adverse ruling against us in pending lawsuits and any subsequent appeals, or in any other claim or counterclaim, as applicable, sought by GYBL, could lead to a significant downward adjustment to the current exercise price of the GEM Warrants, additional expenses incurred related to the lawsuits during the ongoing disputes, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees, and any other remedies the court may deem just.

Current report

We expect our business model and pricing models to continue to evolve.

Current report

Our business model has a limited track record, and as we continue growing our business and operations, we may continue to experiment with different pricing models and introduce new offerings and services. We expect that the services and technology offerings associated with our business model, including the reAlpha platform, will continue to rapidly evolve. Thus, in order to stay current with the industry, we may need to modify our offerings to remain relevant. Further, we have not yet made a final determination regarding how we will charge clients and how certain incentives we offer through the reAlpha platform, such as commission refunds, for example, will be applied to customers utilizing our offerings and the reAlpha platform, as applicable. We cannot guarantee we will be able to produce commercially successful offerings or develop a pricing model for such offerings that is acceptable to our customers and enable us to operate profitably. We cannot offer any assurance that modifications we make to our offerings or business model will be successful or will not harm our business. If the changes we make are not successful, or if we fail to make appropriate changes, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations and potentially on our ability to continue as a going concern.

Previous report

On November 1, 2024, we filed a lawsuit against GYBL (as defined above) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which we are claiming that GYBL operated as an unregistered broker dealer under the Exchange Act, and pursuant to which we are seeking to void the GEM Warrants, or, in the alternative, a declaratory judgment determining that the GEM Warrants’ terms govern the exercise price adjustment calculation thereof, rather than the related GEM Agreement’s terms. An adverse ruling against us in this lawsuit could lead to a significant downward adjustment to the current exercise price of the GEM Warrants, additional expenses incurred related to the lawsuit during the ongoing dispute, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees, and any other remedies the court may deem just.

Previous report

The obligations to the Lender under the Note and related agreements are secured by a security interest in all of our non-foreign assets and all of the assets of Rhove, our wholly-owned subsidiary, so if we default on those obligations, the Lender could proceed against any or all such assets.

Previous report

Our obligations under the Note and the related agreements are secured by all of our non-foreign assets and all of the assets of Rhove, our wholly-owned subsidiary, pursuant to security agreements and intellectual security agreements executed by us and Rhove in connection with the issuance of the Note. As such, the Lender may enforce its security interests over our non-foreign assets and the assets of Rhove that secure the repayment of such obligations, take control of such assets and operations, force us to seek bankruptcy protection or force us to curtail or abandon our current business plans and operations. If that were to happen, any investment in our securities could become worthless.

Previous report

We are subject to certain contractual limitations that could materially adversely affect our ability to consummate future financings.

Previous report

Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, in connection with the issuance of the Note to the Lender, we agreed to be subject to certain restrictions on our ability to issue securities until all of our obligations under the Note, Purchase Agreement and all other related agreements are paid and performed in full. Specifically, we agreed, among other things, to (i) not make any Restricted Issuances (as defined in the Purchase Agreement) without the Lender’s prior written consent, which consent may be granted or withheld in the Lender’s sole and absolute discretion, unless the proceeds therefrom are used to repay the Note in full; (ii) not grant any lien, security interest or encumbrance, subject to certain exceptions, on any of our or our subsidiaries’ assets, in each case without the Lender’s prior written consent, which consent may be granted or withheld in the Lender’s sole discretion; and (iii) not enter into any agreement or otherwise agree to any covenant, condition, or obligation that locks up, restricts in any way or otherwise prohibits us, other than such lock ups, restrictions or prohibitions with a term of no more than 75 days in connection with one transaction, or series of transactions, per any 12 month period: (a) from entering into a variable rate transaction with the Lender or any of the Lender’s affiliates, or (b) from issuing securities to the Lender or any of the Lender’s affiliates. Such restrictions could materially adversely affect our ability to consummate future financings. Under the terms of the Purchase Agreement, if we breach or allegedly breach such restrictions, we will be obligated to indemnify the Lender and all its officers, directors, employees, attorneys, and agents for loss or damage arising as a result of or related to such breach or alleged breach, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Previous report

While the Purchase Agreement further provides that at any time during the 12-month period beginning on the date of the issuance and sale of the Note, the Lender will have the right, but not the obligation, with our prior written consent, to reinvest up to an additional $5,000,000 in the aggregate in the Company in one or more notes on the same terms and conditions as the Note, there can be no assurance that the Lender will exercise such right or that we will be able to negotiate such reinvestment from the Lender on terms acceptable to us.

