As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 25, 2011

Securities Act File No. 333-174756

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM N-2

 

 

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

(312) 205-5050

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

 

David B. Golub
Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

Copies to:

Thomas J. Friedmann
David J. Harris
William J. Tuttle
Dechert LLP
1775 I Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202) 261-3300

 

Approximate date of proposed public offering: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this form are offered on a delayed or continuous basis in reliance on Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, other than securities offered in connection with a dividend reinvestment plan, check the following box. x

It is proposed that this filing will become effective (check appropriate box):

o when declared effective pursuant to section 8(c).

 

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.

PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS		SUBJECT TO COMPLETION     , 2011

$500,000,000

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

Common Stock

Preferred Stock

Warrants

Subscription Rights

Debt Securities

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Our investment objective is to provide our stockholders with current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments in middle-market companies.

GC Advisors LLC serves as our investment adviser. GC Service Company, LLC serves as our administrator. GC Advisors LLC and GC Service Company, LLC are affiliated with Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies that had over $4.8 billion of capital under management as of June 30, 2011.

We may offer, from time to time, in one or more offerings or series, together or separately, up to $500,000,000 of our common stock, preferred stock, warrants representing rights to purchase shares of our common stock, preferred stock or debt securities, subscription rights or debt securities, which we refer to, collectively, as the “securities.” We may sell our common stock through underwriters or dealers, “at-the-market” to or through a market maker into an existing trading market or otherwise directly to one or more purchasers or through agents or through a combination of methods of sale. The identities of such underwriters, dealers, market makers or agents, as the case may be, will be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. The securities may be offered at prices and on terms to be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. In the event we offer common stock, the offering price per share of our common stock exclusive of any underwriting commissions or discounts will not be less than the net asset value per share of our common stock at the time we make the offering except (1) in connection with a rights offering to our existing stockholders, (2) with the consent of the majority of our common stockholders and approval of our board of directors, or (3) under such circumstances as the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, may permit. See “Risk Factors” for more information.

Our common stock is traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”. The last reported closing price for our common stock on August 24, 2011 was $14.88 per share. The net asset value of our common stock on June 30, 2011 (the last date prior to the date of this prospectus on which we determined net asset value) was $14.75 per share.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, frequently trade at a discount to their net asset value. If our shares trade at a discount to our net asset value, it will likely increase the risk of loss for purchasers in this offering. Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. Before buying any securities, you should read the discussion of the material risks of investing in our securities, including the risk of leverage, in “Risk Factors” beginning on page 14 of this prospectus.

This prospectus contains important information you should know before investing in our securities. Please read it before you invest and keep it for future reference. We file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information about us with the SEC. We maintain a website at http://www.golubcapitalbdc.com and make all of our annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other publicly filed information available, free of charge, on or through our website. You may also obtain such information and make shareholder inquiries by contacting us at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60606, Attention: Investor Relations, or by calling us collect at (312) 205-5050. The SEC also maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov that contains such information.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

This prospectus may not be used to consummate sales of securities unless accompanied by a prospectus supplement.

The date of this prospectus is            , 2011.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized any other person to provide you with different information. If anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. We are not, and the underwriters are not, making an offer to sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front cover of this prospectus. Our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects may have changed since that date. We will update these documents to reflect material changes only as required by law.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY			1
FEES AND EXPENSES			10
RISK FACTORS			14
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS			42
USE OF PROCEEDS			43
DISTRIBUTIONS			44
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA			45
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS			47
PRICE RANGE OF COMMON STOCK			69
THE COMPANY			70
PORTFOLIO COMPANIES			81
MANAGEMENT			91
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS			98
RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS AND CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS			108
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDERS			111
DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE			113
DIVIDEND REINVESTMENT PLAN			115
MATERIAL U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS			117
DESCRIPTION OF OUR CAPITAL STOCK			124
DESCRIPTION OF OUR PREFERRED STOCK			129
DESCRIPTION OF OUR SUBSCRIPTION RIGHTS			130
DESCRIPTION OF WARRANTS			132
DESCRIPTION OF OUR DEBT SECURITIES			134
REGULATION			145
CUSTODIAN, TRANSFER AND DIVIDEND PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR			152
BROKERAGE ALLOCATION AND OTHER PRACTICES			152
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION			153
LEGAL MATTERS			155
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM			155
AVAILABLE INFORMATION			155
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS			F-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

This prospectus is part of a registration statement that we have filed with the SEC using the “shelf” registration process. Under the shelf registration process, we may offer from time to time up to $500,000,000 of our common stock, preferred stock, warrants representing rights to purchase shares of our common stock, preferred stock or debt securities, subscription rights or debt securities on the terms to be determined at the time of the offering. We may sell our common stock through underwriters or dealers, “at-the-market” to or through a market maker, into an existing trading market or otherwise directly to one or more purchasers or through agents or through a combination of methods of sale. The identities of such underwriters, dealers, market makers or agents, as the case may be, will be described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. The securities may be offered at prices and on terms described in one or more supplements to this prospectus. This prospectus provides you with a general description of the securities that we may offer. Each time we use this prospectus to offer securities, we will provide a prospectus supplement that will contain specific information about the terms of that offering. The prospectus supplement may also add, update or change information contained in this prospectus, and the prospectus and prospectus supplement will together serve as the prospectus. Please carefully read this prospectus and any prospectus supplement, together with any exhibits, before you make an investment decision. Any exhibits will nonetheless be summarized in the prospectus or applicable prospectus supplement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary highlights some of the information in this prospectus. It is not complete and may not contain all of the information that you may want to consider. You should read the more detailed information set forth under “Risk Factors” and the other information included in this prospectus carefully.

Except as otherwise indicated, the terms:

On April 13, 2010, we converted from a limited liability company into a corporation. In this conversion, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. succeeded to the business of Golub Capital BDC LLC and its consolidated subsidiary, and the members of Golub Capital BDC LLC became stockholders of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. In this prospectus, we refer to such transactions as the “BDC Conversion.” Prior to the BDC Conversion, Golub Capital BDC LLC held all of the outstanding limited liability company interests in our predecessor, Golub Capital Master Funding LLC, or GCMF.

Golub Capital BDC

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the 1940 Act. In addition, for tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a regulated investment company, or RIC, under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, GCMF, which commenced operations in July 2007, to make investments in senior secured, unitranche (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans), mezzanine (a loan that ranks senior only to a borrower’s equity securities and ranks junior to all of such borrower’s other indebtedness in priority of payment) and second lien loans of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms. In this prospectus, the term “middle-market” generally refers to companies having earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, of between $5 million and $40 million annually.

Our investment objective is to maximize the total return to our stockholders in the form of current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $4.8 billion of capital under management as of June 30, 2011, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom we have invested alongside in the past,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

As of June 30, 2011, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 47.4% senior secured loans, 34.8% unitranche loans, 5.4% second lien loans, 10.6% mezzanine loans, 1.9% equity and (0.1)% total return swap. Over time we expect that senior secured loans will represent a smaller percentage of our investment portfolio as we grow our business, these investments are repaid and we invest in a different mix of assets.

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans and warrants and minority equity securities by primarily investing approximately $5 million to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $25 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

As discussed in the “ — Market Opportunity” section below, we believe senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans represent particularly attractive investments when compared to similar loans originated in the 2006 – 2008 period because we expect pricing to be more attractive and borrowing terms and deal structures to be more conservative.

Our Adviser

Our investment activities are managed by our investment adviser, GC Advisors. GC Advisors is responsible for sourcing potential investments, conducting research and due diligence on prospective investments and equity sponsors, analyzing investment opportunities, structuring our investments and monitoring our investments and portfolio companies on an ongoing basis. GC Advisors was organized in September 2008 and is a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the Advisers Act. Under our amended and restated investment advisory agreement with GC Advisors, or the Investment Advisory Agreement, we pay GC Advisors a base management fee and an incentive fee for its services. See “Management Agreements — Management Fee” for a discussion of the base management fee and incentive fee, including the cumulative income incentive fee and the income and capital gains incentive fee, payable by us to GC Advisors. Unlike most closed-end funds whose fees are based on assets net of leverage, our base management fee is based on our average-adjusted gross assets (including leverage but adjusted to exclude cash and cash equivalents so that investors do not pay the base management fee on such assets) and, therefore, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Additionally, under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because it determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. See “Management Agreements — Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement.”

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and has entered into a staffing agreement, or the Staffing Agreement, with two Golub Capital affiliates, Golub Capital Incorporated and Golub Capital Management LLC. Under the Staffing Agreement, these companies make experienced investment professionals available to GC Advisors and provide access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital and its affiliates. The Staffing Agreement provides GC Advisors with access to investment opportunities, which we refer to in the aggregate as deal flow, generated by Golub Capital and its affiliates in the ordinary course of their businesses and commits the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee to serve in that capacity. As our investment adviser, GC Advisors is obligated to allocate investment opportunities among us and its other clients fairly and equitably over time in accordance with its allocation policy. See “Related Party Transactions and Certain Relationships.” However, there can be no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. GC Advisors seeks to capitalize on the significant deal origination, credit underwriting, due diligence, investment structuring, execution, portfolio management and monitoring experience of Golub Capital’s investment professionals.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

An affiliate of GC Advisors, GC Service, provides the administrative services necessary for us to operate. See “The Offering — Administration Agreement” for a discussion of the fees and expenses we are required to reimburse to GC Service.

About Golub Capital

Golub Capital, founded in 1994, is a leading lender to middle-market companies, with a long track record of investing in unitranche and junior capital financings, which is our long-term investment focus. Golub Capital invested more than $2.5 billion in unitranche and mezzanine transactions across a variety of market environments and industries between 2001 and June 30, 2011. From 2005 through 2010, Golub Capital invested in more than 250 middle-market companies and, as of June 30, 2011, it held debt investments in more than 170 middle-market companies.

Golub Capital’s middle-market lending group is managed by a four-member senior management team consisting of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Gregory W. Cashman and Andrew H. Steuerman. As of June 30, 2011, Golub Capital’s 49 investment professionals had an average of over 11 years of investment experience and were supported by 73 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management.

Market Opportunity

We intend to pursue an investment strategy focused on investing in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in, U.S. middle-market companies.

Target Market.  We believe that small and middle-market companies in the United States with annual revenues between $10 million and $2.5 billion represent a significant growth segment of the U.S. economy and often require substantial capital investments to grow. Middle-market companies have generated a significant number of investment opportunities for investment funds managed or advised by Golub Capital and we believe that this market segment will continue to produce significant investment opportunities for us.

Specialized Lending Requirements.  We believe that several factors render many U.S. financial institutions ill-suited to lend to U.S. middle-market companies. For example, based on the experience of our management team, lending to U.S. middle-market companies (1) is generally more labor intensive than lending to larger companies due to the smaller size of each investment and the fragmented nature of information for such companies, (2) requires due diligence and underwriting practices consistent with the demands and economic limitations of the middle-market and (3) may also require more extensive ongoing monitoring by the lender.

Demand for Debt Capital.  We believe that private equity firms will continue to be active investors in middle-market companies. These private equity firms generally seek to leverage their investments by combining their capital with senior secured loans and/or mezzanine debt provided by other sources, and we believe that our capital is well positioned to partner with such equity investors. We expect such activity to be funded by the substantial amounts of private equity capital that have been raised in recent years.

Refinancing Requirements.  We believe the debt associated with a large number of middle-market leveraged mergers and acquisitions completed from 2005 to 2008 will start to come due in the near term and, accordingly, we believe that new financing opportunities will increase as many leveraged companies seek to refinance in the near term.

Deal Structures.  We believe that as a result of the credit crisis, many lenders are requiring less senior and total leverage and more comprehensive loan covenants than was customary in the years leading up to the credit crisis.

Competitive Strengths

Deep, Experienced Management Team.  We are managed by GC Advisors, which has access through the Staffing Agreement to the resources and expertise of Golub Capital’s 119 employees, led by our chairman, Lawrence E. Golub, and our chief executive officer, David B. Golub. As of June 30, 2011, the 49 investment professionals of Golub Capital had an average of over 11 years of investment experience and were supported

TABLE OF CONTENTS

by 73 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management. Golub Capital seeks to hire and retain high-quality investment professionals and reward those personnel based on investor returns. In 2009, Buyouts Magazine named Golub Capital “Middle-Market Lender of the Year” for the second consecutive year and M&A Advisor named Golub Capital the “Mezzanine Financing Agent of the Year” in 2009. These awards do not constitute an endorsement by any such publication or organization of the securities being offered by this prospectus.

Leading U.S. Debt Platform Provides Access to Proprietary Relationship-Based Deal Flow.  GC Advisors gives us access to the deal flow of Golub Capital, one of the leading middle-market lenders in the United States. Reuters Loan Pricing Corporation ranked Golub Capital as the leading senior lender for middle-market leveraged buyouts (total debt financing of under $100 million) for 2009, based both on deal volume and number of deals. Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 160 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with 80 sponsors. We believe that Golub Capital receives relationship-based “early looks” and “last looks” at many investment opportunities in the U.S. middle-market market, allowing it to be highly selective in the transactions it pursues.

Disciplined Investment and Underwriting Process.  GC Advisors utilizes the established investment process of Golub Capital for reviewing lending opportunities, structuring transactions and monitoring investments. Using its disciplined approach to lending, GC Advisors seeks to minimize credit losses through effective underwriting, comprehensive due diligence investigations, structuring and the implementation of restrictive debt covenants.

Regimented Credit Monitoring.  Following each investment, GC Advisors implements a regimented credit monitoring system. This careful approach, which involves ongoing review and analysis by teams of professionals, has enabled us to identify problems early and to assist borrowers before they face difficult liquidity constraints.

Concentrated Middle-Market Focus.  Because of our focus on the middle-market, we understand the following general characteristics of middle-market lending:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Organizational Structure

The following shows a simplified organizational chart reflecting our relationship with our investment adviser and administrator and our direct and indirect ownership interests in certain of our subsidiaries, including the membership interests of the Securitization Issuer, as of the date of this prospectus:

Recent Developments

Revolving Credit Facility.   On July 21, 2011, Golub Capital BDC Funding LLC, our newly created, wholly owned subsidiary, or Funding, entered into a $75 million senior, secured revolving credit facility, or the Credit Facility, with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender.

Under the Credit Facility, which matures on October 21, 2015, the lender has agreed to extend credit to Funding in an aggregate principal amount of $75 million. The Credit Facility is secured by all of the assets held by Funding. Funding’s ability to draw under the Credit Facility is scheduled to terminate on October 20, 2012. The period from the closing date until October 20, 2012 is referred to as the reinvestment period. All amounts outstanding under the Credit Facility are required to be repaid by October 21, 2015. Through the reinvestment period, the Credit Facility bears interest at an annual interest rate equal to LIBOR plus 2.25%. After the reinvestment period, the annual interest rate will reset to LIBOR plus 2.75% for the remaining term of the Credit Facility. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows — Recent Developments — Revolving Credit Facility.”

Exemptive Application to Own an Asset Manager.   We applied for exemptive relief from the SEC on May 19, 2011 to permit us to continue to hold up to 100% of the outstanding voting interest of a portfolio company at such time as such portfolio company is required to register as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. We have not yet formed such a subsidiary. In addition, there is no assurance that such relief will be granted or, if granted, the relief would be acceptable to us if the terms under which the SEC grants relief differ from those we proposed.

Follow-On Equity Offering.   On April 6, 2011, we completed a public offering in which we sold an aggregate of 3,500,000 shares of our common stock at a price per share of $15.75, resulting in proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, to us of approximately $52.6 million. On May 2, 2011, we issued an additional 453,257 shares of our common stock at the public offering price to cover over-allotments resulting in additional proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, of approximately $6.8 million.

SBIC License.  On August 24, 2010, our wholly owned subsidiary, GC SBIC IV, L.P., received approval for a license from the U.S. Small Business Administration, or the SBA, to operate as a Small Business Investment Company, or an SBIC. As a wholly owned subsidiary, GC SBIC IV, L.P. may rely on an exclusion from the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act. As such, this subsidiary will not elect to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. GC SBIC IV, L.P. has an investment objective substantially similar to ours and makes similar types of investments in accordance with SBIC regulations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Prior to GC SBIC IV, L.P. obtaining approval from the SBA, Golub Capital managed two SBICs licensed by the SBA for more than 14 years. The SBIC license allows GC SBIC IV, L.P. to incur leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment and certain approvals by the SBA and customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures carry long-term fixed rates that are generally lower than rates on comparable bank and other debt. Under the regulations applicable to SBICs, an SBIC may have outstanding debentures guaranteed by the SBA generally in an amount of up to twice its regulatory capital, which generally equates to the amount of its equity capital. SBIC regulations currently limit the amount that an SBIC subsidiary may borrow to a maximum of $150 million, assuming that it has at least $75 million of equity capital. GC SBIC IV, L.P. will be subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants.

As of June 30, 2011, we had committed and funded $50.0 million of equity capital to GC SBIC IV, L.P. and had SBA debentures of $48.3 million outstanding, which mature in March 2021. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, the effective annualized average interest rate, which includes amortization of fees paid on the debentures, was 3.7% and 2.9%, respectively. The interest rate on the $20.0 million of outstanding debentures was fixed on March 29, 2011 at an interest rate of 4.5%. The remaining $28.3 million of debentures accrue interest at an interim rate of approximately 1.0%.

As of June 30, 2011, we did not have any unfunded commitments from the SBA.

Under present SBIC regulations, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $225 million. It is possible that GC SBIC IV, L.P. will be constrained in its ability to issue SBA-guaranteed debentures in the future if other Golub Capital SBICs have already issued such debentures. As of June 30, 2011, the two other SBIC licensees operated by Golub Capital had an aggregate of $140.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding, leaving aggregate borrowing capacity of a maximum of $85.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures for GC SBIC IV, L.P. and the two other SBIC licensees, none of which is required to be allocated to us. The borrowing capacity of GC SBIC IV, L.P. could be expanded if any other Golub Capital SBICs retire their SBA-guaranteed debentures, and the other two SBIC licenses are limited to only making add-on investments in existing portfolio companies, making the majority of the incremental borrowing capacity available to GC SBIC IV, L.P. Unless specifically approved by the SBA, the other two licenses were prohibited by the SBA from making new investments when GC SBIC IV, L.P. received its license on August 24, 2010.

We applied for exemptive relief from the SEC on July 9, 2010 and filed an amended application on November 12, 2010, March 31, 2011 and on June 14, 2011 to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary guaranteed by the SBA from our 200% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. If we receive an exemption for this SBA debt, we would have the ability to incur leverage in excess of the amounts we are currently permitted to incur under the 1940 Act.

Debt Securitization.  On July 16, 2010, we completed a $300 million term Debt Securitization in which the Securitization Issuer issued $300 million of notes and, in connection with such issuance, received $300 million of consideration, consisting of $62.1 million of cash as well as senior secured and second lien loans (or participations therein) with an aggregate outstanding loan balance of $237.9 million, which served as the initial collateral for the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer. We use the term “debt securitization” in this prospectus to describe a form of secured borrowing under which an operating company (sometimes referred to as an “originator” or “sponsor”) acquires or originates mortgages, receivables, loans or other assets that earn income, whether on a one-time or recurring basis (collectively, “income producing assets”), and borrows money on a non-recourse basis against a legally separate pool of loans or other income producing assets. In a typical debt securitization, the originator transfers the loans or income producing assets to a single-purpose, bankruptcy-remote subsidiary (also referred to as a “special purpose entity”), which is established solely for the purpose of holding loans and income producing assets and issuing debt secured by these income producing assets. The formation of a special purpose entity and subsequent issuance of debt is referred to in this prospectus as a structured finance transaction. The special purpose entity completes the borrowing through the issuance of notes secured by the loans or other assets. The special purpose entity may issue the notes in the capital markets to a variety of investors, including banks, non-bank financial institutions

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and other investors. In the Debt Securitization, an institutional investor purchased the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer in a private placement.

The notes offered in the Debt Securitization were issued by the Securitization Issuer, and the Class A Notes and Class B Notes are secured by the assets held by the Securitization Issuer. The Debt Securitization was executed through a private placement of $174 million of Aaa/AAA Class A Notes, or the Class A Notes, which bear interest at the three-month London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, plus 2.40%. The $10 million face amount of Class B Notes, or Class B Notes, bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.40%, and the $116 million face amount of Subordinated Notes, or Subordinated Notes, do not bear interest. All of the notes are scheduled to mature on July 20, 2021. In partial consideration for the loans transferred to the Securitization Issuer as part of the Debt Securitization, Holdings retained all of the Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, which together totaled $126 million, and it retained all of the membership interests in the Securitization Issuer, which Holdings initially purchased for $250. All of the notes are scheduled to mature on July 20, 2021. We use the term retained in this prospectus to describe the acquisition by Holdings of the Class B Notes, the Subordinated Notes and the membership interests issued by the Securitization Issuer. Specifically, Holdings acquired the membership interests in the Securitization Issuer in connection with the initial capitalization of the Securitization Issuer. Holdings then acquired the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes from the Securitization Issuer as part of the Debt Securitization in partial consideration for the portfolio loans transferred from Holdings to the Securitization Issuer in the combination sale and contribution transaction described below. These transactions were all completed in reliance on exemptions from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act.

We undertook the Debt Securitization because it provided a number of benefits to us, most notably in providing financing at an attractive cost for portfolio loans that had been financed under our prior credit facility, which was scheduled to mature on December 29, 2010. The Debt Securitization also provided cash for us to lend to portfolio companies because the proceeds we received from the Debt Securitization exceeded the amount necessary to pay off our prior credit facility in full.

There are risks associated with the Debt Securitization, including:

For a more detailed discussion of the Debt Securitization, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — We are subject to risks associated with the Debt Securitization” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Debt Securitization.”

