Exhibit 99.2

RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as the other information included or incorporated by reference herein, before investing in our common stock. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. The market or trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks, and you may lose all or part of your investment. In addition, the risks discussed below also include forward-looking statements and our actual results may differ substantially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. You should also review the section captioned “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” included in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2014. Please note that additional risks not presently known to us, that we currently deem immaterial, or that we have not anticipated may also impair our business and operations.

Risks Related to Our Business

Existing electric utility industry regulations, and changes to regulations, may present technical, regulatory and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar energy systems that may significantly reduce demand for our solar energy systems.

Federal, state and local government regulations and policies concerning the electric utility industry, utility rate structures, interconnection procedures, and internal policies and regulations promulgated by electric utilities, heavily influence the market for electricity generation products and services. These regulations and policies often relate to electricity pricing and the interconnection of customer-owned electricity generation. In the United States, governments and utilities continuously modify these regulations and policies. These regulations and policies could deter potential customers from purchasing renewable energy, including solar energy systems. This could result in a significant reduction in the potential demand for our solar energy systems. For example, utilities commonly charge fees to larger, industrial customers for disconnecting from the electric grid or for having the capacity to use power from the electric grid for back-up purposes. These fees could increase our customers’ cost to use our systems and make our product offerings less desirable, thereby harming our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, depending on the region, electricity generated by solar energy systems competes most effectively with expensive peak-hour electricity from the electric grid, rather than the less expensive average price of electricity. Modifications to the utilities’ peak hour pricing policies or rate design, such as to a flat rate, would require us to lower the price of our solar energy systems to compete with the price of electricity from the electric grid.

In addition, any changes to government or internal utility regulations and policies that favor electric utilities could reduce our competitiveness and cause a significant reduction in demand for our products and services. For example, certain jurisdictions have proposed assessing fees on customers purchasing energy from solar energy systems or imposing a new charge that would disproportionately impact solar energy system customers who utilize net metering, either of which would increase the cost of energy to those customers and could reduce demand for our solar energy systems.

We rely on net metering and related policies to offer competitive pricing to our customers in some of our key markets.

Forty-three states, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. have a regulatory policy known as net energy metering, or net metering. Each of the states where we currently serve customers has adopted a net metering policy except for Texas, where certain individual utilities have adopted net metering or a policy similar to net

metering. Net metering typically allows our customers to interconnect their on-site solar energy systems to the utility grid and offset their utility electricity purchases by receiving a bill credit at the utility’s retail rate for energy generated by their solar energy system that is exported to the grid in excess of electric load used by the customers. At the end of the billing period, the customer simply pays for the net energy used or receives a credit at the retail rate if more energy is produced than consumed. Utilities operating in states without a net metering policy may receive solar electricity that is exported to the grid at times when there is no simultaneous energy demand by the customer to utilize the generation onsite without providing retail compensation to the customer for this generation.

Our ability to sell solar energy systems or the electricity they generate may be adversely impacted by the failure to expand existing limits on the amount of net metering in states that have implemented it, the failure to adopt a net metering policy where it currently is not in place, the imposition of new charges that only or disproportionately impact customers that utilize net metering, or reductions in the amount or value of credit that customers receive through net metering. Our ability to sell solar energy systems or the electricity they generate also may be adversely impacted by the unavailability of expedited or simplified interconnection for grid-tied solar energy systems or any limitation on the number of customer interconnections or amount of solar energy that utilities are required to allow in their service territory or some part of the grid.

Limits on net metering, interconnection of solar energy systems and other operational policies in key markets could limit the number of solar energy systems installed there. For example, California utilities limit net metering credit to 5% of the utilities’ aggregate customer peak demand. California has adopted legislation to establish a process and timeline for developing a new net metering program with no cap on participation. If the caps on net metering in California and other jurisdictions are reached, or if the amount or value of credit that customers receive for net metering is significantly reduced, future customers will be unable to recognize the current cost savings associated with net metering. We substantially rely on net metering when we establish competitive pricing for our prospective customers, and absence of net metering for new customers would greatly limit demand for our solar energy systems.

Regulatory limitations associated with technical considerations may significantly limit our ability to sell electricity from our solar energy systems in certain markets.

Regulatory limits associated with technical considerations may curb our growth in certain key markets. For example, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in promulgating small generator interconnection procedures, recommended limiting customer-sited intermittent generation resources, such as our solar energy systems, to a certain percentage of peak load on a given electrical feeder circuit. Similar limits have been adopted by various states and could constrain our ability to market to customers in certain geographic areas where the concentration of solar installations exceeds the limit. For example, Hawaiian electric utilities have adopted certain policies that limit distributed electricity generation in certain geographic areas. While these limits have constrained our growth in certain parts of Hawaii, policy developments in Hawaii generally have allowed distributed electricity generation penetration beyond the electric utility-imposed limitations. Furthermore, in certain areas, we benefit from policies that allow for expedited or simplified procedures related to connecting solar energy systems to the power grid. If such procedures are changed or cease to be available, our ability to sell the electricity generated by solar energy systems we install may be adversely impacted. As adoption of solar distributed generation increases along with the operation of large scale solar generation in key markets such as California, the amount of solar energy being fed into the power grid will surpass the amount planned for relative to the amount of aggregate demand. Some utilities claim that within several years, solar generation resources may reach a level capable of causing an over-generation situation that could require some solar generation resources to be curtailed to maintain operation of the grid. The adverse effects of such curtailment without compensation could adversely impact our business, results of operations and future growth.

-2-

Our business currently depends on the availability of rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives. The expiration, elimination or reduction of these rebates, credits and incentives would adversely impact our business.

U.S. federal, state and local government bodies provide incentives to end users, distributors, system integrators and manufacturers of solar energy systems to promote solar electricity in the form of rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives such as system performance payments and payments for renewable energy credits associated with renewable energy generation and exclusion of solar energy systems from property tax assessments. We rely on these governmental rebates, tax credits and other financial incentives to lower our cost of capital and to incent fund investors to invest in our funds. These incentives enable us to lower the price we charge customers for energy and for our solar energy systems. However, these incentives may expire on a particular date, end when the allocated funding is exhausted, or be reduced or terminated as solar energy adoption rates increase. These reductions or terminations often occur without warning.

The federal government currently offers a 30% investment tax credit under Section 48(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or the Federal ITC, for the installation of certain solar power facilities until December 31, 2016. This credit is due to adjust to 10% in 2017. Solar energy systems that began construction prior to the end of 2011 were eligible to receive a 30% federal cash grant paid by the U.S. Treasury Department under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, or the U.S. Treasury grant, in lieu of the Federal ITC. Pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011, U.S. Treasury grants are subject to sequestration beginning in 2013. Specifically, U.S. Treasury grants made on or after October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014 will be reduced by 7.2%, regardless of when the U.S. Treasury received the application. As a result, for all applications pending or submitted prior to June 30, 2014, we expect to suffer grant shortfalls of approximately $1.3 million associated with our financing funds. Applicable authorities may adjust or decrease incentives from time to time or include provisions for minimum domestic content requirements or other requirements to qualify for these incentives.

Reductions in, or eliminations or expirations of, governmental incentives could adversely impact our results of operations and ability to compete in our industry by increasing our cost of capital, causing us to increase the prices of our energy and solar energy systems, and reducing the size of our addressable market. In addition, this would adversely impact our ability to attract investment partners and to form new financing funds and our ability to offer attractive financing to prospective customers. For the quarter ended June 30, 2014, approximately 99.2% of new customers chose to enter into financed lease or power purchase agreements rather than buying a solar energy system for cash.

Our business depends in part on the regulatory treatment of third-party owned solar energy systems.

Our leases and power purchase agreements are third-party ownership arrangements. Sales of electricity by third parties face regulatory challenges in some states and jurisdictions. Other challenges pertain to whether third-party owned systems qualify for the same levels of rebates or other non-tax incentives available for customer-owned solar energy systems, whether third-party owned systems are eligible at all for these incentives, and whether third-party owned systems are eligible for net metering and the associated significant cost savings. In some states and utility territories, third parties that own solar energy systems are limited in the way that they may deliver solar energy to their customers. In jurisdictions such as Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, North Carolina and Oklahoma and in the service territory of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, laws have been interpreted to prohibit the sale of electricity pursuant to our standard power purchase agreement, leading us and other solar energy system providers that utilize third-party ownership arrangements to offer leases exclusively in lieu of power purchase agreements, in addition to customer ownership. Imposition of such limitations in additional jurisdictions or reductions in, or eliminations of, incentives for third-party owned systems could reduce demand for our systems, could adversely impact our access to capital and could cause us to increase the price we charge our customers for energy.

-3-

The Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Treasury has issued subpoenas to a number of significant participants in the rooftop solar energy installation industry, including us. The subpoena we received requires us to deliver certain documents in our possession relating to our participation in the U.S. Treasury grant program. These documents are being delivered to the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Treasury, which is investigating the administration and implementation of the U.S. Treasury grant program.

