Company: LTRYW
Filing Date: 2025-04-11
Form Type: S-1
Source: 0001641172-25-003901
Chunk: 86

Company: Lottery.com Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-04-11
Form: S-1
Chunk 86
---
; (g) issuing any shares of common stock which negatively affects the lender and (h) repurchasing any shares of common stock. Such covenants in certain loan agreements may restrict our ability to raise capital, pay consultants, officers and directors, and may ultimately result in material adverse effects to the Company. The result of that may be a decrease in the value of our securities or our need to seek bankruptcy protection. The validity and application of the of certain loan agreements and any notices issued under certain loan agreements may be disputed by the Company and could be referred to the Company’s legal counsel which may pursue pursuing all rights and remedies available to the Company in law or equity.

Our obligations under the loan agreements are secured by a first priority security interest in substantially all of our assets and if we were to default, they could force us to curtail or abandon our business plans and operations.

Although, the amounts borrowed or advanced pursuant to the terms of the Woodford Loan Agreement are secured by substantially all of the present and subsequently acquired assets of the Company and its subsidiaries, the validity and application of the Woodford Loan Agreement Amendment is disputed by the Company. Under the Agreement, Woodford as a creditor, in the event of the occurrence of a default might have been able to enforce security interests over our assets or our subsidiaries which secure 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 the Company (including, but not limited to, any investment in our common stock) could become worthless. The validity and application of the Woodford Amended and Restated Loan Agreement and of notices issued under both agreements is disputed by the Company and the matter is being handled by the Company’s legal counsel which is pursuing various remedies in the UK court system to wind down any connections to Woodford.

Despite requests from the Company, Woodford has repeatedly amongst other things: failed to prove the amounts borrowed by the Company or claimed to have been advanced by Woodford to the Company; failed to indicate if it would accept accelerated payment of those verified amounts; failed to provide an anti-money laundering acceptable account to which payment could be made by the Company and failed to explain failure to respond to requests for other funding to be accepted in the context of the Woodford Loan Agreement; failed to respond to requests for funding under the accordion facility of the Woodford Loan Agreement; and failed to respond to allegations of money laundering and conspiracy to defraud the