Company: TLGYF
Filing Date: 2025-09-29
Form Type: S-4
Source: 0001213900-25-092592
Chunk: 168

Company: TLGY ACQUISITION CORP
Filing Date: 2025-09-29
Form: S-4
Chunk 168
---
 and how it is handled (e.g., whether it is burned, redistributed, or both) depends on the network’s policies. Slashing may also result in a validator being removed from the designated validator set. If our validator business becomes subject to slashing penalties, we could lose a substantial portion of our ENA Token, including token that was delegated to us from third parties. In addition, technical bugs, cyberattacks, misconfigurations, or third -partyfailures (e.g., cloud providers, automation scripts) could all expose us to slashing events. Any of these could lead to reputational damage and material loss of our assets. Our business operations will involve running validator nodes for blockchain networks, including those associated with third-party staking ecosystems. Unpredictable governance decisions or operational failures in such networks could have a material negative impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and business prospects. Our business operations will involve running validator nodes for third -partyblockchain networks and staking ecosystems, including the proposed Converge network or other validation opportunities in the Ethena ecosystem utilizing ENA Token, or other supported networks, which requires us to stake ENA Tokens as collateral. These activities expose us to risks outside of our direct control. Staked tokens are typically locked in smart contracts, and vulnerabilities in the underlying blockchain protocol, validator software, or smart contract code could result in the slashing or permanent loss of staked ENA Token or other assets. Any such event could materially impair the value of our digital asset treasury and reduce our ability to earn validator rewards. 53 Validator operations are also subject to the governance processes of third -partyblockchain protocols, many of which are administered through decentralized autonomous organizations, where governance decisions, including changes to validator selection criteria, staking rewards, protocol fees, or security parameters, are often unpredictable and can be influenced by a small number of large stakeholders. Any governance outcome misaligned with our interests, or that disadvantages validators in the CVN, could materially impact the profitability and sustainability of our validator operations. See “— We have limited ability to influence the governance of the Ethena Protocol, and future changes may negatively impact our business.” In addition, third -partyblockchain networks regularly implement protocol upgrades or changes that require validators to quickly adapt their technical systems. Failure to implement required updates or configuration changes in a timely and secure manner could result in downtime, penalties, or removal from the validator set. Furthermore, we could experience reputational harm from controversies or operational failures affecting the broader Ethena ecosystem or