In July 2012, we and other companies that are significant participants in both the solar industry and the cash grant program under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 received subpoenas from the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of the Inspector General to deliver certain documents in our respective possession. In particular, our subpoena requested, among other things, documents dated, created, revised or referred to since January 1, 2007 that relate to our applications for U.S. Treasury grants or communications with certain other solar development companies or certain firms that appraise solar energy property for U.S. Treasury grant application purposes. The Inspector General is working with the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the administration and implementation of the U.S. Treasury grant program, including possible misrepresentations concerning the fair market value of the solar power systems submitted for grant under that program made in grant applications by companies in the solar industry, including us. We intend to cooperate fully with the Inspector General and the Department of Justice. We are continuing to produce documents and testimony as requested by the Inspector General and we anticipate two to three months will be required to complete the gathering and production of such information, and that the Inspector General will require at least another six months to conclude its review. If at the conclusion of the investigation the Inspector General concludes that misrepresentations were made, the Department of Justice could decide to bring a civil action to recover amounts it believes were improperly paid to us. If it were successful in asserting this action, we could then be required to pay damages and penalties for any funds received based on such misrepresentations (which, in turn, could require us to make indemnity payments to certain of our fund investors). Such consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and prospects. Additionally, the period of time necessary to resolve the investigation is uncertain, and this matter could require significant management and financial resources that could otherwise be devoted to the operation of our business.

If the Internal Revenue Service or the U.S. Treasury Department makes additional determinations that the fair market value of our solar energy systems is materially lower than what we have claimed, we may have to pay significant amounts to our financing funds or to our fund investors and such determinations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We and our fund investors claim the Federal ITC or the U.S. Treasury grant in amounts based on the fair market value of our solar energy systems. We have obtained independent appraisals to support the fair market values we report for claiming Federal ITCs and U.S. Treasury grants. The Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department review these fair market values. With respect to U.S. Treasury grants, the U.S. Treasury Department reviews the reported fair market value in determining the amount initially awarded, and the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department may also subsequently audit the fair market value and determine that amounts previously awarded must be repaid to the U.S. Treasury Department or that excess awards constitute taxable income for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Such audits of a small number of our financing funds are ongoing. With respect to Federal ITCs, the Internal Revenue Service may review the fair market value on audit and determine that the tax credits previously claimed must be reduced. If the fair market value is determined in these circumstances to be less than we reported, we may owe our financing fund or our fund investors an amount equal to this difference, plus any costs and expenses associated with a challenge to that valuation. We could also be subject to tax liabilities, including interest and penalties.

-4-

The U.S. Treasury Department has previously determined in some instances to award U.S. Treasury grants for our solar energy systems at a materially lower value than we had established in our appraisals and, as a result, we have been required to pay our fund investors a true-up payment or contribute additional assets to the associated financing funds. It is possible that the U.S. Treasury Department will make similar determinations in the future. In response to such shortfalls, two of our financing funds filed a lawsuit in the United States Court of Federal Claims to recover the difference between the U.S. Treasury grants they sought and the amounts the U.S. Treasury paid; to the extent that these lawsuits are successful, any recovery would be used to repay us for amounts we previously reimbursed those funds. Our fund investors are contributing to our financing funds at the amounts the U.S. Treasury Department has most recently awarded on similarly situated energy systems to reduce or eliminate the need for us to subsequently pay those fund investors true-up payments or contribute additional assets to the associated financing funds.

If the Internal Revenue Service or the U.S. Treasury Department further disagrees now or in the future, as a result of any pending or future audit, the outcome of the Department of Treasury Inspector General investigation, the change in guidelines or otherwise, with the fair market value of more of our solar energy systems that we have constructed or that we construct in the future, including any systems for which grants have already been paid, and determines we have claimed too high of a fair market value, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects. For example, a hypothetical five percent downward adjustment in the fair market value in the approximately $501.2 million of U.S. Department of Treasury grant applications that have been awarded from the beginning of the U.S. Treasury grant program through June 30, 2014 would obligate us to repay approximately $25.1 million to our fund investors.

We have historically benefited from the declining cost of solar panels, and our business and financial results may be harmed as a result of increases in the cost of solar panels or tariffs on imported solar panels imposed by the U.S. government.

The declining cost of solar panels and the raw materials necessary to manufacture them has been a key driver in the pricing of our solar energy systems and customer adoption of this form of renewable energy. With the stabilization of solar panel and raw materials prices, our growth could slow, and our financial results could suffer. Further, the cost of solar panels and raw materials could increase in the future due to tariff penalties or other factors.

The U.S. government has imposed tariffs on solar cells manufactured in China. Based on determinations by the U.S. government, the most recent applicable anti-dumping and countervailing tariff rates range from approximately 33%-255%. Such anti-dumping and countervailing tariffs are subject to annual review and may be increased. These tariffs have increased the price of solar panels containing Chinese-manufactured solar cells. In the past, we purchased a significant portion of the solar panels used in our solar energy systems from manufacturers based in China. Currently, many of the solar panels we purchase contain components from China or Taiwan. The purchase price of solar panels containing solar cells manufactured in China reflects these tariff penalties. While solar panels containing solar cells manufactured outside of China are not subject to these tariffs, the prices of these solar panels are, and may continue to be, more expensive than panels produced using Chinese solar cells, before giving effect to the tariff penalties.

In addition, the U.S. government has new trade investigations relating to certain components exported from China and Taiwan. In early June 2014, the U.S. government announced its affirmative preliminary determination in the countervailing duty case and in July 2014, the government announced affirmative

-5-

preliminary determinations in the antidumping cases against both China and Taiwan. As a result, cash deposits are now required from importers of record based on the preliminary rates and pricing of affected solar photovoltaic panel components has increased. The new preliminary tariffs do not apply to modules with Chinese solar cells. Those modules are still covered by the existing tariffs from the first trade case. Final determinations in the new trade case are expected before the end of the year.

If additional tariffs are imposed or other negotiated outcomes occur, our ability to purchase these products on competitive terms or to access specialized technologies from those countries could be limited. Any of those events could harm our financial results by requiring us to pay trade penalties or to purchase solar panels or other system components from alternative, higher-priced sources.

On September 23, 2014, we acquired Silevo, Inc., a solar panel technology and manufacturing company. Though we believe that panels manufactured by our company following the acquisition of Silevo will be exempt from these tariffs, we expect to rely on solar panels produced by our other existing suppliers for the near future. In addition, it is possible that system components purchased from other foreign suppliers could be the subject of these or future trade cases.

Our ability to provide solar energy systems to customers on an economically viable basis depends on our ability to finance these systems with fund investors who require particular tax and other benefits.

Our solar energy systems have been eligible for Federal ITCs or U.S. Treasury grants, as well as depreciation benefits. We have relied on, and will continue to rely on, financing structures that monetize a substantial portion of those benefits and provide financing for our solar energy systems. With the lapse of the U.S. Treasury grant program, we anticipate that our reliance on these tax-advantaged financing structures will increase substantially. If, for any reason, we were unable to continue to monetize those benefits through these arrangements, we may be unable to provide and maintain solar energy systems for new customers on an economically viable basis.

The availability of this tax-advantaged financing depends upon many factors, including:

• our ability to compete with other renewable energy companies for the limited number of potential fund investors, each of which has limited funds and limited appetite for the tax benefits associated with these financings;

• the state of financial and credit markets;

• changes in the legal or tax risks associated with these financings; and

• non-renewal of these incentives or decreases in the associated benefits.

Under current law, the Federal ITC will be reduced from approximately 30% of the cost of the solar energy systems to approximately 10% for solar energy systems placed in service after December 31, 2016. In addition, U.S. Treasury grants are no longer available for new solar energy systems. Moreover, potential fund investors must remain satisfied that the structures we offer make the tax benefits associated with solar energy systems available to these investors, which depends both on the investors’ assessment of the tax law and the absence of any unfavorable interpretations of that law. One of our fund investors (which is an affiliate of an initial purchaser in this transaction) is undergoing a voluntary accelerated review of its tax return by the IRS. The investor has held any additional funding pending the outcome of such review. This additional funding is not included in any of our forecasts. Changes in existing law and interpretations by the Internal Revenue Service and the courts could reduce the willingness of fund investors to invest in funds associated with these

-6-

solar energy system investments. We cannot assure you that this type of financing will be available to us. If, for any reason, we are unable to finance solar energy systems through tax-advantaged structures or if we are unable to realize or monetize depreciation benefits, we may no longer be able to provide solar energy systems to new customers on an economically viable basis. This would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We need to enter into additional substantial financing arrangements to facilitate our customers’ access to our solar energy systems, and if this financing is not available to us on acceptable terms, if and when needed, our ability to continue to grow our business would be materially adversely impacted.

Our future success depends on our ability to raise capital from third-party fund investors to help finance the deployment of our residential and commercial solar energy systems. In particular, our strategy is to seek to reduce the cost of capital through these arrangements to improve our margins or to offset future reductions in government incentives and to maintain the price competitiveness of our solar energy systems. If we are unable to establish new financing funds when needed, or upon desirable terms, to enable our customers’ access to our solar energy systems with little or no upfront cost, we may be unable to finance installation of our customers’ systems, or our cost of capital could increase, either of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. To date, we have raised capital sufficient to finance installation of our customers’ solar energy systems from a number of financial institutions and other large companies. The contract terms in certain of our financing fund documents condition our ability to draw on financing commitments from the fund investors, including if an event occurs that could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the fund or in one case on us. If we do not satisfy such condition due to events related to our business or a specific financing fund or developments in our industry (including related to the Department of Treasury Inspector General investigation) or otherwise, and as a result we are unable to draw on existing commitments, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and prospects. For example, one of our fund investors (which is an affiliate of an initial purchaser in this transaction) is undergoing a voluntary accelerated review of its tax return by the IRS. The investor has held any additional funding pending the outcome of such review. This additional funding is not included in any of our forecasts. If any of the financial institutions or large companies that currently invest in our financing funds decide not to invest in future financing funds to finance our solar energy systems due to general market conditions, concerns about our business or prospects, the pendency of the Department of Treasury Inspector General investigation or any other reason, or materially change the terms under which they are willing to provide future financing, we will need to identify new financial institutions and companies to invest in our financing funds and negotiate new financing terms.