Operating and Regulatory Structure

Our investment activities are managed by GC Advisors and supervised by our board of directors, a majority of whom are independent of us, GC Advisors and its affiliates.

As a business development company, we are required to comply with certain regulatory requirements. For example, while we are permitted to finance investments using leverage, which may include the issuance of shares of preferred stock, or notes and other borrowings, our ability to use leverage is limited in significant

TABLE OF CONTENTS

respects. See “Regulation.” Any decision on our part to use leverage will depend upon our assessment of the attractiveness of available investment opportunities in relation to the costs and perceived risks of such leverage. GC Advisors makes recommendations to our board of directors with respect to leverage policies. Our board of directors determines our leverage policy, including approving in advance the incurrence of material indebtedness and the execution of material contracts, and directs GC Advisors to implement such policies. The use of leverage to finance investments creates certain risks and potential conflicts of interest. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns. Our management and incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders,” “— Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a business development company, the necessity of raising additional capital exposes us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage” and “— Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We intend to finance our investments with borrowed money, which will magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.”

Also, as a business development company, we are generally prohibited from acquiring assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, after giving effect to any acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. Qualifying assets generally include securities of “eligible portfolio companies,” cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and high-quality debt investments maturing in one year or less from the time of investment. Under the rules of the 1940 Act, “eligible portfolio companies” include (1) private domestic operating companies, (2) public domestic operating companies whose securities are not listed on a national securities exchange (e.g., the New York Stock Exchange, NYSE Amex Equities and The NASDAQ Global Market) or registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and (3) public domestic operating companies having a market capitalization of less than $250 million. Public domestic operating companies whose securities are quoted on the over-the-counter bulletin board and through Pink Sheets LLC are not listed on a national securities exchange and therefore are eligible portfolio companies. See “Regulation.”

Conflicts of Interests

Subject to certain 1940 Act restrictions on co-investments with affiliates, GC Advisors offers us the right to participate in all investment opportunities that it determines are appropriate for us in view of our investment objective, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other relevant factors. Such offers are subject to the exception that, in accordance with GC Advisors’ code of ethics and allocation policies, we might not participate in each individual opportunity but will, on an overall basis, be entitled to participate equitably with other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates.

To the extent that we compete with entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates for a particular investment opportunity, GC Advisors will allocate investment opportunities across the entities for which such opportunities are appropriate, consistent with (1) its internal conflict of interest and allocation policies, (2) the requirements of the Advisers Act and (3) certain restrictions under the 1940 Act regarding co-investments with affiliates. GC Advisors’ allocation policies are intended to ensure that, over time, we may generally share equitably in investment opportunities with other investment funds, accounts or other investment vehicles, together referred to as accounts, sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, particularly those involving a security with limited supply or involving differing classes of securities of the same issuer which may be suitable for us and such other accounts.

GC Advisors has historically sponsored or managed, and currently sponsors or manages, accounts with similar or overlapping investment strategies and has put in place a conflict-resolution policy that addresses the co-investment restrictions set forth under the 1940 Act. GC Advisors seeks to ensure the equitable allocation of investment opportunities when we are able to invest alongside other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. When we invest alongside such other accounts, such investments are made consistent with GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, GC Advisors will determine separately the amount of any proposed investment to be made by us and similar eligible accounts. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and its affiliates. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisor’s pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the amount that each such party would have invested if sufficient securities or loan amounts were available. In situations in which co-investment with other entities sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, such as when, in the absence of exemptive relief described below, we and such other entities would be making different investments in the same issuer, GC Advisors will need to decide whether we or such other entity or entities will proceed with the investment. GC Advisors will make these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that will be fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. We and GC Advisors have submitted an exemptive application to the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. See “Related Party Transactions and Certain Relationships.”

GC Advisors and its affiliates have other clients with similar or competing investment objectives, including several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which are continuing to seek new capital commitments. In serving these clients, GC Advisors may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities. Our investment objective may overlap with such affiliated accounts. GC Advisors’ allocation procedures are designed to allocate investment opportunities among the accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates in a manner consistent with its obligations under the Advisers Act. If two or more accounts with similar investment strategies are actively investing, GC Advisors will seek to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients.” Additionally, under our incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when we recognize capital gains and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of such capital gains. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — Our incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders.” In addition, because the base management fee that we pay to GC Advisors is based on our average adjusted gross assets, including those assets acquired through the use of leverage, GC Advisors has a financial incentive to incur leverage.

Our principal executive offices are located at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60606, and our telephone number is (312) 205-5050. Our corporate website is located at www.golubcapitalbdc.com. Information on our website is not incorporated into or a part of this prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FEES AND EXPENSES

The following table is intended to assist you in understanding the costs and expenses that an investor in shares of our common stock will bear directly or indirectly. However, we caution you that some of the percentages indicated in the table below are estimates and may vary. The following table excludes one-time fees payable to third parties not affiliated with GC Advisors that were incurred in connection with the Debt Securitization but includes all of the applicable ongoing fees and expenses of the Debt Securitization. Whenever this prospectus contains a reference to fees or expenses paid by “us” or “Golub Capital BDC,” or that “we” will pay fees or expenses, our common stockholders will indirectly bear such fees or expenses.

Stockholder transaction expenses:
Sales load (as a percentage of offering price)			— (1)
Offering expenses (as a percentage of offering price)			—	(2)
Dividend reinvestment plan expenses			None	(3)
Total stockholder transaction expenses (as a percentage of offering price)			—
Annual expenses (as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stock):
Management fees			1.71% (4)
Incentive fees payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement (20%)			0.22% (5)
Interest payments on borrowed funds			1.95% (6)
Other expenses			1.09% (7)
Total annual expenses			4.97% (8)

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer under the collateral management agreement, is entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.35% of the adjusted principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the Securitization Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. This fee, which is less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement, is paid directly by the Securitization Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against such management fee. Accordingly, the 1.375% management fee paid by the Company to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through the Securitization Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by an amount equal to such 0.35% fee paid to GC Advisors by the Securitization Issuer. This fee may be waived by the collateral manager. The collateral management agreement does not include any incentive fee payable to GC Advisors.

For purposes of this table, the SEC requires that the “Management fees” percentage be calculated as a percentage of net assets attributable to common stockholders, rather than total assets, including assets that have been funded with borrowed monies because common stockholders bear all of this cost. If the base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage were calculated instead as a percentage of our total assets, our base management fee portion of the “Management fees” percentage would be

TABLE OF CONTENTS

approximately 1.00% of total assets. The base management fee in the table above is based on net assets of $320.5 million and leverage of $222.3 million as of June 30, 2011.

We accomplish this limitation by subjecting each quarterly incentive fee payable under the “Income and Capital Gain Incentive Fee Calculation” to a cap (the “Incentive Fee Cap”). The Incentive Fee Cap in any quarter is equal to the difference between (a) 20.0% of Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income and (b) cumulative incentive fees of any kind paid to GC Advisors by Golub Capital BDC since April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to become a business development company. To the extent the Incentive Fee Cap is zero or a negative value in any quarter, no incentive fee would be payable in that quarter. Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income is equal to the sum of (a) Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for each period since April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to be regulated as a business development company, and (b) cumulative aggregate realized capital gains, cumulative aggregate realized capital losses, cumulative aggregate unrealized capital depreciation and cumulative aggregate unrealized capital appreciation since April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to be regulated as a business development company.

The income and capital gain incentive fee calculation (the “Income and Capital Gain Incentive Fee Calculation”) has two parts. The income component is calculated quarterly in arrears based on our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for the immediately preceding calendar quarter.

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation. Because of the structure of the income component, it is possible that an incentive fee may be calculated under this formula with respect to a period in which we have incurred a loss. For example, if we receive Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income in excess of the hurdle rate (as defined below) for a calendar quarter, the income component will result in a positive value and an incentive fee will be paid unless the payment of such incentive fee would cause us to pay incentive fees on a cumulative basis that exceed 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income.

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets (defined as total assets less indebtedness and before taking into account any incentive fees payable during the period) at the end of the immediately preceding calendar quarter, is compared to a fixed “hurdle rate” of 2.0% quarterly. If market interest rates rise, we may be able to invest our funds in debt instruments that provide for a higher return, which would increase our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income and make it easier for GC Advisors to surpass the fixed hurdle rate and receive an incentive fee based on such net investment income. Our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income used to calculate this part of the incentive fee is also included in the amount of our total assets (excluding cash and cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets) used to calculate the 1.375% base management fee.

We calculate the income component of the Income and Capital Gain Incentive Fee Calculation with respect to our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income quarterly, in arrears, as follows:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The sum of these calculations yields the Income Incentive Fee. This amount is appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the quarter.

The second part of the Incentive Fee Calculation (the “Capital Gain Incentive Fee”) equals (a) 20.0% of our “Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base,” if any, calculated in arrears as of the end of each calendar year (or upon termination of the Investment Advisory Agreement, as of the termination date), commencing with the calendar year ending December 31, 2010, less (b) the aggregate amount of any previously paid Capital Gain Incentive Fees. Our Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base equals the sum of (1) our realized capital gains on a cumulative positive basis from April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to become a business development company, through the end of each calendar year, (2) all realized capital losses on a cumulative basis and (3) all unrealized capital depreciation on a cumulative basis.

As described above, the incentive fee will not be paid at any time where after such payment the cumulative incentives fees paid to date would be greater than 20.0% of the Cumulative Pre-Incentive Net Income since April 13, 2010. We will accrue the Capital Gain Incentive Fee if, on a cumulative basis, the sum of net realized gains/(losses) plus net unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is positive. The Capital Gain Incentive Fee is calculated on a cumulative basis from the date we elected to become a business development company through the end of each calendar year. For the calendar year ended December 31, 2010, the Capital Gain Incentive Fee was zero. For a more detailed discussion of the calculation of the incentive fee, see “Management Agreements — Management Fee.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Example

The following example demonstrates the projected dollar amount of total cumulative expenses that would be incurred over various periods with respect to a hypothetical investment in our common stock. This example and the expenses in the table above should not be considered a representation of our future expenses, and actual expenses (including the cost of debt, if any, and other expenses) may be greater or less than those shown.

		1 year				3 years				5 years				10 years
You would pay the following expenses on a $1,000 investment, assuming a 5% annual return		$	50			$	149			$	249			$	498

While the example assumes, as required by the SEC, a 5% annual return, our performance will vary and may result in a return greater or less than 5%. The incentive fee under the Investment Advisory Agreement, which, assuming a 5% annual return, would either not be payable or have an immaterial impact on the expense amounts shown above, is not included in the example. Under our Investment Advisory Agreement, no incentive fee would be payable if we have a 5% annual return. If we achieve sufficient returns on our investments, including through the realization of capital gains, to trigger an incentive fee of a material amount, our expenses, and returns to our investors, would be higher. The example assumes that all dividends and other distributions are reinvested at net asset value. Under certain circumstances, reinvestment of dividends and other distributions under our dividend reinvestment plan may occur at a price per share that differs from net asset value. See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan” for more information.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our securities involves a number of significant risks. Before you invest in our securities, you should be aware of various risks, including those described below. You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this prospectus, before you decide whether to make an investment in our securities. The risks set out below are not the only risks we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or not presently deemed material by us may also impair our operations and performance. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. In such case, our net asset value and the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. The risk factors described below are the principal risk factors associated with an investment in us as well as those factors generally associated with an investment company with investment objectives, investment policies, capital structure or trading markets similar to ours.

Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure

We have a limited operating history as a business development company.

Our predecessor, GCMF, was formed in June 2007 and commenced operations in July 2007. Prior to the completion of our initial public offering in April 2010, we did not operate as a business development company. As a result of our limited operating history, we are subject to the business risks and uncertainties associated with recently formed businesses, including the risk that we will not achieve our investment objective and that the value of your investment could decline substantially. In addition, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under the Code.

The 1940 Act and the Code impose numerous constraints on the operations of business development companies and RICs that do not apply to other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. Business development companies are required, for example, to invest at least 70% of their total assets in qualifying assets. Moreover, qualification for taxation as a RIC requires satisfaction of source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. Neither we nor GC Advisors has significant experience operating under these constraints, which may hinder our ability to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities and to achieve our investment objective.

We are dependent upon key personnel of GC Advisors for our future success and upon their access to the investment professionals and partners of Golub Capital and its affiliates.

We do not have any internal management capacity or employees. We depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the senior professionals of GC Advisors to achieve our investment objective. We expect that GC Advisors will evaluate, negotiate, structure, close and monitor our investments in accordance with the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement. We can offer no assurance, however, that senior professionals of GC Advisors will continue to provide investment advice to us. If these individuals do not maintain their existing relationships with Golub Capital and its affiliates and do not develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we may not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the senior professionals of GC Advisors have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities. Therefore, we can offer no assurance that such relationships will generate investment opportunities for us.

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and depends upon access to the investment professionals and other resources of Golub Capital and its affiliates to fulfill its obligations to us under the Investment Advisory Agreement. GC Advisors also depends upon Golub Capital to obtain access to deal flow generated by the professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates. Under the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital provides GC Advisors with the resources necessary to fulfill these obligations. The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital makes available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and provides access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. We are not a party to this Staffing Agreement and cannot assure you that Golub Capital will fulfill its obligations under the agreement. If Golub Capital fails to perform, we cannot assure you that GC Advisors will enforce the Staffing Agreement, that such agreement will not be terminated by either party or that we will continue to have access to the investment professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates or their information and deal flow.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors’ investment committee provides oversight over our investment activities. GC Advisors’ investment committee consists of two members of our board of directors and two employees of Golub Capital. The loss of any member of GC Advisors’ investment committee or of other senior professionals of GC Advisors and its affiliates would limit our ability to achieve our investment objective and operate as we anticipate. This could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our business model depends to a significant extent upon strong referral relationships with sponsors. Any inability of GC Advisors to maintain or develop these relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

We depend upon GC Advisors to maintain Golub Capital’s relationships with sponsors, and we intend to rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If GC Advisors fails to maintain such relationships, or to develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the principals of GC Advisors have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and, therefore, we can offer no assurance that these relationships will generate investment opportunities for us in the future.

We may not replicate the historical results achieved by our predecessor, GCMF, or other entities managed or sponsored by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, or by GC Advisors or its affiliates.

Our investments may differ from those of our predecessor, GCMF, and existing accounts that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. Investors in our common stock are not acquiring an interest in any accounts that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. We may consider co-investing in portfolio investments with other accounts sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates. Any such investments will be subject to regulatory limitations and approvals by directors who are not “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act. We can offer no assurance, however, that we will obtain such approvals or develop opportunities that comply with such limitations. We also cannot assure you that we will replicate the historical results achieved by members of the investment committee, and we caution you that our investment returns could be substantially lower than the returns achieved by them in prior periods. Additionally, all or a portion of the prior results may have been achieved in particular market conditions which may never be repeated. Moreover, current or future market volatility and regulatory uncertainty may have an adverse impact on our future performance.

Our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows will depend on our ability to manage our business effectively.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective will depend on our ability to manage our business and to grow. This will depend, in turn, on GC Advisors’ ability to identify, invest in and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. The achievement of our investment objectives on a cost-effective basis will depend upon GC Advisors’ execution of our investment process, its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services to us and, to a lesser extent, our access to financing on acceptable terms. GC Advisors will have substantial responsibilities under the Investment Advisory Agreement, as well as responsibilities in connection with the management of other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors, members of GC Advisors’ investment committee or Golub Capital and its affiliates. The personnel of GC Advisors and its affiliates, including GC Service, may be called upon to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. These activities may distract them or slow our rate of investment. Any failure to manage our business and our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee, there may be times when GC Advisors or such persons have interests that differ from those of our securityholders, giving rise to a conflict of interest.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients.

The members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do, or of accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Similarly, GC Advisors or its affiliates currently manage and may have other clients with similar or competing investment objectives. In serving in these multiple capacities, they may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have management responsibilities for other accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Our investment objective may overlap with the investment objectives of such affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors currently manages several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which are continuing to seek new capital commitments, and we may compete with these and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates for capital and investment opportunities. As a result, those individuals may face conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities among us and other accounts advised by or affiliated with GC Advisors. GC Advisors will seek to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. However, we can offer no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisor’s pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the amount that each such party would have invested if sufficient securities or loan amounts were available. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to participate in all investment opportunities that are suitable to us.

GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates may, from time to time, possess material non-public information, limiting our investment discretion.

Principals of GC Advisors and its affiliates and members of GC Advisors’ investment committee may serve as directors of, or in a similar capacity with, companies in which we invest, the securities of which are purchased or sold on our behalf. In the event that material nonpublic information is obtained with respect to such companies, or we become subject to trading restrictions under the internal trading policies of those companies or as a result of applicable law or regulations, we could be prohibited for a period of time from purchasing or selling the securities of such companies, and this prohibition may have an adverse effect on us.

Our management and incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders.

In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to GC Advisors. These fees are based on our average adjusted gross assets, which include leverage. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a “gross” basis and receive distributions on a “net” basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than one might achieve through direct investments. Because these fees are based on our average adjusted gross assets, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Although GC Advisors makes recommendations to our board of directors with respect to leverage policies, our board of directors determines our leverage policy, including approving in advance the incurrence of material indebtedness and the execution of material contracts. Additionally, under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when we recognize capital gains and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of such capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interests associated with its management services and compensation. While it is not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. As a result of this arrangement, GC Advisors or its affiliates may from time to time have interests that differ from those of our securityholders, giving rise to a conflict.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The part of the incentive fee payable to GC Advisors that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include interest income that has been accrued but not yet received in cash. This fee structure may be considered to involve a conflict of interest for GC Advisors to the extent that it may encourage GC Advisors to favor debt financings that provide for deferred interest, rather than current cash payments of interest. GC Advisors may have an incentive to invest in deferred interest securities in circumstances where it would not have done so but for the opportunity to continue to earn the incentive fee even when the issuers of the deferred interest securities would not be able to make actual cash payments to us on such securities. This risk could be increased because GC Advisors is not obligated to reimburse us for any incentive fees received even if we subsequently incur losses or never receive in cash the deferred income that was previously accrued.

The valuation process for certain of our portfolio holdings creates a conflict of interest.

Many of our portfolio investments are expected to be made in the form of securities that are not publicly traded. As a result, our board of directors will determine the fair value of these securities in good faith as described below in “— Many of our portfolio investments will be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.” In connection with that determination, investment professionals from GC Advisors may provide our board of directors with portfolio company valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. In addition, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have an indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors. The participation of GC Advisors’ investment professionals in our valuation process, and the indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors by Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub, could result in a conflict of interest as GC Advisors’ management fee is based, in part, on our average adjusted gross assets (including leverage but excluding cash) and our incentive fees will be based, in part, on unrealized gains and losses.

Conflicts related to other arrangements with GC Advisors or its affiliates.

We have entered into a license agreement with Golub Capital Management LLC under which Golub Capital Management LLC has agreed to grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name “Golub Capital”. See “Management Agreements — License Agreement.” In addition, we rent office space from GC Service, an affiliate of GC Advisors, and pay to GC Service our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by GC Service in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, such as rent and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. This will create conflicts of interest that our board of directors must monitor.

The Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors and the Administration Agreement with GC Service were not negotiated on an arm’s length basis and may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

The Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were negotiated between related parties. Consequently, their terms, including fees payable to GC Advisors, may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party. In addition, we may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights and remedies under these agreements because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationship with GC Advisors, GC Service and their respective affiliates. Any such decision, however, would breach our fiduciary obligations to our stockholders.

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates will be restricted, which may limit the scope of investments available to us.

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, of the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, five percent or more of our outstanding voting securities will be our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. We consider GC Advisors and its affiliates to be our affiliates for such purposes. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and, in some cases, of the SEC. We are prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to, among others, any person who owns more than 25% of our voting securities or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such persons, absent the prior approval of the SEC.

We may, however, invest alongside GC Advisors’ and its affiliates’ other clients in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with applicable law and SEC staff interpretations. For example, we may invest alongside such accounts consistent with guidance promulgated by the SEC staff permitting us and such other accounts to purchase interests in a single class of privately placed securities so long as certain conditions are met, including that GC Advisors, acting on our behalf and on behalf of other clients, negotiates no term other than price. We may also invest alongside GC Advisors’ other clients as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, GC Advisors determines separately the amount of any proposed investment to be made by us and similar eligible accounts. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisor’s pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the amount that each such party would have invested if sufficient securities or loan amounts were available. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time.

In situations in which co-investment with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, such as when, in the absence of exemptive relief described below, we and such other entities may make investments in the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interests and those of other GC Advisors clients, GC Advisors will need to decide whether we or such other entity or entities will proceed with such investments. GC Advisors will make these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such investment opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that is fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. Moreover, except in certain circumstances, we will be unable to invest in any issuer in which an account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates has previously invested. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. These restrictions may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

We may also be prohibited under the 1940 Act from knowingly participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our board of directors who are not interested persons and, in some cases, without the prior approval by the SEC. The SEC has interpreted the business development company regulations governing transactions with affiliates to prohibit certain “joint transactions” between entities that share a common investment adviser.

We and GC Advisors have submitted an application for exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. We believe that co-investments by us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates may afford us additional investment opportunities and an ability to achieve greater diversification. Accordingly, our application for exemptive relief seeks an exemptive order permitting us to invest with accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in the same portfolio companies under circumstances in which such investments would otherwise not be permitted by the 1940 Act. We expect that such exemptive relief permitting co-investments, if granted, would apply only if our independent directors review and approve each co-investment.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we plan to make. We compete with public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity and hedge funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, we believe some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a business development company or the source of income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to maintain our qualification as a RIC. The competitive pressures we face may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we may not be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective.

