FORM S-4
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 6, 2005
Registration
No. 333-
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
Form S-4
REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
CCO Holdings, LLC
and
CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
(Exact name of registrants as specified in their charters)
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware |
|
4841 |
|
86-1067239 |
Delaware |
|
4841 |
|
20-0257904 |
|
|
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number) |
12405 Powerscourt Drive
St. Louis, Missouri 63131
(314) 965-0555
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including
area code, of
registrants principal executive offices)
Paul E. Martin
Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer
and Corporate Controller
12405 Powerscourt Drive
St. Louis, Missouri 63131
(314) 965-0555
(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code,
of agent for service)
Copies to:
Alvin G. Segel, Esq.
Irell & Manella LLP
1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
Los Angeles, California 90067-4276
(310) 277-1010
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after the effective date of
this Registration Statement.
If the securities being registered on this form are being
offered in connection with the formation of a holding company
and there is compliance with General Instruction G, check the
following
box. o
If this form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering. o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum |
|
|
Proposed Maximum |
|
|
|
Title of Each Class of |
|
|
Amount to be |
|
|
Offering |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
Amount of |
Securities to be Registered |
|
|
Registered |
|
|
Price Per Unit |
|
|
Offering Price |
|
|
Registration Fee(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013
|
|
|
$300,000,000 |
|
|
100% |
|
|
$295,312,500 |
|
|
$34,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The amount of the registration fee paid herewith was calculated,
pursuant to Rule 457(f)(1) under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended. |
The Registrants hereby amend this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrants 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, as amended, or until this
Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as
the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may
determine.
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 it is
not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state
where such offer or sale is not permitted.
|
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED
OCTOBER 6, 2005
PROSPECTUS
CCO Holdings, LLC
CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
Offer to Exchange
$300,000,000 in Aggregate Principal Amount
of
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013
which have been registered under the Securities Act
for any and all outstanding
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013
Issued by CCO Holdings, LLC and
CCO Holdings Capital Corp. on August 17, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
This exchange offer expires at 5:00 p.m., New York City
time,
on ,
2005, unless extended. |
|
|
|
|
|
No public market currently exists for the original notes or
the new notes. We do not intend to list the new notes on any
securities exchange or to seek approval for quotation through
any automated quotation system. |
CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. hereby offer to
exchange any and all of the $300,000,000 aggregate principal
amount of their
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 (the new notes), which have been
registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
pursuant to a Registration Statement of which this prospectus is
part, for a like principal amount of their
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 (the original notes) outstanding on
the date hereof upon the terms and subject to the conditions set
forth in this prospectus and in the accompanying letter of
transmittal (which together constitute the exchange offer). The
terms of the new notes are identical in all material respects to
those of the original notes, except for certain transfer
restrictions and registration rights relating to the original
notes. The new notes will be issued pursuant to, and entitled to
the benefits of the supplemental indenture under our indenture,
dated as of November 10, 2003, as supplemented among CCO
Holdings, LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A., as trustee.
You should carefully consider the risk factors beginning on
page 15 of this prospectus before deciding whether or not
to participate in the exchange offer.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
The date of this prospectus
is ,
2005.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
We have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a
registration statement on Form S-4 (File
No. 333- )
with respect to the securities we are offering for exchange.
This prospectus, which forms part of this registration
statement, does not contain all the information included in the
registration statement, including its exhibits and schedules.
For further information about us and the securities described in
this prospectus, you should refer to the registration statement
and its exhibits and schedules. Statements we make in this
prospectus about certain contracts or other documents are not
necessarily complete. When we make such statements, we refer you
to the copies of the contracts or documents that are filed as
exhibits to the registration statement, because those statements
are qualified in all respects by reference to those exhibits.
The registration statement, including the exhibits and
schedules, is on file at the offices of the Securities and
Exchange Commission and may be inspected without charge. Our
Securities and Exchange Commission filings are also available to
the public at the Securities and Exchange Commissions
website at www.sec.gov. You may also obtain this information
without charge by writing or telephoning us at the following
address and phone number: Charter Plaza, 12405 Powerscourt
Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63131. Our telephone number is
(314) 965-0555. To obtain timely delivery, you must request
this information no later than five business days before the
date you must make your investment decision. Therefore, you must
request this information no later
than ,
2005.
i
DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus includes forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and
Section 21E of the Exchange Act, regarding, among other
things, our plans, strategies and prospects, both business and
financial. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and
expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking
statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will
achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations.
Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks,
uncertainties and assumptions. Many of the forward-looking
statements contained in this prospectus may be identified by the
use of forward-looking words such as believe,
expect, anticipate, should,
planned, will, may,
intend, estimated and
potential, among others. Important factors that
could cause actual results to differ materially from the
forward-looking statements we make in this prospectus are set
forth in this prospectus and in other reports or documents that
we file from time to time with the SEC, and include, but are not
limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
the availability, in general, of funds to meet interest payment
obligations under our and our parent companies debt and to
fund our operations and necessary capital expenditures, either
through cash flows from operating activities, further borrowings
or other sources and, in particular, our and our parents
and subsidiaries ability to provide, under applicable debt
instruments, such funds (by dividend, investment or otherwise)
to the applicable obligor of such debt; |
|
|
|
our ability to sustain and grow revenues and cash flows from
operating activities by offering video, high-speed Internet,
telephone and other services and to maintain and grow a stable
customer base, particularly in the face of increasingly
aggressive competition from other service providers; |
|
|
|
our and our parent companies ability to comply with all
covenants in our and our parent companies indentures and
credit facilities, any violation of which would result in a
violation of the applicable facility or indenture and could
trigger a default of other obligations under cross-default
provisions; |
|
|
|
our and our parent companies ability to pay or refinance
debt prior to or when it becomes due and/or to take advantage of
market opportunities and market windows to refinance that debt
in the capital markets, through new issuances, exchange offers
or otherwise, including restructuring our and our parent
companies balance sheet and leverage position; |
|
|
|
our ability to obtain programming at reasonable prices or to
pass programming cost increases on to our customers; |
|
|
|
general business conditions, economic uncertainty or
slowdown; and |
|
|
|
the effects of governmental regulation, including but not
limited to local franchise authorities, on our business. |
All forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person
acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety
by this cautionary statement.
ii
SUMMARY
This summary contains a general discussion of our business,
the exchange offer and summary financial information. It does
not contain all the information that you should consider before
making a decision whether to tender your original notes in
exchange for new notes. For a more complete understanding of the
exchange offer, you should read this entire prospectus and the
related documents to which we refer.
For a chart showing our ownership structure, see page 4.
Unless otherwise noted, all business data included in this
summary is as of June 30, 2005.
CCO Holdings, LLC (CCO Holdings) is an indirect
subsidiary of Charter Communications, Inc.
(Charter). CCO Holdings is a direct subsidiary of
CCH II, LLC (CCH II), which is a direct
subsidiary of CCH I, LLC (CCH I). CCH I is
a direct subsidiary of CCH I Holdings, LLC (CIH),
which is a direct subsidiary of Charter Communications Holdings,
LLC (Charter Holdings). CCO Holdings is a holding
company with no operations of its own. CCO Holdings Capital
Corp. (CCO Holdings Capital) is a wholly owned
subsidiary of CCO Holdings. CCO Holdings Capital is a company
with no operations of its own and no subsidiaries.
Unless stated otherwise, the discussion in this prospectus of
our business and operations includes the business of CCO
Holdings and its direct and indirect subsidiaries. The terms
we, us and our refer to CCO
Holdings and its direct and indirect subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis.
Our Business
We are a broadband communications company operating in the
United States, with approximately 6.19 million customers at
June 30, 2005. Through our broadband network of coaxial and
fiber optic cable, we offer our customers traditional cable
video programming (analog and digital, which we refer to as
video service), high-speed cable Internet, advanced
broadband cable services (such as video on demand
(VOD), high definition television service, and
interactive television) and, in some of our markets, we offer
telephone service. See Business Products and
Services for further description of these terms, including
customers.
At June 30, 2005, we served approximately 5.94 million
analog video customers, of which approximately 2.69 million
were also digital video customers. We also served approximately
2.02 million high-speed Internet customers (including
approximately 234,600 who received only high-speed Internet
services). We also provided telephone service to approximately
67,800 customers as of that date.
Our principal executive offices are located at Charter Plaza,
12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63131. Our
telephone number is (314) 965-0555 and we have a website
accessible at www.charter.com. The information posted or
linked on this website is not part of this prospectus and you
should rely solely on the information contained in this
prospectus and the related documents to which we refer herein
when deciding whether or not to tender your original notes in
exchange for new notes.
Strategy
Our principal financial goal is to maximize our return on
invested capital. To do so, we will focus on increasing
revenues, growing our customer base, improving customer
retention and enhancing customer satisfaction by providing
reliable, high-quality service offerings, superior customer
service and attractive bundled offerings.
Specifically, in the near term, we are focusing on:
|
|
|
|
|
improving the overall value to our customers of our service
offerings, relative to pricing; |
|
|
|
developing more sophisticated customer care capabilities through
investment in our customer care and marketing infrastructure,
including targeted marketing capabilities; |
1
|
|
|
|
|
executing growth strategies for new services, including digital
simulcast, VOD, telephone, and digital video recorder service
(DVR); |
|
|
|
managing our operating costs by exercising discipline in capital
and operational spending; and |
|
|
|
identifying opportunities to continue to improve our balance
sheet and liquidity. |
We have begun an internal operational improvement initiative
aimed at helping us gain new customers and retain existing
customers, which is focused on customer care, technical
operations and sales. We intend to continue efforts to focus
management attention on instilling a customer service oriented
culture throughout the company and to give those areas of our
operations priority of resources for staffing levels, training
budgets and financial incentives for employee performance in
those areas.
We believe that our high-speed Internet service will continue to
provide a substantial portion of our revenue growth in the near
future. We also plan to continue to expand our marketing of
high-speed Internet service to the business community, which we
believe has shown an increasing interest in high-speed Internet
service and private network services. Additionally, we plan to
continue to prepare additional markets for telephone launches in
2005.
We believe we offer our customers an excellent choice of
services through a variety of bundled packages, particularly
with respect to our digital video and high-speed Internet
services, as well as telephone in certain markets. Our digital
platform enables us to offer a significant number and variety of
channels, and we offer customers the opportunity to choose among
groups of channel offerings, including premium channels, and to
combine selected programming with other services such as
high-speed Internet, high definition television (in selected
markets) and VOD (in selected markets).
We and our parent companies continue to pursue opportunities to
improve our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in
the completion of a number of transactions in 2004 and 2005, as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the September 2005 exchange by Charter Holdings, CCH I and CIH,
our indirect parent companies, of approximately
$6.8 billion in total principal amount of outstanding debt
securities of Charter Holdings in a private placement for new
debt securities; |
|
|
|
the August 2005 sale by us of $300 million of original
notes due 2013; |
|
|
|
the March and June 2005 issuance of $333 million of Charter
Communications Operating, LLC (Charter Operating)
notes in exchange for $346 million of Charter Holdings
notes; |
|
|
|
the March and June 2005 repurchase of $131 million of
Charters 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006
leaving $25 million in principal amount outstanding; |
|
|
|
the March 2005 redemption of all of CC V Holdings, LLCs
outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 at a
total cost of $122 million; |
|
|
|
the December 2004 sale by us of $550 million of senior
floating rate notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the November 2004 sale by Charter, our indirect parent company,
of $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes
due 2009 and the December 2004 redemption of all of
Charters outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes
due 2005 ($588 million principal amount); |
|
|
|
the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second lien
notes by our subsidiary, Charter Operating, together with the
concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and |
|
|
|
the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for
a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to
reduce indebtedness. |
2
Recent Events
Charter Holdings, CCH I and CIH Exchange Offer.
On September 28, 2005, Charter Holdings and its wholly owned
subsidiaries, CCH I and CIH, completed the exchange of
approximately $6.8 billion in total principal amount of
outstanding debt securities of Charter Holdings in a private
placement for new debt securities capturing $545 million of
discount and extending maturities. Holders of Charter Holdings
notes due in 2009-2010 tendered $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I notes due 2015. Holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $845 million principal amount of
notes for $662 million principal amount of 11% CCH I
notes due 2015. In addition, holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $2.5 billion principal amount of
notes for $2.5 billion principal amount of new CIH notes.
Each series of new CIH notes have the same coupon and provisions
for payment of cash interest as the series of old Charter
Holdings notes for which such CIH notes were exchanged. In
addition, the maturities for each series were extended three
years.
New President and Chief Executive Officer.
On August 9, 2005, Neil Smit was appointed as President and
Chief Executive Officer of Charter, replacing Robert May
effective August 22, 2005, who has served in both positions
on an interim basis since January 2005. Mr. May will remain
on Charters board of directors and serve as a member of
its compensation committee and its strategic planning committee.
During the last year, we have experienced a number of other
changes in our senior management. See Risk
Factors Risks Related to Our Business
Recent management changes could disrupt operations.
CCO Holdings Note Offering.
On August 17, 2005, we issued the original notes with total
principal amount of $300 million, the proceeds of which
will be used for general corporate purposes, including the
potential payment of dividends or distributions to its parent
companies, including Charter Holdings, to pay interest expense.
Approval and Funding of Litigation Settlement; Issuance of
Shares.
On June 30, 2005, the Federal District Court for the
Eastern District of Missouri entered its final approval of the
Stipulation of Settlement, as amended, of certain shareholder
class action and derivative lawsuits filed against Charter which
are more fully described in Business Legal
Proceedings. On July 8, 2005, Charter delivered to
the claims administrator its portion of the settlement
consideration under the Stipulation in the form of
13.4 million shares of Charters Class A common
stock and approximately $63 million in cash, and Charter
has paid $4.5 million to its insurance carriers to satisfy
certain outstanding claims in connection with the settlement.
Two notices of appeal were filed relating to the settlement. On
September 26, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit entered Judgment dismissing the appeals pursuant
to stipulation by the parties. See Business
Legal Proceedings.