In the past, we encountered challenges raising new funds, which caused us to delay deployment of a substantial number of solar energy systems for which we had signed leases or power purchase agreements with customers. For example, in late 2008 and early 2009, as a result of the state of the capital markets, our ability to finance the installation of solar energy systems was limited and resulted in a significant backlog of signed sales orders for solar energy systems. Our future ability to obtain additional financing depends on banks’ and other financing sources’ continued confidence in our business model and the renewable energy industry as a whole. It could also be impacted by the liquidity needs of such financing sources themselves. If we experience higher customer default rates than we currently experience in our existing financing funds or if we lower the credit rating requirement for new customers, this could make it more difficult or costly to attract future financing. Solar energy has yet to achieve broad market acceptance and depends on continued support in the form of performance-based incentives, rebates, tax credits and other incentives from federal, state and foreign governments. If this support diminishes, our ability to obtain external financing on acceptable terms, or at all, could be materially adversely affected. In addition, we face competition for these investor funds. If we are unable to continue to offer a competitive investment profile, we may lose access to these funds or they may only be available on less favorable terms than our competitors. Our current financing sources may be

-7-

inadequate to support the anticipated growth in our business plans. Our inability to secure financing could lead to cancelled projects and could impair our ability to accept new projects and customers. In addition, our borrowing costs could increase, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A material drop in the retail price of utility-generated electricity or electricity from other sources would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We believe that a customer’s decision to buy renewable energy from us is primarily driven by their desire to pay less for electricity. The customer’s decision may also be affected by the cost of other renewable energy sources. Decreases in the retail prices of electricity from the utilities or from other renewable energy sources would harm our ability to offer competitive pricing and could harm our business. The price of electricity from utilities could decrease as a result of:

• the construction of a significant number of new power generation plants, including nuclear, coal, natural gas or renewable energy technologies;

• the construction of additional electric transmission and distribution lines;

• a reduction in the price of natural gas as a result of new drilling techniques or a relaxation of associated regulatory standards;

• the energy conservation technologies and public initiatives to reduce electricity consumption; and

• development of new renewable energy technologies that provide less expensive energy.

A reduction in utility electricity prices would make the purchase of our solar energy systems or the purchase of energy under our lease and power purchase agreements less economically attractive. In addition, a shift in the timing of peak rates for utility-generated electricity to a time of day when solar energy generation is less efficient could make our solar energy system offerings less competitive and reduce demand for our products and services. If the retail price of energy available from utilities were to decrease due to any of these reasons, or others, we would be at a competitive disadvantage. As a result, we may be unable to attract new customers and our growth would be limited.

A material drop in the retail price of utility-generated electricity would particularly adversely impact our ability to attract commercial customers.

Commercial customers comprise a significant and growing portion of our business, and the commercial market for energy is particularly sensitive to price changes. Typically, commercial customers pay less for energy from utilities than residential customers. Because the price we are able to charge commercial customers is only slightly lower than their current retail rate, any decline in the retail rate of energy for commercial entities could have a significant impact on our ability to attract commercial customers. We may be unable to offer solar energy systems for the commercial market that produce electricity at rates that are competitive with the price of retail electricity on a non-subsidized basis. If this were to occur, we would be at a competitive disadvantage to other energy providers and may be unable to attract new commercial customers, and our business would be harmed.

-8-

The terms of our agreement with the Research Foundation for the State University of New York pertaining to the construction of the Buffalo Riverbend Manufacturing Facility, among other things, require us to comply with a number of covenants during the term of the agreement. Any failure to comply with these covenants could obligate us to pay significant amounts to the Foundation and result in termination of the agreement.

In September 2014, our newly acquired subsidiary, Silevo, entered into an amended and restated research and development alliance agreement, referred to as the Riverbend Agreement, with the Research Foundation for the State University of New York, referred to as the Foundation, for the construction of an approximately 1,000,000 square foot manufacturing facility capable of producing 1-gigawatt of solar panels annually on an approximately 88.24 acre site located in Buffalo, New York, referred to as the Manufacturing Facility.

Under the terms of the Riverbend Agreement, the Foundation will construct the Manufacturing Facility and install certain utilities and other improvements, with participation by us as to the design and construction of the Manufacturing Facility, and acquire certain manufacturing equipment designated by us to be used in the Manufacturing Facility. The Foundation will cover construction costs related to the Manufacturing Facility and manufacturing equipment, in each case up to a maximum funding allocation from the State of New York, and we will be responsible for any construction and equipment costs in excess of such amounts. The Foundation will own the Manufacturing Facility and manufacturing equipment. Following completion of the Manufacturing Facility, we will lease the Manufacturing Facility from the Foundation for an initial period of 10 years for $1 per year plus utilities, and the Foundation will grant us the right to use the manufacturing equipment during the initial lease term at no charge. Currently, we estimate that we will incur capital expenses of up to $150 million in connection with the construction and commissioning of the Manufacturing Facility and the initial manufacturing equipment. We cannot assure you that these estimated capital expenses in connection with the construction and commissioning of the Manufacturing Facility and the initial manufacturing equipment will not exceed this estimated amount.

In addition to the other obligations under the Riverbend Agreement, we must (i) use our best commercially reasonable efforts to commission the manufacturing equipment within three months of Manufacturing Facility completion and reach full production output within three months thereafter, (ii) employ 1,460 high-tech jobs for the manufacturing operation at the Manufacturing Facility for five years after Manufacturing Facility completion, (iii) employ at least 2,000 other personnel in the State of New York to support downstream solar panel sales and installation for five years after Manufacturing Facility completion, (iv) work with the Foundation to attract 1,440 additional support contractor and supplier jobs in the State of New York following full production, (v) spend or incur approximately $5 billion in combined capital, operational expenses and other costs in the State of New York during the 10 year period following full production, (vi) make reasonable efforts to provide first consideration to New York-based suppliers, (vii) invest and spend in manufacturing operations at a level than ensures competitive product costs for at least five years from full production, and (viii) negotiate in good faith with the Foundation on an exclusive “first opportunity basis” for 120 days before entering into any agreement for additional solar panel manufacturing capacity that Silevo may wish to develop during the term of the agreement. If we are not able to hire the specified number of employees or identify and qualify local vendors and suppliers, we would face the risk of not only failing to meet the performance criteria under the Riverbend Agreement but also being capable of running the operations related to the Manufacturing Facility. If we fail in any year over the course of the ten year term to meet these specified investment and job creation obligations, as described above, we would be obligated to pay a “program payment” of $41.2 million to the Foundation in any such year. In addition, we are subject to other events of defaults, including breach of these program payments and certain insolvency events, that would lead to the acceleration of all of the then unpaid program payments by us to the Foundation. Our failure to meet our contractual obligations under the Riverbend Agreement may result in our obligation to pay significant amounts to the Foundation in scheduled program payments, other contractual damages and/or the termination of our lease of the Manufacturing Facility. Any inability on our part to raise the capital necessary to operate the Manufacturing Facility and meet the specified requirements of the Riverbend Agreement during the 10 year period following full production would also cause a material adverse effect upon our business operations and prospects.

-9-

The Riverbend Agreement may be terminated by us or the Foundation in the event of specified circumstances, including the Foundation not receiving funding from the State of New York and other events outside of our control.

The Foundation may terminate the Riverbend Agreement if, subject to a 30-day grace period, the Foundation does not obtain funding from the State of New York in such amounts as required to perform the agreement on or before October 17, 2014. We may terminate the Riverbend Agreement if (i) the Foundation does not obtain funding from the State of New York in such amounts as required to perform the agreement on or before October 17, 2014, (ii) the Foundation does not obtain all building permits and other approvals to construct the Manufacturing Facility on or before October 17, 2014, and (iii) the Foundation does not reach certain construction milestones by specified dates. We have the right to terminate the agreement if any of the contingencies are not met after a 30-day grace period. The Riverbend Agreement is also contingent upon, on or prior to November 1, 2014, the Foundation or its affiliate entering into construction contracts reasonably acceptable to us. In the event of any termination of the Riverbend Agreement, including as a result of the Foundation not receiving funding from the State of New York or by us, we will not receive the anticipated benefits under the agreement, and may experience a significant delay or inability to obtain the expected benefits from our acquisition of Silevo, each of which is likely to have a material adverse effect upon our business operations and prospects.

Our expectations as to the cost of building the Manufacturing Facility, acquiring manufacturing equipment and supporting our manufacturing operations may prove incorrect, which could subject us to significant expenses to achieve the desired benefits under the Riverbend Agreement.

Under the Riverbend Agreement, the Foundation is required to receive funding from the State of New York in an amount that we believe will be sufficient to cover the construction and commissioning of the Manufacturing Facility. In addition, we currently estimate that we will need to spend up to $150 million in connection with the construction and commissioning of the Manufacturing Facility and the initial manufacturing equipment. In the event that the full amount of funding is not received by the Foundation from the State of New York and we elect to continue the Riverbend Agreement, or in the event of any cost overruns in construction, commissioning, acquiring manufacturing equipment or operating the Manufacturing Facility, we may incur additional capital and operating expenses that would have a material adverse effect upon our business operations and prospects.