With respect to the investments we make, we do not seek to compete based primarily on the interest rates we offer, and we believe that some of our competitors may make loans with interest rates that will be lower than the rates we offer. In the secondary market for acquiring existing loans, we compete generally on the basis of pricing terms. With respect to all investments, we may lose some investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. However, if we match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may experience decreased net interest income, lower yields and increased risk of credit loss. We may also compete for investment opportunities with accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Although GC Advisors allocates opportunities in accordance with its policies and procedures, allocations to such other accounts will reduce the amount and frequency of opportunities available to us and may not be in the best interests of us and our securityholders. Moreover, the performance of investments will not be known at the time of allocation. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure —  There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns,” “— Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients” and “Related Party Transactions.”

We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we are unable to qualify as a RIC.

To qualify as a RIC under the Code, we must meet certain source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. The distribution requirement for a RIC is satisfied if we distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders on an annual basis. We are subject, to the extent we use debt financing, to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and financial covenants under loan and credit agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict us from making distributions necessary to qualify as a RIC. If we are unable to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, may be subject to corporate-level income tax. To qualify as a RIC, we must also meet certain asset diversification requirements at the end of each calendar quarter. Failure to meet these tests may result in our having to dispose of certain investments quickly in order to prevent the loss of our qualification as a RIC. Because most of our investments will be in private or thinly traded public companies, any such dispositions could be made at disadvantageous prices and may result in substantial losses. If we fail to qualify as a RIC for any reason and become subject to corporate income tax, the resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distributions to stockholders and the amount of our distributions and the amount of funds available for new investments. Such a failure would have a material adverse effect on us and our securityholders. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation as a RIC.”

We may need to raise additional capital to grow because we must distribute most of our income.

We may need additional capital to fund new investments and grow our portfolio of investments. We intend to access the capital markets periodically to issue debt or equity securities or borrow from financial institutions in order to obtain such additional capital. Unfavorable economic conditions could increase our

TABLE OF CONTENTS

funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. A reduction in the availability of new capital could limit our ability to grow. In addition, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to maintain our qualification as a RIC. As a result, these earnings are not available to fund new investments. An inability to access the capital markets successfully could limit our ability to grow our business and execute our business strategy fully and could decrease our earnings, if any, which may have an adverse effect on the value of our securities.

We may have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before, or without, receiving cash representing such income.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accretion of original issue discount. This may arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, or increases in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements, is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also may be required to include in income certain other amounts that we do not receive in cash.

That part of the incentive fee payable by us that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include interest that has been accrued but not yet received in cash, such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities. If a portfolio company defaults on a loan that is structured to provide accrued interest, it is possible that accrued interest previously used in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible.

Since in certain cases we may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to maintain our qualification as a RIC. In such a case, we may have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain such cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation as a RIC.”

Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a business development company, the necessity of raising additional capital exposes us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.

We may issue debt securities or preferred stock and/or borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted as a business development company to issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage ratio, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% of gross assets less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities. If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy this test. If that happens, we may be required to sell a portion of our investments and, depending on the nature of our leverage, repay a portion of our indebtedness at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous. Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. If we issue senior securities, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss. As of June 30, 2011, we had $222.3 million of outstanding borrowings, including $174.0 million outstanding under the Debt Securitization.

In the absence of an event of default, no person or entity from which we borrow money will have a veto right or voting power over our ability to set policy, make investment decisions or adopt investment strategies. If we issue preferred stock, which is another form of leverage, the preferred stock would rank “senior” to common stock in our capital structure, preferred stockholders would have separate voting rights on certain matters and might have other rights, preferences or privileges more favorable than those of our common

TABLE OF CONTENTS

stockholders, and the issuance of preferred stock could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in your best interest. Holders of our common stock will directly or indirectly bear all of the costs associated with offering and servicing any preferred stock that we issue. In addition, any interests of preferred stockholders may not necessarily align with the interests of holders of our common stock and the rights of holders of shares of preferred stock to receive dividends would be senior to those of holders of shares of our common stock. We do not, however, anticipate issuing preferred stock in the next 12 months.

We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the then-current net asset value per share of our common stock if our board of directors determines that such sale is in the best interests of us and our stockholders, and if our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our board of directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any distributing commission or discount). If we raise additional funds by issuing common stock or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time will decrease, and you might experience dilution.

We are subject to risks associated with the Debt Securitization.

As a result of the Debt Securitization, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

We are subject to certain risks as a result of our indirect interests in the junior notes and membership interests of the Securitization Issuer.

Under the terms of the master loan sale agreement governing the Debt Securitization, (1) we sold and/or contributed to Holdings all of our ownership interest in our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement and (2) Holdings, in turn, sold and/or contributed to the Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and the consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement. Following these transfers, the Securitization Issuer, and not Holdings or us, held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations. As a result of the Debt Securitization, we hold indirectly through Holdings a combination of junior notes comprised of Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes as well as membership interests, which comprise 100% of the equity interests, in the Securitization Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of Holdings and the Securitization Issuer, as well as our other subsidiaries, in our consolidated financial statements. Because each of Holdings and the Securitization Issuer is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the sale or contribution by us to Holdings, and by Holdings to the Securitization Issuer, did not constitute a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If the U.S. Internal Revenue Service were to take a contrary position, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The securities issued by the Securitization Issuer, or by any securitization vehicle we sponsor in the future, could be acquired by another business development company or securitization vehicle subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We may also, from time to time, hold asset-backed securities, or the economic equivalent thereof, issued by a securitization vehicle sponsored by another business development company to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act.

The Subordinated Notes and membership interests in the Securitization Issuer are subordinated obligations of the Securitization Issuer.

The Subordinated Notes are the most junior class of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to every other class of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the notes. Therefore, Holdings only receives cash distributions on the Subordinated Notes if the Securitization Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued, and we only receive cash distributions in respect of our indirect ownership of the Securitization Issuer to the extent that Holdings receives any cash distributions in respect of its direct ownership of the Securitization Issuer. The Subordinated Notes are also unsecured and rank behind

TABLE OF CONTENTS

all of the secured creditors, known or unknown, of the Securitization Issuer, including the holders of the senior notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the Securitization Issuer’s portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, or as a result of defaulted loans or individual fund assets, the value of the Subordinated Notes at their redemption could be reduced.

The membership interests in the Securitization Issuer represent all of the equity interest in the Securitization Issuer. As such, the holder of the membership interests is the residual claimant on distributions, if any, made by the Securitization Issuer after holders of all classes of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the Debt Securitization documents. Such payments may be made by the Securitization Issuer only to the extent permitted under the Debt Securitization documents on any payment date or upon payment in full of the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer.

The interests of holders of the senior classes of securities issued by the Securitization Issuer may not be aligned with our interests.

The Class A Notes are the debt obligations ranking senior in right of payment to other securities issued by the Securitization Issuer in the Debt Securitization. As such, there are circumstances in which the interests of holders of the Class A Notes may not be aligned with the interests of holders of the other classes of notes issued by, and membership interests of, the Securitization Issuer. For example, under the terms of the Class A Notes, holders of the Class A Notes have the right to receive payments of principal and interest prior to holders of the Class B Notes, the Subordinated Notes and the membership interests.

For as long as the Class A Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Class A Notes comprise the Controlling Class under the Debt Securitization and, as such, they have the right to act in certain circumstances with respect to the portfolio loans in ways that may benefit their interests but not the interests of holders of more junior classes of notes and membership interests, including by exercising remedies under the indenture in the Debt Securitization.

If an event of default has occurred and acceleration occurs in accordance with the terms of the indenture, the most senior class of notes then outstanding will be paid in full before any further payment or distribution on the notes. In addition, if an event of default occurs, holders of a majority of the Controlling Class will be entitled to determine the remedies to be exercised under the indenture, subject to the terms of the indenture. For example, upon the occurrence of an event of default with respect to the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, the trustee or holders of a majority of the Controlling Class may declare the principal, together with any accrued interest, of all the notes of such class and any junior classes to be immediately due and payable. This would have the effect of accelerating the principal on such notes, triggering a repayment obligation on the part of the Securitization Issuer. If at such time the portfolio loans were not performing well, the Securitization Issuer may not have sufficient proceeds available to enable the trustee under the indenture to repay the obligations of holders of the Class B Notes or the Subordinated Notes, or to pay a dividend to holders of the membership interests.

Remedies pursued by the Controlling Class could be adverse to the interests of the holders of the notes that are subordinated to the Controlling Class (which would include the Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes to the extent the Class A Notes constitute the Controlling Class), and the Controlling Class will have no obligation to consider any possible adverse effect on such other interests. Thus, we cannot assure you that any remedies pursued by the Controlling Class will be in the best interests of Holdings or that Holdings will receive any payments or distributions upon an acceleration of the notes. Any failure of the Securitization Issuer to make distributions on the notes we indirectly hold, whether as a result of an event of default or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and may result in an inability of us to make distributions sufficient to allow our qualification as a RIC.

The Securitization Issuer may fail to meet certain asset coverage tests.

Under the documents governing the Debt Securitization, there are two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes. The first such test compares the amount of interest received on the portfolio loans held by the Securitization Issuer to the amount of interest payable in respect of the Class A

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Notes and Class B Notes. To meet this first test, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 115% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes. The second such test compares the principal amount of the portfolio loans to the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the Class A Notes and Class B Notes. To meet this test at any time, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 158% of the outstanding principal amount of the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes, taken together. If either coverage test is not satisfied, interest and principal received by the Securitization Issuer are diverted on the following payment date to pay the Class A Notes in full and then the Class B Notes in full (in order of seniority) to the extent necessary to cause all coverage tests to be satisfied on a pro forma basis after giving effect to all payments made in respect of the notes, which we refer to as a mandatory redemption. If any asset coverage test with respect to the Class A Notes or Class B Notes is not met or if the Securitization Issuer fails to obtain a confirmation of the initial ratings of the Class A Notes or Class B Notes after the effective date (defined under the indenture as the earlier to occur of January 5, 2011 or the time that the Securitization Issuer has acquired (or committed to acquire) at least $300 million in assets), proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the Securitization Issuer and the holders of the Subordinated Notes will instead be used to redeem first the Class A Notes and then the Class B Notes, to the extent necessary to satisfy the applicable asset coverage tests or to obtain the necessary ratings confirmation. We obtained a confirmation of the initial ratings provided with respect to the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes on January 14, 2011.

The value of the Class B Notes could be adversely affected by a mandatory redemption because such redemption could result in the Class B Notes being redeemed at par at a time when they are trading in the secondary market at a premium to their stated principal amount and when other investments bearing the same rate of interest may be difficult or expensive to acquire. A mandatory redemption could also result in a shorter investment duration than a holder of Class B Notes may have wanted or anticipated, which could, in turn, result in such a holder incurring breakage costs on related hedging transactions. In addition, the reinvestment period under the Debt Securitization may extend through as late as July 20, 2015, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes.

We may not receive cash from the Securitization Issuer.

We receive cash from the Securitization Issuer only to the extent that Holdings receives payments on the Class B Notes, Subordinated Notes or membership interests. The Securitization Issuer may only make payments on such securities to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the indenture governing the notes, which generally provides that principal payments on the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing under the Class A Notes are paid in full. In addition, if the Securitization Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes to first pay the Class A Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to indirectly receive cash from the Securitization Issuer, we could be unable to make such distributions in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all.

We may be required to assume liabilities of the Securitization Issuer.

As part of the Debt Securitization, we entered into a master loan sale agreement under which we would be required to repurchase any loan (or participation interest therein) which was sold to the Securitization Issuer in breach of any representation or warranty made by us with respect to such loan on the date such loan was sold. To the extent we fail to satisfy any such repurchase obligation, the trustee may, on behalf of the Securitization Issuer, bring an action against us to enforce these repurchase obligations.

The structure of the Debt Securitization is intended to prevent, in the event of our bankruptcy or the bankruptcy of Holdings, the consolidation of the Securitization Issuer with our operations or those of Holdings. If the true sale of these assets were not respected in the event of our insolvency, a trustee or debtor-in-possession might reclaim the assets of the Securitization Issuer for our estate. However, in doing so, we would become directly liable for all of the indebtedness then outstanding under the Debt Securitization, which would equal the full amount of debt of the Securitization Issuer reflected on our consolidated balance sheet. In addition, we cannot assure that the recovery in the event we were consolidated with the Securitization Issuer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

for purposes of any bankruptcy proceeding would exceed the amount to which we would otherwise be entitled as an indirect holder of the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes had we not been consolidated with the Securitization Issuer.

In addition, in connection with the Debt Securitization, we indirectly gave the lenders certain customary representations with respect to the legal structure of the Securitization Issuer and the quality of the assets transferred to it. We remain indirectly liable for any incorrect statements or omissions for a period of at least one year, and potentially for the life of the Debt Securitization.

The Securitization Issuer may issue additional Subordinated Notes.

Under the terms of the Debt Securitization documents, the Securitization Issuer could issue additional Subordinated Notes and use the net proceeds of such issuance to purchase additional portfolio loans. Any such additional issuance, however, would require the consent of the collateral manager and the approval of a majority of the Subordinated Notes. Among the other conditions that must be satisfied in connection with an additional issuance of Subordinated Notes, the aggregate principal amount of all additional issuances of Subordinated Notes may not exceed 100% of the original outstanding principal of Subordinated Notes on the closing date, or $116 million; the Issuer must notify each rating agency of such issuance prior to the issuance date; and the terms of the notes to be issued must be identical to the terms of previously issued Subordinated Notes (except that all monies due on such additional Subordinated Notes will accrue from the issue date of such notes and that the prices of such Subordinated Notes do not have to be identical to those of the initial Subordinated Notes). We do not expect to cause the Securitization Issuer to issue any additional Subordinated Notes at this time, and the terms of the Debt Securitization documents do not provide for additional issuances of Class A Notes or Class B Notes.

We are subject to risks associated with the Credit Facility.

On July 21, 2011, Funding, our wholly owned subsidiary, entered into the Credit Facility. As a result of the Credit Facility, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

Our interests in Funding are subordinated.

We own 100% of the equity interests in Funding. We consolidate the financial statements of Funding in our consolidated financial statements and treat the indebtedness of Funding as our leverage. Our interests in Funding are subordinated in priority of payment to every other obligation of Funding and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the Credit Facility. We receive cash distributions on our equity interests in Funding only if Funding has made all required cash interest payments to the lenders. We cannot assure you that distributions on the assets held by Funding will be sufficient to make any distributions to us or that such distributions will meet our expectations.

Our equity interests in Funding rank behind all of the secured and unsecured creditors, known or unknown, of Funding, including the lenders. Consequently, to the extent that the value of Funding’s portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, defaulted loans, capital gains and losses on the underlying assets, prepayment or changes in interest rates, the return on our investment in Funding could be reduced. Accordingly, our investment in Funding may be subject to up to 100% loss.

We may not receive cash on our equity interests from Funding.

We receive cash from Funding only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in Funding. Funding may make payments on such interests only to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility generally provides that payments on such interests may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing to the lenders and other secured parties are paid in full. In addition, if Funding does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the Credit Facility documents, cash would be diverted from us to first pay the Lender in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to receive cash from Funding, we could be unable to make distributions to our stockholders in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all. We also could be forced to sell investments in portfolio companies at less than their fair value in order to continue making such distributions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The ability to sell investments held by Funding is limited.

The Credit Facility places significant restrictions on the servicer’s ability to sell investments. As a result, there may be times or circumstances during which the servicer is unable to sell investments or take other actions that might be in our best interests.

Our ability to invest in public companies may be limited in certain circumstances.

To maintain our status as a business development company, we are not permitted to acquire any assets other than “qualifying assets” specified in the 1940 Act unless, at the time the acquisition is made, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets (with certain limited exceptions). Subject to certain exceptions for follow-on investments and investments in distressed companies, an investment in an issuer that has outstanding securities listed on a national securities exchange may be treated as qualifying assets only if such issuer has a common equity market capitalization that is less than $250 million at the time of such investment.

We intend to finance our investments with borrowed money, which will magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.

The use of leverage magnifies the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested. The use of leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique and increases the risks associated with investing in our securities. We may issue senior debt securities to banks, insurance companies and other lenders. Lenders of these senior securities will have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of our common stockholders, and we would expect such lenders to seek recovery against our assets in the event of a default. We may pledge up to 100% of our assets and may grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we may enter into with lenders. In addition, under the terms of any credit facility or other debt instrument we enter into, we are likely to be required by its terms to use the net proceeds of any investments that we sell to repay a portion of the amount borrowed under such facility or instrument before applying such net proceeds to any other uses. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause our net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not leveraged, thereby magnifying losses or eliminating our equity stake in a leveraged investment. Similarly, any decrease in our revenue or income will cause our net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline would also negatively affect our ability to make distributions on our common stock or any outstanding preferred stock. Our ability to service our debt will depend largely on our financial performance and will be subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. Moreover, as the base management fee payable to GC Advisors is payable based on our average adjusted gross assets, including those assets acquired through the use of leverage, GC Advisors has a financial incentive to incur leverage which may not be consistent with our stockholders’ interests. In addition, our common stockholders will bear the burden of any increase in our expenses as a result of our use of leverage, including interest expenses and any increase in the base management fee payable to GC Advisors.

As a business development company, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets to total borrowings and other senior securities, which include the Class A Notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, our other borrowings and any preferred stock that we may issue in the future, of at least 200%. If this ratio declines below 200%, we cannot incur additional debt and could be required to sell a portion of our investments to repay some debt when it is disadvantageous to do so. This could have a material adverse effect on our operations, and we may not be able to make distributions. The amount of leverage that we employ will depend on GC Advisors’ and our board of directors’ assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us.

We have applied for exemptive relief from the SEC which, if granted, would permit GC SBIC IV, L.P. to incur leverage to the full extent permitted under the SBIC license and to disregard such debt (and the corresponding GC SBIC IV, L.P. assets) for purposes of calculating our compliance with the asset coverage requirements under the 1940 Act. If granted, this relief would grant us the ability to incur leverage in excess of the amounts we are currently permitted to incur under the 1940 Act. There is no assurance that such relief will be granted or, if granted, the relief would be acceptable to us if the terms under which the SEC grants relief differ from those we proposed. If such relief is granted and we incur additional leverage in excess of the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

amounts we are currently permitted to incur, our net asset value will decline more sharply if the value of our assets declines than if we had not incurred such additional leverage and the effects of leverage described above will be magnified.

The following table illustrates the effect of leverage on returns from an investment in our common stock assuming various annual returns, net of expenses. The calculations in the table below are hypothetical and actual returns may be higher or lower than those appearing in the table below.

		Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)
		-10%				-5%				0%				5%				10%
Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)			-19	%			-11	%			-2	%			6	%			15	%

Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $222.3 million as of June 30, 2011 and the effective annual interest rate of 3.2% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 1.3% to cover annual interest payments on the outstanding debt.

To the extent we use debt to finance our investments, changes in interest rates will affect our cost of capital and net investment income.

To the extent we borrow money to make investments, our net investment income will depend, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds and the rate at which we invest those funds. As a result, we can offer no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates will not have a material adverse effect on our net investment income in the event we continue to use debt to finance our investments. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the Class A Notes and Class B Notes issued under the Debt Securitization are floating, which could reduce our net investment income to the extent any debt investments have fixed interest rates. We expect that our long-term fixed-rate investments will be financed primarily with issuances of equity and long-term debt securities. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act.

You should also be aware that a rise in the general level of interest rates typically leads to higher interest rates applicable to our debt investments. Accordingly, an increase in interest rates may result in an increase of the amount of incentive fees payable to GC Advisors.

We have entered into a total return swap and may enter into other derivative transactions which expose us to certain risks, including risks similar to those associated with the use of leverage.

GCMF has entered into a total return swap, or the TRS, with Citibank, N.A., or Citibank. A total return swap is a contract in which one party agrees to make periodic payments to another party based on the change in the market value of the assets referenced by the total return swap, which may include a specified security, basket of securities or securities indices during the specified period, in return for periodic payments based on a fixed or variable interest rate. A total return swap typically is used to obtain exposure to a security or market without owning or taking physical custody of such security or investing directly in such market. A total return swap may effectively add leverage to a company’s portfolio because, in addition to total net assets, the company is subject to investment exposure on the amount of securities subject to the total return swap.

A total return swap is also subject to the risk that a counterparty will default on its payment obligations under the arrangements or that one party will not be able to meet its obligations to the other. In the case of the TRS, we are required to post cash collateral amounts to secure its obligations to Citibank under the TRS. Citibank, however, is not required to collateralize any of its obligations to us under the TRS.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

In the event that Citibank chooses to exercise its termination rights under the TRS, it is possible that we will owe more to Citibank or, alternatively, will be entitled to receive less from Citibank than it would have if we controlled the timing of such termination due to the existence of adverse market conditions at the time of such termination.

In addition, because a TRS is a form of synthetic leverage, such arrangements are subject to risks similar to those associated with the use of leverage.

We may enter into reverse repurchase agreements, which are another form of leverage.

We may enter into reverse repurchase agreements as part of our management of our temporary investment portfolio. Under a reverse repurchase agreement, we will effectively pledge our assets as collateral to secure a short-term loan. Generally, the other party to the agreement makes the loan in an amount equal to a percentage of the fair value of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of the reverse repurchase agreement, we will be required to repay the loan and correspondingly receive back our collateral. While used as collateral, the assets continue to pay principal and interest which are for the benefit of us.