Previous report

The Purchase Agreement also contains a “most favored nation” provision pursuant to which, so long as the Note is outstanding, upon any issuance by us of any debt security with any economic term or condition more favorable to the holder of such security or with a term in favor of the holder of such security that was not similarly provided to the Lender in the transaction documents related to the Note, we agreed to notify the Lender of such additional or more favorable economic term and such term, at the Lender’s option, shall become a part of the transaction documents related to the Note for the benefit of the Lender. Such “most favored nation” provision may also restrict our ability to secure future financings unless the Lender waives its rights under such provision.

Previous report

If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us, when we require it, our ability to continue to pursue our business objectives and to respond to business opportunities, challenges, or unforeseen circumstances could be significantly limited, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Previous report

If we fail to comply with the restrictions and covenants in the Purchase Agreement or the Note, there could be an event of default under the Note, which could result in an acceleration of payments due under the Note, the application of default interest and other consequences.

Previous report

Failure to meet the restrictions, obligations and limitations under the Purchase Agreement and the Note may result in an event of default in accordance with the terms of the Note. Such events include, among others, our failure to pay any amount when due and payable thereunder, us becoming insolvent or declaring bankruptcy, the occurrence of a Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Purchase Agreement) except those that result in the Note being paid in full, failure to observe and comply with certain covenants, obligations, conditions or agreements set forth therein, any representation, warranty or other statement made therein or otherwise in connection with the issuance of this Note being false, incorrect, incomplete or misleading in any material respect subject to certain cure periods, and effectuating a reverse stock split without a certain prior written notice to the Lender, which events could result in the acceleration of obligations under the Note. Also, an event of default would, among other things, provide the noteholder with the right to increase the outstanding balance by 10% for certain major events of default and 5% for others, subject to certain limitations set forth in the Note. Additionally, at any time following an event of default, upon written notice to us, interest will accrue on the outstanding balance of the Note beginning on the date the applicable event of default occurred at an interest rate equal to the lesser of 15% per annum or the maximum rate permitted under applicable law. Such consequences upon an event of default could materially impair our financial condition and liquidity. In addition, if the Lender accelerates the Note, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient assets to satisfy our obligations under the Note.

Previous report

The redemption feature of the Note may require us to make redemption payments at the request of the Lender, which redemptions may have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations and ability to pay our debts as they come due, and we may not have the required funds to pay such redemptions, which could result in an event of default under the Note.

Previous report

From time to time, beginning seven months after issuance, the Lender may redeem up to $545,000 of the Note per month, which amount will be due and payable in cash within three trading days of our receipt of a redemption notice from the Lender. Further, once we have made five redemption payments in cash, all subsequent redemption payments paid in cash will be subject to a 9% redemption premium. Such redemptions may have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, results of operations and ability to pay our other debts as they come due. In addition, we may not have the required funds to pay such redemptions and our failure to pay the redemptions, when due, may result in an event of default under the Note.

Previous report

Failing to successfully execute and integrate acquisitions could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Previous report

We have acquired Rhove, Naamche, AiChat, Hyperfast and Be My Neighbor, and may acquire more businesses and/or technologies, as we continue to evaluate potential acquisitions. We may also not successfully evaluate or utilize acquired technology and accurately forecast the financial impact of an acquisition, including accounting charges. In addition, we may finance acquisitions by issuing equity or convertible debt securities, which could result in further dilution to our existing stockholders. We may enter into negotiations for acquisitions that are not ultimately consummated. Those negotiations could result in diversion of management time and significant out-of-pocket costs. And, in the future, we may not be able to find suitable acquisition candidates, and we may not be able to complete acquisitions on favorable terms or at all. Any of the foregoing factors, including if we fail to evaluate and execute acquisitions successfully, can materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Previous report