Our projections as to the time necessary to build the Manufacturing Facility and acquire the manufacturing equipment may prove incorrect and subject us to significant delay and additional expense.

We currently anticipate that the Manufacturing Facility will be completed and be ready to commence operations in the first quarter of 2016. However, there are a number of risks which may delay the completion of the Manufacturing Facility and commencement of operations, including:

• the timing of receipt of funding from the State of New York;

• failure or delay in obtaining necessary permits, licenses or other governmental support or approvals;

• the time necessary for the construction of related utility and infrastructure improvements;

-10-

• unforeseen engineering problems;

• the inability to identify and hire qualified construction and other workers on a timely basis or at all;

• construction delays and contractor performance shortfalls;

• work stoppages or labor disruptions, including efforts by our employees to enter into collective bargaining agreements;

• availability of raw materials and components from suppliers and any delivery delays in such materials or components;

• delays resulting from environmental conditions, and any design changes or additions necessary to remediate prior environmental hazards at the site; and

• adverse weather conditions, such as an extreme winter, and natural disasters.

Any delay in the completion of the Manufacturing Facility and commencement of our operations will result in us incurring additional expenses and could negatively affect our operating results, financial condition and prospects.

We may not be able to achieve anticipated production yields, efficiencies and quality, which would harm our production volume and increase our costs.

Successfully achieving volume manufacturing of solar cells at our projected yield, efficiency and quality levels will be difficult, and we have little experience in high-volume manufacturing. As we integrate the Silevo team, expand our manufacturing capacity and qualify additional suppliers to support projected production volume, we may initially experience lower yields than anticipated. Any deviations in our manufacturing processes may result in significant decreases in production yield, efficiency and quality, and may in some cases cause production to be suspended or yield no output. If we cannot achieve planned yields over time, our production costs could increase and we may be unable to produce a sufficient amount of our solar panels to meet our installation needs.

In addition, Silevo’s Triex technology is novel and involves proprietary and complex manufacturing techniques, which may result in undetected errors or defects in the solar cells produced. Any defects in our solar panels could cause us to incur significant warranty, non-warranty and re-engineering costs, divert the attention of our engineering personnel, result in indemnification liability to our fund investors and significantly affect our customer relations and business reputation.

If we are unable to achieve our cost projections or otherwise control the costs associated with operating our manufacturing business, our financial condition and operating results will suffer.

As a result of initial production levels that under-utilize the Manufacturing Facility as we ramp up production, we anticipate that our initial production costs (on a per watt basis) will be relatively high. As we work to achieve full utilization of the Manufacturing Facility, we anticipate that the volume of production will reduce our production costs (on a per watt basis). There is no guarantee that we will be able to achieve planned cost targets, and some of these costs will be beyond our control. For example, the costs of our raw materials and components, such as polysilicon, could increase due to shortages as global demand for these products increases. Any failure to achieve our per watt cost projections would cause our financial condition

-11-

and operating results to suffer. In addition, if our competitors are able to reduce their manufacturing and installation costs faster than we are able to, the pricing of our solar energy systems may become less competitive and we could lose market share.

Competition in the solar industry is intense, and future success and innovation will require additional research and development expenses.

The Manufacturing Facility is designed to be a high-technology volume-manufacturing facility. In constructing the Manufacturing Facility, including local utility infrastructure upgrades, and procuring the manufacturing equipment, the State of New York is making a significant investment in the Buffalo-area economy. However, the solar panel manufacturing market is characterized by continually changing technology that requires improved features, such as increased efficiency, higher power output and enhanced aesthetics. In the time it takes us to achieve volume production of Silevo’s Triex technology, it is possible that additional innovation and solar technology advances could result in our technology and the Manufacturing Facility becoming less competitive or obsolete, which could harm our costs and adversely affect our business operations. This risk requires us to continuously focus on research and development, and will require significant on-going research and development expenses. If we cannot continually improve the efficiency and power output of our solar panels and reduce the cost of production, we could become less competitive in the market and our financial and operating results would be adversely affected.

If we fail to remediate deficiencies in our control environment or are unable to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in the future, the accuracy and timeliness of our financial and operating reporting and related disclosures may be adversely affected.

In connection with the audit of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013, we identified four material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting relating to (i) the costing of our solar system installations, (ii) accounting for and classification of redeemable noncontrolling interests, (iii) segregation of incompatible duties at our lease administrator and our controls over the data received from our administrator, and (iv) certain areas of our financial statement close process. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. These material weaknesses resulted from separate control deficiencies, as well as our misinterpretation of certain accounting standards, and resulted in the restatement of our consolidated financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009 and for certain interim periods in 2012 and 2013.

In addition, we have previously identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and inventory in 2010 and 2011. The accounting policies associated with our financing funds are complex, which contributed to the material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, in particular those relating to the presentation of noncontrolling interests for related partnership fund structures. For our lease pass-through arrangements, we initially characterized funds received from investors as deferred revenue rather than financing obligations, which resulted in adjustments to our 2010 consolidated financial statements. For a particular sale-leaseback transaction, we did not initially defer the correct amount of gain associated with this arrangement, which was corrected in our 2010 consolidated financial statements. The foregoing resulted in a prior restatement to our 2010 consolidated financial statements. In addition, deficiencies in the design and operation of our internal controls resulted in audit adjustments and delayed our financial statement close process for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010.

We are taking and have taken numerous steps to remediate these material weaknesses and improve our internal control over financial reporting. In connection with the filing of our quarterly report on Form 10-Q

-12-

for the fiscal period ended June 30, 2014, our management performed an evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2014 pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting and our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2014, except for the impact of material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, as previously disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013. We began the process of developing, adopting and implementing new policies and procedures to address these material weaknesses beginning in the first quarter of 2014. Although we believe that our remediation efforts implemented to date and other additional changes to our internal controls will improve our internal control over financial reporting and other disclosure controls and procedures, additional time is required to further design, fully implement and test our remediation efforts to demonstrate that our remediation efforts result in the effective operation of our internal controls.

If in the future, we are not able to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures, or if additional material weaknesses are discovered in future periods, a risk that is significantly increased in light of the complexity of our business, we may be unable to accurately and timely report our financial position, results of operations, cash flows or key operating metrics, which could result in additional late filings of our annual and quarterly reports under the Exchange Act, additional restatements of our consolidated financial statements or other corrective disclosures, a decline in our stock price, suspension or delisting of our common stock by the NASDAQ Global Select Market, an inability to access the capital and commercial lending markets, defaults under our credit and other agreements, or other material adverse effects on our business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Rising interest rates could adversely impact our business.

Changes in interest rates could have an adverse impact on our business by increasing our cost of capital. For example:

• rising interest rates would increase our cost of capital; and

• rising interest rates may negatively impact our ability to secure financing on favorable terms to facilitate our customers’ purchase of our solar energy systems or energy generated by our solar energy systems.

The majority of our cash flows to date have been from solar energy systems under lease and power purchase agreements that have been monetized under various financing fund structures. One of the components of this monetization is the present value of the payment streams from the customers who enter into these leases and power purchase agreements. If the rate of return required by the fund investor rises as a result of a rise in interest rates, it will reduce the present value of the customer payment stream and consequently reduce the total value that we are able to derive from monetizing the payment stream will each be reduced. Interest rates are at historically low levels, partially as a result of intervention by the U.S. Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve has taken actions to begin to taper its intervention, and should these actions continue, it is likely that interest rates will rise, our costs of capital will increase and our ability to secure financing could be impeded. Rising interest rates could harm our business and financial condition.

-13-

In our lease pass-through financing funds, there is a one-time reset of the lease payments, and we may be obligated, in connection with the resetting of the lease payments at true up, to refund lease prepayments or to contribute additional assets to the extent the system sizes, costs, and timing are not consistent with the initial lease payment model.

In our lease pass-through financing funds, the models used to calculate the lease prepayments will be updated for each fund at a fixed date occurring after placement in service of all solar systems or an agreed upon date (typically within the first year of the applicable lease term) to reflect certain specified conditions as they exist at such date, including the ultimate system size of the equipment that was leased, how much it cost, and when it went into service. As a result of this true up, the lease payments are resized and we may be obligated to refund the investor’s lease prepayments or to contribute additional assets to the fund. Any significant refunds or capital contributions that we may be required to make could adversely affect our financial condition.

We are not currently regulated as a utility under applicable law, but we may be subject to regulation as a utility in the future.

Federal law and most state laws do not currently regulate us as a utility. As a result, we are not subject to the various federal and state standards, restrictions and regulatory requirements applicable to U.S. utilities. In the United States, we obtain federal and state regulatory exemptions by establishing “Qualifying Facility” status with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for all of our qualifying solar energy projects. In Canada, we also are generally subject to the regulations of the relevant energy regulatory agencies applicable to all producers of electricity under the relevant feed-in tariff regulations (including the feed-in tariff rates), however we are not currently subject to regulation as a utility. Our business strategy includes the continued development of larger solar energy systems in the future for our commercial and government customers, which has the potential to impact our regulatory position. Any local, state, federal or foreign regulations could place significant restrictions on our ability to operate our business and execute our business plan by prohibiting or otherwise restricting our sale of electricity. If we were subject to the same state, federal or foreign regulatory authorities as utilities in the United States or if new regulatory bodies were established to oversee our business in the United States or in foreign markets, then our operating costs would materially increase.