Our use of reverse repurchase agreements, if any, involves many of the same risks involved in our use of leverage, as the proceeds from reverse repurchase agreements generally will be invested in additional securities. There is a risk that the market value of the securities acquired in the reverse repurchase agreement may decline below the price of the securities that we have sold but remain obligated to purchase. In addition, there is a risk that the market value of the securities retained by us may decline. If a buyer of securities under a reverse repurchase agreement were to file for bankruptcy or experience insolvency, we may be adversely affected. Also, in entering into reverse repurchase agreements, we would bear the risk of loss to the extent that the proceeds of such agreements at settlement are less than the fair value of the underlying securities being pledged. In addition, due to the interest costs associated with reverse repurchase agreements transactions, our net asset value would decline, and, in some cases, we may be worse off than if we had not used such instruments.

We are currently operating in a period of capital markets disruption and economic downturn.

The U.S. capital markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruption during the economic downturn that began in mid-2007, and the U.S. economy was in a recession for several consecutive calendar quarters during the same period. Disruptions in the capital markets have increased the spread between the yields realized on risk-free and higher risk securities, resulting in illiquidity in parts of the capital markets. A prolonged period of market illiquidity may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could limit our investment originations, limit our ability to grow and negatively impact our operating results.

Adverse developments in the credit markets may impair our ability to enter into new debt financing arrangements.

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions limited routine refinancing and loan modification transactions and even reviewed the terms of existing facilities to identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. As a result, it may be difficult for us to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms, or at all.

If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could fail to qualify as a business development company or be precluded from investing according to our current business strategy.

As a business development company, we may not acquire any assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, at the time of and after giving effect to such acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. See “Regulation — Qualifying Assets.”

In the future, we believe that most of our investments will constitute qualifying assets. However, we may be precluded from investing in what we believe are attractive investments if such investments are not

TABLE OF CONTENTS

qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940 Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could violate the 1940 Act provisions applicable to business development companies. As a result of such violation, specific rules under the 1940 Act could prevent us, for example, from making follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies (which could result in the dilution of our position) or could require us to dispose of investments at inappropriate times in order to come into compliance with the 1940 Act. If we need to dispose of such investments quickly, it could be difficult to dispose of such investments on favorable terms. We may not be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we may have to sell the investments at a substantial loss. Any such outcomes would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we do not maintain our status as a business development company, we would be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act. As a registered closed-end fund, we would be subject to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility.

Many of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

Many of our portfolio investments take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable, and we value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our securities. As discussed in more detail under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows — Critical Accounting Policies,” most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) are classified as Level 3 under Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement. This means that our portfolio valuations are based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. Inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments requires significant management judgment or estimation. Even if observable market data are available, such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which may include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information. We have retained the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of these securities. The types of factors that the board of directors may take into account in determining the fair value of our investments generally include, as appropriate, comparison to publicly traded securities including such factors as yield, maturity and measures of credit quality, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these securities existed. Our net asset value could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such securities.

We adjust quarterly the valuation of our portfolio to reflect our board of directors’ determination of the fair value of each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are recorded in our consolidated statement of operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or depreciation.

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on the debt securities we acquire, the default rate on such securities, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and general economic conditions. In light of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of our performance in future periods.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

New or modified laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business.

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation by laws at the U.S. federal, state and local levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws, regulations and interpretations may also come into effect. Any such new or changed laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business. In particular, on July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank, became law. The scope of Dodd-Frank impacts many aspects of the financial services industry, and it requires the development and adoption of many implementing regulations over the next several months and years. The effects of Dodd-Frank on the financial services industry will depend, in large part, upon the extent to which regulators exercise the authority granted to them and the approaches taken in implementing regulations. We have begun to assess the potential impact of Dodd-Frank on our business and operations, but at this early stage, the likely impact cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty.

Additionally, changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations related to permitted investments may cause us to alter our investment strategy in order to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities. Such changes could result in material differences to our strategies and plans set forth in this prospectus and may shift our investment focus from the areas of expertise of GC Advisors to other types of investments in which GC Advisors may have little or no expertise or experience. Any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

Our board of directors may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval.

Our board of directors has the authority, except as otherwise provided in the 1940 Act, to modify or waive our investment objective and certain of our operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. However, absent stockholder approval, we may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a business development company. Under Delaware law, we also cannot be dissolved without prior stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, operating results and the price value of our common stock. Nevertheless, any such changes could adversely affect our business and impair our ability to make distributions.

Provisions of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse effect on the price of our securities.

The General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, or the DGCL, contains provisions that may discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control of us or the removal of our directors. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that limit liability and provide for indemnification of our directors and officers. These provisions and others also may have the effect of deterring hostile takeovers or delaying changes in control or management. We are subject to Section 203 of the DGCL, the application of which is subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. This section generally prohibits us from engaging in mergers and other business combinations with stockholders that beneficially own 15% or more of our voting stock, or with their affiliates, unless our directors or stockholders approve the business combination in the prescribed manner. If our board of directors does not approve a business combination, Section 203 of the DGCL may discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such an offer.

We have also adopted measures that may make it difficult for a third party to obtain control of us, including provisions of our certificate of incorporation classifying our board of directors in three classes serving staggered three-year terms, and provisions of our certificate of incorporation authorizing our board of directors to classify or reclassify shares of our preferred stock in one or more classes or series, to cause the issuance of additional shares of our stock, and to amend our certificate of incorporation, without stockholder approval, to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might otherwise be in the best interests of our securityholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement within that time, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Advisors has the right, under the Investment Advisory Agreement, to resign at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Advisors resigns, we may not be able to find a new investment adviser or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms within 60 days, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and investment activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a single institution or group of executives having the expertise possessed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. Even if we are able to retain comparable management, whether internal or external, the integration of such management and their lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

GC Service can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Service has the right to resign under the Administration Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Service resigns, we may not be able to find a new administrator or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and administrative activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a service provider or individuals with the expertise possessed by GC Service. Even if we are able to retain a comparable service provider or individuals to perform such services, whether internal or external, their integration into our business and lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We incur significant costs as a result of being a publicly traded company.

As a publicly traded company, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC.

Efforts to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act will involve significant expenditures, and non-compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act may adversely affect us and the market price of our common stock.

Under current SEC rules, we are required to report on our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules and regulations of the SEC beginning with fiscal year 2011. As a result, we are incurring additional expenses that may negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to make distributions. This process also results in a diversion of management’s time and attention. We cannot be certain as to the timing of completion of our evaluation, testing and remediation actions or the impact of the same on our operations, and we may not be able to ensure that the process is effective or that our internal control over financial reporting is or will be effective in a timely manner. In the event that we are unable to maintain or achieve compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, we and the market price of our securities may be adversely affected.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We are highly dependent on information systems and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business, which may, in turn, negatively affect the market price of our common stock and our ability to pay dividends and other distributions.

Our business depends on the communications and information systems of GC Advisors and its affiliates. Any failure or interruption of such systems could cause delays or other problems in our activities. This, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and negatively affect the market price of our securities and our ability to pay dividends and other distributions to our securityholders.

Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have substantial control over us.

As of June 30, 2011, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub beneficially owned, in the aggregate, approximately 42.8% and 42.5%, respectively, of our outstanding common stock, primarily as a result of their ownership interests in and control of Golub Capital Management LLC, the investment adviser to Golub Capital Company IV, LLC, Golub Capital Company V LLC, Golub Capital Company VI LLC (collectively, the “Capital Companies”) and GEMS Fund L.P., a limited partnership affiliated with GC Advisors. As a result, these individuals, acting together, may have the ability to control the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors and any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets, and may cause actions to be taken that you may not agree with or that are not in your interests or those of other securityholders.

This concentration of beneficial ownership also might harm the market price of our securities by:

Risks Related to Our Investments

Economic recessions or downturns could impair our portfolio companies and harm our operating results.

Many of our portfolio companies are susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay our loans during these periods. Therefore, our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during these periods. Adverse economic conditions may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our loans and the value of our equity investments. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in our portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could prevent us from increasing our investments and harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize our portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting portfolio company. In addition, lenders in certain cases can be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by them when they become too involved in the borrower’s business or exercise control over a borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken if we render significant managerial assistance to the borrower. Furthermore, if one of our portfolio companies were to file for bankruptcy protection, even though we may have structured our investment as senior secured debt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to claims of other creditors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Current market conditions have materially and adversely affected debt and equity capital markets in the United States and around the world.

From mid-2007 through 2010, the global capital markets experienced a period of disruption resulting in a lack of liquidity in parts of the debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial services sector relating to subprime mortgages and the re-pricing of credit risk in the broadly syndicated market. These events, along with the deterioration of the housing market, illiquid market conditions, declining business and consumer confidence and the failure of major financial institutions in the United States, led to a general decline of economic conditions. This economic decline materially and adversely affected the broader financial and credit markets and has reduced the availability of debt and equity capital for the market as a whole and to financial firms, in particular. To the extent that we wish to use debt to fund our investments, the debt capital available to us, if at all, may be at a higher cost and on terms and conditions that may be less favorable than what we expect, which could negatively affect our financial performance and results. A prolonged period of market illiquidity may cause us to reduce the volume of loans we originate and/or fund and adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Any deterioration of current market conditions could materially and adversely affect our business.

Our investments in leveraged portfolio companies may be risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Investment in leveraged companies involves a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold. Such developments may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we may have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also may have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

Our investments in private and middle-market portfolio companies are risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Investment in private and middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we expect to rely on the ability of GC Advisors’ investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. Middle-market companies may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment. In addition, such companies typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and market conditions, as well as general economic downturns. Additionally, middle-market companies are more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons. Therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on our portfolio company and, in turn, on us. Middle-market companies also may be parties to litigation and may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence. In addition, our executive officers, directors and GC Advisors may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in the portfolio companies.

The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.

We may invest all of our assets in illiquid securities, and a substantial portion of our investments in leveraged companies are and will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than more broadly traded public securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our

TABLE OF CONTENTS

investments. We may also face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a portfolio company to the extent that we, GC Advisors, Golub Capital or any of its affiliates have material nonpublic information regarding such portfolio company.

Price declines and illiquidity in the corporate debt markets may adversely affect the fair value of our portfolio investments, reducing our net asset value through increased net unrealized depreciation.

As a business development company, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. As part of the valuation process, we may take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments:

When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we use the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate our valuation. We record decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments as unrealized depreciation. Declines in prices and liquidity in the corporate debt markets may result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio may reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and may suffer additional unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We have not yet identified the portfolio company investments we will acquire.

While we currently hold a portfolio of investments, we have not yet identified additional potential investments for our portfolio that we will acquire with the proceeds of any offering of securities pursuant to this prospectus. Privately negotiated investments in illiquid securities or private middle-market companies require substantial due diligence and structuring, and we cannot assure you that we will achieve our anticipated investment pace. As a result, you will be unable to evaluate any future portfolio company investments prior to purchasing our shares of common stock. Additionally, GC Advisors selects all of our investments, and our stockholders will have no input with respect to such investment decisions. These factors increase the uncertainty, and thus the risk, of investing in our securities.

We anticipate that we will use substantially all of the net proceeds of any offering of our securities within approximately six months following the completion of any offering of our securities, depending on the availability of appropriate investment opportunities consistent with our investment objectives and market conditions. Until such appropriate investment opportunities can be found, we will invest the net proceeds primarily in cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less from the date of investment. We expect these temporary investments to earn yields substantially lower than the income that we expect to receive in respect of investments in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans and equity securities. As a result, any distributions we make during this period may be substantially smaller than the distributions that we expect to pay when our portfolio is fully invested.

We are a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest

TABLE OF CONTENTS

in securities of a single issuer. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers, our net asset value may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond our asset diversification requirements as a RIC under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few portfolio companies.

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries, which will subject us to a risk of significant loss if any of these companies defaults on its obligations under any of its debt instruments or if there is a downturn in a particular industry.

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries. Beyond the asset diversification requirements associated with our qualification as a RIC under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification. As a result, the aggregate returns we realize may be significantly adversely affected if a small number of investments perform poorly or if we need to write down the value of any one investment. Additionally, while we are not targeting any specific industries, our investments may be concentrated in relatively few industries. As a result, a downturn in any particular industry in which we are invested could also significantly impact the aggregate returns we realize.

We may hold the debt securities of leveraged companies that may, due to the significant volatility of such companies, enter into bankruptcy proceedings.

Leveraged companies may experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress. The bankruptcy process has a number of significant inherent risks. Many events in a bankruptcy proceeding are the product of contested matters and adversary proceedings and are beyond the control of the creditors. A bankruptcy filing by an issuer may adversely and permanently affect the issuer. If the proceeding is converted to a liquidation, the value of the issuer may not equal the liquidation value that was believed to exist at the time of the investment. The duration of a bankruptcy proceeding is also difficult to predict, and a creditor’s return on investment can be adversely affected by delays until the plan of reorganization or liquidation ultimately becomes effective. The administrative costs of a bankruptcy proceeding are frequently high and would be paid out of the debtor’s estate prior to any return to creditors. Because the standards for classification of claims under bankruptcy law are vague, our influence with respect to the class of securities or other obligations we own may be lost by increases in the number and amount of claims in the same class or by different classification and treatment. In the early stages of the bankruptcy process, it is often difficult to estimate the extent of, or even to identify, any contingent claims that might be made. In addition, certain claims that have priority by law (for example, claims for taxes) may be substantial.

Our failure to make follow-on investments in our portfolio companies could impair the value of our portfolio.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we may make additional investments in that portfolio company as “follow-on” investments, in seeking to:

We have discretion to make follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. Failure on our part to make follow-on investments may, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful operation. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we may elect not to make a follow-on investment because we may not want to increase our level of risk, because we prefer other opportunities or because of regulatory or other considerations. Our ability to make follow-on investments may also be limited by GC Advisors’ allocation policy.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Because we generally do not hold controlling equity interests in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to exercise control over our portfolio companies or to prevent decisions by management of our portfolio companies that could decrease the value of our investments.

Although we may do so in the future, we do not currently hold controlling equity positions in our portfolio companies. As a result, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of a portfolio company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that are adverse to our interests. Due to the lack of liquidity of the debt and equity investments that we typically hold in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and may therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Defaults by our portfolio companies will harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets. This could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize such portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt or equity securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms, which may include the waiver of certain financial covenants, with a defaulting portfolio company.

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.

We have invested a portion of our capital in second lien and mezzanine loans issued by our portfolio companies and intend to continue to do so in the future. The portfolio companies usually have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the debt securities in which we invest. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. After repaying senior creditors, the portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we invest, we would have to share any distributions on an equal and ratable basis with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Additionally, certain loans that we make to portfolio companies may be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

We have made in the past, and may make in the future, unsecured loans to portfolio companies, meaning that such loans will not benefit from any interest in collateral of such companies. Liens on a portfolio company’s collateral, if any, will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under its outstanding secured debt and may secure certain future debt that is permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under its secured

TABLE OF CONTENTS

loan agreements. The holders of obligations secured by such liens will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of such collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of such collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of such collateral would be sufficient to satisfy our unsecured loan obligations after payment in full of all secured loan obligations. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay the outstanding secured loan obligations, then our unsecured claims would rank equally with the unpaid portion of such secured creditors’ claims against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

The rights we may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of such senior debt. Under a typical intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that may be taken in respect of the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens:

We may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.

If we make subordinated investments, the obligors or the portfolio companies may not generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We may make subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the obligor in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of default than senior obligations as a result of adverse changes in the financial condition of the obligor or in general economic conditions. If we make a subordinated investment in a portfolio company, the portfolio company may be highly leveraged, and its relatively high debt-to-equity ratio may create increased risks that its operations might not generate sufficient cash flow to service all of its debt obligations.

The disposition of our investments may result in contingent liabilities.

A significant portion of our investments involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we may be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We may also be required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to potential liabilities. These arrangements may result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of distributions previously made to us.

Our incentive fee may induce GC Advisors to make certain investments, including speculative investments.

The incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors may create an incentive for GC Advisors to make investments on our behalf that are riskier or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement. The way in which the incentive fee payable to GC Advisors is determined may encourage GC Advisors to use leverage to increase the return on our investments. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor our securityholders.

The incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors also may create an incentive for GC Advisors to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we would accrue the interest over the life of the investment but would not receive the cash income from the investment until

TABLE OF CONTENTS

the end of the term. Our net investment income used to calculate the income portion of our investment fee, however, includes accrued interest. Thus, a portion of this incentive fee would be based on income that we have not yet received in cash such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities.

Additionally, the incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors may create an incentive for GC Advisors to cause us to realize capital gains or losses that may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. Under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While it is not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate.

GC Advisors’ liability is limited, and we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors against certain liabilities, which may lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, GC Advisors does not assume any responsibility to us other than to render the services called for under that agreement, and it is not responsible for any action of our board of directors in following or declining to follow GC Advisors’ advice or recommendations. Under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, GC Advisors, its officers, members, personnel, and any person controlling or controlled by GC Advisors are not liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s stockholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of GC Advisors’ duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement. In addition, we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors and each of its officers, directors, members, managers and employees from and against any claims or liabilities, including reasonable legal fees and other expenses reasonably incurred, arising out of or in connection with our business and operations or any action taken or omitted on our behalf pursuant to authority granted by the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement. These protections may lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

We may be subject to additional risks if we engage in hedging transactions and/or invest in foreign securities.

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company may not acquire any asset other than assets of the type listed in the 1940 Act, which are referred to as “qualifying assets,” unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company’s total assets. In order for our investments to be classified as “qualifying assets,” among other requirements, such investments must be in issuers organized under the laws of, and which have their principal place of business in, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or any other possession of the United States. Our investment strategy does not presently contemplate investments in securities of non-U.S. companies. On June 30, 2011 we were invested in the securities of one non-U.S. company and may make additional investments in non-U.S. companies, including emerging market issuers, to the limited extent such transactions and investments are permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that these investments would focus on the same types of investments that we make in U.S. middle-market companies and accordingly would be complementary to our overall strategy and enhance the diversity of our holdings. Investing in securities of emerging market issuers involves many risks including economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions in the emerging market, potential inflationary economic environments, regulation by foreign governments, different accounting standards and political uncertainties. Economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions also could negatively affect the value of emerging market companies. These factors could include changes in the emerging market government’s economic and fiscal policies, the possible

TABLE OF CONTENTS

imposition of, or changes in, currency exchange laws or other laws or restrictions applicable to the emerging market companies or investments in their securities and the possibility of fluctuations in the rate of exchange between currencies.

Engaging in either hedging transactions or investing in foreign securities would entail additional risks to our stockholders. We could, for example, use instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors and, if we were to invest in foreign securities, we could use instruments such as forward contracts or currency options and borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to minimize our foreign currency exposure. In each such case, we generally would seek to hedge against fluctuations of the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in market interest rates or currency exchange rates. Hedging against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions would not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions or prevent losses if the values of the positions declined. However, such hedging could establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions could also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the underlying portfolio positions increased. Moreover, it might not be possible to hedge against an exchange rate or interest rate fluctuation that was so generally anticipated that we would not be able to enter into a hedging transaction at an acceptable price.

While we may enter into such transactions to seek to reduce currency exchange rate and interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged could vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we might not seek to establish a perfect correlation between the hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation could prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. In addition, it might not be possible to hedge fully or perfectly against currency fluctuations affecting the value of securities denominated in non-U.S. currencies because the value of those securities would likely fluctuate as a result of factors not related to currency fluctuations.

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

When we invest in unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans, we may acquire warrants or other equity securities of portfolio companies as well. We may also invest in equity securities directly. To the extent we hold equity investments, we will attempt to dispose of them and realize gains upon our disposition of them. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and may decline in value. As a result, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience.

Risks Relating to Offerings Pursuant to this Prospectus

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, often trade at a discount to their net asset value.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, may trade at a discount from net asset value. This characteristic of closed-end investment companies and business development companies is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share may decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value.

There is a risk that investors in our equity securities may not receive distributions or that our distributions may not grow over time and a portion of our distributions may be a return of capital.

We intend to make distributions on a quarterly basis to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this prospectus. Due to the asset coverage test applicable to us under the 1940 Act as a business development company, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Investing in our securities may involve an above average degree of risk.

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective may result in a higher amount of risk than alternative investment options and a higher risk of volatility or loss of principal. Our investments in portfolio companies involve higher levels of risk, and therefore, an investment in our securities may not be suitable for someone with lower risk tolerance.

The market price of our securities may fluctuate significantly.

The market price and liquidity of the market for our securities may be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. These factors include:

If we issue preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt securities, the net asset value and market value of our common stock may become more volatile.

We cannot assure you that the issuance of preferred stock and/or debt securities would result in a higher yield or return to the holders of our common stock. The issuance of preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt would likely cause the net asset value and market value of our common stock to become more volatile. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to approach the net rate of return on our investment portfolio, the benefit of leverage to the holders of our common stock would be reduced. If the dividend rate on the preferred stock, or the interest rate on the debt securities, were to exceed the net rate of return on our portfolio, the use of leverage would result in a lower rate of return to the holders of common stock than if we had not issued the preferred stock or debt securities. Any decline in the net asset value of our investment would be borne entirely by the holders of our common stock. Therefore, if the market value of our portfolio were to decline, the leverage would result in a greater decrease in net asset value to the holders of our common stock than if we were not leveraged through the issuance of preferred stock. This decline in net asset value would also tend to cause a greater decline in the market price for our common stock.

There is also a risk that, in the event of a sharp decline in the value of our net assets, we would be in danger of failing to maintain required asset coverage ratios which may be required by the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or units or of a downgrade in the ratings of the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or units or our current investment income might not be sufficient to meet the dividend requirements on the preferred stock or the interest payments on the debt securities. In order to counteract such an event, we might need to liquidate investments in order to fund redemption of some or all

TABLE OF CONTENTS

of the preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt. In addition, we would pay (and the holders of our common stock would bear) all costs and expenses relating to the issuance and ongoing maintenance of the preferred stock, debt securities, convertible debt or any combination of these securities. Holders of preferred stock, debt securities or convertible debt may have different interests than holders of common stock and may at times have disproportionate influence over our affairs.