Hurricane Katrina
We have cable, broadband and related operations in the parts of
Louisiana, Mississippi and Georgia which were impacted by
hurricane Katrina. Approximately 3% of our total customers lost
service. Service to the majority of those customers has since
been restored. However, we have only recently been allowed
access to some service areas and are therefore in the early
stages of assessing damages. As a result, we are not able to
estimate the impact to our financial results at this time.
3
Organizational Structure
The chart below sets forth our organizational structure and that
of our direct and indirect parent companies and subsidiaries.
This chart does not include all of our affiliates and
subsidiaries and, in some cases, we have combined separate
entities for presentation purposes. In addition, the chart does
not give effect to the exchange of $3.4 billion principal
amount of Charter Holdings notes scheduled to mature in
2009 and 2010 for CCH I notes and the exchange of
$3.4 billion principal amount of notes scheduled to mature
in 2011 and 2012 for CIH notes and CCH I notes. The equity
ownership, voting percentages and indebtedness amounts shown
below are approximations as of June 30, 2005, and do not
give effect to any exercise, conversion or exchange of then
outstanding options, preferred stock, convertible notes and
other convertible or exchangeable securities.
|
|
(1) |
Charter acts as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its
direct and indirect limited liability company subsidiaries,
including CCO Holdings. |
4
|
|
(2) |
These membership units are held by Charter Investment, Inc. and
Vulcan Cable III Inc., each of which is 100% owned by Paul
G. Allen, our Chairman and controlling shareholder. They are
exchangeable at any time on a one-for-one basis for shares of
Charter Class A common stock. |
|
(3) |
Represents 100% of the preferred membership interests in CC
VIII, LLC, a subsidiary of CC V Holdings, LLC. An issue has
arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of such CC VIII, LLC
membership interests following Mr. Allens acquisition
of those interests on June 6, 2003. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter Communications, Inc.
and Its Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights
CC VIII. |
5
The Exchange Offer
|
|
|
Original Notes |
|
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013, which we issued on August 17, 2005. |
|
New Notes |
|
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013, the issuance of which will be (or will have
been) registered under the Securities Act of 1933. |
|
Exchange Offer |
|
We are offering to exchange the new notes for the original
notes. The original notes may only be exchanged in multiples of
$1,000 principal amount. To be exchanged, an original note must
be properly tendered and accepted. |
|
Resales Without Further Registration |
|
We believe that the new notes issued pursuant to the exchange
offer may be offered for resale, resold or otherwise transferred
by you without compliance with the registration and prospectus
delivery provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
provided that:. |
|
|
|
you are acquiring the new notes issued in the
exchange offer in the ordinary course of your business; |
|
|
|
you have not engaged in, do not intend to engage in,
and have no arrangement or understanding with any person to
participate in, the distribution of the new notes issued to you
in the exchange offer, and; |
|
|
|
you are not our affiliate, as defined
under Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933. |
|
|
|
Each of the participating broker-dealers that receives new notes
for its own account in exchange for original notes that were
acquired by such broker or dealer as a result of market-making
or other activities must acknowledge that it will deliver a
prospectus in connection with the resale of the new notes. |
|
Expiration Date |
|
5:00 p.m., New York City time,
on ,
2005 unless we extend the exchange offer. |
|
Exchange and Registration Rights Agreement |
|
You have the right to exchange the original notes that you hold
for new notes with substantially identical terms pursuant to an
exchange and registration rights agreement. This exchange offer
is intended to satisfy these rights. Once the exchange offer is
complete, you will no longer be entitled to any exchange or
registration rights with respect to your original notes and the
new notes will not provide for additional interest in connection
with registration defaults. |
|
Accrued Interest on the New Notes and Original Notes |
|
The new senior notes will bear interest
from ,
2005 (the date of the last interest payment in respect of the
original notes). Holders of original notes that are accepted for
exchange will be deemed to have waived the right to receive any
payment in respect of interest on such original notes accrued to
the date of issuance of the new notes. |
|
Conditions to the Exchange Offer |
|
The exchange offer is conditioned upon certain customary
conditions which we may waive and upon compliance with
securities laws. |
6
|
|
|
Procedures for Tendering Original Notes |
|
Each holder of original notes wishing to accept the exchange
offer must:. |
|
|
|
complete, sign and date the letter of transmittal,
or a facsimile of the letter of transmittal; or |
|
|
|
arrange for The Depository Trust Company to transmit
certain required information to the exchange agent in connection
with a book-entry transfer. |
|
|
|
You must mail or otherwise deliver such documentation together
with the original notes to the exchange agent. |
|
Special Procedures for Beneficial Holders |
|
If you beneficially own original notes registered in the name of
a broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other
nominee and you wish to tender your original notes in the
exchange offer, you should contact such registered holder
promptly and instruct them to tender on your behalf. If you wish
to tender on your own behalf, you must, before completing and
executing the letter of transmittal for the exchange offer and
delivering your original notes, either arrange to have your
original notes registered in your name or obtain a properly
completed bond power from the registered holder. The transfer of
registered ownership may take considerable time. |
|
Guaranteed Delivery Procedures |
|
You must comply with the applicable procedures for tendering if
you wish to tender your original notes and: |
|
|
|
time will not permit your required documents to
reach the exchange agent by the expiration date of the exchange
offer; |
|
|
|
you cannot complete the procedure for book-entry
transfer on time; or |
|
|
|
your original notes are not immediately available. |
|
Withdrawal Rights |
|
You may withdraw your tender of original notes at any time prior
to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the date the exchange
offer expires. |
|
Failure to Exchange Will Affect You Adversely |
|
If you are eligible to participate in the exchange offer and you
do not tender your original notes, you will not have further
exchange or registration rights and your original notes will
continue to be subject to some restrictions on transfer.
Accordingly, the liquidity of your original notes will be
adversely affected. |
|
Certain Federal Income Tax Considerations |
|
The exchange of outstanding notes for exchange notes in the
exchange offer will not be a taxable event for United States
federal income tax purposes. See Important United States
Federal Income Tax Considerations. |
|
Exchange Agent |
|
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is serving as exchange agent. |
|
Use of Proceeds |
|
We will not receive any proceeds from the exchange offer. |
7
Summary Terms of the New Notes
|
|
|
Issuers |
|
CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital. |
|
Notes Offered |
|
$300 million aggregate principal amount of
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013. |
|
Maturity |
|
November 15, 2013. |
|
Interest Payment Dates |
|
May 15 and November 15 of each year, beginning on
November 15, 2005. |
|
Forms and Terms |
|
The form and terms of the new notes will be the same as the form
and terms of the original notes except that: |
|
|
|
the new notes will bear a different CUSIP number
from the original notes, but will bear the same CUSIP number as
our $500 million
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 that were originally issued in November 2003; |
|
|
|
the new notes have been registered under the
Securities Act of 1933 and, therefore, will not bear legends
restricting their transfer; and |
|
|
|
you will not be entitled to any exchange or
registration rights with respect to the new notes and the new
notes will not provide for additional interest in connection
with registration defaults. |
|
|
|
The new notes will evidence the same debt as the original notes.
They will be entitled to the benefits of the indenture governing
the original notes and will be treated under the indenture as a
single class with the original notes. |
|
Ranking |
|
The new notes will be: |
|
|
|
our senior unsecured securities; |
|
|
|
effectively subordinated to any of our secured
indebtedness, to the extent of the value of the assets securing
such indebtedness; |
|
|
|
equal in right of payment with all of our existing
and future unsecured debt, including the outstanding
$500 million
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 and the outstanding $550 million Senior
Floating Rate Notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
senior in right of payment to all of our future
subordinated debt; and |
|
|
|
structurally subordinated to all indebtedness and
other liabilities of our subsidiaries, including indebtedness
under our subsidiaries notes and credit facilities as well
as their trade debt. |
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2005, pro forma for the sale of the new
notes and the anticipated application of the net proceeds
therefrom, as if such transactions had occurred on that date,
the indebtedness of CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries reflected
on our consolidated balance sheet would have totaled
approximately $8.7 billion, and the new notes would have
been structurally subordinated to approximately
$7.4 billion of that amount. |
8
|
|
|
Optional Redemption |
|
The new notes may be redeemed in whole or in part at our option
at any time on or after November 15, 2008 at the redemption
prices specified in this prospectus under Description of
the Notes Optional Redemption. |
|
|
|
At any time prior to November 15, 2006, we may redeem up to
35% of the new notes in an amount not to exceed the amount of
proceeds of one or more public equity offerings at a price equal
to 108.750% of the principal amount thereof, plus accrued and
unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, provided
that at least 65% of the original aggregate principal amount
of the original notes issued remains outstanding after the
redemptions. |
|
Restrictive Covenants |
|
The indenture governing the new notes will, among other things,
restrict our ability and the ability of certain of our
subsidiaries to: |
|
|
|
pay dividends on stock or repurchase stock; |
|
|
|
make investments; |
|
|
|
borrow money; |
|
|
|
grant liens; |
|
|
|
sell all or substantially all of our assets or merge
with or into other companies; |
|
|
|
use the proceeds from sales of assets and
subsidiaries stock; |
|
|
|
in the case of our restricted subsidiaries, create
or permit to exist dividend or payment restrictions; and |
|
|
|
engage in certain transactions with affiliates. |
|
|
|
These covenants are subject to important exceptions and
qualifications as described under Description of the
Notes Certain Covenants, including provisions
allowing us, as long as our leverage ratio is below 4.5 to 1.0,
to make investments, including designating restricted
subsidiaries as unrestricted subsidiaries or making investments
in unrestricted subsidiaries. We are also permitted under these
covenants, regardless of our leverage ratio, to provide funds to
our parent companies to pay interest on, or, subject to meeting
our leverage ratio test, retire or repurchase, their debt
obligations. |
|
Change of Control |
|
Following a Change of Control, as defined in Description
of the Notes Certain Definitions, we will be
required to offer to purchase all of the new notes at a purchase
price of 101% of their principal amount plus accrued and unpaid
interest, if any, to the date of purchase thereof. |
|
Absence of Established Markets for the Notes |
|
The new notes are new issues of securities, and currently there
are no markets for them. We do not intend to apply for the new
notes to be listed on any securities exchange or to arrange for
any quotation system to quote them. Accordingly, we cannot
assure you that liquid markets will develop for the new notes. |
9
You should carefully consider all of the information in this
prospectus. In particular, you should evaluate the information
beginning on page 15 under Risk Factors for a
discussion of risks associated with an investment in the new
notes.
For more complete information about the new notes, see the
Description of the Notes section of this prospectus.
10
Summary Consolidated Financial Data
In June 2003, CCO Holdings was formed. CCO Holdings is a holding
company whose primary assets are equity interests in our cable
operating subsidiaries. At that time, Charter Holdings entered
into a series of transactions and contributions which had the
effect of (i) creating CCO Holdings, its parent,
CCH II and CCH I, LLC; and (ii) combining and
contributing all of its interest in cable operations not
previously owned by Charter Operating to Charter Operating.
These transactions were accounted for as a reorganization of
entities under common control. Accordingly, the financial
information for CCO Holdings combines the historical financial
condition, cash flows and results of operations of Charter
Operating, and the operations of subsidiaries contributed by
Charter Holdings for all periods presented.
The following table presents summary financial and other data
for CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries, and has been derived from
the audited consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings
and its subsidiaries for the three years ended December 31,
2004 and the unaudited consolidated financial statements of CCO
Holdings and its subsidiaries for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004. The consolidated financial
statements of CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries for the years
ended December 31, 2002 to 2004 have been audited by KPMG
LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The pro
forma data set forth below represent our unaudited pro forma
consolidated financial statements after giving effect to the
following transactions as if they occurred on January 1 of
the respective period for the statement of operations data and
other financial data and as of the last day of the respective
period for the operating data and balance sheet data:
|
|
|
(1) the disposition of certain assets in March and April
2004 for total proceeds of $735 million and the use of such
proceeds in each case to pay down credit facilities; |
|
|
(2) the issuance and sale of $550 million of CCO
Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004 and
$1.5 billion of Charter Operating senior second lien notes
in April 2004; |
|
|
(3) an increase in amounts outstanding under the Charter
Operating credit facilities in April 2004 and the use of such
funds, together with the proceeds from the sale of the Charter
Operating senior second lien notes in April 2004, to refinance
amounts outstanding under the credit facilities of our
subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and
Falcon; |
|
|
(4) the repayment of $530 million of borrowings under
the Charter Operating revolving credit facility with net
proceeds from the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior
floating rate notes in December 2004, which were included in our
cash balance at December 31, 2004; |
|
|
(5) the redemption of all of CC V Holdings, LLCs
outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 with
cash on hand; and |
|
|
(6) the issuance and sale of $300 million of original
notes in August 2005 and the temporary investment of such
proceeds. |
11
The following information should be read in conjunction with
Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data,
Capitalization, Unaudited Pro Forma
Consolidated Financial Statements, Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and the historical consolidated financial
statements and related notes included elsewhere in this
prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
Pro Forma(a) | |
|
Pro Forma(a) | |
|
Pro Forma(a) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
3,420 |
|
|
$ |
3,461 |
|
|
$ |
3,373 |
|
|
$ |
3,352 |
|
|
$ |
1,674 |
|
|
$ |
1,703 |
|
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
4,566 |
|
|
|
4,819 |
|
|
|
4,977 |
|
|
|
4,948 |
(b) |
|
|
2,424 |
(b) |
|
|
2,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
2,068 |
|
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,489 |
|
|
|
728 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
7,107 |
|
|
|
2,347 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(2,159 |
) |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
(616 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
(331 |
) |
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before minority interest, income taxes and
cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(4,946 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
(2,703 |
) |
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(124 |
) |
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
(2,683 |
) |
|
|
(181 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
Income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(4,746 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(2,500 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,647 |
) |
|
$ |
(184 |
) |
|
$ |
(138 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$ |
2,095 |
|
|
$ |
804 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
891 |
|
|
$ |
378 |
|
|
$ |
542 |
|
|
Ratio of earnings to cover fixed charges(c)
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
Deficiency of earnings to cover fixed charges(c)
|
|
$ |
4,946 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
$ |
2,555 |
|
|
$ |
2,703 |
|
|
$ |
172 |
|
|
$ |
124 |
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
Actual | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(end of period)(d):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog video customers
|
|
|
6,431,300 |
|
|
|
6,200,500 |
|
|
|
5,991,500 |
|
|
|
6,133,200 |
|
|
|
5,943,100 |
|
|
Digital video customers
|
|
|
2,671,900 |
|
|
|
2,588,600 |
|
|
|
2,674,700 |
|
|
|
2,650,200 |
|
|
|
2,685,600 |
|
|
Residential high-speed Internet customers
|
|
|
1,565,600 |
|
|
|
1,527,800 |
|
|
|
1,884,400 |
|
|
|
1,711,400 |
|
|
|
2,022,200 |
|
|
Telephone customers
|
|
|
24,900 |
|
|
|
24,900 |
|
|
|
45,400 |
|
|
|
31,200 |
|
|
|
67,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
As of June 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
(end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
16,637 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
8,738 |
|
Loans payable-related party
|
|
|
62 |
|
Minority interest(e)
|
|
|
662 |
|
Members equity
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Actual revenues exceeded pro forma revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30,
2004 and 2005 by $29 million, $29 million and $0,
respectively. Pro forma income (loss) before cumulative effect
of accounting change exceeded actual income (loss) before
cumulative effect of accounting change by $147 million,
$138 million and $2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30,
2004 and 2005, respectively. The unaudited pro forma financial
information required allocation of certain revenues and expenses
and such information has been presented for comparative purposes
and does not purport to be indicative of the consolidated
results of operations had these transactions been completed as
of the assumed date or which may be obtained in the future. |
|
(b) |
Pro forma 2004 revenue by quarter is as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
Revenue | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
1st Quarter
|
|
$ |
1,185 |
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
|
1,248 |
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
1,276 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total pro forma revenue
|
|
$ |
4,948 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c) |
Earnings include net loss plus fixed charges. Fixed charges
consist of interest expense and an estimated interest component
of rent expense. |
|
(d) |
See Business Products and Services for
definitions of the terms contained in this section. |
|
(e) |
Minority interest represents the preferred membership interests
in CC VIII, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of CCO Holdings.