We may not realize the anticipated benefits of past or future acquisitions, and integration of these acquisitions may disrupt our business and management and cause dilution to our stockholders.

On September 23, 2014, we acquired Silevo, Inc., a solar panel technology and manufacturing company. In 2013, we acquired Zep Solar, Common Assets, certain assets of Paramount Solar, and completed various other smaller acquisitions. In the future we may acquire additional companies, project pipelines, products, or technologies, including additional photovoltaics companies, or enter into joint ventures or other strategic initiatives. Our ability as an organization to integrate acquisitions is unproven. We may not realize the anticipated benefits of our acquisitions or any other future acquisition, or the acquisition may be viewed negatively by customers, financial markets or investors.

Any acquisition has numerous risks, these risks include the following, among others:

• difficulty in assimilating the operations and personnel of the acquired company;

• difficulty in effectively integrating the acquired technologies or products with our current products and technologies;

-14-

• difficulty in maintaining controls, procedures, and policies during the transition and integration;

• disruption of our ongoing business and distraction of our management and employees from other opportunities and challenges due to integration issues;

• difficulty integrating the acquired company’s accounting, management information, and other administrative systems;

• inability to retain key technical and managerial personnel of the acquired business;

• inability to retain key customers, vendors, and other business partners of the acquired business;

• inability to achieve the financial and strategic goals for the acquired and combined businesses;

• incurring acquisition-related costs or amortization costs for acquired intangible assets that could impact our operating results;

• potential failure of the due diligence processes to identify significant issues with product quality, legal and financial liabilities, among other things;

• potential inability to assert that internal controls over financial reporting are effective; and

• potential inability to obtain, or obtain in a timely manner, approvals from governmental authorities, which could delay or prevent such acquisitions.

In connection with our acquisitions of Zep Solar and Paramount Solar, we issued approximately 6.4 million shares of our common stock. As consideration for our acquisition of Silevo we issued approximately 2.4 million shares of our common stock, and assuming the timely achievement of all earnout related milestones, we may issue additional common stock with an aggregate value of up to $150 million, subject to adjustments. In addition, we typically offer additional equity compensation to continuing employees of these businesses. If we are unable to successfully integrate these businesses and technologies or are unable to otherwise achieve the anticipated benefits of these acquisitions, the related issuances of our securities may be highly dilutive to our existing stockholders.

A failure to hire and retain a sufficient number of employees in key functions would constrain our growth and our ability to timely complete our customers’ projects.

To support our growth, we need to hire, train, deploy, manage and retain a substantial number of skilled employees. In particular, we need to continue to expand and optimize our sales infrastructure to grow our customer base and our business, and we plan to expand our direct sales force. Identifying and recruiting qualified personnel and training them requires significant time, expense and attention. It can take several months before a new salesperson is fully trained and productive. If we are unable to hire, develop and retain talented sales personnel or if new direct sales personnel are unable to achieve desired productivity levels in a reasonable period of time, we may not be able to realize the expected benefits of this investment or grow our business.

To complete current and future customer projects and to continue to grow our customer base, we need to hire a large number of installers in the relevant markets. Competition for qualified personnel in our industry is increasing, particularly for skilled installers and other personnel involved in the installation of solar energy systems. We also compete with the homebuilding and construction industries for skilled labor. As these

-15-

industries recover and seek to hire additional workers, our cost of labor may increase. The unionization of our labor force could also increase our labor costs. Shortages of skilled labor could significantly delay a project or otherwise increase our costs. Because our profit on a particular installation is based in part on assumptions as to the cost of such project, cost overruns, delays or other execution issues may cause us to not achieve our expected margins or cover our costs for that project. In addition, because we are headquartered in the San Francisco Bay Area, we compete for a limited pool of technical and engineering resources that requires us to pay wages that are competitive with relatively high regional standards for employees in these fields.

If we cannot meet our hiring, retention and efficiency goals, we may be unable to complete our customers’ projects on time, in an acceptable manner or at all. Any significant failures in this regard would materially impair our growth, reputation, business and financial results. If we are required to pay higher compensation than we anticipate, these greater expenses may also adversely impact our financial results and the growth of our business.

We have guaranteed a minimum return to be received by an investor in one of our financing funds and could be adversely affected if we are required to make any payments under this guarantee.

We have guaranteed payments to the investor in one of our financing funds to compensate for payments that the investor would be required to make to a certain third party as a result of the investor not achieving a specified minimum internal rate of return in this fund, assessed annually. The amounts of potential future payments under this guarantee depend on the amounts and timing of future distributions to the investor from the funds and the tax benefits that accrue to the investor from the fund’s activities. Because of uncertainties associated with estimating the timing and amounts of distributions to the investor, we cannot determine the potential maximum future payments that we could have to make under this guarantee. We may agree to similar terms in the future if market conditions require it. Any significant payments that we may be required to make under our guarantees could adversely affect our financial condition.

It is difficult to evaluate our business and prospects due to our limited operating history.

Since our formation in 2006, we have focused our efforts primarily on the sales, financing, engineering, installation and monitoring of solar energy systems for residential, commercial and government customers. We launched our pilot commercial and residential energy storage products and services in late-2013, and revenue attributable to this line of business has not been material compared to revenue attributable to our solar energy systems. We may be unsuccessful in significantly broadening our customer base through installation of solar energy systems within our current markets or in new markets we may enter. Additionally, we cannot assure you that we will be successful in generating substantial revenue from our current energy-related products and services or from any additional products and services we may introduce in the future. Our limited operating history, combined with the rapidly evolving and competitive nature of our industry, may not provide an adequate basis for you to evaluate our operating and financing results and business prospects. In addition, we only have limited insight into emerging trends that may adversely impact our business, prospects and operating results. As a result, our limited operating history may impair our ability to accurately forecast our future performance.

-16-

We have incurred losses and may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability in the future.

We have incurred net losses in the past, and we had an accumulated deficit of $274.0 million as of June 30, 2014. We may incur net losses from operations as we increase our spending to finance the expansion of our operations, expand our installation, engineering, administrative, sales and marketing staffs, and implement internal systems and infrastructure to support our growth. We do not know whether our revenue will grow rapidly enough to absorb these costs, and our limited operating history makes it difficult to assess the extent of these expenses or their impact on our operating results. Our ability to achieve profitability depends on a number of factors, including:

• growing our customer base;

• finding investors willing to invest in our financing funds;

• maintaining and further lowering our cost of capital;

• reducing the cost of components for our solar energy systems; and

• reducing our operating costs by optimizing our design and installation processes and supply chain logistics.

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may be unable to sustain or increase our profitability in the future.

We face competition from both traditional energy companies and renewable energy companies.

The solar energy and renewable energy industries are both highly competitive and continually evolving as participants strive to distinguish themselves within their markets and compete with large utilities. We believe that our primary competitors are the traditional utilities that supply energy to our potential customers. We compete with these utilities primarily based on price, predictability of price, and the ease by which customers can switch to electricity generated by our solar energy systems. If we cannot offer compelling value to our customers based on these factors, then our business will not grow. Utilities generally have substantially greater financial, technical, operational and other resources than we do. As a result of their greater size, these competitors may be able to devote more resources to the research, development, promotion and sale of their products or respond more quickly to evolving industry standards and changes in market conditions than we can. Utilities could also offer other value-added products or services that could help them to compete with us even if the cost of electricity they offer is higher than ours. In addition, a majority of utilities’ sources of electricity is non-solar, which may allow utilities to sell electricity more cheaply than electricity generated by our solar energy systems.

We also compete with solar companies in the downstream value chain of solar energy. For example, we face competition from purely finance driven organizations which then subcontract out the installation of solar energy systems, from installation businesses that seek financing from external parties, from large construction companies and utilities, and increasingly from sophisticated electrical and roofing companies. Some of these competitors specialize in either the residential or commercial solar energy markets, and some may provide energy at lower costs than we do. Many of our competitors also have significant brand name recognition and have extensive knowledge of our target markets. Competitors have increasingly begun vertically integrating their operations to offer comprehensive products and services offerings similar to ours. For us to remain competitive, we must distinguish ourselves from our competitors by offering an integrated approach that successfully competes with each level of products and services offered by our competitors at various points in the value chain. As more of our competitors develop an integrated approach similar to ours, our marketplace differentiation may suffer.

We also face competition in the energy-related products and services markets and we expect to face competition in additional markets as we introduce new products and services. As the solar industry grows and evolves, we will also face new competitors who are not currently in the market. Our failure to adapt to changing market conditions and to compete successfully with existing or new competitors will limit our growth and will have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects.

-17-

Projects for our significant commercial or government customers involve concentrated project risks that may cause significant changes in our financial results.

During any given financial reporting period, we typically have ongoing significant projects for commercial and governmental customers that represent a significant portion of our potential financial results for such period. For example, Walmart is a significant customer for which we have installed a substantial number of solar energy systems. In November 2011, we announced SolarStrong, our five-year plan to build more than $1 billion in solar energy projects for privatized U.S. military housing communities across the country that we anticipate will involve a significant investment in resources and project management over time and will require additional financing funds to support the project. These larger projects create concentrated operating and financial risks. The effect of recognizing revenue or other financial measures on the sale of a larger project, or the failure to recognize revenue or other financial measures as anticipated in a given reporting period because a project is not yet completed under applicable accounting rules by period end, may materially impact our quarterly or annual financial results. In addition, if construction, warranty or operational issues arise on a larger project, or if the timing of such projects unexpectedly shifts for other reasons, such issues could have a material impact on our financial results. If we are unable to successfully manage these significant projects in multiple markets, including our related internal processes and external construction management, or if we are unable to continue to attract such significant customers and projects in the future, our financial results would be harmed.