We are a holding company and depend on payments from our subsidiaries in order to make payments on any debt securities that we may issue as well as to pay dividends on our common stock. Any debt securities that we issue will be structurally subordinated to the obligations of our subsidiaries.

We are a holding company and fund a majority of our investments through wholly owned subsidiaries, and a majority of the assets that we hold directly are the equity interests in such subsidiaries, including the Subordinated Notes. We depend upon the cash flow from our subsidiaries and the receipt of funds from them in the form of payments on the Subordinated Notes, dividends, and other distributions, any of which may be subject to restriction or limitations based on the organizational documents of the subsidiaries and the agreements governing the debt of any such subsidiary. In addition, because we are a holding company, any debt securities that we issue will be structurally subordinated to the obligations of our subsidiaries. In the event that one of our subsidiaries becomes insolvent, liquidates, reorganizes, dissolves or otherwise winds up, its assets will be used first to satisfy the claims of its creditors. Consequently, any claim by us or our creditors, including holders of any debt securities that we may issue, against any subsidiary will be structurally subordinated to all of the claims of the creditors of such subsidiary. We cannot assure security holders that they will receive any payments required to be made under the terms of any debt securities that we may issue, dividends or other distributions.

Holders of any preferred stock that we may issue will have the right to elect members of the board of directors and have class voting rights on certain matters.

The 1940 Act requires that holders of shares of preferred stock must be entitled as a class to elect two directors at all times and to elect a majority of the directors if dividends on such preferred stock are in arrears by two years or more, until such arrearage is eliminated. In addition, certain matters under the 1940 Act require the separate vote of the holders of any issued and outstanding preferred stock, including changes in fundamental investment restrictions and conversion to open-end status and, accordingly, preferred stockholders could veto any such changes. Restrictions imposed on the declarations and payment of dividends or other distributions to the holders of our common stock and preferred stock, both by the 1940 Act and by requirements imposed by rating agencies, might impair our ability to maintain our qualification as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Your interest in us may be diluted if you do not fully exercise your subscription rights in any rights offering. In addition, if the subscription price is less than our net asset value per share, then you will experience an immediate dilution of the aggregate net asset value of your shares.

In the event we issue subscription rights, stockholders who do not fully exercise their subscription rights should expect that they will, at the completion of a rights offering pursuant to this prospectus, own a smaller proportional interest in us than would otherwise be the case if they fully exercised their rights. We cannot state precisely the amount of any such dilution in share ownership because we do not know at this time what proportion of the shares will be purchased as a result of such rights offering.

In addition, if the subscription price is less than the net asset value per share of our common stock, then our stockholders would experience an immediate dilution of the aggregate net asset value of their shares as a result of the offering. The amount of any decrease in net asset value is not predictable because it is not known at this time what the subscription price and net asset value per share will be on the expiration date of a rights offering or what proportion of the shares will be purchased as a result of such rights offering. Such dilution could be substantial.

These dilutive effects may be exacerbated if we were to conduct multiple subscription rights offerings, particularly if such offerings were to occur over a short period of time. In addition, subscription rights offerings and the prospect of future subscription rights offerings may create downward pressure on the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

secondary market price of our common stock due to the potential for the issuance of shares at a price below our net asset value, without a corresponding change to our net asset value.

Our stockholders will experience dilution in their ownership percentage if they do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan.

All dividends declared in cash payable to stockholders that are participants in our dividend reinvestment plan are automatically reinvested in shares of our common stock. As a result, our stockholders that do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan will experience dilution in their ownership percentage of our common stock over time.

The trading market or market value of our publicly issued debt securities may fluctuate.

Our publicly issued debt securities may or may not have an established trading market. We cannot assure you that a trading market for our publicly issued debt securities will ever develop or be maintained if developed. In addition to our creditworthiness, many factors may materially adversely affect the trading market for, and market value of, our publicly issued debt securities. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

You should also be aware that there may be a limited number of buyers when you decide to sell your debt securities. This too may materially adversely affect the market value of the debt securities or the trading market for the debt securities.

Terms relating to redemption may materially adversely affect your return on any debt securities that we may issue.

If your debt securities are redeemable at our option, we may choose to redeem your debt securities at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on your debt securities. In addition, if your debt securities are subject to mandatory redemption, we may be required to redeem your debt securities also at times when prevailing interest rates are lower than the interest rate paid on your debt securities. In this circumstance, you may not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as your debt securities being redeemed.

Our credit ratings may not reflect all risks of an investment in our debt securities.

Our credit ratings are an assessment by third parties of our ability to pay our obligations. Consequently, real or anticipated changes in our credit ratings will generally affect the market value of our debt securities. Our credit ratings, however, may not reflect the potential impact of risks related to market conditions generally or other factors discussed above on the market value of or trading market for the publicly issued debt securities.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or the availability of such common stock for sale, could adversely affect the prevailing market prices for our common stock. If this occurs and continues, it could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of securities should we desire to do so.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements in this prospectus constitute forward-looking statements, which relate to future events or our future performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus involve risks and uncertainties, including statements as to:

Such forward-looking statements may include statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “intend,” “should,” “could,” “can,” “would,” “expect,” “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “predict,” “potential,” “plan” or similar words.

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this prospectus on information available to us on the date of this prospectus, and we assume no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those implied or expressed in our forward-looking statements for any reason, including the factors set forth as “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus, and future results could differ materially from historical performance. Although we undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, you are advised to consult any additional disclosures that we may make directly to you or through reports that we have filed or in the future may file with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

You should understand that, under Sections 27A(b)(2)(B) of the Securities Act and Section 21E(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act, the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to statements made in connection with any offering of securities pursuant to this prospectus, any prospectus supplement or in periodic reports we file under the Exchange Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

USE OF PROCEEDS

Unless otherwise specified in a prospectus supplement, we intend to use the net proceeds from the sale of our securities to invest in portfolio companies in accordance with our investment objective and strategies and for general corporate purposes. We expect that our new investments will consist primarily of senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans. We will also pay operating expenses, including management and administrative fees, and may pay other expenses such as due diligence expenses of potential new investments, from the net proceeds of any offering of our securities.

We anticipate that we will use substantially all of the net proceeds of an offering for the above purposes within approximately six months after the completion of any offering of our securities, depending on the availability of appropriate investment opportunities consistent with our investment objectives and market conditions. We cannot assure you that we will achieve our targeted investment pace.

Until such appropriate investment opportunities can be found, we will invest the net proceeds of any offering of our securities primarily in cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities and high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less from the date of investment. These temporary investments may have lower yields than our other investments and, accordingly, may result in lower distributions, if any, during such period. See “Regulation — Temporary Investments” for additional information about temporary investments we may make while waiting to make longer-term investments in pursuit of our investment objective.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DISTRIBUTIONS

To the extent that we have income available, we intend to make quarterly distributions to our stockholders. Our quarterly distributions, if any, will be determined by our board of directors. Any distributions to our stockholders will be declared out of assets legally available for distribution.

We have elected to be treated, and intend to qualify annually, as a RIC under the Code. To maintain RIC tax treatment, we must distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of our net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders. In order to avoid certain excise taxes imposed on RICs, we currently intend to distribute during each calendar year an amount at least equal to the sum of: (1) 98% of our net ordinary income for such calendar year; (2) 98.2% of our net capital gains in excess of capital losses for the one-year period ending on October 31 of the calendar year; and (3) any net ordinary income and net capital gains for preceding years that were not distributed during such years and on which we previously paid no U.S. federal income tax.

The following table reflects the cash distributions, including dividends and returns of capital per share that we have paid on our common stock since completion of our initial public offering.

		Payment Dates				Distributions Declared
Record Dates						Per Share				Dollar amount
						(in thousands except per share data)
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2010
June 22, 2010			June 29, 2010			$	0.24			$	4,251
September 10, 2010			September 30, 2010				0.31				5,491
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2011
December 20, 2010			December 30, 2010				0.31				5,490
March 18, 2011			March 30, 2011				0.32				5,678
June 17, 2011			June 29, 2011				0.32				6,947
Total(1)						$	1.50			$	27,857

On August 4, 2011, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.32 per share payable on September 28, 2011 to holders of record as of September 19, 2011.

We currently intend to distribute net capital gains (i.e., net long-term capital gains in excess of net short-term capital losses), if any, at least annually out of the assets legally available for such distributions. However, we may decide in the future to retain such capital gains for investment and elect to treat such gains as deemed distributions to you. If this happens, you will be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as if you had received an actual distribution of the capital gains that we retain and reinvested the net after tax proceeds in us. In this situation, you would be eligible to claim a tax credit (or, in certain circumstances, a tax refund) equal to your allocable share of the tax we paid on the capital gains deemed distributed to you. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Taxation of U.S. Stockholders.” We cannot assure you that we will achieve results that will permit us to pay any cash distributions, and if we issue senior securities, we will be prohibited from making distributions if doing so would cause us to fail to maintain the asset coverage ratios stipulated by the 1940 Act or if such distributions are limited by the terms of any of our borrowings.

Unless you elect to receive your distributions in cash, we intend to make such distributions in additional shares of our common stock under our dividend reinvestment plan. Although distributions paid in the form of additional shares of our common stock will generally be subject to U.S. federal, state and local taxes in the same manner as cash distributions, investors participating in our dividend reinvestment plan will not receive any corresponding cash distributions with which to pay any such applicable taxes. If you hold shares of our common stock in the name of a broker or financial intermediary, you should contact such broker or financial intermediary regarding your election to receive distributions in cash in lieu of shares of our common stock. Any distributions reinvested through the issuance of shares through our dividend reinvestment plan will increase our gross assets on which the base management fee and the incentive fee are determined and paid to GC Advisors. See “Dividend Reinvestment Plan.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The following selected consolidated financial data for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2010, 2009, 2008 and for the fiscal period from July 27, 2007 (inception) through September 30, 2007 is derived from our consolidated financial statements that have been audited by McGladrey & Pullen, LLP, independent auditors. The Company’s consolidated financial statements for the nine-month period ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are unaudited. However, in our opinion, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation have been made. Interim results may not be indicative of the results of operations for a full fiscal year. This financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this Prospectus and with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition, Results of Operations and Cash Flows” which follows.

		Golub Capital BDC(1)												GCMF
		Nine Months Ended								Years ended												For the Period July 27, 2007 (inception) through September 30, 2007
		June 30, 2011				June 30, 2010				September 30, 2010				September 30, 2009				September 30, 2008
		(unaudited)
		(in thousands, except per share data)
Statement of Operations Data:
Total investment income		$	28,319			$	25,718			$	33,150			$	33,338			$	20,686			$	1,868
Base management fee			4,122				2,237				3,328				2,849				1,726				134
Incentive fee			525				55				55				—				—				—
All other expenses			7,307				4,411				6,400				5,011				8,916				1,117
Net investment income			16,365				19,015				23,367				25,478				10,044				617
Net realized gain/(loss) on investments			1,997				—				(40	)			(3,972	)			(4,503	)			—
Net change in unrealized depreciation on investments			(4	)			985				2,921				(1,489	)			(8,957	)			(558	)
Net increase/(decrease) in net assets resulting from operations			18,358				20,000				26,248				20,017				(3,416	)			59
Per share data:
Net asset value		$	14.75				N/A	(2)		$	14.71				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Net investment income			0.86				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Net realized gain on investments			0.11				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Net change in unrealized depreciation on investments			—				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations			—				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Per share distributions declared			0.95				N/A	(2)			0.55				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Dollar amount of distributions declared			18,115				N/A	(2)			9,742				N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)			N/A	(2)
Other data:
Weighted average annualized yield on income producing assets at fair value(3)			8.6	%			8.2	%			8.4	%			8.1	%			9.3	%			6.4	%
Number of portfolio companies at period end			99				79				94				95				60				56

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Golub Capital BDC												GCMF
		June 30, 2011				June 30, 2010				September 30, 2010				September 30, 2009				Setpember 30, 2008				September 30, 2007
		(unaudited)																				(unaudited)
		(in thousands)
Balance sheet data at period end:
Investments, at fair value		$	438,593			$	277,610			$	344,869			$	376,294			$	135,476			$	201,147
Cash and cash equivalents			73,396				104,108				92,990				30,614				4,252				4,237
Other assets			35,270				2,042				4,904				2,214				1,213				2,819
Total assets			547,259				383,760				442,763				409,122				140,941				208,203
Total liabilities			226,736				123,975				182,222				316,370				124,088				174,722
Total net assets			320,523				259,785				260,541				92,752				16,853				33,481

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION, RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows should be read in conjunction with “Selected Financial and Other Information” and the financial statements and the related notes thereto of us and our predecessor, GCMF, appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. On April 13, 2010, Golub Capital BDC LLC converted from a Delaware limited liability company into a Delaware corporation and elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In this conversion, which we refer to as the BDC Conversion, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. assumed the business activities of Golub Capital BDC LLC and became the sole surviving entity. As a result of the conversion, GCMF became a wholly owned subsidiary of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. At the time of the BDC Conversion, all limited liability company interests were exchanged for 8,984,863 shares of common stock in Golub Capital BDC, Inc. Immediately prior to the BDC Conversion, the limited liability company interests were owned by investment vehicles managed by Golub Capital. For periods prior to April 13, 2010, the consolidated financial statements and related footnotes reflect the performance of Golub Capital BDC LLC and its predecessor, GCMF. The information in this section contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Please see “Risk Factors” and “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” for a discussion of the uncertainties, risks and assumptions associated with these statements.

Overview

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In addition, for tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, GCMF, which commenced operations in July 2007, to make investments in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms.

On April 14, 2010, we priced our initial public offering, selling 7,100,000 shares of common stock at a public offering price of $14.50 per share. Concurrent with our initial public offering, we sold an additional 1,322,581 shares through a private placement, also at $14.50 per share. On May 19, 2010, we issued an additional 305,000 shares at $14.50 following the exercise of the underwriters’ over-allotment option. Our shares are currently listed on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”.

Our investment objective is to maximize the total return to our stockholders in the form of current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $4.8 billion of capital under management as of June 30, 2011, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom we have invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

Our investment activities are managed by GC Advisors and supervised by our board of directors, of which a majority of the members are independent of us.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement entered into on April 14, 2010, which was amended and restated on July 16, 2010, we have agreed to pay GC Advisors an annual base management fee based on our average adjusted gross assets as well as an incentive fee based on our investment performance. We have also entered into the Administration Agreement with GC Service under which we have agreed to reimburse GC Service for our allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our independent directors) of overhead and other expenses incurred by GC Service in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement.

As of June 30, 2011, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 47.4% senior secured loans, 34.8% unitranche loans, 5.4% second lien loans, 10.6% mezzanine loans, 1.9% equity and (0.1)% total return swap. Over time we expect that senior secured loans will represent a smaller percentage of our investment portfolio as we grow our business, these investments are repaid and we invest in a different mix of assets.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans and warrants and minority equity securities by primarily investing approximately $5 million to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $25 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we had debt investments in 99, 94, 95, and 60 portfolio companies, respectively. For the three months ended June 30, 2011 and the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, our income producing assets, which represented nearly 100% of our total portfolio, had a weighted average annualized interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 8.6%, 8.4%, 8.1% and 9.3% and a weighted average annualized investment income (which includes interest income and amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 9.6%, 10.9%, 9.0% and 9.6%, respectively.

Revenues:  We generate revenue in the form of interest income on debt investments and capital gains and distributions, if any, on portfolio company investments that we originate or acquire. Our debt investments, whether in the form of senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine or second lien loans, typically have a term of three to seven years and bear interest at a fixed or floating rate. In some instances, we receive payments on our debt investments based on scheduled amortization of the outstanding balances. In addition, we receive repayments of some of our debt investments prior to their scheduled maturity date. The frequency or volume of these repayments may fluctuate significantly from period to period. Our portfolio activity also reflects the proceeds of sales of securities. In some cases, our investments provide for deferred interest payments or PIK interest. The principal amount of loans and any accrued but unpaid interest generally become due at the maturity date. In addition, we may generate revenue in the form of commitment, origination, amendment, structuring or due diligence fees, fees for providing managerial assistance and consulting fees. Loan origination fees, original issue discount and market discount or premium are capitalized, and we accrete or amortize such amounts as interest income. We record prepayment premiums on loans as interest income. When we receive principal payments on a loan in an amount that exceeds its amortized cost, we also record the excess principal payment as interest income. Dividend income, if any, is recognized on an accrual basis to the extent that we expect to collect such amounts.

Expenses:  Our primary operating expenses include the payment of fees to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement, our allocable portion of overhead expenses under the Administration Agreement and other operating costs described below. Additionally, we pay interest expense on all outstanding debt. We bear all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses of our operations and transactions, including:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer under the collateral management agreement, is entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.35% of the principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the Securitization Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. This fee, which is less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement, is paid directly by the Securitization Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against such management fee. Accordingly, the 1.375% management fee paid by the Company to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through the Securitization Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by an amount equal to such 0.35% fee paid to GC Advisors by the Securitization Issuer. This fee may be waived by the collateral manager. The collateral management agreement does not include any incentive fee payable to GC Advisors. In addition, the Securitization Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC a structuring and placement fee for its services in connection with the initial structuring of the Debt Securitization. The Securitization Issuer also agreed to pay ongoing administrative expenses to the trustee, collateral manager, independent accountants, legal counsel, rating agencies and independent managers in connection with developing and maintaining reports and providing required services in connection with the administration of the Debt Securitization. The administrative expenses are paid by the Securitization Issuer on each payment date in two parts: (1) a component that is paid in a priority to other amounts distributed by the Securitization Issuer, subject to a cap equal to the sum of 0.04% per annum on the adjusted principal balance of the portfolio loans and other assets held by the Securitization Issuer on the last day of the collection period relating to such payment date, plus $150,000 per annum, and (2) a component that is paid in a subordinated position relative to other amounts distributed by the Securitization Issuer, equal to any amounts that exceed the aforementioned administrative expense cap.

Recent Developments

Total Return Swap

On June 17, 2011, we, through GCMF, entered into the TRS, with Citibank. The purpose of entering into the TRS was to gain economic exposure to a portfolio of broadly syndicated loans. Generally, under the terms of a total return swap, one party agrees to make periodic payments to another party based on the change in the market value of the assets referenced by the total return swap, which may include a specified security, basket of securities or securities indices during the specified period, in return for periodic payments based on

TABLE OF CONTENTS

a fixed or variable interest rate. A total return swap is typically used to obtain exposure to a security or market without owning or taking physical custody of such security or investing directly in such market.

Under the terms of the TRS, we have the ability to recommend purchases of loans, but all investment decisions are subject to approval by Citibank. The loans are purchased in the open market by Citibank at fair value. The maximum fair value of the portfolio loans subject to the TRS is $100 million (determined at the time each such loan becomes subject to the TRS).

In order for Citibank to purchase a loan for the TRS, each individual loan, and the portfolio of loans taken as a whole, must meet certain specified criteria. We receive from Citibank all interest and fees payable in respect of the loans included in the portfolio. We pay to Citibank interest at an annual rate equal to three-month London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, plus 1.2% based on the settled notional value of the TRS. In addition, upon the termination or repayment of any loan subject to the TRS, we will either receive from Citibank the appreciation in the value of such loan, or pay to Citibank any depreciation in the value of such loan. On a quarterly basis, net payment between GCMF and Citibank for interest and realized appreciation and depreciation on the portfolio of loans occurs. We are required to post additional collateral from time to time as a result of a decline in the fair value of the portfolio of loans subject to the TRS.

The obligations of GCMF under the TRS are non-recourse to us, and our exposure under the TRS is limited to the value of our investment and cash collateral. GCMF subsequently is required to cash collateralize 20% of the market value of each loan included under the TRS. This investment generally will equal the value of cash collateral provided by GCMF under the TRS plus any unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on the investment.

We act as the manager of the rights and obligations of GCMF under the TRS.

Citibank may terminate the TRS on or after the third anniversary of the effectiveness of the TRS. We may terminate the TRS at any time upon providing no less than 30 days, prior notice to Citibank.

As of June 30, 2011, the fair value of the TRS was $(0.3) million. The TRS is reflected on the our consolidated statements of financial condition as investments, at fair value. The change in value of the TRS, which was $(0.3) million for the three and nine month periods ended June 30, 2011, is reflected in the consolidated statements of operations as net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments. Realized gains and losses on the TRS are composed of any gains or losses on the referenced portfolio of loans as well as the net interest received or owed at the time of the quarterly settlement. Unrealized gains and losses on the TRS are composed of the net interest income earned or interest expense owed during the period that was not previously settled as well as the change in fair value of the referenced portfolio of loans.

As of June 30, 2011, the TRS has a portfolio with a notional value of $55.9 million, and through GCMF, we had a due from broker in the amount of $11.5 million, which represents collateral held at Citibank. Of the $55.9 million of notional value at June 30, 2011, $46.5 million represented loans that were sold by us to various third party brokers at fair value, which were subsequently, independently purchased at a fair value of $46.5 million by Citibank for the TRS. Additionally, we have a payable to Citibank in the amount of $0.9 million, reflected on the consolidated statements of financial condition as due to broker. The Moody's weighted average rating of the referenced portfolio of loans within the TRS was B1 at June 30, 2011.

Revolving Credit Facility

On July 21, 2011, Funding, our newly created, wholly owned subsidiary, entered into a $75 million senior, secured revolving credit facility with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender.