Paul G. Allen indirectly holds the preferred membership
interests in CC VIII, LLC as a result of the exercise of a
put right originally granted in connection with the Bresnan
transaction in 2000. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate
ownership of the CC VIII, |
13
|
|
|
LLC membership interests following the consummation of the
Bresnan put transaction on June 6, 2003. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter and Its
Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights
CC VIII. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased
recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of
CC VIII, LLC for financial reporting purposes until such
time as the resolution of the issue is determinable or certain
other events occur. |
14
RISK FACTORS
The new notes, like the original notes, entail the following
risks. You should carefully consider these risk factors, as well
as the other information contained in this prospectus, before
making a decision to continue your investment in the notes or to
tender your original notes in exchange for the new notes. In
this prospectus, when we refer to notes, we are
referring to both the original notes and the new notes.
Risks Related to Substantial Indebtedness of Us, Our
Subsidiaries and Our Parent Companies
We, our subsidiaries and our parent companies have a
significant amount of existing debt and may incur significant
additional debt, including secured debt, in the future, which
could adversely affect our financial health and our ability to
react to changes in our business.
We, our subsidiaries and our parent companies, have a
significant amount of debt and may (subject to applicable
restrictions in our and their debt instruments) incur additional
debt in the future. As of June 30, 2005, pro forma for the
issuance and sale of the notes and the anticipated application
of the net proceeds therefrom, our total debt reflected on our
consolidated balance sheet would have been approximately
$8.7 billion, our members equity would have been
approximately $5.6 billion and the deficiency of earnings
to cover fixed charges for the six-month period ended
June 30, 2005, would have been approximately
$124 million. The maturities of these obligations are set
forth in Description of Other Indebtedness.
As of June 30, 2005, Charter had outstanding approximately
$888 million aggregate principal amount of convertible
senior notes, $25 million of which mature in 2006. As of
June 30, 2005, pro forma for the exchange of
$3.4 billion principal amount of Charter Holdings
notes scheduled to mature in 2009 and 2010 for CCH I notes and
the exchange of $3.4 billion principal amount of Charter
Holdings notes scheduled to mature in 2011 and 2012 for
CIH notes and CCH I notes, Charter Holdings had outstanding
approximately $1.8 billion aggregate principal amount of
senior notes and senior discount notes, some of which mature in
2007 and the remainder of which mature in 2009 through 2012, CIH
had outstanding approximately $2.5 billion aggregate
principal amount of senior notes and senior discount notes which
mature in 2014 and 2015 , CCH I had outstanding approximately
$3.5 billion aggregate principal amount of senior notes
which mature in 2015 and CCH II had outstanding
approximately $1.6 billion of senior notes which mature in
2010. Charter, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and CCH II will
need to raise additional capital and/or receive distributions or
payments from us in order to satisfy their debt obligations.
However, because of their significant indebtedness, the ability
of our parent companies to raise additional capital at
reasonable rates or at all is uncertain, and our ability to make
distributions or payments to our parent companies is subject to
availability of funds and restrictions under our and our
subsidiaries applicable debt instruments as more fully
described in Description of Other Indebtedness. You
should note that the indentures governing the notes generally
will permit us to provide funds to Charter, Charter Holdings,
CIH, CCH I and CCH II to pay interest on their debt or to
repay, repurchase, redeem or defease their debt.
Our, our parent companies and our subsidiaries
significant amounts of debt could have other important
consequences to you. For example, the debt will or could:
|
|
|
|
|
require us to dedicate a significant portion of our cash flow
from operating activities to payments on our, our parent
companies and our subsidiaries debt, which will
reduce our funds available for working capital, capital
expenditures and other general corporate expenses; |
|
|
|
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes
in our business, the cable and telecommunications industries and
the economy at large; |
|
|
|
place us at a disadvantage as compared to our competitors that
have proportionately less debt; |
|
|
|
make us vulnerable to interest rate increases, because a
significant portion of our borrowings are, and will continue to
be, at variable rates of interest; |
|
|
|
expose us to increased interest expense as we refinance our
existing lower interest rate instruments; |
15
|
|
|
|
|
adversely affect our relationship with customers and suppliers; |
|
|
|
limit our ability to borrow additional funds in the future, if
we need them, due to applicable financial and restrictive
covenants in our debt; and |
|
|
|
make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations to the
holders of our notes and for our subsidiaries to satisfy their
obligations to their lenders under their credit facilities and
to their noteholders as well as our parent companies
ability to satisfy their obligations to their noteholders. |
A default by us or one of our subsidiaries under our or its debt
obligations could result in the acceleration of those
obligations, the obligations of our other subsidiaries and our
obligations under the notes and our existing senior notes, as
well as our parent companies obligations under their
notes. We may not have the ability to fund our obligations under
the notes in the event of such a default. We and our
subsidiaries may incur substantial additional debt in the
future. If current debt levels increase, the related risks that
we and you now face will intensify.
Any failure by our direct and indirect parent companies to
satisfy their substantial debt obligations could have a material
adverse effect on us.
Because Charter is our sole manager, and because we are
indirectly and directly wholly owned by Charter Holdings, CIH,
CCH I and CCH II, their financial or liquidity problems
could cause serious disruption to our business and could have a
material adverse effect on our operations and results. A failure
by either of Charter, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I or
CCH II to satisfy its respective debt payment obligations
or a bankruptcy filing with respect to Charter, Charter
Holdings, CIH, CCH I or CCH II would give the lenders under
the Charter Operating credit facilities the right to accelerate
the payment obligations under these facilities. Any such
acceleration would be a default under the indenture governing
the notes. In addition, if Charter, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I
or CCH II were to default under their respective debt
obligations and that default were to result in a change of
control of any of them (whether through a bankruptcy,
receivership or other reorganization, or otherwise), such a
change of control could result in an event of default under the
Charter Operating credit facilities and our subsidiaries
outstanding notes and require a change of control repurchase
offer under the notes and our parent companies and
subsidiaries outstanding notes. See
Risks Related to the Offering We
may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to fulfill
our obligations under the notes following a change of control,
which would place us in default under the indenture governing
the notes.
Furthermore, the Charter Operating credit facilities provide
that an event of default would occur if certain of Charter
Operatings parent companies have indebtedness in excess of
$500 million aggregate principal amount which remains
undefeased three months prior to its final maturity. The parent
company indebtedness subject to this provision will mature in
2009 and 2010, respectively. The inability of those parent
companies to refinance or repay their indebtedness would result
in a default under those credit facilities.
The agreements and instruments governing our debt and the
debt of our subsidiaries and our parent companies contain
restrictions and limitations that could significantly affect our
ability to operate our business, as well as significantly affect
our and our parent companies liquidity, and adversely
affect you, as the holders of the Notes.
The Charter Operating credit facilities and the indentures
governing our parent companies and subsidiaries
public debt and our existing senior notes contain, and the
indenture governing the notes contains, a number of significant
covenants that could adversely affect the holders of the notes
and our ability to operate our business, as well as
significantly affect our and our parent companies
liquidity. These covenants restrict our and our
subsidiaries ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional debt; |
|
|
|
repurchase or redeem equity interests and debt; |
|
|
|
make certain investments or acquisitions; |
16
|
|
|
|
|
pay dividends or make other distributions; |
|
|
|
receive distributions from our subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
dispose of assets or merge; |
|
|
|
enter into related party transactions; |
|
|
|
grant liens; and |
|
|
|
pledge assets. |
Furthermore, Charter Operatings credit facilities require
us and our subsidiaries to, among other things, maintain
specified financial ratios, meet specified financial tests and
provide audited financial statements, with an unqualified
opinion from our independent auditors. See Description of
Other Indebtedness for a summary of our outstanding
indebtedness and a description of our credit facilities and
other indebtedness and for details on our debt covenants and
future liquidity. Charter Operatings ability to comply
with these provisions may be affected by events beyond our
control.
The breach of any covenants or obligations in the foregoing
indentures or credit facilities, not otherwise waived or
amended, could result in a default under the applicable debt
agreement or instrument and could trigger acceleration of the
related debt, which in turn could trigger defaults under other
agreements governing our long-term indebtedness. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity and
Capital Resources. In addition, the secured lenders under
the Charter Operating credit facilities and the holders of the
Charter Operating senior second-lien notes could foreclose on
their collateral, which includes equity interests in our
subsidiaries, and exercise other rights of secured creditors.
Any default under those credit facilities or the indenture
governing the notes, our outstanding debt, our
subsidiaries debt or the debt of our parent companies
could adversely affect our growth, our financial condition and
our results of operations and our ability to make payments on
the notes, our other notes, Charter Operatings credit
facilities and other debt of our parent companies and
subsidiaries. See Description of Other Indebtedness
for a summary of our outstanding indebtedness and a description
of our credit facilities and other indebtedness.
We may not generate (or, in general, have available to the
applicable obligor) sufficient cash flow or have sufficient
access to additional external liquidity sources to fund our
capital expenditures, ongoing operations and our and our parent
companies debt obligations, including our payment
obligations under the notes, which could have a material adverse
effect on you as the holder of the notes.
Our ability to service our and our parent companies debt
(including payments on the notes) and to fund our planned
capital expenditures and ongoing operations will depend on both
our ability to generate cash flow and our and our parent
companies access to additional external liquidity sources,
and in general our ability to provide (by dividend or
otherwise), such funds to the applicable issuer of the debt
obligation. Our ability to generate cash flow is dependent on
many factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
our future operating performance; |
|
|
|
the demand for our products and services; |
|
|
|
general economic conditions and conditions affecting customer
and advertiser spending; |
|
|
|
competition and our ability to stabilize customer
losses; and |
|
|
|
legal and regulatory factors affecting our business. |
Some of these factors are beyond our control. If we and our
parent companies are unable to generate sufficient cash flow
and/or to access additional external liquidity sources, we and
our parent companies may not be able to service and repay our
and our parent companies debt, operate our business,
respond to competitive challenges or fund our and our parent
companies other liquidity and capital needs. Cash flows
from operating activities and amounts available under our credit
facilities may not be sufficient to permit us to fund our
operations and satisfy our and our parent companies
interest payments and principal
17
repayment obligations that come due in 2006 and, we believe,
such amounts will not be sufficient to fund our operations and
satisfy such obligations thereafter. See Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Additionally, franchise valuations performed in accordance with
the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, are based on the projected cash flows
derived by selling products and services to new customers in
future periods. Declines in future cash flows could result in
lower valuations which in turn may result in impairments to the
franchise assets in our financial statements.
Charter Operating may not be able to access funds under
its credit facilities if it fails to satisfy the covenant
restrictions in its credit facilities, which could adversely
affect our financial condition and our ability to conduct our
business.
Our subsidiaries have historically relied on access to credit
facilities in order to fund operations and to service parent
company debt, and we expect such reliance to continue in the
future. Unused availability under the Charter Operating credit
facilities was approximately $870 million as of
June 30, 2005. However, Charter Operatings access to
these funds is subject to its satisfaction of the covenants and
conditions to borrowing in those facilities that are described
under Description of Other Indebtedness Credit
Facilities included elsewhere in this prospectus.
An event of default under the credit facilities or indentures,
if not waived, could result in the acceleration of those debt
obligations and, consequently, other debt obligations. Such
acceleration could result in the exercise of remedies by our
creditors and could force us to seek the protection of the
bankruptcy laws, which could materially adversely impact our
ability to operate our business and to make payments under our
and our parent companies debt instruments. In addition, an
event of default under the credit facilities, such as the
failure to maintain the applicable required financial ratios,
would prevent additional borrowing under our credit facilities,
which could materially adversely affect our ability to operate
our business and to make payments under our and our parent
companies debt instruments.