We depend on a limited number of suppliers of solar panels and other system components to adequately meet anticipated demand for our solar energy systems. Any shortage, delay or component price change from these suppliers could result in sales and installation delays, cancellations and loss of market share.

We purchase solar panels, inverters and other system components from a limited number of suppliers, making us susceptible to quality issues, shortages and price changes. If we fail to develop, maintain and expand our relationships with these or other suppliers, we may be unable to adequately meet anticipated demand for our solar energy systems, or we may only be able to offer our systems at higher costs or after delays. If one or more of the suppliers that we rely upon to meet anticipated demand ceases or reduces production, we may be unable to quickly identify alternate suppliers or to qualify alternative products on commercially reasonable terms, and we may be unable to satisfy this demand. In particular, there are a limited number of inverter suppliers. Once we design a system for use with a particular inverter, if that type of inverter is not readily available at an anticipated price, we may incur additional delay and expense to redesign the system.

In addition, production of solar panels involves the use of numerous raw materials and components, several of which have experienced periods of limited availability, particularly polysilicon, but also including indium, cadmium telluride, aluminum and copper. The manufacturing infrastructure for some of these raw materials and components has a long lead time, requires significant capital investment and relies on the continued availability of key commodity materials, potentially resulting in an inability to meet demand for these components. The prices for these raw materials and components fluctuate depending on global market conditions and demand, and we may experience rapid increases in costs or sustained periods of limited supplies.

In addition to purchasing from New York-based suppliers, we anticipate that we will need to purchase supplies globally in order to meet the anticipated production output of the Manufacturing Facility. Despite our efforts to obtain raw materials and components from multiple sources whenever possible, many of our

-18-

suppliers may be single source suppliers of certain components. If we are not able to maintain long-term supply agreements or identify and qualify multiple sources for raw materials and components, our access to supplies at satisfactory prices, volumes and quality levels may be harmed. We may also experience delivery delays of raw materials and components from suppliers in various global locations. In addition, we may be unable to establish alternate supply relationships or obtain or engineer replacement components in the short term, or at all, at prices or costs that are favorable to us. Qualifying alternate suppliers or developing our own replacements for certain components may be time consuming, costly and may force us to make modifications to our product designs.

Any decline in the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar compared to the functional currency of our component suppliers could increase our component prices. In addition, the state of the financial markets could limit our suppliers’ ability to raise capital if required to expand their production to meet our needs or satisfy their operating capital requirements. Changes in economic and business conditions, wars, governmental changes and other factors beyond our control or which we do not presently anticipate, could also affect our suppliers’ solvency and ability to deliver components to us on a timely basis. Any of these shortages, delays or price changes could limit our growth, cause cancellations or adversely affect our profitability, and result in loss of market share and damage to our brand.

Our operating results may fluctuate from quarter to quarter, which could make our future performance difficult to predict and could cause our operating results for a particular period to fall below expectations, resulting in a severe decline in the price of our common stock.

Our quarterly operating results are difficult to predict and may fluctuate significantly in the future. We have experienced seasonal and quarterly fluctuations in the past. However, given that we are an early-stage company operating in a rapidly growing industry, those fluctuations may be masked by our recent growth rates and thus may not be readily apparent from our historical operating results. As such, our past quarterly operating results may not be good indicators of future performance.

In addition to the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section, the following factors could cause our operating results to fluctuate:

• the expiration or initiation of any rebates or incentives;

• significant fluctuations in customer demand for our products and services;

• our ability to complete installations in a timely manner due to market conditions resulting in inconsistently available financing;

• our ability to continue to expand our operations, and the amount and timing of expenditures related to this expansion;

• actual or anticipated changes in our growth rate relative to our competitors;

• announcements by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital-raising activities or commitments;

• changes in our pricing policies or terms or those of our competitors, including utilities; and

• actual or anticipated developments in our competitors’ businesses or the competitive landscape.

-19-

For these or other reasons, the results of any prior quarterly or annual periods should not be relied upon as indications of our future performance. In addition, our actual revenue, key operating metrics and other operating results in future quarters may fall short of the expectations of investors and financial analysts, which could have a severe adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

We act as the licensed general contractor for our customers and are subject to risks associated with construction, cost overruns, delays, regulatory compliance and other contingencies, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We are a licensed contractor or use licensed subcontractors in every community we service, and we are responsible for every customer installation. For our residential projects, we are the general contractor, construction manager and installer. For our commercial projects, we are the general contractor and construction manager, and we typically rely on licensed subcontractors to install these commercial systems. We may be liable to customers for any damage we cause to their home or facility, belongings or property during the installation of our systems. For example, we frequently penetrate our customers’ roofs during the installation process and may incur liability for the failure to adequately weatherproof such penetrations following the completion of construction. In addition, shortages of skilled subcontractor labor for our commercial projects could significantly delay a project or otherwise increase our costs. Because our profit on a particular installation is based in part on assumptions as to the cost of such project, cost overruns, delays or other execution issues may cause us to not achieve our expected margins or cover our costs for that project.

In addition, the installation of solar energy systems, energy-storage systems and other energy-related products requiring building modifications are subject to oversight and regulation in accordance with national, state and local laws and ordinances relating to building codes, safety, environmental protection, utility interconnection and metering, and related matters. It is difficult and costly to track the requirements of every individual authority having jurisdiction over our installations and to design solar energy systems to comply with these varying standards. Any new government regulations or utility policies pertaining to our systems may result in significant additional expenses to us and our customers and, as a result, could cause a significant reduction in demand for our systems.

Compliance with occupational safety and health requirements and best practices can be costly, and noncompliance with such requirements may result in potentially significant monetary penalties, operational delays and adverse publicity.

The installation of solar energy systems requires our employees to work at heights with complicated and potentially dangerous electrical systems. The evaluation and installation of our energy-related products requires our employees to work in locations that may contain potentially dangerous levels of asbestos, lead or mold. We also maintain a fleet of more than 1,000 vehicles that our employees use in the course of their work. There is substantial risk of serious injury or death if proper safety procedures are not followed. Our operations are subject to regulation under the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act, or OSHA, and equivalent state laws. Changes to OSHA requirements, or stricter interpretation or enforcement of existing laws or regulations, could result in increased costs. If we fail to comply with applicable OSHA regulations, even if no work-related serious injury or death occurs, we may be subject to civil or criminal enforcement and be required to pay substantial penalties, incur significant capital expenditures, or suspend or limit operations. In the past, we have had workplace accidents and received citations from OSHA regulators for alleged safety violations, resulting in fines and operational delays for certain projects. Any such accidents, citations, violations, injuries or failure to comply with industry best practices may subject us to adverse publicity, damage our reputation and competitive position and adversely affect our business.

-20-

Problems with product quality or performance may cause us to incur warranty expenses and performance guarantee expenses, may lower the residual value of our solar energy systems and may damage our market reputation and adversely affect our financial performance and valuation.

Our solar energy system warranties are lengthy. Customers who buy energy from us under leases or power purchase agreements are covered by warranties equal to the length of the term of these agreements—typically 20 years. Depending on the state where they live, customers who purchase our solar energy systems for cash are covered by a warranty up to 10 years in duration. We also make extended warranties available at an additional cost to customers who purchase our solar energy systems for cash. In addition, we provide a pass-through of the inverter and panel manufacturers’ warranties to our customers, which generally range from 5 to 25 years. One of these third-party manufacturers could cease operations and no longer honor these warranties, instead leaving us to fulfill these potential obligations to our customers. For example, Evergreen Solar, Inc., one of our former solar panel suppliers, filed for bankruptcy in August 2011. Further, we provide a performance guarantee with our leased solar energy systems that compensates a customer on an annual basis if their system does not meet the electricity production guarantees set forth in their lease.

Because of the limited operating history of our solar energy systems, we have been required to make assumptions and apply judgments regarding a number of factors, including our anticipated rate of warranty claims, and the durability, performance and reliability of our solar energy systems. We have made these assumptions based on the historic performance of similar systems or on accelerated life cycle testing. Our assumptions could prove to be materially different from the actual performance of our systems, causing us to incur substantial expense to repair or replace defective solar energy systems in the future or to compensate customers for systems that do not meet their production guarantees. Product failures or operational deficiencies also would reduce our revenue from power purchase agreements because they are dependent on system production. Any widespread product failures or operating deficiencies may damage our market reputation and adversely impact our financial results.

In addition, we amortize costs of our solar energy systems over 30 years, which typically exceeds the period of the component warranties and the corresponding payment streams from our operating lease arrangements with our customers. In addition, we typically bear the cost of removing the solar energy systems at the end of the lease term. Furthermore, it is difficult to predict how future environmental regulations may affect the costs associated with the removal, disposal or recycling of our solar energy systems. Consequently, if the residual value of the systems is less than we expect at the end of the lease, after giving effect to any associated removal and redeployment costs, we may be required to accelerate all or some of the remaining unamortized expenses. This could materially impair our future operating results.

Compliance with environmental regulations can be expensive, and noncompliance with these regulations may result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages and fines.