In addition, we may not be successful in integrating acquisitions or the businesses we acquire may not perform as well as we expect. Any future failure to manage and successfully integrate acquired businesses could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including the following:

Previous report

We may also expend significant cash or incur substantial debt to finance such acquisitions, which indebtedness could result in restrictions on our business and significant use of available cash to make payments of interest and principal. We may also incur significant transaction and acquisition-related costs in connection with company acquisitions and such expenditures may create significant liquidity and cash flow risks for us. For instance, we may incur significant, nonrecurring, and recurring costs associated with potential related company acquisition(s), including costs associated with the continued integration of the businesses, unanticipated liabilities that we assume as a result of acquiring companies and other expenses.

Previous report

While we have assumed that this level of expense will be incurred, there are factors beyond our control that could affect the total amount, including other integration expenses. Moreover, many of the expenses that will be incurred are, by their nature, difficult to estimate accurately. To the extent any acquisition and integration expenses are higher than anticipated and we do not have sufficient cash, or if we default on any assumed liabilities as a result of an acquisition, then we may experience liquidity or cash flow issues that may materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Previous report

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence, in our operations may require us to expend material resources for compliance and may present risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security and other risks to our confidential information, proprietary information and personal information, any of which may result in reputational harm and liability, or otherwise adversely affect our business.

Previous report

Integrating AI into our operations presents risks and challenges that could affect its adoption, and therefore our business. There are significant risks involved in utilizing AI and no assurance can be provided that the usage of AI will enhance our business or assist our business in becoming more efficient or profitable. The use of certain AI technology can give rise to intellectual property risks, including compromises to proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement and misappropriation. Other known risks of AI currently include inaccuracy, bias, toxicity, data privacy and cybersecurity issues, and data provenance disputes. In addition, AI may have errors or inadequacies that are not easily detectable. AI may also be subject to data herding and interconnectedness (i.e., multiple market participants utilizing the same data), which may adversely impact our business. If the data used to train AI or the content, analyses, or recommendations that AI applications assist in producing are or are alleged to be deficient, inaccurate, incomplete, overbroad or biased, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be adversely affected. Additionally, we expect to see increasing government and supranational regulation and ethical concerns related to AI use which may also significantly increase the burden and cost of research, development and compliance in this area. For example, the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act — the world’s first comprehensive AI law — entered into force on August 1, 2024 and, with some exceptions, will become fully applicable 24 months thereafter. This legislation imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of high risk AI systems, and encourages providers and deployers of AI systems to account for certain ethical principles in their design, development and use of these systems. The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain our technology and products to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. The legal landscape and subsequent legal protection for the use of AI remains uncertain, and development of the law in this area could impact our ability to enforce our proprietary rights or protect against infringing uses. If we do not have sufficient rights to use the data on which AI relies or to the outputs produced by AI applications, we may incur liability through the violation of certain laws, third-party privacy or other rights or contracts to which we are a party. Our use of AI applications may also, in the future, result in cybersecurity incidents that implicate the personal data of customers or patients. Any such cybersecurity incidents related to our use of AI applications could adversely affect our reputation and results of operations.

Previous report

Aspects of our business are subject to privacy, data use and data security regulations, which may impact the way we use data to target customers, and the increasing regulatory focus on cybersecurity and privacy issues and expanding laws could affect our business model and expose us to increased liability.