Because of our holding company structure, the notes will
be structurally subordinated in right of payment to all
liabilities of our subsidiaries. Restrictions in our
subsidiaries debt instruments limit their ability to
provide funds to us.
Our sole assets are our equity interests in, and intercompany
obligations owing to us from, our subsidiaries. Our operating
subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and are
not obligated to make funds available to us for payment of the
notes or other obligations in the form of loans, distributions
or otherwise. Our subsidiaries ability to make
distributions to us is subject to their compliance with the
terms of their credit facilities and indentures. Our direct or
indirect subsidiaries include the borrowers and guarantors under
the Charter Operating credit facilities. Two of our subsidiaries
are also obligors under other senior high yield notes. The notes
are structurally subordinated in right of payment to all of the
debt and other liabilities of our subsidiaries. The total
principal amount of our subsidiaries debt reflected on our
balance sheet would have been $7.4 billion as of
June 30, 2005, pro forma for the sale of the notes and the
anticipated application of the net proceeds therefrom.
In the event of bankruptcy, liquidation or dissolution of one or
more of our subsidiaries, that subsidiarys assets would
first be applied to satisfy its own obligations, and following
such payments, such subsidiary may not have sufficient assets
remaining to make payments to us as an equity holder or
otherwise. In that event:
|
|
|
|
|
the lenders under Charter Operatings credit facilities and
the holders of their other debt instruments will have the right
to be paid in full before us from any of our subsidiaries
assets; and |
|
|
|
although Mr. Allens indirect ownership interest in CC
VIII, LLC is currently the subject of a dispute, Paul G. Allen,
as an indirect holder of preferred membership interests in our
subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC, may have a claim on a portion of its
assets that would reduce the amounts available for repayment to
holders of the notes. See Risk Factors Risks
Related to our |
18
|
|
|
|
|
Business Charters dispute with Paul G. Allen
concerning the ownership of an interest in CC VIII, LLC could
adversely impact our ability to repay our debt and our ability
to obtain future financing. |
In addition, the notes are unsecured and therefore will be
effectively subordinated in right of payment to all existing and
future secured debt we may incur to the extent of the value of
the assets securing such debt. See Description of Other
Indebtedness for a summary of our outstanding indebtedness
and a description of these credit facilities and other
indebtedness.
Under certain circumstances, federal and state laws may
allow courts to avoid or subordinate claims with respect to the
notes.
Under the federal Bankruptcy Code and comparable provisions of
state fraudulent transfer laws, a court could void claims with
respect to the notes, or subordinate them, if, among other
things, CCO Holdings, at the time it issued the notes:
|
|
|
|
|
received less than reasonably equivalent value or fair
consideration for the notes; and |
|
|
|
was insolvent or rendered insolvent by reason of the incurrence; |
|
|
|
was engaged in a business or transaction for which its remaining
assets constituted an unreasonably small capital; or |
|
|
|
intended to incur, or believed that it would incur, debts beyond
its ability to pay such debts as they became due. |
The measures of insolvency for purposes of these fraudulent
transfer laws vary depending upon the law applied in any
proceeding to determine whether a fraudulent transfer has
occurred. Generally, however, CCO Holdings would be considered
insolvent if:
|
|
|
|
|
the sum of its debts, including contingent liabilities, was
greater than the fair saleable value of all its assets; |
|
|
|
the present fair saleable value of its assets was less than the
amount that would be required to pay its probable liability on
its existing debts, including contingent liabilities, as they
became absolute and mature; or |
|
|
|
it could not pay its debts as they became due. |
In addition, if there were to be a bankruptcy of Charter or its
subsidiaries, creditors of our parent companies may attempt to
make claims against us and our subsidiaries, which (if
successful) could have an adverse effect on the noteholders and
their recoveries in any bankruptcy proceeding.
Paul G. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated to
purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to us or any
of our subsidiaries in the future.
Paul G. Allen and his affiliates have purchased equity,
contributed funds and provided other financial support to
Charter and Charter Holdco in the past. However, Mr. Allen
and his affiliates are not obligated to purchase equity from,
contribute to or loan funds to us or any of our parent companies
or subsidiaries in the future.
Risks Related to Our Business
We operate in a very competitive business environment,
which affects our ability to attract and retain customers and
can adversely affect our business and operations. We have lost a
significant number of customers to direct broadcast satellite
competition and further loss of customers could have a material
negative impact on our business.
The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has
become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete
against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, easier access
to financing, greater personnel resources, greater brand name
recognition and long-established relationships with
19
regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation
in the cable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules
may provide additional benefits to certain of our competitors,
either through access to financing, resources or efficiencies of
scale.
Our principal competitor for video services throughout our
territory is direct broadcast satellite television services,
also known as DBS. Competition from DBS, including intensive
marketing efforts, aggressive pricing and the ability of DBS to
provide certain services that we are in the process of
developing, has had an adverse impact on our ability to retain
customers. DBS has grown rapidly over the last several years and
continues to do so. The cable industry, including us, has lost a
significant number of subscribers to DBS competition, and we
face serious challenges in this area in the future. We believe
that competition from DBS service providers may present greater
challenges in areas of lower population density, and that our
systems service a higher concentration of such areas than those
of other major cable service providers.
Local telephone companies and electric utilities can offer video
and other services in competition with us and they increasingly
may do so in the future. Certain telephone companies have begun
more extensive deployment of fiber in their networks that will
enable them to begin providing video services, as well as
telephone and high bandwidth Internet access services, to
residential and business customers. Some of these telephone
companies have obtained, and are now seeking, franchises or
operating authorizations that are less burdensome than existing
Charter franchises. The subscription television industry also
faces competition from free broadcast television and from other
communications and entertainment media.
Further loss of customers to DBS or other alternative video and
Internet services could have a material negative impact on the
value of our business and its performance.
With respect to our Internet access services, we face
competition, including intensive marketing efforts and
aggressive pricing, from dial-up and digital
subscriber line (DSL). DSL service is competitive
with high-speed Internet service over cable systems. Telephone
companies (which already have telephone lines into the
household, an existing customer base and other operational
functions in place) and other companies offer DSL service. In
addition, DBS providers have entered into joint marketing
arrangements with Internet access providers to offer bundled
video and Internet service, which competes with our ability to
provide bundled services to our customers.
In order to attract new customers, from time to time we make
promotional offers, including offers of temporarily
reduced-price or free service. These promotional programs result
in significant advertising, programming and operating expenses,
and also require us to make capital expenditures to acquire
additional digital set-top terminals. Customers who subscribe to
our services as a result of these offerings may not remain
customers for any significant period of time following the end
of the promotional period. A failure to retain existing
customers and customers added through promotional offerings or
to collect the amounts they owe us could have a material adverse
effect on our business and financial results.
Mergers, joint ventures and alliances among franchised, wireless
or private cable operators, satellite television providers,
local exchange carriers and others, may provide additional
benefits to some of our competitors, either through access to
financing, resources or efficiencies of scale, or the ability to
provide multiple services in direct competition with us.
We cannot assure you that our cable systems will allow us to
compete effectively. Additionally, as we expand our offerings to
include other telecommunications services, and to introduce new
and enhanced services, we will be subject to competition from
other providers of the services we offer. We cannot predict the
extent to which competition may affect our business and
operations in the future. See Business
Competition.
Charters dispute with Paul G. Allen concerning the
ownership of an interest in CC VIII, LLC could adversely impact
our ability to repay our debt and our ability to obtain future
financing.
As part of our acquisition of the cable systems owned by Bresnan
Communications Company Limited Partnership in February 2000, CC
VIII, LLC, our indirect limited liability company subsidiary,
issued,
20
after adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership
units (which we refer to collectively as the CC VIII interest)
with a value and an initial capital account of approximately
$630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T
Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (which we
refer to as the Comcast sellers). Charters controlling
shareholder, Paul G. Allen, granted the Comcast sellers the
right to sell to him the CC VIII interest for approximately
$630 million plus 4.5% interest annually from February 2000
(the Comcast put right). In April 2002, the Comcast
sellers exercised the Comcast put right in full, and this
transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003. Accordingly,
Mr. Allen has become the holder of the CC VIII interest,
indirectly through an affiliate.
Charter is in a dispute with Mr. Allen as to whether he is
entitled to retain the CC VIII interest, or whether he must
exchange that interest for units of our indirect parent, Charter
Holdco. The dispute concerns whether the documentation for the
Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the
ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following
consummation of the Comcast put right. The law firm that
prepared the documents for the Bresnan transaction brought this
matter to the attention of Charter and representatives of
Mr. Allen in 2002. After subsequently conducting an
investigation of the relevant facts and circumstances, a Special
Committee of Charters Board of Directors determined that a
scriveners error had occurred in February 2000
in connection with the preparation of the Bresnan transaction
documents, resulting in the inadvertent deletion of a provision
that would have required an automatic exchange of the CC VIII
interest for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units if the
Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right and sold the CC
VIII interest to Mr. Allen or his affiliates.
Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committees
determinations and contends that the transaction is accurately
reflected in the transaction documentation and contemporaneous
and subsequent company public disclosures. If the Special
Committee and Mr. Allen are unable to reach a resolution
through an ongoing mediation process or to agree on an
alternative dispute resolution process, the Special Committee
intends to seek resolution of this dispute through judicial
proceedings in an action that would be commenced, after
appropriate notice, in the Delaware Court of Chancery against
Mr. Allen and his affiliates seeking contract reformation,
declaratory relief as to the respective rights of the parties
regarding this dispute and alternative forms of legal and
equitable relief. The dispute and related matters (including
certain issues associated with the ultimate disposition of the
interest in CC VIII) are more fully described in Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter and Its
Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights CC
VIII.
If it is determined that Mr. Allen is entitled to retain
the CC VIII interest, then our indirect interest in CC VIII
would continue to exclude the value of Mr. Allens
interest in CC VIII, consistent with our current treatment of
the CC VIII interest in our financial statements. As a result,
the amounts available for repayment to holders of the notes or
our other creditors, including creditors of our subsidiaries,
would not include the value represented by Mr. Allens
CC VIII interest, which could affect the value of the notes.
Further, such retained interest in CC VIII could reduce our
borrowing capacity (due to a portion of the equity interest
being held by a party other than Charter or a Charter
subsidiary) or make it more difficult for us to secure financing
for our CC VIII subsidiary due to concerns as to possible claims
that could be asserted by Mr. Allen as the holder of a
minority interest in CC VIII. In addition, if it is determined
that Mr. Allen is entitled to retain the CC VIII interest,
such retention could complicate efforts to sell our CC VIII
subsidiary or its assets to a third party, and Mr. Allen
could be entitled to receive a portion of the proceeds of such a
sale, thereby reducing the amount of such proceeds that would
otherwise be available to us and our security holders.
Charter is currently the subject of certain lawsuits and
other legal matters, the unfavorable outcome of which could
adversely affect our business and financial condition.
A number of putative federal class action lawsuits were filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri against Charter and certain of its former and present
officers and directors alleging violations of securities laws,
and were consolidated for pretrial purposes. In addition, a
number of shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed against
Charter in the same and other jurisdictions. A shareholders
derivative suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of Missouri against Charter and its then
current directors. Also, three shareholder derivative suits were
filed in Missouri state
21
court against Charter, its then current directors and its former
independent auditor. These state court actions were
consolidated. The federal shareholder derivative suit and the
consolidated derivative suit each alleged that the defendants
breached their fiduciary duties.
Charter entered into Stipulations of Settlement setting forth
proposed terms of settlement for the above-described class
actions and derivative suits. On May 23, 2005 the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
conducted the final fairness hearing for the actions, and it
issued its final order approving the settlement on June 30,
2005. Members of the class had 30 days from the issuance of
that order to file an appeal challenging the approval. Two
notices of appeal were filed relating to the settlement. Those
appeals were directed to the amount of fees that the attorneys
for the class were to receive and to the fairness of the
settlement. On September 26, 2005, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit entered Judgment dismissing the
appeals pursuant to stipulation by the parties.
Furthermore, we are also a party to, or otherwise involved in,
other lawsuits, claims, proceedings and legal matters that have
arisen in the ordinary course of conducting our business,
certain of which are described in Business
Legal Proceedings. In addition, our restatement of our
2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements could lead to
additional or expanded claims or investigations.
We cannot predict with certainty the ultimate outcome of any of
the lawsuits, claims, proceedings and other legal matters to
which we or Charter are a party, or in which we or Charter are
otherwise involved, due to, among other things, (i) the
inherent uncertainties of litigation and legal matters
generally, (ii) the remaining conditions to the
finalization of certain litigation and other settlements and
resolutions to which we or Charter are parties, (iii) the
outcome of appeals and (iv) the need for Charter and us to
comply with, and/or otherwise implement, certain covenants,
conditions, undertakings, procedures and other obligations that
would be, or have been, imposed under the terms of settlements
and resolutions of legal matters Charter has entered into.
An unfavorable outcome in any of the lawsuits pending against us
or Charter, or in any other legal matter, including those
described herein, or our or Charters failure to comply
with or properly implement the terms of the settlements and
resolutions of legal matters Charter has entered into, could
result in substantial potential liabilities and otherwise have a
material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial
condition and results of operations, in our and our parent
companies liquidity, our operations, and/or our ability to
comply with any debt covenants. Further, these legal matters,
and our actions in response to them, could result in substantial
potential liabilities, additional defense and other costs,
increase our or Charters indemnification obligations,
divert managements attention, and/or adversely affect our
ability to execute our business and financial strategies.
To the extent that the foregoing matters are not covered by
insurance, CCO Holdings limited liability company
agreement and management agreements may require us to indemnify
or reimburse Charter and its directors and certain current and
former officers in connection with such matters. Further, these
legal matters, and Charters actions in response to them,
could result in substantial potential liabilities, additional
defense and other costs, increase our indemnification
obligations, divert managements attention, and/or
adversely affect our ability to execute our business and
financial strategies. See Business Legal
Proceedings for additional information concerning these
and other litigation matters.