We are required to comply with all foreign, U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding pollution control and protection of the environment. In addition, under some statutes and regulations, a government agency, or other parties, may seek recovery and response costs from operators of property where releases of hazardous substances have occurred or are ongoing, even if the operator was not responsible for such release or otherwise at fault. While we and the State of New York have performed environmental diligence relating to the construction of the Manufacturing Facility, the site where the Manufacturing Facility is to be located is on the former site of Republic Steel and has been considered a “brownfield.”

The operation of Silevo’s manufacturing and research and development facilities, including in Hangzhou, China, Buffalo, New York and Fremont, California, involves the use of hazardous chemicals and

-21-

materials which may subject us to liabilities for any releases or other failures to comply with applicable laws, regulations and policies. Any failure by us to maintain effective controls regarding use of hazardous materials and to obtain and maintain all necessary permits could subject us to potentially significant fines and damages, or interrupt our operations.

Product liability claims against us could result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages.

If one of our solar energy systems or other products injured someone we would be exposed to product liability claims. Because solar energy systems and many of our other current and anticipated products are electricity producing devices, it is possible that consumers could be injured by our products, whether by product malfunctions, defects, improper installation or other causes. We rely on our general liability insurance to cover product liability claims and have not obtained separate product liability insurance. Any product liability claim we face could be expensive to defend and divert management’s attention. The successful assertion of product liability claims against us could result in potentially significant monetary damages that could require us to make significant payments, as well as subject us to adverse publicity, damage our reputation and competitive position. Also, any product liability claims and any adverse outcomes may subject us to adverse publicity, damage our reputation and competitive position and adversely affect sales of our systems and other products.

Damage to our brand and reputation would harm our business and results of operations.

We depend significantly on our reputation for high-quality products and services, best-in-class engineering, exceptional customer service and the brand name “SolarCity” to attract new customers and grow our business. If we fail to continue to deliver our solar energy systems and our other energy products and services within the planned timelines, if our products and services do not perform as anticipated or if we damage any of our customers’ properties or cancel projects, our brand and reputation could be significantly impaired. In addition, if we fail to deliver, or fail to continue to deliver, high-quality products and services to our customers through our long-term relationships, our customers will be less likely to purchase future products and services from us, which is a key strategy to achieve our desired growth. We also depend greatly on referrals from existing customers for our growth, in addition to our other marketing efforts. Therefore, our inability to meet or exceed our current customers’ expectations would harm our reputation and growth through referrals.

If we fail to manage our recent and future growth effectively, we may be unable to execute our business plan, maintain high levels of customer service or adequately address competitive challenges.

We have experienced significant growth in recent periods, and we intend to continue to expand our business significantly within existing markets and in a number of new locations in the future. This growth has placed, and any future growth may place, a significant strain on our management, operational and financial infrastructure. In particular, we will be required to expand, train and manage our growing employee base. Our management will also be required to maintain and expand our relationships with customers, suppliers and other third-parties and attract new customers and suppliers, as well as to manage multiple geographic locations.

In addition, our current and planned operations, personnel, systems and procedures might be inadequate to support our future growth and may require us to make additional unanticipated investment in our infrastructure. Our success and ability to further scale our business will depend, in part, on our ability to manage these changes in a cost-effective and efficient manner. If we cannot manage our growth, we may be unable to take advantage of market opportunities, execute our business strategies or respond to competitive

-22-

pressures. This could also result in declines in quality or customer satisfaction, increased costs, difficulties in introducing new products and services or other operational difficulties. Any failure to effectively manage growth could adversely impact our business and reputation.

We may not be successful in leveraging our customer base to grow our business through sales of other energy products and services.

To date, we have derived substantially all of our revenue and cash receipts from the sale of solar energy systems and the sale of energy under our long-term customer agreements. While we continue to develop and offer innovative energy-related products and services, customer demand for these offerings may be more limited than we anticipate. We may not be successful in completing development of these products as a result of research and development difficulties, technical issues, availability of third-party products or other reasons. Even if we are able to offer these or other additional products and services, we may not successfully generate meaningful customer demand to make these offerings viable. If we fail to deliver these additional products and services, if the costs associated with bringing these additional products and services to market is greater than we anticipate, if customer demand for these offerings is smaller than we anticipate, or if our strategies to implement new sales approaches and acquire new customers are not successful, our growth will be limited.

Our growth depends in part on the success of our strategic relationships with third parties.

A key component of our growth strategy is to develop or expand our strategic relationships with third parties. For example, we are investing resources in establishing relationships with industry leaders, such as trusted retailers and commercial homebuilders, to generate new customers. Identifying partners and negotiating relationships with them requires significant time and resources. If we are unsuccessful in establishing or maintaining our relationships with these third parties, our ability to grow our business could be impaired. Even if we are able to establish these relationships, we may not be able to execute on our goal of leveraging these relationships to meaningfully expand our business and customer base. This would limit our growth potential and our opportunities to generate significant additional revenue or cash receipts.

The loss of one or more members of our senior management or key employees may adversely affect our ability to implement our strategy.

We depend on our experienced management team, and the loss of one or more key executives could have a negative impact on our business. In particular, we are dependent on the services of our chief executive officer and co-founder, Lyndon R. Rive, and our chief technology officer and cofounder, Peter J. Rive. We also depend on our ability to retain and motivate key employees and attract qualified new employees. Neither our founders nor our key employees are bound by employment agreements for any specific term, and we may be unable to replace key members of our management team and key employees in the event we lose their services. Integrating new employees into our management team could prove disruptive to our operations, require substantial resources and management attention and ultimately prove unsuccessful. An inability to attract and retain sufficient managerial personnel who have critical industry experience and relationships could limit or delay our strategic efforts, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business may be harmed if we fail to properly protect our intellectual property.

We believe that the success of our business depends in part on our proprietary technology, including our hardware, software, information, processes and know-how. We rely on many forms of intellectual property rights to secure our technology, including for example trade secrets and patents. We cannot be

-23-

certain that we have adequately protected or will be able to adequately protect our technology, that our competitors will not be able to use our existing technology or develop similar technology independently, that any patents or other intellectual property rights held by us will be broad enough to protect our technology or that foreign intellectual property laws will adequately protect us. Moreover, our patents and other intellectual property rights may not provide us with a competitive advantage.

Despite our precautions, it may be possible for third parties to obtain and use our intellectual property without our consent. Reverse engineering, unauthorized use or other misappropriation of our proprietary technology could enable third parties to benefit from our technology without compensating us for doing so. In addition, our proprietary technology may not be adequately protected because:

• our systems may be subject to intrusions, security breaches or targeted theft of our trade secrets;

• people may not be deterred from misappropriating our technology despite the existence of laws or contracts prohibiting it;

• unauthorized use of our intellectual property may be difficult to detect, and expensive and time consuming to remedy, and any remedies obtained may be inadequate to restore protection of our intellectual property;

• the laws of other countries in which we manufacture our solar products, such as Silevo’s joint venture manufacturing company with partners in Hangzhou, China and other countries in the Asia/Pacific region, may offer little or no protection for our proprietary technology; and

• reports we may be required to file in connection with any government-sponsored research contracts are or will be generally available to the public, and may disclose some of our sensitive confidential information.

Any such activities or any other inabilities to adequately protect our proprietary rights could harm our ability to compete, to generate revenue and to grow our business.

Claims of patent and other intellectual property infringement are complex and their outcomes uncertain, and the costs associated with such claims may be high and could harm our business.

Our success in operating our business, including operation of the Manufacturing Facility, depends largely on our ability to use and develop our proprietary technologies and manufacturing know-how without infringing or misappropriating the intellectual property rights of third parties, many of whom have robust patent portfolios, greater capital resources and decades of manufacturing experience. In addition, as we have gained greater visibility and market exposure as a public company, we face a higher risk of being the subject of intellectual property infringement claims. Any claim of infringement by a third party, even those without merit, could cause us to incur substantial legal costs defending against the claim and could distract our management and technical personnel from our business. In particular, the validity and scope of claims relating to photovoltaic technology patents involve complex scientific, legal and factual considerations and analysis and, therefore, may be highly uncertain. Furthermore, we could be subject to a judgment or voluntarily enter into a settlement, either of which could require us to pay substantial damages. A judgment or settlement could also include an injunction, a court order or other agreement that could prevent us from operating the Manufacturing Facility and producing our products. In addition, we might elect or be required to seek a license for the use of third party intellectual property, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or if available, the payments under such license may harm our operating results and financial condition. Alternatively, we may be required to develop non-infringing technology, redesign our products or

-24-

alter our manufacturing techniques and processes, each of which could require significant research and development efforts and expenses and may ultimately not be successful. Any of these events could seriously harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources, divert management’s attention and affect our ability to attract and retain qualified board members and officers.

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the listing requirements of the NASDAQ Global Select Market and other applicable securities rules and regulations. Compliance with these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on our systems and resources. The Exchange Act requires, among other things, that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and operating results and maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. To maintain and, if required, improve our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting to meet this standard, significant resources and management oversight may be required. As a result, management’s attention may be diverted from other business concerns, which could harm our business and operating results. Although we have already hired additional employees to comply with these requirements, we may need to hire more employees in the future, which will increase our costs and expenses.

As a public company, we also expect that it will be more expensive for us to maintain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified executive officers and members of our board of directors, particularly to serve on our audit committee and compensation committee.

The production and installation of solar energy systems depends heavily on suitable meteorological conditions. If meteorological conditions are unexpectedly unfavorable, the electricity production from our solar energy systems may be substantially below our expectations and our ability to timely deploy new systems may be adversely impacted.