Previous report

Privacy and security laws and regulations may limit the use and disclosure of certain information and require us to adopt certain cybersecurity and data handling practices that may affect our ability to effectively market our manufacturing capabilities to current, past or prospective customers. In many jurisdictions consumers must be notified in the event of a data security breach, and such notification requirements continue to increase in scope and cost. The changing privacy laws in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere, including the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) in the European Union (“EU”), which became effective May 25, 2018, and the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). The GDPR and other European laws regarding privacy and data protection regulate the transfer of personal data from Europe, including the European Economic Area (“EEA”) the UK, and Switzerland, to third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, including the United States, unless the parties to the transfer have implemented specific safeguards to protect the transferred personal information. The safeguard on which we have primarily relied for such transfers has been use of the European Commission’s standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”). We have undertaken certain efforts to conform transfers of personal data from the European Economic Area (“EEA”) to the United States based on our understanding of current regulatory obligations and the guidance of data protection authorities. In the “Schrems II” decision issued by the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) on July 16, 2020, the CJEU invalidated one mechanism for cross-border personal data transfer, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, and imposed additional obligations on companies relying on the SCCs to transfer personal data. Similarly, the CCPA was enacted on June 28, 2018 and became effective on January 1, 2020, and it creates new individual privacy rights and impose increased obligations, including disclosure obligations, on companies handling personal data. In addition, the CCPA broadly defines personal information, gives California residents expanded privacy rights and protections, and provides for civil penalties for certain violations. Furthermore, in November 2020, California voters passed the California Privacy Rights and Enforcement Act of 2020 (“CPRA”), which amends and expands CCPA with additional data privacy compliance requirements and establishes a regulatory agency dedicated to enforcing those requirements. Additional countries and states, including Nevada, Virginia, Colorado, Utah, and Connecticut, have also passed comprehensive privacy laws with additional obligations and requirements on businesses. These laws and regulations are increasing in severity, complexity and number, change frequently, and increasingly conflict among the various jurisdictions in which we operate, which has resulted in greater compliance risk and cost for us. In addition, we are…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous report

Additionally, we recently acquired companies that provide mortgage brokerage services, title services and others. Our mortgage brokerage subsidiary is subject to the privacy regulations of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the “GLBA”), along with its implementing regulations, which restricts certain collection, transfer, processing, storage, use and disclosure of personal information, requires notice to individuals of privacy practices, provides individuals with certain rights to prevent the use and disclosure of certain nonpublic or otherwise legally protected information and imposes requirements for the safeguarding and proper destruction of personal information through the issuance of data security standards or guidelines. In addition, on March 1, 2017, new cybersecurity rules took effect for financial institutions, insurers and certain other companies, like our mortgage subsidiaries, supervised by the NY Department of Financial Services (the “NY DFS Cybersecurity Regulation”). The NY DFS Cybersecurity Regulation imposes significant regulatory burdens intended to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information systems. We also have contractual obligations to protect confidential and personally identifiable information we obtain from third parties. These obligations generally require them, in accordance with applicable laws, to protect such information to the same extent that they protect their own such information.

Previous report

The impact of these continuously evolving laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on the way we use data to digitally market and pursue our customers, as well as in our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous report

As a result of the acquisition of Be My Neighbor, we are subject to additional laws and regulations that monitor the loan origination and servicing sectors, and rules issued by the CFPB may increase our regulatory compliance burden and associated costs.

Previous report

Our mortgage brokerage subsidiary is subject to the regulatory, supervisory and examination authority of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which has oversight of federal and state non-depository lending and servicing institutions, including residential mortgage originators and loan servicers. The CFPB has rulemaking authority with respect to many of the federal consumer protection laws applicable to mortgage lenders and servicers, including the Truth in Lending Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act. The CFPB has issued a number of regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act relating to loan origination and servicing activities, including ability to repay and “qualified mortgage” standards and other origination standards and practices.

Previous report

The CFPB’s examinations have increased, and will likely continue to increase, our mortgage business’ administrative and compliance costs. They could also greatly influence the availability and cost of residential mortgage credit and increase servicing costs and risks. These increased costs of compliance, the effect of these rules on the lending industry and loan servicing, and any failure in our mortgage business’s ability to comply with the new rules by their effective dates, could be detrimental to their business. The CFPB also issued guidelines on sending examiners to banks and other institutions that service and/or originate mortgages to assess whether consumers’ interests are protected. The CFPB also has broad enforcement powers, and can order, among other things, rescission or reformation of contracts, the refund of moneys or the return of real property, restitution, disgorgement or compensation for unjust enrichment, the payment of damages or other monetary relief, public notifications regarding violations, limits on activities or functions, remediation of practices, external compliance monitoring and civil money penalties. The CFPB has been active in investigations and enforcement actions and, when necessary, has issued civil money penalties to parties the CFPB determines has violated the laws and regulations it enforces.

