Twist Bioscience (0ME) Risk Analysis

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to any provisions of the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, any action or proceeding asserting a claim as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction upon the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine, subject in each case to the Court of Chancery having personal jurisdiction over the parties named as defendants therein. The exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. The choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. If a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we might incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions. In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the U.S. federal district courts are the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. Our exclusive forum provision will not relieve us of our duties to comply with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, and our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with these laws, rules and regulations. The enforceability of similar federal court choice of forum provisions in other companies' certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that a court could find our federal court choice of forum provision to be inapplicable or unenforceable. If a court were to find either of the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions. Additionally, while the Delaware Supreme Court recently determined that choice of forum provisions for actions arising under the Securities Act are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring such a claim arising under the Securities Act against us, our directors, officers, or other employees in a venue other than in the federal district courts of the United States. In such instance, we would expect to vigorously assert the validity and enforceability of the exclusive forum provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, and this may require significant additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change in control of our Company. These provisions could also make it more difficult for stockholders to elect directors and take other corporate actions. These provisions include: - providing for a classified board of directors with staggered, three-year terms;- authorizing our board of directors to issue preferred stock with voting or other rights or preferences that could discourage a takeover attempt or delay changes in control;- prohibiting cumulative voting in the election of directors;- providing 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;- prohibiting the adoption, amendment or repeal of our amended and restated bylaws or the repeal of the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation regarding the election and removal of directors without the required approval of at least 66.67% of the shares entitled to vote at an election of directors;- prohibiting stockholder action by written consent;- limiting the persons who may call special meetings of stockholders; and - requiring advance notification of stockholder nominations and proposals. These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management. In addition, the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law (the "DGCL"), govern us. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time without the consent of our board of directors. These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws and under Delaware law could discourage potential takeover attempts, reduce the price investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock and result in the market price of our common stock being lower than it would be without these provisions.

As we have in the past, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner, we determine from time to time. We have also issued and expect to issue common stock to employees and directors pursuant to our equity incentive plans. If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in future transactions, or common stock is issued pursuant to equity incentive plans, investors may be materially diluted. New investors in such subsequent transactions could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock.

Short sellers have in the past and may attempt in the future to drive down the market price of our common stock. Short selling is the practice of selling securities that the seller does not own but may have borrowed with the intention of buying identical securities back at a later date. The short seller hopes to profit from a decline in the value of the securities between the time the securities are borrowed and the time they are replaced. As it is in the short seller's best interests for the price of the stock to decline, many short sellers (sometime known as "disclosed shorts") publish, or arrange for the publication of, negative opinions regarding the relevant issuer and its business prospects to create negative market momentum. Although traditionally these disclosed shorts were limited in their ability to access mainstream business media or to otherwise create negative market rumors, the rise of the Internet and technological advancements regarding document creation, videotaping and publication by weblog ("blogging") have allowed many disclosed shorts to publicly attack a company's credibility, strategy and veracity by means of so-called "research reports" that mimic the type of investment analysis performed by large Wall Street firms and independent research analysts. These short attacks have, in the past, led to selling of shares in the market. Further, these short seller publications are not regulated by any governmental, self-regulatory organization or other official authority in the United States and they are not subject to certification requirements imposed by the SEC. Accordingly, the opinions they express may be based on distortions, omissions or fabrications. Companies that are subject to unfavorable allegations, even if untrue, may have to expend a significant amount of resources to investigate such allegations and/or defend themselves, including shareholder suits against the company that may be prompted by such allegations. We have been and may in the future be the subject of shareholder suits that we believe were prompted by allegations made by short sellers.