We have a history of net losses and expect to continue to
experience net losses. Consequently, we may not have the ability
to finance future operations.
We have had a history of net losses and expect to continue to
report net losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses are
principally attributable to insufficient revenue to cover the
interest costs on our debt, the depreciation expenses that we
incur resulting from the capital investments we have made in our
cable properties, and the amortization and impairment of our
franchise intangibles. We expect that these expenses (other than
amortization and impairment of franchises) will remain
significant, and we expect to continue to report net losses for
the foreseeable future. We reported losses before cumulative
effect of accounting change of $4.7 billion for 2002,
$2.5 billion for 2004, and $46 million and
$136 million for the
22
six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005, respectively.
Continued losses would reduce our cash available from operations
to service our indebtedness, as well as limit our ability to
finance our operations.
We may not have the ability to pass our increasing
programming costs on to our customers, which would adversely
affect our cash flow and operating margins.
Programming has been, and is expected to continue to be, our
largest operating expense item. In recent years, the cable
industry has experienced a rapid escalation in the cost of
programming, particularly sports programming. We expect
programming costs to continue to increase because of a variety
of factors, including inflationary or negotiated annual
increases, additional programming being provided to customers
and increased costs to purchase programming. The inability to
fully pass these programming cost increases on to our customers
would have an adverse impact on our cash flow and operating
margins. As measured by programming costs, and excluding premium
services (substantially all of which were renegotiated and
renewed in 2003), as of July 7, 2005, approximately 9% of
our current programming contracts were expired, and
approximately another 21% were scheduled to expire at or before
the end of 2005. There can be no assurance that these agreements
will be renewed on favorable or comparable terms. Our
programming costs increased by approximately 6% in 2004 and we
expect our programming costs in 2005 to increase at a higher
rate than in 2004. To the extent that we are unable to reach
agreement with certain programmers on terms that we believe are
reasonable we may be forced to remove such programming channels
from our line-up, which could result in further loss of
customers.
If our required capital expenditures exceed our
projections, we may not have sufficient funding, which could
adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of
operations.
During the six months ended June 30, 2005, we spent
approximately $542 million on capital expenditures. During
2005, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately
$1 billion. The actual amount of our capital expenditures
depends on the level of growth in high-speed Internet customers
and in the delivery of other advanced services, as well as the
cost of introducing any new services. We may need additional
capital if there is accelerated growth in high-speed Internet
customers or in the delivery of other advanced services. If we
cannot obtain such capital from increases in our cash flow from
operating activities, additional borrowings or other sources,
our growth, financial condition and results of operations could
suffer materially.
Our inability to respond to technological developments and
meet customer demand for new products and services could limit
our ability to compete effectively.
Our business is characterized by rapid technological change and
the introduction of new products and services. We cannot assure
you that we will be able to fund the capital expenditures
necessary to keep pace with unanticipated technological
developments, or that we will successfully anticipate the demand
of our customers for products and services requiring new
technology. Our inability to maintain and expand our upgraded
systems and provide advanced services in a timely manner, or to
anticipate the demands of the marketplace, could materially
adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers.
Consequently, our growth, financial condition and results of
operations could suffer materially.
We may not be able to carry out our strategy to improve
operating results by standardizing and streamlining operations
and procedures.
In prior years, we experienced rapid growth through acquisitions
of a number of cable operators and the rapid rebuild and rollout
of advanced services. Our future success will depend in part on
our ability to standardize and streamline our operations. The
failure to implement a consistent corporate culture and
management, operating or financial systems or procedures
necessary to standardize and streamline our operations and
effectively operate our enterprise could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations and financial
condition.
Recent management changes could disrupt operations.
Since August 2004, we have experienced a number of changes in
our senior management, including changes in our Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer,
Executive Vice
23
President of Finance and Strategy and Interim co-Chief Financial
Officer and our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary. The individual currently serving as Chief Financial
Officer is serving in an interim capacity. In addition, Neil
Smit assumed the positions of President and Chief Executive
Officer effective August 22, 2005 and on September 26,
2005, it was announced that Grier Raclin will become the
Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate
Secretary. These senior management changes could disrupt our
ability to manage our business as we transition to and integrate
a new management team, and any such disruption could adversely
affect our operations, growth, financial condition and results
of operations.
Malicious and abusive Internet practices could impair our
high-speed Internet services.
Our high-speed Internet customers utilize our network to access
the Internet and, as a consequence, we or they may become victim
to common malicious and abusive Internet activities, such as
unsolicited mass advertising (i.e., spam) and
dissemination of viruses, worms and other destructive or
disruptive software. These activities could have adverse
consequences on our network and our customers, including
degradation of service, excessive call volume to call centers
and damage to our or our customers equipment and data.
Significant incidents could lead to customer dissatisfaction
and, ultimately, loss of customers or revenue, in addition to
increased costs to us to service our customers and protect our
network. Any significant loss of high-speed Internet customers
or revenue or significant increase in costs of serving those
customers could adversely affect our growth, financial condition
and results of operations.
Risks Related to Mr. Allens Controlling
Position
The failure by Mr. Allen to maintain a minimum voting
and economic interest in us could trigger a change of control
default under our subsidiarys credit facilities.
The Charter Operating credit facilities provide that the failure
by Mr. Allen to maintain a 35% direct or indirect voting
interest in the applicable borrower would result in a change of
control default. Such a default could result in the acceleration
of repayment of the Notes and our and our subsidiaries and
our parent companies other indebtedness, including
borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities. See
Risks Related to the Exchange Offer and the
Notes We may not have the ability to raise the funds
necessary to fulfill our obligations under the Notes following a
change of control, which would place us in default under the
indenture governing the Notes.
Mr. Allen indirectly controls us and may have
interests that conflict with your interests.
Mr. Allen has the ability to control us. Through his
control as of August 31, 2005 of approximately 91% of the
voting power of the capital stock of our manager, Charter,
Mr. Allen is entitled to elect all but one of its board
members and effectively has the voting power to elect the
remaining board member as well. Mr. Allen thus has the
ability to control fundamental corporate transactions requiring
equity holder approval, including, but not limited to, the
election of all of Charters directors, approval of merger
transactions involving us and the sale of all or substantially
all of our assets.
Mr. Allen is not restricted from investing in, and has
invested in, and engaged in, other businesses involving or
related to the operation of cable television systems, video
programming, high-speed Internet service, telephone or business
and financial transactions conducted through broadband
interactivity and Internet services. Mr. Allen may also
engage in other businesses that compete or may in the future
compete with us.
Mr. Allens control over our management and affairs
could create conflicts of interest if he is faced with decisions
that could have different implications for him, us and the
holders of the notes. Further, Mr. Allen could effectively
cause us to enter into contracts with another entity in which he
owns an interest or to decline a transaction into which he (or
another entity in which he owns an interest) ultimately enters.
Current or future agreements between us and either
Mr. Allen or his affiliates may not be the result of
arms-length negotiations. Consequently, such agreements
may be less favorable to us than agreements
24
that we could otherwise have entered into with unaffiliated
third parties. See Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions.
We are not permitted to engage in any business activity
other than the cable transmission of video, audio and data
unless Mr. Allen authorizes us to pursue that particular
business activity, which could adversely affect our ability to
offer new products and services outside of the cable
transmission business and to enter into new businesses, and
could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and
results of operations.
Charters certificate of incorporation and Charter
Holdcos limited liability company agreement provide that
Charter and Charter Holdco and their subsidiaries, including us
and our subsidiaries, cannot engage in any business activity
outside the cable transmission business except for specified
businesses. This will be the case unless we first offer the
opportunity to pursue the particular business activity to
Mr. Allen, he decides not to pursue it and he consents to
our engaging in the business activity. The cable transmission
business means the business of transmitting video, audio
(including telephone services), and data over cable television
systems owned, operated or managed by us from time to time.
These provisions may limit our ability to take advantage of
attractive business opportunities.
The loss of Mr. Allens services could adversely
affect our ability to manage our business.
Mr. Allen is Chairman of Charters board of directors
and provides strategic guidance and other services to Charter.
If Charter were to lose his services, our growth, financial
condition and results of operations could be adversely impacted.
Risks Related to Regulatory and Legislative Matters
Our business is subject to extensive governmental
legislation and regulation, which could adversely affect our
business.
Regulation of the cable industry has increased cable
operators administrative and operational expenses and
limited their revenues. Cable operators are subject to, among
other things:
|
|
|
|
|
rules governing the provision of cable equipment and
compatibility with new digital technologies; |
|
|
|
rules and regulations relating to subscriber privacy; |
|
|
|
limited rate regulation; |
|
|
|
requirements governing when a cable system must carry a
particular broadcast station and when it must first obtain
consent to carry a broadcast station; |
|
|
|
rules for franchise renewals and transfers; and |
|
|
|
other requirements covering a variety of operational areas such
as equal employment opportunity, technical standards and
customer service requirements. |
Additionally, many aspects of these regulations are currently
the subject of judicial proceedings and administrative or
legislative proposals. There are also ongoing efforts to amend
or expand the federal, state and local regulation of some of our
cable systems, which may compound the regulatory risks we
already face. Certain states and localities are considering new
telecommunications taxes that could increase operating expenses.
Our cable systems are operated under franchises that are
subject to non-renewal or termination. The failure to renew a
franchise in one or more key markets could adversely affect our
business.
Our cable systems generally operate pursuant to franchises,
permits and similar authorizations issued by a state or local
governmental authority controlling the public rights-of-way.
Many franchises establish comprehensive facilities and service
requirements, as well as specific customer service standards and
monetary penalties for non-compliance. In many cases, franchises
are terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with
significant provisions set forth in the franchise agreement
governing system operations.
25
Franchises are generally granted for fixed terms and must be
periodically renewed. Local franchising authorities may resist
granting a renewal if either past performance or the prospective
operating proposal is considered inadequate. Franchise
authorities often demand concessions or other commitments as a
condition to renewal. In some instances, franchises have not
been renewed at expiration, and we have operated and are
operating under either temporary operating agreements or without
a license while negotiating renewal terms with the local
franchising authorities. Approximately 11% of our franchises,
covering approximately 11% of our video customers, were expired
as of June 30, 2005. Approximately 4% of additional
franchises, covering approximately an additional 5% of our video
customers, will expire on or before December 31, 2005, if
not renewed prior to expiration.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to comply with all
significant provisions of our franchise agreements and certain
of our franchisors have from time to time alleged that we have
not complied with these agreements. Additionally, although
historically we have renewed our franchises without incurring
significant costs, we cannot assure you that we will be able to
renew, or to renew as favorably, our franchises in the future. A
termination of or a sustained failure to renew a franchise in
one or more key markets could adversely affect our business in
the affected geographic area.
Our cable systems are operated under franchises that are
non-exclusive. Accordingly, local franchising authorities can
grant additional franchises and create competition in market
areas where none existed previously, resulting in overbuilds,
which could adversely affect results of operations.
Our cable systems are operated under non-exclusive franchises
granted by local franchising authorities. Consequently, local
franchising authorities can grant additional franchises to
competitors in the same geographic area or operate their own
cable systems. In addition, certain telephone companies are
seeking authority to operate in local communities without first
obtaining a local franchise. As a result, competing operators
may build systems in areas in which we hold franchises. In some
cases municipal utilities may legally compete with us without
obtaining a franchise from the local franchising authority.
Different legislative proposals have been introduced in the
United States Congress and in some state legislatures that would
greatly streamline cable franchising. This legislation is
intended to facilitate entry by new competitors, particularly
local telephone companies. Such legislation has already passed
in at least one state but is now subject to court challenge.
Although various legislative proposals provide certain
regulatory relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals
are generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants.
The existence of more than one cable system operating in the
same territory is referred to as an overbuild. These overbuilds
could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and
results of operations by creating or increasing competition. As
of June 30, 2005, we are aware of overbuild situations
impacting approximately 5% of our estimated homes passed, and
potential overbuild situations in areas servicing approximately
2% of our estimated homes passed. Additional overbuild
situations may occur in other systems.
Local franchise authorities have the ability to impose
additional regulatory constraints on our business, which could
further increase our expenses.
In addition to the franchise agreement, cable authorities in
some jurisdictions have adopted cable regulatory ordinances that
further regulate the operation of cable systems. This additional
regulation increases the cost of operating our business. We
cannot assure you that the local franchising authorities will
not impose new and more restrictive requirements. Local
franchising authorities also have the power to reduce rates and
order refunds on the rates charged for basic services.
Further regulation of the cable industry could cause us to
delay or cancel service or programming enhancements or impair
our ability to raise rates to cover our increasing costs,
resulting in increased losses.
Currently, rate regulation is strictly limited to the basic
service tier and associated equipment and installation
activities. However, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and the U.S. Congress continue to be
concerned that cable rate increases are exceeding inflation. It
is possible that either the FCC or the U.S. Congress will
again restrict the ability of cable system operators to implement
26
rate increases. Should this occur, it would impede our ability
to raise our rates. If we are unable to raise our rates in
response to increasing costs, our losses would increase.
There has been considerable legislative interest recently in
requiring cable operators to offer historically bundled
programming services on an à la carte basis. Although the
FCC last year made a recommendation to Congress against the
imposition of an à la carte mandate, it is still possible
that new marketing restrictions could be adopted in the future.
Such restrictions could adversely affect our operations.
Actions by pole owners might subject us to significantly
increased pole attachment costs.
Pole attachments are cable wires that are attached to poles.