The energy produced and revenue and cash receipts generated by a solar energy system depend on suitable solar and weather conditions, both of which are beyond our control. Furthermore, components of our systems, such as panels and inverters, could be damaged by severe weather, such as hailstorms or tornadoes. In these circumstances, we generally would be obligated to bear the expense of repairing the damaged solar energy systems that we own. Sustained unfavorable weather also could unexpectedly delay our installation of solar energy systems, leading to increased expenses and decreased revenue and cash receipts in the relevant periods. Weather patterns could change, making it harder to predict the average annual amount of sunlight striking each location where we install. This could make our solar energy systems less economical overall or make individual systems less economical. Any of these events or conditions could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We typically bear the risk of loss and the cost of maintenance and repair on solar systems that are owned or leased by our fund investors.

We typically bear the risk of loss and are generally obligated to cover the cost of maintenance and repair on any solar systems that we sell or lease to our fund investors. At the time we sell or lease a solar system to a fund investor, we enter into a maintenance services agreement where we agree to operate and maintain the system for a fixed fee that is calculated to cover our future expected maintenance costs. If our solar systems require an above-average amount of repairs or if the cost of repairing systems were higher than

-25-

our estimate, we would need to perform such repairs without additional compensation. If our solar systems, a majority of which are located in California, are damaged in the event of a natural disaster beyond our control, losses could be excluded, such as earthquake damage, or exceed insurance policy limits, and we could incur unforeseen costs that could harm our business and financial condition. We may also incur significant costs for taking other actions in preparation for, or in reaction to, such events. We purchase Property and Business Interruption insurance with industry standard coverage and limits approved by an investor’s third-party insurance advisors to hedge against such risk, but such coverage may not cover our losses.

Any unauthorized disclosure or theft of personal information we gather, store and use could harm our reputation and subject us to claims or litigation.

We receive, store and use personal information of our customers, including names, addresses, e-mail addresses, credit information and other housing and energy use information. Unauthorized disclosure of such personal information, whether through breach of our systems by an unauthorized party, employee theft or misuse, or otherwise, could harm our business. If we were subject to an inadvertent disclosure of such personal information, or if a third party were to gain unauthorized access to customer personal information we possess, our operations could be seriously disrupted and we could be subject to claims or litigation arising from damages suffered by our customers. In addition, we could incur significant costs in complying with the multitude of federal, state and local laws regarding the unauthorized disclosure of personal information. Finally, any perceived or actual unauthorized disclosure of such information could harm our reputation, substantially impair our ability to attract and retain customers and have an adverse impact on our business.

We may have trouble refinancing our credit facilities or obtaining new financing for our working capital, equipment financing and other needs in the future or complying with the terms of existing credit facilities. If credit facilities are not available to us on acceptable terms, if and when needed, or if we are unable to comply with their terms, our ability to continue to grow our business would be adversely impacted.

We have entered into several secured credit agreements, including a working capital facility under which we may currently borrow up to $250.0 million (with $200.0 million currently committed from several lenders and an additional $50.0 million subject to further conditions) that matures in December 2016. As of June 30, 2014, we had the ability to draw up to an additional $671.4 million under our credit facilities. The working capital facility requires us to comply with certain financial, reporting and other requirements. The timing of our commercial projects has on occasion adversely affected our ability to satisfy certain financial covenants under these or prior facilities. While our lenders have given us waivers of certain covenants we have not satisfied in the past, there is no assurance that the lenders will waive or forbear from exercising their remedies with respect to any future defaults that might occur. For example, in May 2013, we executed amendments to two of our then outstanding secured credit facilities and obtained a waiver from our lenders under our third secured credit facility so that financial covenants regarding debt service coverage for the first quarter of 2013 would not apply to us because our trailing twelve-month non-GAAP EBITDA would have been insufficient to satisfy the covenants. In June 2013, we amended the debt service coverage ratio in our remaining two secured credit facilities to limit debt service to only cash interest charges. In September 2014, we amended our revolving credit facility to allow for the issuance of the 2014 notes. While we believe that some of the financial and other covenants are generally more favorable to us following these changes, a breach of our covenants may still occur in the future.

Further, there is no assurance that we will be able to enter into new credit facilities on acceptable terms. If we are unable to satisfy financial covenants and other terms under existing or new facilities or obtain associated waivers or forbearance from our lenders or if we are unable to obtain refinancing or new financings for our working capital, equipment and other needs on acceptable terms if and when needed, our business would be adversely affected.

-26-

We intend to expand our international activities, which will subject us to a number of risks.

Our long-term strategic plans include international expansion, and we intend to sell our solar energy products and services in international markets. Risks inherent to international operations include the following:

• inability to work successfully with third parties with local expertise to co-develop international projects;

• multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations, including export and import restrictions, tax laws and regulations, environmental regulations, labor laws and other government requirements, approvals, permits and licenses;

• changes in general economic and political conditions in the countries where we operate, including changes in government incentives relating to power generation and solar electricity;

• political and economic instability, including wars, acts of terrorism, political unrest, boycotts, curtailments of trade and other business restrictions;

• difficulties and costs in recruiting and retaining individuals skilled in international business operations;

• international business practices that may conflict with U.S. customs or legal requirements;

• financial risks, such as longer sales and payment cycles and greater difficulty collecting accounts receivable;

• fluctuations in currency exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar; and

• inability to obtain, maintain or enforce intellectual property rights, including inability to apply for or register material trademarks in foreign countries.

Doing business in foreign markets requires us to be able to respond to rapid changes in market, legal, and political conditions in these countries. The success of our business will depend, in part, on our ability to succeed in differing legal, regulatory, economic, social and political environments. We may not be able to develop and implement policies and strategies that will be effective in each location where we do business.

Our international operations subject us to risks related to any violations of anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Our manufacturing operations and our continued international expansion efforts may subject us to additional regulatory risks that may harm our operating results. For example, business practices in certain foreign countries, particularly those with developing economies, may be prohibited by laws and regulations applicable to us, such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA. The FCPA generally prohibits companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Other countries in which we operate have adopted similar anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws. Our operations have historically been conducted predominantly within the United States, and our international expansion has largely resulted from acquired businesses, including Silevo’s joint-venture operations in China with entities affiliated with the Chinese government. Any violation of anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws could subject us to criminal or civil penalties or other sanctions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and reputation.

-27-

Our expanded operations also subject us to risks associated with currency fluctuations.

Our need to purchase supplies globally in order to meet the anticipated production output of the Manufacturing Facility, and our continued international expansion further subjects us to risks relating to currency fluctuations. Foreign currencies periodically experience rapid fluctuations in value against the U.S. dollar. A weakened U.S. dollar could increase the cost of procurement of raw materials from foreign jurisdictions and operating expenses in foreign locations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish misleading or unfavorable research about our business, the price and trading volume of our securities could decline.

The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrade our stock or publish incorrect or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and therefore the trading price of our notes would likely decline. In addition, if one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which could cause the price or trading volume of our securities to decline.

We incur significant costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies, which could adversely affect our operating results.

As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, including costs associated with public company reporting and corporate governance requirements. These requirements include compliance with Section 404 and other provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and The NASDAQ Global Select Market. If these requirements divert our management’s attention from other business concerns, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. In addition, complying with these rules and regulations has substantially increased our legal and financial compliance expenses, has made some activities more time-consuming and costly, and may in the future require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business or increase the prices of our solutions, which could negatively impact our business.

We do not expect to declare any dividends in the foreseeable future.

We do not anticipate declaring any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. In addition, any future financing agreements may prohibit us from paying any type of dividends. Consequently, investors may need to sell all or part of their holdings of our common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law may delay or prevent an acquisition of our company.

Our certificate of incorporation, bylaws and Delaware law contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws include provisions that:

• authorize “blank check” preferred stock, which could be issued by the board without stockholder approval and may contain voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to our common stock;

• create a classified board of directors whose members serve staggered three-year terms;

-28-

• specify that special meetings of our stockholders can be called only by our board of directors, the chairperson of the board, the chief executive officer or the president;

• establish an advance notice procedure for stockholder approvals to be brought before an annual meeting of our stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors;

• provide that our directors may be removed only for cause;

• provide that vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum;

• specify that no stockholder is permitted to cumulate votes at any election of directors; and

• require supermajority votes of the holders of our common stock to amend specified provisions of our charter documents.

These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control or changes in our management.

In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which limits the ability of stockholders owning in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock to merge or combine with us.

Any provision of our certificate of incorporation or bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.

To the extent that our pre-tax income or loss becomes relatively modest, our ability to conclude that a control deficiency is not a material weakness or that an accounting error does not require a restatement could be adversely affected.

Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, our management is required to assess the impact of control deficiencies based upon both quantitative and qualitative factors, and depending upon that analysis we classify such identified deficiencies as either a control deficiency, significant deficiency or a material weakness. One element of our analysis of the significance of any control deficiency is its actual or potential financial impact. This assessment will vary depending on our level of pre-tax income or loss. For example, a smaller pre-tax income or loss will increase the likelihood of a quantitative assessment of a control deficiency as a significant deficiency or material weakness.

To the extent that our pre-tax income or loss is relatively small, if management or our independent registered public accountants identify an error in our interim or annual financial statements, it is more likely that such an error may be determined to be a material weakness or be considered a material error that could, depending upon the complete quantitative and qualitative analysis, result in our having to restate previously issued financial statements.

29