Enough is Enough: Takeover Time 2026 Calls on CTNT Stockholders to Prepare to Make Their Voices Heard

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“This campaign is not about one transaction. It is about the entire record and one fundamental question: who should decide whether CTNT's current Board has earned the right to continue representing stockholders? I believe the answer is the stockholders themselves. Look at the capital raises. Look at the dilution. Look at the reverse splits. Look at the Company's disclosed ineffective controls. Look at the tens of millions of dollars deployed into loans and investments. Look at the concentration of executive and voting authority. And then look at what happened after our effort to replace the Board became public. If stockholders are satisfied with that record, they can make that judgment. If they are tired of it and want fundamentally different oversight and accountability, they should have the opportunity to make that judgment too.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“Raising capital is not inherently wrong. Public companies need capital. But after stockholders absorb repeated equity issuance and repeated reverse splits, they are entitled to ask where the capital went, what risks were taken with it, what returns those decisions produced and whether the Board exercised the degree of independent oversight stockholders deserve.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“Stockholders watched CTNT raise enormous amounts of equity capital while the Company's own filings show substantial corporate liquidity being deployed into unsecured third-party lending and other investment arrangements. We are not going to invent facts about where money ultimately went or accuse anyone of wrongdoing without evidence. But stockholders absolutely have the right to ask why these decisions were made, who approved them, what diligence was conducted, what protections were obtained and whether these uses of corporate capital served CTNT's best interests.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“When a public company itself reports ineffective disclosure controls, stockholders are entitled to demand remediation, stronger financial oversight and accountability from the people charged with supervising the Company.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“That deserves answers. Who served on that committee? What did they know? What did they discuss? What materials did they receive? Was there a meeting or written consent? What legal and financial advice was provided? Did the committee discuss the October 1 Board-replacement filing? Did it discuss the Section 220 demand or record-date request? Did it evaluate the voting consequences of issuing 1.5 million additional votes directly to the incumbent Chairman and CEO? And did the committee consider the obvious fact that the incumbent Board itself was the subject of the pending replacement effort? We are not declaring that fact alone made any director legally interested or disqualified. We are asking what was considered and why.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“Even if CTNT genuinely needed another $330,000, why did that financing need to carry 1.5 million votes? Why Class B? Why not Class A? Why not another financing instrument that would not have the same effect on voting power? CTNT had repeatedly raised money through Class A stock. Stockholders deserve to know what corporate need made fifteen-vote Class B shares the chosen instrument on October 7.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“So what was the Rule 5635(b) analysis? Did CTNT determine that this transaction did not result in a change of control? If so, on what facts? Did CTNT consult Nasdaq? Did the Company seek an interpretation? Was shareholder approval considered? If the Company's position is that shareholder approval was not required, stockholders deserve to understand the basis for that conclusion.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“This is precisely why contemporaneous evidence matters. The question is not simply whether CTNT had authorized Class B stock available. The questions are why those shares were issued, why that amount was selected, why fifteen-vote stock was used instead of Class A, what the approving committee knew, what alternatives it considered, whether the voting effect was calculated and discussed, and what corporate purpose the directors actually articulated at the time. Those questions should be answered by documents and evidence—not speculation from either side.”

Natasha Yuryevna Ovsepyan, Managing Member of Takeover Time 2026 LLC and proposed director nominee

“I have developed tremendous respect for Delaware's corporate-law system and the Court of Chancery. Delaware has built a system where companies can conduct business with substantial authority, but directors and controlling actors can also be called upon to explain how that authority was exercised when stockholder rights are implicated. The Court's role is not to take my side or management's side. Its role is to apply Delaware law fairly to the evidence. That is exactly what I am asking it to do, and I will respect the Court's process and rulings. That balance—strong protection for l”