Cable system attachments to public utility poles historically
have been regulated at the federal or state level, generally
resulting in favorable pole attachment rates for attachments
used to provide cable service. The FCC clarified that a cable
operators favorable pole rates are not endangered by the
provision of Internet access, and that approach ultimately was
upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Despite the
existing regulatory regime, utility pole owners in many areas
are attempting to raise pole attachment fees and impose
additional costs on cable operators and others. In addition, the
favorable pole attachment rates afforded cable operators under
federal law can be increased by utility companies if the
operator provides telecommunications services, as well as cable
service, over cable wires attached to utility poles. Any
significant increased costs could have a material adverse impact
on our profitability and discourage system upgrades and the
introduction of new products and services.
We may be required to provide access to our networks to
other Internet service providers, which could significantly
increase our competition and adversely affect our ability to
provide new products and services.
A number of companies, including independent Internet service
providers, or ISPs, have requested local authorities and the FCC
to require cable operators to provide non-discriminatory access
to cables broadband infrastructure, so that these
companies may deliver Internet services directly to customers
over cable facilities. In a June 2005 ruling, commonly referred
to as Brand X, the Supreme Court upheld an FCC decision
(and overruled a conflicting Ninth Circuit opinion) making it
much less likely that any nondiscriminatory open
access requirements (which are generally associated with
common carrier regulation of telecommunications
services) will be imposed on the cable industry by local,
state or federal authorities. The Supreme Court held that the
FCC was correct in classifying cable provided Internet service
as an information service, rather than a
telecommunications service. This favorable
regulatory classification limits the ability of various
governmental authorities to impose open access requirements on
cable-provided Internet service. Given how recently Brand X
was decided, however, the nature of any legislative or
regulatory response remains uncertain. The imposition of open
access requirements could materially affect our business.
If we were required to allocate a portion of our bandwidth
capacity to other Internet service providers, we believe that it
would impair our ability to use our bandwidth in ways that would
generate maximum revenues.
Changes in channel carriage regulations could impose
significant additional costs on us.
Cable operators also face significant regulation of their
channel carriage. They currently can be required to devote
substantial capacity to the carriage of programming that they
would not carry voluntarily, including certain local broadcast
signals, local public, educational and government access
programming, and unaffiliated commercial leased access
programming. This carriage burden could increase in the future,
particularly if cable systems were required to carry both the
analog and digital versions of local broadcast signals (dual
carriage) or to carry multiple program streams included with a
single digital broadcast transmission (multicast carriage).
Additional government-mandated broadcast carriage obligations
could disrupt existing programming commitments, interfere with
our preferred use of limited channel capacity and limit our
ability to offer services that would maximize customer appeal
and revenue potential. Although the FCC issued a decision in
February 2005, confirming an earlier ruling against mandating
27
either dual carriage or multicast carriage, that decision has
been appealed. In addition, the FCC could reverse its own ruling
or Congress could legislate additional carriage obligations.
Offering voice communications service may subject us to
additional regulatory burdens, causing us to incur additional
costs.
In 2002, we began to offer voice communications services on a
limited basis over our broadband network. We continue to explore
development and deployment of Voice over Internet Protocol or
VoIP services. The regulatory requirements applicable to VoIP
service are unclear although the FCC has declared that certain
VoIP services are not subject to traditional state public
utility regulation. The full extent of the FCC preemption of
VoIP services is not yet clear. Expanding our offering of these
services may require us to obtain certain authorizations,
including federal, state and local licenses. We may not be able
to obtain such authorizations in a timely manner, or conditions
could be imposed upon such licenses or authorizations that may
not be favorable to us. Furthermore, telecommunications
companies generally are subject to significant regulation,
including payments to the Federal Universal Service Fund and the
intercarrier compensation regime, and it may be difficult or
costly for us to comply with such regulations, were it to be
determined that they applied to VoIP offerings such as ours. The
FCC has already determined that VoIP providers must comply with
traditional 911 emergency service obligations (E911)
and has imposed a specific timeframe for VoIP providers to
accommodate law enforcement wiretaps. Based on a recent FCC
release we are now seeking subscriber acknowledgement of E911
limitations so as to minimize the risk of potential sanctions.
In addition, pole attachment rates are higher for providers of
telecommunications services than for providers of cable service.
If there were to be a final legal determination by the FCC, a
state Public Utility Commission, or appropriate court that VoIP
services are subject to these higher rates, our pole attachment
costs could increase significantly, which could adversely affect
our financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to the Exchange Offer and the Notes
There is currently no public market for the notes, and an
active trading market may not develop for the notes. The failure
of a market to develop for the notes could adversely affect the
liquidity and value of the notes.
Until an exchange offer is consummated for the original notes,
the original notes will have a separate CUSIP number than our
outstanding $500 million
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 (the 2003 Notes), since the 2003
Notes were previously exchanged for registered notes, although
the original notes and the 2003 Notes will vote together as one
class on all matters under the indenture. Accordingly, prior to
this exchange offer, there was no existing market for the notes.
Although we intend to apply for the notes to be eligible for
trading in the
PORTALsm
Market, we do not intend to apply for listing of the notes or if
issued, the new notes, on any securities exchange or for
quotation of the notes on any automated dealer quotation system.
A market may not develop for the notes, and if a market does
develop, it may not be sufficiently liquid for your purposes. If
an active, liquid market does not develop for the notes, the
market price and liquidity of the notes may be adversely
affected.
The liquidity of the trading market, if any, and future trading
prices of the notes will depend on many factors, including,
among other things, prevailing interest rates, our operating
results, financial performance and prospects, the market for
similar securities and the overall securities market, and may be
adversely affected by unfavorable changes in these factors. The
market for the notes may be subject to disruptions that could
have a negative effect on the holders of the notes, regardless
of our operating results, financial performance or prospects.
We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary
to fulfill our obligations under the notes following a change of
control, which would place us in default under the indenture
governing the notes.
Under the indenture governing the notes, upon the occurrence of
specified change of control events, we will be required to offer
to repurchase all of the outstanding notes. However, we may not
have sufficient funds at the time of the change of control event
to make the required repurchases of the notes.
28
In addition, a change of control would require the repayment of
borrowings under credit facilities and publicly held debt of our
subsidiaries and our parent companies. Our failure to make or
complete an offer to repurchase the notes would place us in
default under the indenture governing the notes.
If we do not fulfill our obligations to you under the
notes, you will not have any recourse against Charter, Charter
Holdco, Mr. Allen or their affiliates.
None of our direct or indirect equity holders, directors,
officers, employees or affiliates, including, without
limitation, Charter, Charter Holdco, Charter Holdings, CIH,
CCH I, CCH II and Mr. Allen, will be an obligor
or guarantor under the notes. The indenture governing the notes
expressly provides that these parties will not have any
liability for our obligations under the notes or the indenture
governing the notes. By accepting the notes, you waive and
release all such liability as consideration for issuance of the
notes. If we do not fulfill our obligations to you under the
notes, you will have no recourse against any of our direct or
indirect equity holders, directors, officers, employees or
affiliates including, without limitation, Charter, Charter
Holdco, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I, CCH II and
Mr. Allen.
If you do not exchange your original notes for new notes,
you will continue to have restrictions on your ability to resell
them.
The original notes were not registered under the Securities Act
of 1933 or under the securities laws of any state and may not be
resold, offered for resale or otherwise transferred unless they
are subsequently registered or resold pursuant to an exemption
from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933
and applicable state securities laws. If you do not exchange
your original notes for new notes pursuant to the exchange
offer, you will not be able to resell, offer to resell or
otherwise transfer the original notes unless they are registered
under the Securities Act of 1933 or unless you resell them,
offer to resell them or otherwise transfer them under an
exemption from the registration requirements of, or in a
transaction not subject to, the Securities Act of 1933. In
addition, once the exchange offer has terminated, we will no
longer be under an obligation to register the original notes
under the Securities Act of 1933 except in the limited
circumstances provided in the registration rights agreement. In
addition, to the extent that original notes are tendered for
exchange and accepted in the exchange offer, any trading market
for the untendered and tendered but unaccepted original notes
could be adversely affected.
29
USE OF PROCEEDS
This exchange offer is intended to satisfy our obligations under
the exchange and registration rights agreement that was executed
in connection with the sale of the original notes. We will not
receive any proceeds from the exchange offer. You will receive,
in exchange for the original notes tendered by you and accepted
by us in the exchange offer, new notes in the same principal
amount. The original notes surrendered in exchange for the new
notes will be retired and will not result in any increase in our
outstanding debt. Any tendered-but-unaccepted original notes
will be returned to you and will remain outstanding.
30
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth as of June 30, 2005, on a
consolidated basis:
|
|
|
|
|
cash and cash equivalents; |
|
|
|
the actual (historical) capitalization of CCO
Holdings; and |
|
|
|
the capitalization of CCO Holdings, pro forma to reflect the
issuance and sale of $300 million principal amount of
83/4% senior
notes due 2013 and the temporary investment of such proceeds. |
The following information should be read in conjunction with the
Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data,
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial
Statements, Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
and the historical consolidated financial statements and related
notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Actual | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions, | |
|
|
unaudited) | |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
Charter Operating:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.000% senior second lien notes due 2012
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
83/8% senior
second lien notes due 2014
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
Renaissance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
Credit Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating(a)
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
|
8,444 |
|
|
|
8,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan Payable Related Party
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority Interest(b)
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members Equity
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$ |
14,802 |
|
|
$ |
15,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Unused total potential availability under our credit facilities
was $870 million as of June 30, 2005, none of which
was restricted due to covenants. However, Charter
Operatings access to these funds is subject to
satisfaction of the covenants and conditions to borrowing in
those facilities that are more fully described in
Description of Other Indebtedness Credit
Facilities in this prospectus. |
|
(b) |
Minority interest consists of the preferred membership interests
in CC VIII, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of CCO Holdings. Paul G.
Allen indirectly holds the preferred membership interests in CC
VIII as a result of the exercise of put rights originally
granted in connection with the Bresnan transaction in 2000. An
issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII
membership interests following the consummation of the Bresnan
put transaction on June 6, 2003. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter and Its
Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights CC
VIII. |
31
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial
statements are based on the historical consolidated financial
statements of CCO Holdings, adjusted on a pro forma basis to
reflect the following transactions as if they occurred on
January 1, 2004 for the unaudited pro forma consolidated
statement of operations and as of June 30, 2005 for the
unaudited pro forma consolidated balance sheet:
(1) the disposition of certain assets in March and April
2004 for total proceeds of $735 million and the use of such
proceeds in each case to pay down credit facilities;
(2) the issuance and sale of $550 million of CCO
Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004 and
$1.5 billion of Charter Operating senior second lien notes
in April 2004;
(3) an increase in amounts outstanding under the Charter
Operating credit facilities in April 2004 and the use of such
funds, together with the proceeds from the sale of the Charter
Operating senior second lien notes in April 2004, to refinance
amounts outstanding under the credit facilities of our
subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and Falcon;
(4) the repayment of $530 million of borrowings under
the Charter Operating revolving credit facility with net
proceeds from the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior
floating rate notes in December 2004, which were included in our
cash balance at December 31, 2004;
(5) the redemption of all of CC V Holdings, LLCs
outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 with
cash on hand; and
(6) the issuance and sale of $300 million of CCO
Holdings original notes in August 2005 and the temporary
investment of such proceeds.
The unaudited pro forma adjustments are based on information
available to us as of the date of this prospectus and certain
assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the
circumstances. The Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial
Statements required allocation of certain revenues and expenses
and such information has been presented for comparative purposes
and is not intended (a) to provide any indication of what
our actual financial position or results of operations would
have been had the transactions described above been completed on
the dates indicated or (b) to project our results of
operations for any future date.
32
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2004
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset | |
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dispositions | |
|
Transactions | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
(Note A) | |
|
(Note B) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
1,695 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,674 |
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
2,453 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,424 |
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
728 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest and income taxes
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(172 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(181 |
) |
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
$ |
(108 |
) |
|
$ |
(30 |
) |
|
$ |
(184 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note A: Represents the elimination of operating
results related to the disposition of certain assets in March
and April 2004 and a reduction of interest expense related to
the use of the net proceeds from such sales to repay a portion
of our subsidiaries credit facilities.
33
Note B: Represents adjustment to interest expense
associated with the completion of the financing transactions
discussed in pro forma assumptions two through six (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on the Charter Operating senior second lien notes
issued in April 2004 and the amended and restated Charter
Operating credit facilities
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Historical interest expense for Charter
Operating credit facilities and on subsidiary credit facilities
repaid
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
Interest on $550 million of CCO Holdings senior floating
rate notes issued in December 2004
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Historical interest expense for Charter
Operatings revolving credit facility repaid with cash on
hand in February 2005
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Historical interest expense for the CC V Holdings, LLC
11.875% senior discount notes repaid with cash on hand in
March 2005
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Interest on $300 million of CCO Holdings
83/4% senior
notes issued in August 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to loss on extinguishment of debt represents the
elimination of the write-off of deferred financing fees and
third party costs related to the Charter Operating refinancing
in April 2004.
34
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Year Ended December 31, 2004
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset | |
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dispositions | |
|
Transactions | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
(Note A) | |
|
(Note B) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
3,373 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,352 |
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
738 |
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
4,977 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,948 |
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,068 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,489 |
|
|
Impairments of franchises
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
Gain (loss) on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,159 |
) |
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(616 |
) |
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(509 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest, income taxes, and cumulative
effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(2,703 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting
change
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(2,683 |
) |
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(2,500 |
) |
|
$ |
(108 |
) |
|
$ |
(39 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,647 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note A: Represents the elimination of operating results
related to the disposition of certain assets in March and April
2004 and a reduction of interest expense related to the use of
the net proceeds from such sales to repay a portion of our
subsidiaries credit facilities.