Under the Credit Facility, which matures on October 21, 2015, the lender has agreed to extend credit to Funding in an aggregate principal amount of $75 million. Funding’s ability to draw under the Credit Facility is scheduled to terminate on October 20, 2012. The period from the closing date until October 20, 2012 is referred to as the reinvestment period. All amounts outstanding under the Credit Facility are required to be repaid by October 21, 2015. Through the reinvestment period, the Credit Facility bears interest at an annual interest rate equal to LIBOR plus 2.25%. After the reinvestment period, the annual interest rate will reset to LIBOR plus 2.75% for the remaining term of the Credit Facility.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Credit Facility is secured by all of the assets held by Funding, and we have pledged our interests in Funding as collateral to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as the collateral agent, under an ancillary agreement to secure our obligations as the transferor and servicer under the Credit Facility. We have made customary representations and warranties and are required to comply with various covenants, reporting requirements and other customary requirements for similar credit facilities. Borrowing under the Credit Facility is subject to the leverage restrictions contained in the 1940 Act.

We plan to transfer certain loans and debt securities we have originated or acquired from time to time to Funding through a purchase and sale agreement and may cause Funding to originate or acquire loans in the future, consistent with our investment objectives. We serve as servicer to Funding under the Credit Facility.

Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield

As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we had investments in 99, 94, 95 and 60 portfolio companies, respectively, with a total value of $438.9 million, $344.9 million, $376.3 million and $135.5 million, respectively. For the three months ended June 30, 2011, we funded 24 senior secured loans, seven unitranche loans, five subordinated loans and four equity security with values of $57.8 million, $44.4 million, $21.4 million and $1.2 million, respectively. For the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we funded 56 senior secured loans, 13 unitranche loans, four second lien loans, eight subordinated loans and 12 equity securities with values of $135.1 million, $82.2 million, $19.6 million, $32.5 million and $5.4 million, respectively. For the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we originated 27, 86 and 42 new investments, with a total value of approximately $144.1 million, $357.6 million and $345.2 million, respectively. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we had approximately $33.5 million, $108.9 million, $130.2 million, $52.1 million and $18.6 million in debt repayments in existing portfolio companies, and sales of securities in 19, 37, four, 42 and 70 portfolio companies aggregating approximately $46.2 million, $80.1 million, $51.7 million, $154.0 million and $403.1 million, respectively.

At June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, our investment portfolio included $3.9 million and $48.2 million, respectively, in liquid, broadly syndicated loans that we anticipate selling in future periods as we find opportunities to redeploy those assets into higher yielding investments. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and for the year ended September 30, 2010, we had sales of broadly syndicated loans in 15, 29 and one portfolio companies aggregating approximately $34.3 million, $62.0 million and $1.2 million, respectively.

The following table shows the par, amortized cost, and fair value of our portfolio of investments, excluding our TRS, by asset class:

		As of June 30, 2011(1)												As of September 30, 2010(1)												As of September 30, 2009(1)
		Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value
		(In thousands)
Senior Secured:
Performing		$	208,977			$	205,742			$	204,492			$	231,404			$	223,962			$	223,953			$	257,684			$	245,346			$	241,228
Non-accrual(2)			5,659				5,413				3,360				4,422				4,346				3,095				10,924				10,295				7,252
Unitranche:
Performing			153,916				151,374				152,680				91,931				90,309				90,369				120,339				118,299				116,233
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				2,771				2,771				1,124
Second Lien(3):
Performing			23,769				23,290				23,769				11,396				11,192				11,380				10,920				10,582				10,457
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—
Subordinated Debt:
Performing			46,709				45,743				46,338				13,436				13,091				13,436				—				—				—
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—				—
Equity			N/A				8,099				8,216				N/A				2,636				2,636				N/A				—				—
Total		$	439,030			$	439,661			$	438,855			$	352,589			$	345,536			$	344,869			$	402,638			$	387,293			$	376,294

TABLE OF CONTENTS

For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the weighted average annualized interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield on the fair value of investments in our portfolio was 8.6%, 8.6%, 8.4%, 8.1% and 9.3%, respectively. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010, the weighted average annualized interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield on the fair value of income producing investments in our portfolio was 7.8% and 8.2%, respectively. As of June 30, 2011, 75.2% and 75.3% of our portfolio, excluding the total return swap, at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit the minimum applicable interest rates on such loans. As of September 30, 2010, 59.2% and 60.0% of our portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit minimum interest rates on such loans. As of September 30, 2009, 47.6% and 47.1% of our portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit minimum interest rates on such loans.

The following table shows the weighted average rate, spread over LIBOR and fees on investments originated and the weighted average rate on full principal payments and sales of investments during the three months ended June 30, 2011, March 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and September 30, 2010:

		Three months ended
		June 30, 2011				March 31, 2011				December 31, 2010				September 30, 2010
Weighted average rate of new investment fundings			7.8	%			7.2	%			8.8	%			7.9	%
Weighted average spread over LIBOR of new investment fundings			6.7	%			5.6	%			7.1	%			6.4	%
Weighted average fees of new investment fundings			1.5	%			1.2	%			2.0	%			1.8	%
Weighted average rate of sales and full payoffs of portfolio companies			5.7	%			6.0	%			7.1	%			5.3	%

The following table shows the new investment commitments, excluding the TRS, and payoffs of portfolio companies and sales for the three months ended June 30, 2011, March 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and September 30, 2010:

		For the three months ended
		June 30, 2011				March 31, 2011				December 31, 2010				September 30, 2010
		(In thousands)
New investment commitments		$	135,805			$	54,592			$	113,692			$	83,708
Payoffs of portfolio companies and sales			79,627				46,033				64,147				13,536

Consolidated Results of Operations

The consolidated results of operations set forth below include historical financial information of our predecessor, GCMF, prior to our election to be regulated as a business development company and our election to be treated as a RIC. As a business development company and a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we are also subject to certain constraints on our operations, including limitations imposed by the 1940 Act and the Code. Also, the management fee that we pay to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement is determined by reference to a formula that differs materially from the management fee paid by GCMF in prior

TABLE OF CONTENTS

periods. In addition, our portfolio of investments consisted primarily of senior secured and unitranche loans as of June 30, 2011 and 2010, and over time we expect that senior secured loans will represent a smaller percentage of our investment portfolio as we grow our business, these investments are repaid and we invest in a different mix of assets. For these and other reasons, the results of operations described below may not be indicative of the results we report in future periods.

Consolidated operating results for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 for the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:

		For the nine months ended June 30,								For the year ended September 30,
		2011				2010				2010				2009				2008
		(In thousands)
Total investment income		$	28,319			$	25,718			$	33,150			$	33,338			$	20,686
Total expenses			11,954				6,703				9,783				7,860				10,642
Net investment income			16,365				19,015				23,367				25,478				10,044
Net realized gains (losses)			1,997				—				(40	)			(3,972	)			(4,503	)
Net unrealized gains (losses)			(4	)			985				2,921				(1,489	)			(8,957	)
Net income		$	18,358			$	20,000			$	26,248			$	20,017			$	(3,416	)
Average investments, at fair value		$	390,714			$	310,495			$	307,552			$	371,240			$	214,675
Average debt outstanding		$	193,250			$	230,122			$	213,793			$	305,440			$	191,225

Net income can vary substantially from period to period for various reasons, including the recognition of realized gains and losses and unrealized appreciation and depreciations. As a result, quarterly or annual comparisons of net income may not be meaningful.

Comparison of the Three and Nine Months Ended June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010

Investment Income

Investment income increased by $2.8 million, or 39.3%, for the three months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the three months ended June 30, 2010. The increase in investment income was primarily a result of an increase in the average balance of investments as well as an increase on the yield of income producing loans, which was partially offset by a decrease in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees. For the three months ended June 30, 2011, total investment income consisted of $9.1 million in interest income from investments and $1.0 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees. For the three months ended June 30, 2010, total investment income consisted of $5.5 million in interest income and $1.7 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees.

Investment income increased by $2.6 million, or 10.1%, for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the nine months ended June 30, 2010. The increase in investment income was primarily a result of an increase in the average balance of investments as well as an increase on the yield of income producing loans, which were partially offset by a decrease in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees. For the nine months ended June 30, 2011, total investment income consisted of $24.2 million in interest income from investments and $4.1 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees. For the nine months ended June 30, 2010, total investment income consisted of $19.1 million in interest income and $6.6 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees.

Expenses

Total expenses increased by $1.7 million, or 70.6%, to $4.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the three months ended June 30, 2010. For the same period, total interest and other debt financing expenses increased by $1.0 million or 177% and all other expenses increased by $0.7 million, or 36.1%. Total expenses increased by $5.3 million, or 78.3%, to $12.0 million for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the nine months ended June 30, 2010. For the same period, total interest expense increased by $2.6 million, or 118.3%, and all other expenses increased by $2.7 million, or 59.5%.

Interest expense was higher in the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 than the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010 due to a higher average debt outstanding balance for the three and nine months

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ended June 30, 2011 as well as higher average interest rates on the debt outstanding at June 30, 2011. Excluding interest expense, expenses increased for the three month period ended June 30, 2011 compared to the three month period ended June 30, 2010 primarily due to an increase in management fees. The increase in management fees was driven by higher average assets at June 30, 2011 compared to June 30, 2010.

Excluding interest expense, expenses increased for the nine month period ended June 30, 2011 compared to the nine month period ended June 30, 2010 due to an increase in professional fees, management fees, incentive fees, administrative service fees and general administrative expenses as a result of us becoming a public entity. Professional fees increased due to higher legal, audit and valuation services. In addition, following the completion of our initial public offering, we accrued management and incentive fees under the Investment Advisory Agreement, which provides for a higher management fee percentage as compared to amounts previously paid by GCMF. In addition, this agreement provides for the calculation of an incentive fee, which was $470,000 higher for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 than the nine months ended June 30, 2010. Prior to completion of our initial public offering, we did not pay an incentive fee or an administrative servicing fee.

Prior to completion of our initial public offering, Golub Capital Incorporated, or the Investment Manager, paid for certain expenses on behalf of GCMF, all of which were subsequently reimbursed directly with cash or through a member’s equity contribution. Subsequent to our initial public offering, GC Advisors, an affiliate of the Investment Manager, pays for certain expenses incurred by us. These expenses are subsequently reimbursed in cash. Total expenses reimbursed to GC Advisors and the Investment Manager, as applicable, for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 were $68,000 and $266,000, respectively.

Total expenses reimbursed to GC Advisors and the Investment Manager, as applicable, for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010 were $215,000 and $639,000, respectively. Of these amounts, for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010, zero and $225,000 were reimbursed via a members’ equity contribution, respectively.

As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, included in accounts payable and accrued expenses were $105,000 and $116,000, respectively, for accrued expenses paid on behalf of us by the GC Advisors.

Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses

During the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, we had $71,000 and $2.0 million in net realized gains, respectively. For the three months ended June 30, 2011, we had $2.1 million in unrealized appreciation on 29 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $1.3 million in unrealized depreciation on 78 portfolio company investments and unrealized depreciation of $262,000 on the TRS. For the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we had $6.0 million in unrealized appreciation on 57 portfolio company investments, which was fully offset by $5.7 million in unrealized depreciation on 72 portfolio company investments and unrealized depreciation of $262,000 on the TRS.

Unrealized appreciation during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value.

During the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010, we had $0 and $0 in net realized losses and $3.2 million and $11.8 million in unrealized appreciation on 49 and 79 portfolio company investments, respectively. These amounts offset unrealized depreciation on 53 and 49 portfolio company investments totaling $3.3 million and $10.8 million, respectively. Unrealized appreciation during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value.

Comparison of the Years Ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008

Set forth below are the results of operations for the years ended September 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Investment Income

Investment income decreased by $(200,000), or 0.6%, for the year ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2009. Investment income was fairly consistent for the year ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2009, despite a decline in average invested assets. This occurred as a result of an increase in the amortization of discounts and origination fees into interest income as a result of increased payoff activity and an increase in the average yield of investments. For the year ended September 30, 2010, total investment income consisted of $25.5 million in interest income from investments and $7.7 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees. For the year ended September 30, 2009, total investment income consisted of $27.7 million in interest income and $5.6 million in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees.

Investment income increased by $12.7 million, or 61.2%, for the year ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2008. The increase in investment income was primarily due to an increase in average invested assets. For the year ended September 30, 2008, total investment income consisted of $20.2 million in interest income and $315,000 in income from the amortization of discounts and origination fees, respectively.

Operating Expenses

Total operating expenses increased by $1.9 million, or 24.5%, to $9.8 million for the year ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2009. This increase was primarily due to non-recurring organizational costs associated with our initial public offering, as well as increase in professional fees, management fees and administrative service fees. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in interest and other credit facility expenses.

Professional fees increased primarily due to higher legal, audit, and valuation services, which all increased as a result of us becoming a public entity. In addition, following the completion of our initial public offering, we pay management and incentive fees under the Investment Advisory Agreement, which provides a higher management fee percentage as compared to amounts previously paid by GCMF. In addition, this agreement provides for the calculation of an incentive fee. Prior to completion of our initial public offering, we did not pay an incentive fee or an administrative servicing fee.

Interest and other credit facility expenses were lower in the year ended September 30, 2010 than the year ended September 30, 2009 primarily due to lower average debt outstanding.

Total operating expenses decreased by $2.8 million, or 26.1%, to $7.9 million for the year ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2008. This decrease was primarily due to a decrease in interest expense as a result of lower average cost of borrowing on debt outstanding in 2009 compared to 2008. This decrease was partially offset by an increase in management fees for reasons identified above.

Prior to our initial public offering, Golub Capital Incorporated paid for certain expenses on behalf of GCMF, all of which were subsequently reimbursed directly with cash or through a member’s equity contribution. Subsequent to our initial public offering, GC Advisors, an affiliate of Golub Capital Incorporated, pays for certain expenses incurred by us. These expenses are subsequently reimbursed in cash.

Total expenses reimbursed to Golub Capital and GC Advisors, as applicable, for the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $639,000, $344,000 and $258,000, respectively. Of these amounts, for the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009, and 2008, $225,000, $344,000 and $258,000 were reimbursed via a members’ equity contribution, respectively.

As of September 30, 2010 and 2009, included in accounts payable and accrued expenses were $257,000 and $13,000, respectively, for accrued expenses paid on behalf of us by Golub Capital or GC Advisors, as applicable. As of September 30, 2009, also included in accounts payable and accrued expenses was $672,000 payable to an affiliated entity for cash received from an investment owned by the affiliate.

Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses

During the year ended September 30, 2010, we had $(40,000) in net realized losses and $11.1 million in unrealized appreciation on 77 portfolio company investments. These amounts offset unrealized depreciation on

TABLE OF CONTENTS

34 portfolio company investments totaling $(8.2) million. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2010 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value.

During the year ended September 30, 2009, we had $(3.9) million in net realized loss and $13.2 million in unrealized appreciation on 63 portfolio company investments. This was offset by unrealized depreciation on 52 portfolio company investments totaling $(14.7) million. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2009 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value.

During the year ended September 30, 2008, we had $(4.5) million in net realized loss and $702,000 in unrealized appreciation on 12 portfolio company investments. This was offset by unrealized depreciation on 43 portfolio company investments totaling $(9.7) million. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2008 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from negative credit related adjustments, which caused a reduction in fair value.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As a business development company, we distribute substantially all of our net income to our stockholders and will have an ongoing need to raise additional capital for investment purposes. To fund growth, we have a number of alternatives available to increase capital, including raising equity, increasing debt, including through one or more additional securitization facilities, and funding from operational cash flow.

For the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we experienced a net decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $17.1 million. During the period we used $107.9 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $286.3 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments of $108.9 million and sales of portfolio investments of $80.1 million and net investment income of $16.4 million. During the same period, cash provided by financing activities was $88.3 million, primarily due to net proceeds from the follow-on offering of $59.4 million and borrowings on debt of $48.3 million, partially offset by distributions paid of $17.0 million. Lastly, net cash provided by investing activities was $2.5 million as a result of a decrease in restricted cash and cash equivalents.

For the nine months ended June 30, 2010, there was an increase in case and cash equivalents of $71.4 million. During the same period, cash provided by operating activities was $120.0 million, primarily a result of proceeds from principal payments of $118.0 million and net investment income of $19.0 million. During the same period, cash used in financing activities was $46.5 million, which was primarily a result of repayments of debt of $193.5 million and payments of members’ equity distributions of $13.5 million, partially offset by proceeds from members’ equity contributions of $47.2 million. Lastly, net cash used in investment activities was $2.1 million as a result of an increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents.

As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 and 2009, we had cash and cash equivalents of $44.1 million, $61.2 million and zero, respectively. In addition, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $29.3 million, $31.8 million and $30.6 million as of June 30, 2011, September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Cash and cash equivalents are available to fund new investments, pay operating expenses and pay dividends and other distributions. $20.2 million of our restricted cash and cash equivalents can be used to fund new investments that meet the investment guidelines established in the Debt Securitization, which are described in further detail in Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements and for the payment of interest expense on the notes issued in the Debt Securitization. The remaining $9.1 million of restricted cash and cash equivalents can be used to fund new investments that meet the regulatory and investment guidelines established by the SBA for our small business investment company, which are described in further detail in Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements, and for interest expense and fees on our outstanding SBA debentures. We also had borrowings of $222.3 million, $174.0 million, $315.3 million and $123.1 million as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008, respectively.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Our cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2011 have been generated primarily from the proceeds of a $25.0 million private placement that occurred prior to the closing of our initial public offering, $117.6 million in net proceeds from our initial public offering and concurrent private placement, the Debt Securitization, $48.3 million of SBA debentures and our $59.4 million follow-on equity offering. We meet our short-term liquidity needs from cash flows from operations, investment sales and repayments and earned income. A portion of the total net proceeds from our private placement and initial public offering was used to make a $50 million payment on the Retired Credit Facility on April 20, 2010. A portion of the total proceeds was also used to fund new investments, pay quarterly distributions and fund operating expenses.

The average debt outstanding (including both the debt under the Debt Securitization and the SBA debentures) for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 was $206.5 million and $193.3 million, respectively. The average debt outstanding under the Company’s prior credit facility for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2010 was $150.3 million and $230.1 million, respectively.

Although we expect to fund the growth of our investment portfolio through the net proceeds from future securities offerings and through our dividend reinvestment plan, or future borrowings, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, we cannot assure you that our plans to raise capital will be successful. In addition to capital not being available, it also may not be available on favorable terms.

We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2011 will be sufficient to fund our anticipated requirements through at least June 30, 2012. In the future, we expect to raise additional debt and equity capital from time to time to fund our growth. In particular, in the next 12 months, we expect to raise additional equity capital through the issuance and sale of shares of common stock and additional debt capital in the form of issuances of SBA debentures by GC SBIC IV, L.P., our wholly owned SBIC subsidiary. Additionally, we expect to explore various financing activities which may include raising additional debt capital through one or more securitization transactions. The actual amount of any future equity or debt financings will depend on our capital needs, the availability of debt financing and our compliance with the asset coverage requirements of the 1940 Act and the covenants and restrictions in our debt documents.

Initial Public Offering and Concurrent Private Placement

On April 20, 2010, we completed our initial public offering in which we sold an aggregate of 7,405,000 shares of our common stock resulting in net proceeds to us of approximately $99.9 million (including the purchase by the underwriters of an additional 305,000 shares of our common stock at the public offering price to cover over-allotments, which was completed on May 19, 2010). Concurrently with the closing of our initial public offering, certain existing investors in entities advised by affiliates of Golub Capital and certain of our officers and directors, their immediate family members or entities owned by, or family trusts for the benefit of, such persons purchased in a separate private placement an aggregate of 1,322,581 shares of common stock at a price of $14.50 per share, resulting in aggregate net cash proceeds to us of approximately $19.2 million.

Debt Securitization

On July 16, 2010, we completed the Debt Securitization in which the Securitization Issuer issued $300 million of notes and, in connection with such issuance, received $300 million of consideration, consisting of $62.1 million of cash as well as loans with an aggregate outstanding loan balance of $237.9 million, which served as the initial collateral for the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer. The notes offered in the Debt Securitization were issued by the Securitization Issuer, and the Class A Notes and Class B Notes are secured by the assets held by the Securitization Issuer. The transaction was executed through a private placement of $174 million of Aaa/AAA Class A Notes. The Class A Notes bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR, plus 2.40%. The $10 million face amount of Class B Notes bear interest at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 2.40%, and the $116 million face amount of Subordinated Notes do not bear interest. In partial consideration for the loans transferred to the Securitization Issuer as part of the Debt Securitization, Holdings retained all of the Class B and Subordinated Notes, which totaled $126 million, and it retained all of the membership interests in the Securitization Issuer, which Holdings initially purchased for $250. All of the notes are scheduled to mature on July 20, 2021. As discussed below, in accordance with ASC Topic 860, Transfers and Servicing, we are required to consolidate the special purpose vehicle used in an asset-backed securitization and treat the transaction as a secured borrowing. In analyzing the relevant facts and

TABLE OF CONTENTS

circumstances, the purpose and design of the Debt Securitization was to facilitate the refinancing of assets that were consolidated on our balance sheet and used as collateral for the Retired Credit Facility, which was terminated on July 16, 2010. We indirectly received the Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes in exchange for our indirect contribution of these assets to the Securitization Issuer, which consisted primarily of middle-market loans, and the proceeds from the Debt Securitization were used to repay amounts outstanding under the Retired Credit Facility as well as provide capital for new investments. GC Advisors is our investment adviser and also the collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer, which results in the “continued involvement” of us in the business of the Securitization Issuer. In addition, the investments of the Securitization Issuer constitute a substantial percentage of our total assets. As a result of this continued involvement and the fact that the investments of the Securitization Issuer constitute a substantial percentage of our assets, we consolidate the financial statements of the Securitization Issuer.