Previous report

Additionally, antidiscrimination statutes, such as the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), prohibit creditors from discriminating against loan applicants and borrowers based on certain characteristics, such as race, religion and national origin, among others. Various federal regulatory agencies and departments, including the U.S. Department of Justice and the CFPB, take the position that these laws apply not only to intentional discrimination, but also to neutral practices that have a disparate impact on a group that shares a characteristic that a creditor may not consider in making credit decisions (i.e., creditor or servicing practices that have a disproportionate negative effect on a protected class of individuals). These regulatory agencies, as well as consumer advocacy groups and plaintiffs’ attorneys, are focusing greater attention on “disparate impact” claims. Regulatory agencies and private plaintiffs are expected to apply the “disparate impact” theory to both the Fair Housing Act and ECOA in the context of mortgage lending and servicing, among others. To the extent that the “disparate impact” theory continues to apply, it may significantly increase our administrative burdens, compliance requirements and potential liability for failures to comply.

Previous report

Our mortgage business’s failure to comply with the federal consumer protection laws, rules and regulations to which they are subject, whether actual or alleged, could expose them to enforcement actions or potential litigation liabilities. Moreover, if the CFPB or other regulatory authorities adopt new rules governing the use of AI in mortgage underwriting or loan approval processes, we may face additional compliance obligations and potential enforcement risks. Our inability to adapt to these regulatory changes in a timely and efficient manner could result in an adverse effect to our business, financial condition and results of operations in our technology services segment.

Previous report

We are subject to domestic and international governmental export and import controls that may impair our ability to compete in international markets or subject us to liability if we are not in compliance with applicable laws or if we do not secure or maintain the required export authorizations.

Previous report

In many cases, our products and services are or may in the future be subject to U.S. export control laws and regulations and subject to trade and economic sanctions maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”). We are also subject to export control and trade sanctions laws and regulations in the EU, Singapore and other jurisdictions in which we and our subsidiaries may operate. As such, an export license may be required to export or re-export our technology and services to certain countries or end-users, or for certain end-uses, especially AI technologies, such as those involving sensitive customer data or proprietary algorithms. If we were to fail to comply with such U.S. export controls laws and regulations, U.S. economic sanctions, or other similar laws or regulations in other jurisdictions, we could be subject to both civil and criminal penalties, including substantial fines, possible incarceration for employees and managers for willful violations, and the possible loss of our export or import privileges. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our services, including new releases and/or the performance of services, may create delays in the introduction of our services in non-U.S. markets, prevent our customers with non-U.S. operations from deploying these services throughout their global systems or, in some cases, prevent the export of the services to some countries altogether.

Previous report

Obtaining the necessary export license for a particular sale or offering may not be possible, may be time-consuming, and may result in the delay or loss of sales opportunities. In addition, compliance with the directives of the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (“DDTC”) may result in substantial expenses and diversion of management attention. Any failure to adequately address the directives of DDTC could result in civil fines or suspension or loss of our export privileges, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. Further, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions as well as similar laws and regulations in other jurisdictions prohibit the export of offerings to certain U.S. embargoed or sanctioned countries, governments, and persons, as well as for prohibited end-uses. We may in the future fail to secure or maintain at all times all required export authorizations, which could have negative consequences on our business, including reputational harm, government investigations and civil and criminal penalties. Additionally, monitoring and ensuring compliance with these complex export control laws, regulations and sanctions may be particularly challenging as we expand internationally and our offerings are distributed in non-U.S. countries. Any failure by us, our subsidiaries or our partners to comply with all relevant export laws and regulations could have negative consequences for us, including reputational harm, government investigations and penalties.

Previous report

Any change in domestic or international export or import laws or regulations, economic sanctions, or related legislation, shift in the enforcement or scope of existing export, import, or sanctions laws or regulations, or change in the countries, governments, persons, or technologies targeted by such export, import, or sanctions laws or regulations, could result in decreased use of our platform by, or in our decreased ability to export or sell access to our platform to, existing or potential end-customers with international operations. Any decreased use of our platform or limitation on our ability to export to or sell access to our platform in international markets would adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.