35
Note B: Represents adjustment to interest expense
associated with the completion of the financing transactions
discussed in pro forma assumptions two through six (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on the Charter Operating senior second lien notes
issued in April 2004 and the amended and restated Charter
Operating credit facilities
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Historical interest expense for Charter
Operating credit facilities and on subsidiary credit facilities
repaid
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
Interest on $550 million of CCO Holdings senior floating
rate notes issued in December 2004
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Historical interest expense for Charter
Operatings revolving credit facility repaid with cash on
hand in February 2005
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Historical interest expense for the CC V Holdings, LLC
11.875% senior discount notes repaid with cash on hand in
March 2005
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Interest on $300 million of CCO Holdings
83/4% senior
notes issued in August 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to loss on extinguishment of debt represents the
elimination of the write-off of deferred financing fees and
third party costs related to the Charter Operating refinancing
in April 2004.
36
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
(Note A) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
1,703 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,703 |
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
2,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,594 |
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
Loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(324 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(331 |
) |
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Gain on investments
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(283 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(285 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest and income taxes
|
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(124 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
(138 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37
Note A: Represents adjustment to interest expense
associated with the completion of the financing transactions
discussed in pro forma assumptions four through six (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on CCO Holdings
83/4% senior
notes
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Historical interest expense for Charter Operatings
revolving credit facility repaid with cash on hand
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
Historical interest expense for the CC V Holdings
11.875% senior discount notes repaid with cash on hand
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net increase in interest expense for other financing transactions
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to loss on extinguishment of debt represents the
elimination of losses related to the redemption of CC V
Holdings, LLC 11.875% notes due 2008.
38
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Balance Sheet
As of June 30, 2005
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
(Note A) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
ASSETS |
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
289 |
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
INVESTMENT IN CABLE PROPERTIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
6,033 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,033 |
|
|
Franchises, net
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment in cable properties, net
|
|
|
15,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,872 |
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
16,343 |
|
|
$ |
294 |
|
|
$ |
16,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$ |
900 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
900 |
|
|
Payables to related party
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT
|
|
|
8,444 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
8,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOANS PAYABLE RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED MANAGEMENT FEES RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members equity
|
|
|
5,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,639 |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total members equity
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and members equity
|
|
$ |
16,343 |
|
|
$ |
294 |
|
|
$ |
16,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note A: Represents increase in long-term debt and deferred
financing costs associated with the completion of the financing
transaction discussed in pro forma assumption six.
39
SELECTED HISTORICAL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
In June 2003, CCO Holdings was formed. CCO Holdings is a holding
company whose primary assets are equity interests in our cable
operating subsidiaries. Charter Holdings entered into a series
of transactions and contributions which had the effect of
(i) creating CCO Holdings, CCO Holdings Capital,
CCH II, our direct parent, and CCH I; and
(ii) combining and contributing all of Charter
Holdings interest in cable operations not previously owned
by Charter Operating to Charter Operating. These transactions
were accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common
control. Accordingly, the financial information for CCO Holdings
combines the historical financial condition, cash flows and
results of operations of Charter Operating, and the operations
of subsidiaries contributed by Charter Holdings for all periods
presented.
The following table presents summary financial and other data
for CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries and has been derived from
the audited consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings
and its subsidiaries for the five years ended December 31,
2004 and the unaudited consolidated financial statements of CCO
Holdings and its subsidiaries for the six months ended
June 30, 2004 and 2005. The consolidated financial
statements of CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries for the years
ended December 31, 2000 to 2004 have been audited by KPMG
LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The
following information should be read in conjunction with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and the historical
consolidated financial statements and related notes included
elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
|
(unaudited) | |
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$ |
3,141 |
|
|
$ |
3,807 |
|
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
$ |
4,977 |
|
|
$ |
2,453 |
|
|
$ |
2,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
1,486 |
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
826 |
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,387 |
|
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
Option compensation expense (income), net
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,218 |
|
|
|
5,018 |
|
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(1,077 |
) |
|
|
(1,211 |
) |
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
(525 |
) |
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
|
(324 |
) |
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Other, net
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before minority interest, income taxes and
cumulative effect of accounting change, net
|
|
|
(1,727 |
) |
|
|
(1,838 |
) |
|
|
(4,946 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(1,740 |
) |
|
|
(1,854 |
) |
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
|
(unaudited) | |
Income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(1,716 |
) |
|
|
(1,827 |
) |
|
|
(4,746 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(136 |
) |
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(1,716 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,851 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of earnings to cover fixed charges(a)
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
Deficiencies of earnings to cover fixed charges(a)
|
|
$ |
1,727 |
|
|
$ |
1,838 |
|
|
$ |
4,946 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
$ |
2,555 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
Balance Sheet Data (end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
310 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
24,235 |
|
|
|
26,091 |
|
|
|
21,984 |
|
|
|
20,994 |
|
|
|
16,964 |
|
|
|
20,058 |
|
|
|
16,343 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
7,531 |
|
|
|
6,961 |
|
|
|
8,066 |
|
|
|
7,956 |
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
7,609 |
|
|
|
8,444 |
|
Loans payable related party
|
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Minority interest(b)
|
|
|
666 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
693 |
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
Members equity
|
|
|
13,493 |
|
|
|
15,940 |
|
|
|
11,040 |
|
|
|
10,585 |
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
10,233 |
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Earnings include net loss plus fixed charges. Fixed charges
consist of interest expense and an estimated interest component
of rent expense. |
|
(b) |
|
Minority interest consists of the preferred membership interests
in CC VIII, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of CCO Holdings,
indirectly held by Paul G. Allen as a result of the exercise of
put rights originally granted in connection with the Bresnan
transaction in 2000. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate
ownership of the CC VIII membership interests following
consummation of the Bresnan put transaction on June 6,
2003. See Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions Transactions Arising Out of Our
Organizational Structure and Mr. Allens Investment in
Charter and Its Subsidiaries Equity Put
Rights CC VIII. Effective January 1,
2005, we ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or
losses of CC VIII, LLC for financial reporting purposes until
such time as the resolution of the issue is determinable or
certain other events occur. |
41
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Reference is made to Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements, which describes important factors that could
cause actual results to differ from expectations and
non-historical information contained herein. In addition, the
following discussion should be read in conjunction with the
audited consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings and
subsidiaries as of and for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002 and the unaudited consolidated financial
statements of CCO Holdings and subsidiaries as of and for the
six months ended June 30, 2005.
CCO Holdings is a holding company whose primary assets are
equity interests in our cable operating subsidiaries. CCO
Holdings was formed in June 2003 and is a wholly owned
subsidiary of CCH II, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of
CCH I. CCH I is a wholly owned subsidiary of CIH,
which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Holdings.
Charter Holdings is a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Holdco
which is a subsidiary of Charter. See Summary
Organized Structure. Our parent companies are
CCH II, CCH I, CIH, Charter Holdings, Charter Holdco
and Charter. We, us and our
refer to CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries.
CCO Holdings is the sole owner of Charter Operating. In June and
July 2003, Charter Holdings entered into a series of
transactions and contributions which had the effect of
(i) creating CCO Holdings, CCO Holdings Capital, CCH II,
and CCH I and (ii) combining and contributing all of
Charter Holdings interest in cable operations not
previously owned by Charter Operating to Charter Operating. This
transaction was accounted for as a reorganization of entities
under common control. Accordingly, the historical financial
condition and results of operations of CCO Holdings combine the
historical financial condition and results of operations of
Charter Operating, and the operations of subsidiaries
contributed by Charter Holdings, for all periods presented.
Introduction
In 2004 and 2005, we completed several transactions that
improved our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in
the completion of a number of transactions in 2004 and 2005, as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the August 2005 sale by us of $300 million of the original
notes due 2013; |
|
|
|
the March and June 2005 issuance of $333 million of Charter
Operating notes in exchange for $346 million of Charter
Holdings notes; |
|
|
|
the March 2005 redemption of all of CC V Holdings,
LLCs outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due
2008 at a total cost of $122 million; |
|
|
|
the December 2004 sale by us of $550 million of senior
floating rate notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second-lien
notes by our subsidiary, Charter Operating, together with the
concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and |
|
|
|
the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for
a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to
reduce indebtedness; |
During the years 1999 through 2001, we grew significantly,
principally through acquisitions of other cable businesses
financed by debt and, to a lesser extent, equity. We have no
current plans to pursue any significant acquisitions. However,
we may pursue exchanges of non-strategic assets or divestitures,
such as the sale of cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance,
LLC discussed under Liquidity and Capital
Resources Sale of Assets, below. We therefore
do not believe that our historical growth rates are accurate
indicators of future growth.
The industrys and our most significant operational
challenges in 2004 and 2003 included competition from DBS
providers and DSL service providers. See
Business Competition. We believe that
competition from DBS has resulted in net analog video customer
losses and decreased growth rates for
42
digital video customers. Competition from DSL providers combined
with limited opportunities to expand our customer base now that
approximately 30% of our analog video customers subscribe to our
high-speed Internet services has resulted in decreased growth
rates for high-speed Internet customers. In the recent past, we
have grown revenues by offsetting video customer losses with
price increases and sales of incremental advanced services such
as high-speed Internet, video on demand, digital video recorders
and high definition television. We expect to continue to grow
revenues through continued growth in high-speed Internet and
incremental new services including telephone, high definition
television, VOD and DVR service.
Historically, our ability to fund operations and investing
activities has depended on our continued access to credit under
our credit facilities. We expect we will continue to borrow
under our credit facilities from time to time to fund cash
needs. The occurrence of an event of default under our credit
facilities could result in borrowings from these facilities
being unavailable to us and could, in the event of a payment
default or acceleration, trigger events of default under the
indentures governing our outstanding notes and would have a
material adverse effect on us. Approximately $15 million of
indebtedness under our credit facilities is scheduled to mature
during the remainder of 2005. We expect to fund payment of such
indebtedness through borrowings under our revolving credit
facility. See Liquidity and Capital
Resources.
Acquisitions
The following table sets forth information regarding our
significant acquisitions from January 1, 2000 to
December 31, 2002 (none in 2003, 2004 or 2005):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase Price (Dollars in Millions) | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities | |
|
|
|
|
Acquisition | |
|
Cash | |
|
Assumed | |
|
Issued/Other | |
|
Total | |
|
Acquired | |
|
|
Date | |
|
Paid | |
|
Debt | |
|
Consideration | |
|
Price | |
|
Customers | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Interlake
|
|
|
1/00 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
|
6,000 |
|
Bresnan
|
|
|
2/00 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
1,014 |
(a) |
|
|
3,077 |
|
|
|
695,800 |
|
Capital Cable
|
|
|
4/00 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
23,200 |
|
Farmington
|
|
|
4/00 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,700 |
|
Kalamazoo
|
|
|
9/00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
(b) |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
50,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2000 Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,188 |
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
3,336 |
|
|
|
781,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT&T Systems
|
|
|
6/01 |
|
|
|
1,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
(c) |
|
|
1,736 |
(c) |
|
|
551,100 |
|
Cable USA
|
|
|
8/01 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55 |
(d) |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
30,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2001 Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
1,836 |
|
|
|
581,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High Speed Access Corp.
|
|
|
2/02 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Enstar Limited Partnership Systems
|
|
|
4/02 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
21,600 |
|
Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P.
|
|
|
9/02 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
6,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2002 Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2000-2002 Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,085 |
|
|
$ |
963 |
|
|
$ |
1,265 |
|
|
$ |
5,313 |
|
|
|
1,391,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Comprised of $385 million in equity in Charter
Communications Holding Company and $629 million of
preferred limited liability company membership interests in CC
VIII. |
|
(b) |
|
In connection with this transaction, we acquired all of the
outstanding stock of Cablevision of Michigan in exchange for
11,173,376 shares of Charter Communications, Inc.
Class A common stock. |
43
|
|
|
(c) |
|
Comprised of approximately $1.7 billion, as adjusted, in
cash and a cable system located in Florida valued at
approximately $25 million, as adjusted. |
|
(d) |
|
In connection with this transaction, at the closing we acquired
all of the outstanding stock of Cable USA and the assets of
related affiliates in exchange for cash and 505,664 shares
of Charter Communications, Inc. Series A convertible
redeemable preferred stock. In the first quarter of 2003, an
additional $0.34 million in cash was paid and 39,595
additional shares of Series A convertible redeemable
preferred stock were issued to certain sellers. |
All acquisitions were accounted for under the purchase method of
accounting and results of operations were included in our
consolidated financial statements from their respective dates of
acquisition.
We have no current plans to pursue any significant acquisitions.
However, we will continue to evaluate opportunities to
consolidate our operations through the sale of cable systems to,
or exchange of like-kind assets with, other cable operators as
such opportunities arise, and on a very limited basis, consider
strategic new acquisitions.
Our primary criteria in considering these opportunities are the
rationalization of our operations into geographic clusters and
the potential financial benefits we expect to ultimately realize
as a result of the sale, exchange, or acquisition.
Overview of Operations
Approximately 86% of our revenues for both the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and for the year ended December 31,
2004, respectively, are attributable to monthly subscription
fees charged to customers for our video, high-speed Internet,
telephone and commercial services provided by our cable systems.
Generally, these customer subscriptions may be discontinued by
the customer at any time. The remaining 14% of revenue is
derived primarily from advertising revenues, franchise fee
revenues, which are collected by us but then paid to local
franchising authorities, pay-per-view and VOD programming where
users are charged a fee for individual programs viewed,
installation or reconnection fees charged to customers to
commence or reinstate service, and commissions related to the
sale of merchandise by home shopping services. We have increased
revenues during the past three years, primarily through the sale
of digital video and high-speed Internet services to new and
existing customers and price increases on video services offset
in part by dispositions of systems. Going forward, our goal is
to increase revenues by stabilizing our analog video customer
base, implementing price increases on certain services and
packages and increasing the number of our customers who purchase
high-speed Internet services, digital video and new products and
services such as telephone, VOD, high definition television and
DVR service. To accomplish this, we are increasing prices for
certain services and we are offering new bundling of services
combining digital video and our advanced services (such as
high-speed Internet service and high definition television) at
what we believe are attractive price points. See
Business Sales and Marketing for more
details.