An important aspect of a debt securitization transaction is that the purchaser of the notes must become comfortable through their due diligence investigation that the sale and/or contribution of income producing assets into a special purpose entity would be considered a true sale and/or contribution or, in other words, that as a result of such sale and/or contribution, the originator no longer owns the income producing assets. This structure seeks to reduce risk to noteholders by insulating them from the credit and bankruptcy risks faced by the originator. The structure of any debt securitization is in large part intended to prevent, in the event of a bankruptcy, the consolidation in the originator’s bankruptcy case of the special purpose entity with the operations of the originator, based on equitable principles, and the noteholders must become comfortable with this analysis. As a result of this structure, debt securitization transactions frequently achieve lower overall borrowing costs than would be achieved if the borrowing had been structured as a traditional secured lending transaction.

In a typical sale transaction, the purchaser exchanges an asset for cash or some other asset, whereas in a contribution transaction, the contributor typically exchanges an asset for securities issued by the purchaser. In the Debt Securitization, we transferred the portfolio loans that comprise the collateral to Holdings in a transaction that was a partial sale and a partial capital contribution. Holdings then transferred these same portfolio loans to the Securitization Issuer in a transfer that was also a partial sale and a partial capital contribution. To the extent that we received cash proceeds from Holdings in consideration for the portfolio loans transferred to Holdings, such portion of the transfer constituted a sale. To the extent that Holdings received cash proceeds, Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes from the Securitization Issuer in consideration for the portfolio loans transferred by it to the Securitization Issuer, such portion of the transfer also constituted a sale. By contrast, to the extent that we received cash proceeds from Holdings equal to or less than the fair value of the portfolio loans transferred by us to Holdings, the difference between the fair value of such portfolio loans and the cash we received from Holdings was deemed to be a contribution to the capital of Holdings pursuant to the terms of the governing master loan sale agreement. Likewise, to the extent that the cash proceeds, Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes received by Holdings from the Securitization Issuer was less than the fair value of the portfolio loans transferred from Holdings to the Securitization Issuer, such portion of the transfer was deemed to be a contribution to the capital of the Securitization Issuer by Holdings pursuant to the terms of such master loan sale agreement. In these transactions, there were no material differences between selling and/or contributing loans or participations, viewed from the perspective of the Securitization Issuer’s ownership interests therein, as all of the ownership interests in such loans and participations were transferred to, and are now owned by, the Securitization Issuer under the terms of the master loan sale agreement, irrespective of whether such loans or participations were sold or contributed from us to Holdings and from Holdings to the Securitization Issuer.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer, selected the senior secured and second lien loans (or participations therein) that were transferred to the Securitization Issuer. The senior secured and second lien loans (or participations therein) were selected in accordance with the criteria set forth in the Debt Securitization documents. These are primarily objective requirements determined by the constraints of the market for collateralized debt obligations, and are generally designed to comply with regulations governing commercial lending and similar financing activities in the United States and the requirements of Rule 3a-7 under the 1940 Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

By their terms, the Class B Notes are limited recourse secured obligations of the Securitization Issuer, with amounts, including principal and interest, payable under the Class B Notes funded solely from the income generated by the portfolio loans and other assets owned by the Securitization Issuer that secure such Class B Notes. Consequently, holders of the Class B Notes must rely solely on payments made under such portfolio loans and other assets held by the Securitization Issuer and, in the event of a portfolio loan event of default, from the proceeds of any liquidation of the collateral underlying such portfolio loans. Likewise, the Subordinated Notes are limited recourse, unsecured obligations of the Securitization Issuer payable solely from payments made under the portfolio loans and other assets held by the Securitization Issuer and, in the event of a portfolio loan event of default, from the proceeds of any liquidation of the collateral underlying such portfolio loans. Additionally, for as long as the Class A Notes and Class B Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Subordinated Notes will not generally be entitled to exercise remedies under the indenture. As an unsecured class of notes, the interests and rights of holders of the Subordinated Notes in and to the portfolio loans and other assets owned by the Securitization Issuer are subject to the prior claims of secured creditors of the Securitization Issuer and are potentially subject to or will rank equally with the claims of other unsecured creditors of the Securitization Issuer.

The Class B Notes are subordinated in right of payment on each payment date to prior payments on the Class A Notes and to certain amounts payable by the Securitization Issuer as administrative expenses. The Subordinated Notes are subordinated in right of payment on each payment date to payments on the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes as well as to certain amounts payable by the Securitization Issuer as administrative expenses and to the claims of other unsecured creditors of the Securitization Issuer.

The Securitization Issuer may only make payments on such securities to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the indenture governing the notes, which generally provides that principal payments on the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing under the Class A Notes are paid in full. In addition, if the Securitization Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes to first pay the Class A Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In addition, no payments may be made on the membership interests in any period until all required payments in respect of the Class A Notes, the Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes have been paid in full. Therefore, to the extent that any losses are suffered by noteholders as a result of losses on the portfolio loans and other assets owned by the Securitization Issuer, such losses will be borne in the first instance by the holders of the membership interests, then by the Subordinated Notes, then by the holders of the Class B Notes and lastly by the holders of the Class A Notes.

We believe that the Debt Securitization benefits from “internal” credit enhancement, meaning that holders of more senior classes of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer benefit from the terms of subordination applicable to the more junior classes of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer. Thus, the Class A Notes enjoy the benefit of credit enhancement effectively provided by the subordination provisions of the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes. Likewise, the Class B Notes enjoy the benefit of credit enhancement effectively provided by the subordination provisions of the Subordinated Notes. Specifically, as the Securitization Issuer realizes losses on its portfolio loans, such losses are borne initially by the Subordinated Notes, then by the Class B Notes and lastly by the Class A Notes.

The Debt Securitization documents expressly provide that we and our subsidiaries (other than the Securitization Issuer) are not, and cannot be held, liable for any shortfall in payments or any defaults on any of the classes of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer in connection with the Debt Securitization because such obligations are the obligations of the Securitization Issuer only, and the sole recourse for such obligations is to the collateral owned by the Securitization Issuer rather than our assets or the assets of Holdings.

Under the terms of the documents related to the Debt Securitization, recourse to us and to Holdings is limited and generally consistent with the terms of other similarly structured finance transactions. Under the master loan sale agreement with respect to the Debt Securitization, (1) we sold and/or contributed to Holdings all of our ownership interest in certain of our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement, and (2) Holdings, in turn, sold and/or

TABLE OF CONTENTS

contributed to the Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement. These transfers were structured by their terms to provide limited recourse to us by the Securitization Issuer relating to certain representations and warranties with respect to certain characteristics including title and quality of the portfolio loans that were transferred to the Securitization Issuer. If we breached these representations and warranties and such breach materially and adversely affected the value of the portfolio loans or the interests of holders of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, then we could be required, within 30 days of notice or our knowledge of such breach, to (a) cure such breach in all material respects, (b) repurchase the portfolio loan or loans subject to such breach or (c) remove the portfolio loan or loans subject to such breach from the pool of loans and other assets held by the Securitization Issuer and substitute a portfolio loan or loans that meet the requirements of the Debt Securitization documents. This repurchase and substitution obligation of us constitutes the sole remedy available against us for any breach of a representation or warranty related to the portfolio loans transferred to the Securitization Issuer.

A collateral management agreement is an agreement entered into between an adviser and a debt securitization vehicle or similar issuer and sets forth the terms and conditions pursuant to which the adviser will provide advisory and/or management services with respect to the client’s securities portfolio. Under the collateral management agreement between GC Advisors and the Securitization Issuer, GC Advisors’ duties include (1) selecting portfolio loans to be acquired and selecting the portfolio loans to be sold or otherwise disposed of by the Securitization Issuer, (2) reinvesting in other portfolio loans, where appropriate, (3) instructing the trustee with respect to any acquisition, disposition or tender of, or offer with respect to, a portfolio loan or other assets received in the open market or otherwise by the Securitization Issuer, and (4) performing all other tasks, and taking all other actions, that are specified in, or not inconsistent with, the duties of the collateral manager.

The Debt Securitization provided a number of benefits to us, most notably in providing financing for our portfolio loans that had been financed under the Retired Credit Facility, which was scheduled to mature on December 29, 2010, as well as an ability on our part to finance new portfolio loans acquired by the Securitization Issuer at an attractive cost. The Debt Securitization also generated additional cash for us to lend to portfolio companies because the proceeds received by us from the Debt Securitization exceeded the amount necessary to pay off the Retired Credit Facility in full.

Prior to completion of the Debt Securitization, our portfolio loans were owned by GCMF pursuant to the terms of the Retired Credit Facility. Under the terms of the Debt Securitization, we sold and/or contributed the portfolio loans formerly serving as collateral on the Retired Credit Facility to Holdings, which, in turn, sold and/or contributed them to the Securitization Issuer. Both prior to and following completion of the Debt Securitization, we have no direct ability to enforce the payment obligations on such portfolio loans. The contribution of loans and participations did not constitute a realization event under the Investment Advisory Agreement, and no incentive fee was earned as a result of the Debt Securitization.

Both the Retired Credit Facility and the Debt Securitization are similarly structured in that each entity contracted or contracts with a third party servicer to whom the vehicle has assigned voting rights related to the loans held by such entity, including rights to vote on amendments to and waivers of provisions in the credit agreements of portfolio companies. Golub Capital Incorporated, in its role as servicer for the Retired Credit Facility, was the party directly responsible for enforcing payment obligations under such portfolio loans. GC Advisors, in its role as collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer, is the party responsible for enforcing such payment obligations.

We structured the Debt Securitization with the assistance of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, for which Wells Fargo Securities, LLC received a structuring and placement fee. In connection with the Debt Securitization, the Securitization Issuer issued the following classes of notes: $174 million of Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes, $10 million of Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes and $116 million of Subordinated Notes. We acquired the portfolio loans and other assets using the proceeds of the Debt Securitization, a portion of which was used to pay off the Retired Credit Facility through which the portfolio loans had been financed previously.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We expect to originate and acquire additional portfolio loans using the proceeds of the Debt Securitization that we did not use to repay amounts outstanding under the Retired Credit Facility or to pay the expenses of the Debt Securitization. We anticipate that such additional portfolio loans will be held by us directly or sold and/or contributed into one of our subsidiaries, which would enable us to borrow additional amounts in securitization or other structures using such portfolio loans as collateral. We believe that this approach will enable us to deploy our capital efficiently and to increase our capacity to provide financing for small to medium-sized businesses in our target market.

The Class B Notes may be transferred to: (1) “qualified institutional buyers,” as that term is defined in Rule 144A under the Securities Act, who are also “qualified purchasers” as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(51) of the 1940 Act; (2) to a limited number of other institutional accredited investors within the meaning of Rule 501(a)(1), (2), (3) or (7) of Regulation D under the Securities Act, who are also qualified purchasers; and (3) outside of the United States to qualified purchasers in compliance with Regulation S under the Securities Act. The Subordinated Notes may be transferred only to persons or entities that are either (x) qualified institutional buyers or (y) institutional accredited investors and, in either case, are qualified purchasers. By their terms, the Subordinated Notes may only be owned by U.S. persons. No Subordinated Note (or interests in such notes) may be acquired or owned by any person that is classified for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a disregarded entity (unless the beneficial owner of such person is a corporation that is not a subchapter S corporation or otherwise taxable as a corporation), partnership, subchapter S corporation or grantor trust unless such person obtains a legal opinion to the effect that such acquisition or ownership will not cause the Securitization Issuer to be treated as a publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation.

Membership interests in the Securitization Issuer may be transferred only with the written consent of the designated manager of the Securitization Issuer, which is us. Even with such consent, such membership interests may not be transferred unless, simultaneously with the transfer of such membership interests: (1) a proportionate amount of the Subordinated Notes are transferred so that the ratio of the percentage interest of the Subordinated Notes so transferred to all Subordinated Notes and the ratio of the percentage interest of the membership interests so transferred to all membership interests are equal, (2) the transfers of membership interests and the Subordinated Notes referred to in this paragraph are made to the same person or entity, and (3) the percentage interest of the membership interests and the Subordinated Notes, respectively, so transferred is no less than ten percent. The membership interests and the Subordinated Notes must at all times be held in such proportion that the ratio set forth in clause (1) is always met.

As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, the Securitization Issuer held investments in 76 and 77 portfolio companies with a total fair value of $271.1 and $272.8 million, respectively. The pool of loans in the Debt Securitization must meet certain requirements, including asset mix and concentration, collateral coverage, term, agency rating, minimum coupon, minimum spread and sector diversity requirements.

SBIC License

On August 24, 2010, GC SBIC IV, L.P., our wholly owned subsidiary, received approval for a license from the SBA to operate as an SBIC. As an SBIC, GC SBIC IV L.P. is subject to a variety of regulations and oversight by the SBA concerning the size and nature of companies in which it may invest as well as the structures of those investments.

The license allows GC SBIC IV, L.P. to obtain leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to issuance of a capital commitment by the SBA and customary procedures. These debentures are non-recourse to us, have interest payable semi-annually and a ten-year maturity. The interest rate is fixed at the time of issuance at a market-driven spread over U.S. Treasury Notes with ten-year maturities.

As of June 30, 2011, we had committed and funded $50.0 million of equity capital to GC SBIC IV, L.P. and had SBA debentures of $48.3 million outstanding, which mature in March 2021. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, the effective annualized average interest rate, which includes amortization of fees paid on the debentures, was 3.7% and 2.9%, respectively. The interest rate on the $20.0 million of outstanding debentures was fixed on March 29, 2011 at an interest rate of 4.5%. The remaining $28.3 million of debentures accrue interest at an interim rate of 1.0%

As of June 30, 2011, we did not have any unfunded commitments from the SBA.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Under present SBIC regulations, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $225 million. It is possible that GC SBIC IV, L.P. will be constrained in its ability to issue SBA-guaranteed debentures in the future if other Golub Capital SBICs have already issued such debentures. As of June 30, 2011, the two other SBIC licensees operated by Golub Capital had an aggregate of $140.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding, leaving aggregate borrowing capacity of a maximum of $85.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures for GC SBIC IV, L.P. and the two other SBIC licensees, none of which is required to be allocated to us. The borrowing capacity of GC SBIC IV, L.P. could be expanded if any other Golub Capital SBICs retire their SBA-guaranteed debentures, and the other two SBIC licenses are limited to only making add-on investments in existing portfolio companies, making the majority of the incremental borrowing capacity available to GC SBIC IV, L.P. Unless specifically approved by the SBA, the other two licenses were prohibited by the SBA from making new investments when GC SBIC IV, L.P. received its license on August 24, 2010.

We applied for exemptive relief from the SEC on July 9, 2010 and filed an amended application on November 12, 2010, March 31, 2011 and on June 14, 2011 to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary from our 200% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. If we receive an exemption for this SBA debt, we would have increased flexibility under the 200% asset coverage test.

Follow-on Equity Offering

On April 6, 2011, we completed a public offering in which we sold an aggregate of 3,500,000 shares of our common stock at a price per share of $15.75, resulting in proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, to us of approximately $52.6 million. On May 2, 2011, we issued an additional 453,257 shares of our common stock at the public offering price to cover over-allotments resulting in additional proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, of approximately $6.8 million.

Inflation

Inflation has not had a significant effect on our results of operations in any of the reporting periods presented in our financial statements. However, our portfolio companies have and may continue to experience the impact of inflation on their operating results.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

A summary of our significant contractual payment obligations as of June 30, 2011 is as follows:

		Payments Due by Period (In millions)
		Total				Less Than 1 Year				1 – 3 Years				3 – 5 Years				More Than 5 Years
Debt Securitization		$	174.0			$	—			$	—			$	—			$	174.0
SBA Debentures			48.3				—				—				—				48.3
Unfunded commitments(1)			43.0				43.0				—				—				—
Total contractual obligations		$	265.3			$	43.0			$	—			$	—			$	222.3

The notes offered in the Debt Securitization are scheduled to mature on July 20, 2021.

We may become a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of our business to meet the financial needs of our portfolio companies. These instruments may include commitments to extend credit and involve, to varying degrees, elements of liquidity and credit risk in excess of the amount recognized in the balance sheet. As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, we had outstanding commitments to fund investments totaling $43.0 million and $26.6 million, respectively.

We have certain contracts under which we have material future commitments. We have entered into the Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors in accordance with the 1940 Act. The Investment Advisory Agreement became effective upon the pricing of our initial public offering and was amended and restated on July 16, 2010 in order to offset fees payable in connection with the Debt Securitization against the base management fee. Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, GC Advisors provides us with investment advisory and management services. We pay for these services (1) a management fee equal to a percentage of the average adjusted value of our gross assets and (2) an incentive fee based on our performance. To the extent that GC Advisors or any of its affiliates provides investment advisory, collateral management or other similar services to a subsidiary of ours, we intend to reduce the base management fee by an amount equal to the product of (1) the total fees paid to GC Advisors by such subsidiary for such services and (2) the percentage of such subsidiary’s total equity, including membership interests and any class of notes not held exclusively by one or more third parties, that is owned, directly or indirectly, by us. See “Management Agreements — Management Fee.”

We have also entered into the Administration Agreement with GC Service as our administrator on April 14, 2010. Under the Administration Agreement, GC Service furnishes us with office facilities and equipment, provides us clerical, bookkeeping and record keeping services at such facilities and provides us with other administrative services as GC Service, subject to review by our board of directors, determines necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations. We reimburse GC Service for the allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our board of directors) of overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions, and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. Under the Administration Agreement, GC Service also provides on our behalf significant managerial assistance to those portfolio companies to which we are required to provide such assistance and will be paid an additional amount based on the services provided, not to exceed the amount we receive from such portfolio companies.

If any of the contractual obligations discussed above are terminated, our costs under any new agreements that we enter into may increase. In addition, we would likely incur significant time and expense in locating alternative parties to provide the services we receive under our Investment Advisory Agreement and our Administration Agreement. Any new investment advisory agreement would also be subject to approval by our stockholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Distributions

In order to qualify as a RIC and to avoid corporate level tax on the income we distribute to our stockholders, we are required under the Code to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our net stockholders on an annual basis. Additionally, we must annually during each calendar year distribute an amount at least equal to 98% of our ordinary income (determined on a calendar year basis) plus 98.2% of net capital gains in excess of capital losses (for our one year period ending October 31) and any net ordinary income and net capital gains for preceding years that were not distributed during such years and on which we previously paid no U.S. federal income tax to avoid a U.S. federal excise tax. We intend to make quarterly distributions to our stockholders as determined by our board of directors.

We may not be able to achieve operating results that will allow us to make distributions at a specific level or to increase the amount of our distributions from time to time. In addition, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions due to the asset coverage requirements applicable to us as a business development company under the 1940 Act. If we do not distribute a certain percentage of our income annually, we will suffer adverse tax consequences, including the possible loss of our qualification as a RIC. We cannot assure stockholders that they will receive any distributions.

To the extent our taxable earnings fall below the total amount of our distributions for that fiscal year, a portion of those distributions may be deemed a return of capital to our stockholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Thus, the source of a distribution to our stockholders may be the original capital invested by the stockholder rather than our income or gains. Stockholders should read any written disclosure accompanying a distribution payment carefully and should not assume that the source of any distribution is our ordinary income or gains.

We have adopted an “opt out” dividend reinvestment plan for our common stockholders. As a result, if we declare a distribution, then our stockholders’ cash distributions will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock unless a stockholder specifically “opts out” of our dividend reinvestment plan. If a stockholder opts out, that stockholder will receive cash distributions. Although distributions paid in the form of additional shares of our common stock will generally be subject to U.S. federal, state and local taxes in the same manner as cash distributions, stockholders participating in our dividend reinvestment plan will not receive any corresponding cash distributions with which to pay any such applicable taxes.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

We are subject to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates. Many of the loans in our portfolio have floating interest rates, and we expect that our loans in the future will also have floating interest rates. These loans are usually based on a floating LIBOR and typically have interest rate re-set provisions that adjust applicable interest rates under such loans to current market rates on a quarterly basis. In addition, the Debt Securitization has a floating interest rate provision based on LIBOR, which resets quarterly, and we expect that any other credit facilities into which we enter in the future may have floating interest rate provisions.

Assuming that the balance sheet as of the periods covered by this analysis were to remain constant and that we took no actions to alter our existing interest rate sensitivity, a hypothetical immediate 1% change in interest rates may affect net income by more than 1% over a one-year horizon. Although we believe that this analysis is indicative of our existing sensitivity to interest rate changes, it does not adjust for changes in the credit market, credit quality, the size and composition of the assets in our portfolio and other business developments, including borrowings, that could affect net increase in net assets resulting from operations, or net income. Accordingly, we can offer no assurances that actual results would not differ materially from the statement above.

We may in the future hedge against interest rate fluctuations by using standard hedging instruments such as futures, options and forward contracts. While hedging activities may insulate us against adverse changes in interest rates, they may also limit our ability to participate in the benefits of lower interest rates with respect to the investments in our portfolio with fixed interest rates.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and revenues and expenses during the periods reported. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates. We have identified the following items as critical accounting policies.

Valuation of Investments

We value investments for which market quotations are readily available at their market quotations. However, a readily available market value is not expected to exist for many of the investments in our portfolio, and we value these portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors under our valuation policy and process. We may seek pricing information with respect to certain of our investments from pricing services or brokers or dealers in order to value such investments. We also employ independent third party valuation firms for all of our investments for which there is not a readily available market value.

Valuation methods may include comparisons of the portfolio companies to peer companies that are public, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings, discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, and other relevant factors. When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we will consider the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate the private equity valuation. Due to the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of investments that do not have a readily available market value, the fair value of the investments may differ significantly from the values that would have been used had a readily available market value existed for such investments, and may differ materially from values that may ultimately be received or settled.

Our board of directors is ultimately and solely responsible for determining, in good faith, the fair value of the portfolio investments that are not publicly traded, whose market prices are not readily available on a quarterly basis or any other situation where portfolio investments require a fair value determination.

With respect to investments for which market quotations are not readily available, our board of directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter, as described below:

The factors that are taken into account in fair value pricing investments include available current market data, including relevant and applicable market trading and transaction comparables; applicable market yields and multiples; security covenants; call protection provisions; information rights; the nature and realizable value of any collateral; the portfolio company’s ability to make payments; the portfolio company’s earnings and discounted cash flows and the markets in which it does business; comparisons of financial ratios of peer companies that are public; comparable merger and acquisition transactions; and the principal market and enterprise values.

Determination of fair values involves subjective judgments and estimates not verifiable by auditing procedures. Under current auditing standards, the notes to our financial statements refer to the uncertainty with respect to the possible effect of such valuations, and any change in such valuations, on our consolidated financial statements.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We follow ASC Topic 820 — Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, as amended by Accounting Standards Update 2010-06, for measuring the fair value of portfolio investments. Fair value is the price that would be received in the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters, or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or inputs are not available, valuation models are applied. These valuation models involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the instruments or market and the instruments’ complexity. Our fair value analysis includes an analysis of the value of any unfunded loan commitments. Financial investments recorded at fair value in the consolidated financial statements are categorized for disclosure purposes based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their value. The valuation hierarchical levels are based upon the transparency of the inputs to the valuation of the investment as of the measurement date. The three levels are defined as follows:

Level 1:		Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical financial instruments at the measurement date.
Level 2:		Inputs include quoted prices for similar financial instruments in active markets and inputs that are observable for the financial instruments, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.
Level 3:		Inputs include significant unobservable inputs for the financial instruments and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the investment. The inputs into the determination of fair value are based upon the best information available and may require significant management judgment or estimation.

In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, an investment’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and we consider factors specific to the financial instrument. The following section describes the valuation techniques used by us to measure different financial instruments at fair value and includes the level within the fair value hierarchy in which the financial instrument is categorized.

With the exception of money market accounts held at large financial institutions (Level 1 investment), all of the financial instruments that were recorded at fair value as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2009 were valued using Level 3 inputs of the fair value hierarchy. As of September 30, 2010, we also invested in commercial paper, which is a Level 2 investment. Level 1 assets are valued using quoted market prices. Level 2 assets are valued using market consensus prices that are corroborated by observable market data and quoted market prices for similar instruments. Financial instruments that are recorded at Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy are our debt and equity investments. Level 3 assets are valued at fair value as determined in good faith by the board of directors, based on input of management, the audit committee and independent valuation firms that have been engaged at the direction of the board of directors to assist in the valuation of each portfolio investment without a readily available market quotation at least once during a trailing twelve-month period under a valuation policy and a consistently applied valuation process. This valuation process is conducted at the end of each fiscal quarter, with approximately 25% (based on fair value) of our valuation of portfolio companies without readily available market quotations subject to review by an independent valuation firm.

When valuing Level 3 debt and equity investments, we may take into account the following factors, where relevant, in determining the fair value of the investments: the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable valuable of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flows, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparison to publicly traded securities, changes in the interest rate environment and the credit markets generally that may affect the price at which similar investments may be made and other relevant factors. In addition, for certain debt and equity investments, we may base its valuation on indicative bid and ask prices provided by an independent third party pricing service. Bid prices reflect the highest price that we and others may be willing

TABLE OF CONTENTS

to pay. Ask prices represent the lowest price that we and others may be willing to accept for an investment. We generally use the midpoint of the bid/ask range as the best estimate of fair value of such investment.

We value our TRS referenced by a portfolio of senior secured floating rate loans in accordance with the agreements governing such arrangement. Pursuant to those agreements, the counterparty to the TRS values the loans underlying the TRS based on quotes received from third-party dealers.

Revenue Recognition:

Our revenue recognition policies are as follows:

Investments and Related Investment Income:  Our board of directors determines the fair value of our portfolio of investments. Interest income is accrued based upon the outstanding principal amount and contractual interest terms of debt investments. In addition, we may generate revenue in the form of commitment, origination, amendment, structuring or due diligence fees, fees for providing managerial assistance and consulting fees. Loan origination fees, original issue discount and market discount or premium are capitalized, and we accrete or amortize such amounts over the life of the loan as interest income. We record prepayment premiums on loans as interest income. When we receive principal payments on a loan in an amount that exceeds its amortized cost, we record the excess principal payment as interest income. For investments with contractual PIK interest, which represents contractual interest accrued and added to the principal balance that generally becomes due at maturity, we do not accrue PIK interest if the portfolio company valuation indicates that the PIK is not likely to be collectible. We account for investment transactions on a trade-date basis. Realized gains or losses on investments are measured by the difference between the net proceeds from the disposition and the cost basis of investment, without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. We report changes in fair value of investments that are measured at fair value as a component of the net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments in our consolidated statement of operations. Realized gains and losses on the TRS are composed of any gains or losses on the referenced portfolio of loans as well as the net interest received or owed at the time of quarterly settlement. Unrealized gains and losses on the TRS are composed of the net interest income earned or interest expense owed during the period that was not previously settled as well as the change in fair value of the referenced portfolio of loans.

Non-accrual:  Loans may be left on accrual status during the period we are pursuing repayment of the loan. Management reviews all loans that become past due 90 days or more on principal and interest or when there is reasonable doubt that principal or interest will not be collected for possible placement on non-accrual status. We generally reverse accrued interest when a loan is placed on non-accrual. Interest payments received on non-accrual loans may be recognized as income or applied to principal depending upon management’s judgment. We restore non-accrual loans to accrual status when past due principal and interest is paid and, in our management’s judgment, are likely to remain current. The total fair value of our non-accrual loans were $3.4 million, $3.1 million, $8.4 million and $0 million as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Income taxes:

We have elected to be treated as a RIC under subchapter M of the Code and operate in a manner so as to qualify for the tax treatment applicable to RICs. In order to qualify as a RIC, among other things, we are required to meet certain source of income and asset diversification requirements and timely distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of investment company taxable income, as defined by the Code, for each year. We have made and intend to continue to make the requisite distributions to our stockholders, which will generally relieve us from U.S. federal income taxes with respect to all income distributed to our stockholders.

Depending on the level of taxable income earned in a tax year, we may choose to carry forward taxable income in excess of current year distributions into the next tax year and pay a 4% excise tax on such income, as required. To the extent that we determine that our estimated current year annual taxable income will be in excess of estimated current year distributions, we accrue excise tax, if any, on estimated excess taxable income as taxable income is earned.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Because U.S. federal income tax regulations differ from generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, distributions in accordance with tax regulations may differ from net investment income and realized gains recognized for financial reporting purposes. Differences may be permanent or temporary. Permanent differences are reclassified within capital accounts in the financial statements to reflect their tax character. Temporary differences arise when certain items of income, expense, gain or loss are recognized at some time in the future. Differences in classification may also result from the treatment of short-term gains as ordinary income for tax purposes.

Senior Securities

Information about our senior securities is shown in the following table as of June 30, 2011 and September 30 for each of the years indicated in the table.

Class and Year		Total Amount Outstanding Exclusive of Treasury Securities(1)				Asset Coverage per Unit(2)				Involuntary Liquidating Preference per Unit(3)				Average Market Value per Unit(4)
		(in thousands)
Retired Credit Facility
September 30, 2008		$	123,083			$	1,137				—				N/A
September 30, 2009		$	315,306			$	1,294				—				N/A
Debt Securitization
September 30, 2010		$	174,000			$	2,487				—				N/A
June 30, 2011		$	174,000			$	3,120				—				N/A
SBA Debentures
June 30, 2011		$	48,300			$	11,239				—				N/A
Total Debt as of June 30, 2011		$	222,300			$	2,442				—				N/A

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRICE RANGE OF COMMON STOCK

Our common stock began trading on April 15, 2010 and is currently traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”. The following table lists the high and low closing sale price for our common stock, the closing sale price as a percentage of net asset value, or NAV, and quarterly distributions per share since shares of our common stock began being regularly quoted on The NASDAQ Global Select Market.

Period		NAV(1)				Closing Sales Price								Premium/ Discount of High Sales Price to NAV(2)				Premium/ Discount of Low Sales Price to NAV(2)				Declared Distributions(4)
						High				Low
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2010
Third quarter(3)		$	14.67			$	14.85			$	12.85				101.2	%			87.6	%		$	0.24
Fourth quarter		$	14.71			$	15.30			$	13.83				104.0	%			94.0	%		$	0.31
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2011
First quarter		$	14.74			$	17.95			$	15.44				121.7	%			104.7	%		$	0.31
Second quarter		$	14.75			$	17.60			$	15.78				119.3	%			107.0	%		$	0.32
Third quarter		$	14.75			$	16.30			$	14.40				110.5	%			97.6	%		$	0.32

Shares of business development companies may trade at a market price that is less than the NAV that is attributable to those shares. Our shares traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Market at $14.93 and $15.30 as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, respectively. Our NAV was $14.75 and $14.71 as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, respectively. The possibility that our shares of common stock will trade at a discount from net asset value or at a premium that is unsustainable over the long term is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value will decrease. It is not possible to predict whether our shares will trade at, above or below net asset value in the future.

On August 24, 2011, the last reported closing price of our common stock was $14.88 per share. On August 4, 2011, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.32 per share payable on September 28, 2011 to holders of record as of September 19, 2011. As of August 24, 2011 we had 118 stockholders of record.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE COMPANY

General

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In addition, for tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, GCMF, which commenced operations in July 2007, to make investments in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms.

Our investment objective is to maximize the total return to our stockholders in the form of current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $4.8 billion of capital under management as of June 30, 2011, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom we have invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

As of June 30, 2011, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 47.4% senior secured loans, 34.8% unitranche loans, 5.4% second lien loans, 10.6% mezzanine loans, 1.9% equity and (0.1)% total return swap. Over time we expect that senior secured loans will represent a smaller percentage of our investment portfolio as we grow our business, these investments are repaid and we invest in a different mix of assets.

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans and warrants and minority equity securities by primarily investing approximately $5 million to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $25 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

We believe senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans represent particularly attractive investments when compared to similar loans originated in the 2006 – 2008 period because we expect pricing to be more attractive and borrowing terms and deal structures to be more conservative.

Our Adviser

Our investment activities are managed by our investment adviser, GC Advisors. GC Advisors is responsible for sourcing potential investments, conducting research and due diligence on prospective investments and equity sponsors, analyzing investment opportunities, structuring our investments and monitoring our investments and portfolio companies on an ongoing basis. GC Advisors was organized in September 2008 and is a registered investment adviser under the Advisers Act. Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, we pay GC Advisors a base management fee and an incentive fee for its services. See “Management Agreements — Management Fee” for a discussion of the base management fee and incentive fee, including the cumulative income incentive fee and the income and capital gains incentive fee, payable by us to GC Advisors. Unlike most closed-end funds whose fees are based on assets net of leverage, our base management fee is based on our average adjusted gross assets (including leverage) and, therefore, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Additionally, under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because it determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. See “Management Agreements — Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement.”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and has entered into the Staffing Agreement, with two Golub Capital affiliates, Golub Capital Incorporated and Golub Capital Management LLC. Under the Staffing Agreement, these companies make experienced investment professionals available to GC Advisors and provide access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital and its affiliates. The Staffing Agreement provides GC Advisors with access to deal flow generated by Golub Capital and its affiliates in the ordinary course of their businesses and commits the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee to serve in that capacity. As our investment adviser, GC Advisors is obligated to allocate investment opportunities among us and its other clients fairly and equitably over time in accordance with its allocation policy. See “Related Party Transactions and Certain Relationships.” However, there can be no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short term or over time. GC Advisors seeks to capitalize on the significant deal origination, credit underwriting, due diligence, investment structuring, execution, portfolio management and monitoring experience of Golub Capital’s investment professionals.

GC Service

GC Service, an affiliate of GC Advisors, provides the administrative services necessary for us to operate. GC Service furnishes us with office facilities and equipment and provides us clerical, bookkeeping, recordkeeping and other administrative services at such facilities. Under the Administration Agreement, GC Service performs, or oversees the performance of, our required administrative services, which include, among other things, being responsible for the financial records we are required to maintain and preparing our reports to our stockholders and reports filed with the SEC. In addition, GC Service also assists us in determining and publishing our net asset value, oversees the preparation and filing of our tax returns, printing and disseminating reports to our stockholders and generally oversees the payment of our expenses and the performance of administrative and professional services rendered to us by others. GC Service may retain third parties to assist in providing administrative services to us. To the extent that GC Service outsources any of its functions, we pay the fees associated with such functions on a direct basis without profit to GC Service. We reimburse GC Service for the allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our board of directors) of GC Service’s overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions, and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. GC Service also provides on our behalf significant managerial assistance to those portfolio companies to which we are required to provide such assistance.

About Golub Capital

Golub Capital, founded in 1994, is a leading lender to middle-market companies. Reuters Loan Pricing Corporation ranked Golub Capital as the leading senior lender for middle-market leveraged buyouts (defined as total debt financing of under $100 million) in 2009, based both on deal value and number of deals. In 2008, Golub Capital was presented with three major middle-market lender awards from leading industry publications and organizations, including: Buyouts Magazine’s “Middle-market Lender of the Year,” M&A Advisor’s “Financing Firm of the Year” and ACG Mergers & Acquisitions’ “M&A Lender of the Year.” In addition, M&A Advisor named Golub Capital the “Mezzanine Financing Agent of the Year” in 2009. These awards do not constitute an endorsement by any such publication or organization of the securities being offered by this prospectus. As of June 30, 2011, Golub Capital had over $4.8 billion of capital under management, with a team of 49 investment professionals dedicated to U.S. middle-market lending in New York, Chicago and Atlanta.

Since its founding, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 160 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with 80 sponsors. We believe that Golub Capital enjoys robust deal flow. Golub Capital received notice of approximately 1,700 potential investments in 2010 and more than 1,000 potential investments through the first seven months of 2011, many of which we believe were proprietary or relationship-based opportunities.

Golub Capital has a long track record of investing in unitranche and junior capital financings, which is our long-term investment focus. Golub Capital invested more than $2.2 billion in unitranche and mezzanine transactions across a variety of market environments and industries between 2001 and June 30, 2011. From 2005 through 2010, Golub Capital invested in more than 250 middle-market companies and as of June 30,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2011, it held debt investments in more than 170 middle-market companies. Golub Capital has developed expertise in industries such as business and consumer services, consumer products, defense, value-added distribution, healthcare services, manufacturing, media and restaurants.

Golub Capital’s middle-market lending group is managed by a four-member senior management team consisting of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Gregory W. Cashman and Andrew H. Steuerman. As of June 30, 2011, Golub Capital’s 49 investment professionals had an average of over 11 years of investment experience and were supported by 73 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management.

Market Opportunity

We intend to pursue an investment strategy focused on investing in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in, U.S. middle-market companies. We believe the economic recession and the recent dislocation in U.S. credit markets have provided excellent conditions for middle-market lending. We find the middle-market attractive for the following reasons:

Target Market.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau in its 2002 economic census, there were approximately 153,000 small and middle-market companies in the United States with annual revenues between $10 million and $2.5 billion, compared with 900 companies with revenues greater than $2.5 billion. We believe that these middle-market companies represent a significant growth segment of the U.S. economy and often require substantial capital investments to grow. Middle-market companies have generated a significant number of investment opportunities for accounts sponsored or managed by Golub Capital, including approximately 1,700 lending opportunities in 2010 and more than 1,000 potential investments through the first seven months of 2011, and we believe that this market segment will continue to produce significant investment opportunities for us.

Specialized Lending Requirements.  We believe that several factors render many U.S. financial institutions ill-suited to lend to U.S. middle-market companies. For example, based on the experience of our management team, lending to U.S. middle-market companies (1) is generally more labor intensive than lending to larger companies due to the smaller size of each investment and the fragmented nature of information for such companies, (2) requires due diligence and underwriting practices consistent with the demands and economic limitations of the middle-market and (3) may also require more extensive ongoing monitoring by the lender. As a result, middle-market companies historically have been served by a limited segment of the lending community.

We also believe that the dislocation in the markets from mid-2007 through 2010 further reduced the amount of credit available to middle-market companies. Many participants in the second lien and mezzanine debt market over the past five years, such as hedge funds and managers of CLOs have contracted or eliminated their origination activities as investors’ credit concerns have reduced available funding. In addition, we believe several existing business development companies are less active in the lending markets due to a lack of access to debt and equity financing. Moreover, many commercial banks face significant balance sheet constraints and increased regulatory scrutiny, which we believe restrict their ability to provide loans to middle-market companies.

Demand for Debt Capital.  We believe that private equity firms will continue to be active investors in middle-market companies. These private equity firms generally seek to leverage their investments by combining their capital with senior secured loans and/or mezzanine debt provided by other sources, and we believe that our capital is well positioned to partner with such equity investors. We expect such activity to be funded by the substantial amounts of private equity capital that have been raised in recent years.

Refinancing Requirements.  We believe the debt associated with a large number of middle-market leveraged mergers and acquisitions completed from 2005 to 2008 will start to come due in the near term and, accordingly, we believe that new financing opportunities will increase as many leveraged companies seek to refinance in the near term.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Deal Structures.  We believe that as a result of the credit crisis, many lenders are requiring less senior and total leverage and more comprehensive loan covenants than was customary in the years leading up to the credit crisis. Lower debt multiples on purchase prices suggest that the cash flow of borrowing companies should enable them to service their debt more easily, creating a greater buffer against a downturn.

Competitive Strengths

Deep, Experienced Management Team.  We are managed by GC Advisors, which has access through the Staffing Agreement to the resources and expertise of Golub Capital’s 122 employees, led by our chairman, Lawrence E. Golub, and our chief executive officer, David B. Golub. As of June 30, 2011, the 49 investment professionals of Golub Capital had an average of over 11 years of investment experience and were supported by 73 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology, and office management. Golub Capital seeks to hire and retain high-quality investment professionals and reward those personnel based on investor returns. In 2009, Buyouts Magazine named Golub Capital “Middle-Market Lender of the Year” for the second consecutive year and M&A Advisor named Golub Capital the “Mezzanine Financing Agent of the Year” in 2009. These awards do not constitute an endorsement by any such publication or organization of the securities being offered by this prospectus.

Leading U.S. Debt Platform Provides Access to Proprietary Relationship-Based Deal Flow.  GC Advisors gives us access to the deal flow of Golub Capital, one of the leading middle-market lenders in the United States. Reuters Loan Pricing Corporation ranked Golub Capital as the leading senior lender for middle-market leveraged buyouts (total debt financing of under $100 million) for 2009, based both on deal volume and number of deals. We believe this market position makes Golub Capital the first choice lender to many sponsors. Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 160 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with 80 sponsors. We believe that Golub Capital receives relationship-based “early looks” and “last looks” at many investment opportunities in the U.S. middle-market market, allowing it to be highly selective in the transactions it pursues.

Disciplined Investment and Underwriting Process.  GC Advisors utilizes the established investment process of Golub Capital for reviewing lending opportunities, structuring transactions and monitoring investments. Using its disciplined approach to lending, GC Advisors seeks to minimize credit losses through effective underwriting, comprehensive due diligence investigations, structuring and the implementation of restrictive debt covenants. We expect that GC Advisors will select borrowers whose businesses will retain significant value, even in a depressed market or a distressed sale. We intend to reduce risk further by focusing on proven, successful sponsors. While emphasizing thorough credit analysis, we intend to maintain strong relationships with sponsors by offering rapid initial feedback from senior investment professionals to each investment opportunity shown to us.

Regimented Credit Monitoring.  Following each investment, GC Advisors implements a regimented credit monitoring system. This careful approach, which involves ongoing review and analysis by teams of professionals, has enabled us to identify problems early and to assist borrowers before they face difficult liquidity constraints. If necessary, GC Advisors can assume the role of deal sponsor in a work-out situation and has extensive restructuring experience, both in and out of bankruptcy. We believe in the need to prepare for possible negative contingencies in order to address them promptly should they arise.

Concentrated Middle-Market Focus.  Because of our focus on the middle-market, we understand the following general characteristics of middle-market lending:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Investment Criteria/Guidelines

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation, by investing primarily in senior secured, unitranche, mezzanine and second lien loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in U.S. middle-market companies. We seek to generate strong risk-adjusted net returns by assembling a diversified portfolio of investments across a broad range of industries and private equity investors.

We primarily target U.S. middle-market companies controlled by private equity investors that require capital for growth, acquisitions, recapitalizations, refinancings and leveraged buyouts. We may also make opportunistic loans to independently owned and publicly held middle-market companies. We seek to partner with strong management teams executing long-term growth strategies. Target businesses will typically exhibit some or all of the following characteristics:

While we believe that the criteria listed above are important in identifying and investing in prospective portfolio companies, not all of these criteria will be met by each prospective portfolio company.

Investment Process Overview

We view our investment process as consisting of four distinct phases described below:

Origination.  GC Advisors sources investment opportunities through access to a network of over 10,000 individual contacts developed in the financial services and related industries by Golub Capital and managed through a proprietary customer relationship database. Among these contacts is an extensive network of private equity firms and relationships with leading middle-market senior lenders. The senior deal professionals of Golub Capital supplement these leads through personal visits and marketing campaigns. It is their responsibility to identify specific opportunities, to refine opportunities through candid exploration of the underlying facts and circumstances and to apply creative and flexible thinking to solve clients’ financing needs. Golub Capital’s origination personnel are located in three offices across the United States. Each originator maintains long-standing customer relationships and is responsible for covering a specified target market. We believe those originators’ strength and breadth of relationships across a wide range of markets generate numerous financing opportunities, which we believe enables GC Advisors to be highly selective in recommending investments to us.