Our success in our efforts to grow revenues and improve margins
will be impacted by our ability to compete against companies
with often fewer regulatory burdens, easier access to financing,
greater personnel resources, greater brand name recognition and
long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and
customers. Additionally, controlling our cost of operations is
critical, particularly cable programming costs, which have
historically increased at rates in excess of inflation and are
expected to continue to increase. See Business
Programming for more details. We are attempting to control
our costs of operations by maintaining strict controls on
expenses. More specifically, we are focused on managing our cost
structure by renegotiating programming agreements to reduce the
rate of historical increases in programming cost, managing our
workforce to control increases and improve productivity, and
leveraging our size in purchasing activities.
Our expenses primarily consist of operating costs, selling,
general and administrative expenses, depreciation and
amortization expense and interest expense. Operating costs
primarily include programming costs, the cost of our workforce,
cable service related expenses, advertising sales costs,
franchise fees and expenses related to customer billings. Our
income from operations decreased from $190 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2004 to $161 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2005. We had a
44
positive operating margin (defined as income (loss) from
operations divided by revenues) of 6% and 8% for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The decline in
income from operations and operating margin for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 is principally due to the one-time gain
as a result of the sale of certain cable systems in Florida,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC of approximately $106 million,
recognized in the six months ended June 30, 2004 offset by
$85 million recorded in special charges as part of the
terms set forth in memoranda of understanding regarding
settlement of the consolidated Federal Class Action and
Federal Derivative Action which did not recur in 2005. For the
years ended December 31, 2004 and 2002, loss from
operations was $2.0 billion and $4.3 billion,
respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2003, income
from operations was $516 million. Operating margin was 11%
for the year ended December 31, 2003, whereas for the years
ending December 31, 2004 and 2002, we had negative
operating margin of 41% and 95%, respectively. The improvement
in income from operations and operating margin from 2002 to 2003
was principally due to a $4.6 billion franchise impairment
charge in the fourth quarter of 2002 which did not recur in 2003
and the recognition of gains in 2003 of $93 million related
to unfavorable contracts and other settlements and gain on sale
of systems. Although we do not expect charges for impairment in
the future of comparable magnitude, potential charges could
occur due to changes in market conditions.
We have a history of net losses. Further, we expect to continue
to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses
are principally attributable to insufficient revenue to cover
the interest costs on our debt, the depreciation expenses that
we incur resulting from the capital investments we have made in
our cable properties and the amortization and impairment of our
franchise intangibles. We expect that these expenses (other than
impairment of franchises) will remain significant, and we
therefore expect to continue to report net losses for the
foreseeable future. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased
recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII,
LLC for financial reporting purposes until the dispute between
Charter and Mr. Allen regarding the preferred membership
interests in CC VIII, LLC is determinable or other events occur.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Certain of our accounting policies require our management to
make difficult, subjective or complex judgments. Management has
discussed these policies with the Audit Committee of
Charters board of directors and the Audit Committee has
reviewed the following disclosure. We consider the following
policies to be the most critical in understanding the estimates,
assumptions and judgments that are involved in preparing our
financial statements and the uncertainties that could affect our
results of operations, financial condition and cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalization of labor and overhead costs; |
|
|
|
Useful lives of property, plant and equipment; |
|
|
|
Impairment of property, plant, and equipment, franchises, and
goodwill; |
|
|
|
Income taxes; and |
|
|
|
Litigation. |
In addition, there are other items within our financial
statements that require estimates or judgment but are not deemed
critical, such as the allowance for doubtful accounts, but
changes in judgment, or estimates in these other items could
also have a material impact on our financial statements.
|
|
|
Capitalization of labor and overhead costs |
The cable industry is capital intensive, and a large portion of
our resources are spent on capital activities associated with
extending, rebuilding, and upgrading our cable network. As of
June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and 2003, the net
carrying amount of our property, plant and equipment (consisting
primarily of cable network assets) was approximately
$6.0 billion (representing 37% of total assets),
45
$6.1 billion (representing 36% of total assets) and
$6.8 billion (representing 32% of total assets),
respectively. Total capital expenditures for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002 were approximately $542 million,
$893 million, $804 million and $2.1 billion,
respectively.
Costs associated with network construction, initial customer
installations, installation refurbishments and the addition of
network equipment necessary to provide advanced services are
capitalized. Costs capitalized as part of initial customer
installations include materials, direct labor, and certain
indirect costs. These indirect costs are associated with the
activities of personnel who assist in connecting and activating
the new service and consist of compensation and overhead costs
associated with these support functions. The costs of
disconnecting service at a customers dwelling or
reconnecting service to a previously installed dwelling are
charged to operating expense in the period incurred. Costs for
repairs and maintenance are charged to operating expense as
incurred, while equipment replacement and betterments, including
replacement of cable drops from the pole to the dwelling, are
capitalized.
We make judgments regarding the installation and construction
activities to be capitalized. We capitalize direct labor and
certain indirect costs (overhead) using standards
developed from actual costs and applicable operational data. We
calculate standards for items such as the labor rates, overhead
rates and the actual amount of time required to perform a
capitalizable activity. For example, the standard amounts of
time required to perform capitalizable activities are based on
studies of the time required to perform such activities.
Overhead rates are established based on an analysis of the
nature of costs incurred in support of capitalizable activities
and a determination of the portion of costs that is directly
attributable to capitalizable activities. The impact of changes
that resulted from these studies were not significant in the
periods presented.
Labor costs directly associated with capital projects are
capitalized. We capitalize direct labor costs associated with
personnel based upon the specific time devoted to network
construction and customer installation activities. Capitalizable
activities performed in connection with customer installations
include such activities as:
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduling a truck roll to the customers
dwelling for service connection; |
|
|
|
Verification of serviceability to the customers dwelling
(i.e., determining whether the customers dwelling is
capable of receiving service by our cable network and/or
receiving advanced or Internet services); |
|
|
|
Customer premise activities performed by in-house field
technicians and third-party contractors in connection with
customer installations, installation of network equipment in
connection with the installation of expanded services and
equipment replacement and betterment; and |
|
|
|
Verifying the integrity of the customers network
connection by initiating test signals downstream from the
headend to the customers digital set-top terminal. |
Judgment is required to determine the extent to which overhead
is incurred as a result of specific capital activities, and
therefore should be capitalized. The primary costs that are
included in the determination of the overhead rate are
(i) employee benefits and payroll taxes associated with
capitalized direct labor, (ii) direct variable costs
associated with capitalizable activities, consisting primarily
of installation and construction vehicle costs, (iii) the
cost of support personnel, such as dispatch, that directly
assist with capitalizable installation activities, and
(iv) indirect costs directly attributable to capitalizable
activities.
While we believe our existing capitalization policies are
appropriate, a significant change in the nature or extent of our
system activities could affect managements judgment about
the extent to which we should capitalize direct labor or
overhead in the future. We monitor the appropriateness of our
capitalization policies, and perform updates to our internal
studies on an ongoing basis to determine whether facts or
circumstances warrant a change to our capitalization policies.
We capitalized direct labor and overhead of $91 million,
$164 million, $174 million and $335 million for
the six months ended
46
June 30, 2005 and the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively. Capitalized internal direct labor
and overhead costs significantly decreased in 2004 and 2003
compared to 2002 primarily due to the substantial completion of
the upgrade of our systems and a decrease in the amount of
capitalizable installation costs.
|
|
|
Useful lives of property, plant and equipment |
We evaluate the appropriateness of estimated useful lives
assigned to our property, plant and equipment, based on annual
studies of such useful lives, and revise such lives to the
extent warranted by changing facts and circumstances. Any
changes in estimated useful lives as a result of these studies,
which were not significant in the periods presented, will be
reflected prospectively beginning in the period in which the
study is completed. The effect of a one-year decrease in the
weighted average remaining useful life of our property, plant
and equipment would be an increase in depreciation expense for
the year ended December 31, 2004 of approximately
$296 million. The effect of a one-year increase in the
weighted average useful life of our property, plant and
equipment would be a decrease in depreciation expense for the
year ended December 31, 2004 of approximately
$198 million. Depreciation expense related to property,
plant and equipment totaled $753 million,
$1.5 billion, $1.5 billion and $1.4 billion,
representing approximately ) 31%, 21%, 34% and 16% of costs and
expenses, for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Depreciation is recorded using the straight-line composite
method over managements estimate of the estimated useful
lives of the related assets as listed below:
|
|
|
|
|
Cable distribution systems
|
|
|
7-20 years |
|
Customer equipment and installations
|
|
|
3-5 years |
|
Vehicles and equipment
|
|
|
1-5 years |
|
Buildings and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
5-15 years |
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
5 years |
|
|
|
|
Impairment of property, plant and equipment, franchises
and goodwill |
As discussed above, the net carrying value of our property,
plant and equipment is significant. We also have recorded a
significant amount of cost related to franchises, pursuant to
which we are granted the right to operate our cable distribution
network throughout our service areas. The net carrying value of
franchises as of June 30, 2005, December 31, 2004 and
2003 was approximately $9.8 billion (representing 60% of
total assets), $9.9 billion (representing 58% of total
assets) and $13.7 billion (representing 65% of total
assets), respectively. Furthermore, our noncurrent assets
included approximately $52 million of goodwill.
We adopted SFAS No. 142 on January 1, 2002.
SFAS No. 142 requires that franchise intangible assets
that meet specified indefinite-life criteria no longer be
amortized against earnings, but instead must be tested for
impairment annually based on valuations, or more frequently as
warranted by events or changes in circumstances. In determining
whether our franchises have an indefinite-life, we considered
the exclusivity of the franchise, the expected costs of
franchise renewals, and the technological state of the
associated cable systems with a view to whether or not we are in
compliance with any technology upgrading requirements. We have
concluded that as of June 30, 2005, December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002 more than 99% of our franchises qualify for
indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142, and that
less than one percent of our franchises do not qualify for
indefinite-life treatment due to technological or operational
factors that limit their lives. Costs of finite-lived
franchises, along with costs associated with franchise renewals,
are amortized on a straight-line basis over 10 years, which
represents managements best estimate of the average
remaining useful lives of such franchises. Franchise
amortization expense was $2 million and $4 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2005 and the year ended
December 31, 2004, respectively, and $9 million for
each of the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. We
expect that amortization expense on franchise assets will be
approximately $3 million annually for each of the next five
years. Actual amortization expense in future periods could
differ from these estimates as a result of
47
new intangible asset acquisitions or divestitures, changes in
useful lives and other relevant factors. Our goodwill is also
deemed to have an indefinite life under SFAS No. 142.
SFAS No. 144, Accounting for Impairment or Disposal
of Long-Lived Assets, requires that we evaluate the
recoverability of our property, plant and equipment and
franchise assets which did not qualify for indefinite-life
treatment under SFAS No. 142 upon the occurrence of
events or changes in circumstances which indicate that the
carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Such events
or changes in circumstances could include such factors as the
impairment of our indefinite-life franchises under
SFAS No. 142, changes in technological advances,
fluctuations in the fair value of such assets, adverse changes
in relationships with local franchise authorities, adverse
changes in market conditions or poor operating results. Under
SFAS No. 144, a long-lived asset is deemed impaired
when the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the projected
undiscounted future cash flows associated with the asset. No
impairments of long-lived assets were recorded in the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 or 2002. We were also
required to evaluate the recoverability of our indefinite-life
franchises, as well as goodwill, as of January 1, 2002 upon
adoption of SFAS No. 142, and on an annual basis or
more frequently as deemed necessary.
Under both SFAS No. 144 and SFAS No. 142, if
an asset is determined to be impaired, it is required to be
written down to its estimated fair market value. We determine
fair market value based on estimated discounted future cash
flows, using reasonable and appropriate assumptions that are
consistent with internal forecasts. Our assumptions include
these and other factors: penetration rates for analog and
digital video and high-speed Internet, revenue growth rates,
expected operating margins and capital expenditures.
Considerable management judgment is necessary to estimate future
cash flows, and such estimates include inherent uncertainties,
including those relating to the timing and amount of future cash
flows and the discount rate used in the calculation.
Based on the guidance prescribed in Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) Issue No. 02-7, Unit of Accounting
for Testing of Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible
Assets, franchises were aggregated into essentially
inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset
groups generally represent geographic clustering of our cable
systems into groups by which such systems are managed.
Management believes such groupings represent the highest and
best use of those assets. We determined that our franchises were
impaired upon adoption of SFAS No. 142 on
January 1, 2002 and as a result recorded the cumulative
effect of a change in accounting principle of $206 million
(approximately $572 million before minority interest
effects of $306 million and tax effects of
$60 million). As required by SFAS No. 142, the
standard has not been retroactively applied to results for the
period prior to adoption.
Our valuations, which are based on the present value of
projected after tax cash flows, result in a value of property,
plant and equipment, franchises, customer relationships and our
total entity value. The value of goodwill is the difference
between the total entity value and amounts assigned to the other
assets. The use of different valuation assumptions or
definitions of franchises or customer relationships, such as our
inclusion of the value of selling additional services to our
current customers within customer relationships versus
franchises, could significantly impact our valuations and any
resulting impairment.
Franchises, for valuation purposes, are defined as the future
economic benefits of the right to solicit and service potential
customers (customer marketing rights), and the right to deploy
and market new services such as interactivity and telephone to
the potential customers (service marketing rights). Fair value
is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows
using assumptions consistent with internal forecasts. The
franchise after-tax cash flow is calculated as the after-tax
cash flow generated by the potential customers obtained and the
new services added to those customers in future periods. The sum
of the present value of the franchises after-tax cash flow
in years 1 through 10 and the continuing value of the
after-tax cash flow beyond year 10 yields the fair value of
the franchise. Prior to the adoption of EITF Topic D-108,
Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other
than Goodwill, discussed below, we followed a residual
method of valuing our franchise assets, which had the effect of
including goodwill with the franchise assets.
48
We follow the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17, Recognition
of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets Acquired in a
Business Combination, in valuing customer relationships.
Customer relationships, for valuation purposes, represent the
value of the business relationship with our existing customers
and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash flows
from these customers including the right to deploy and market
additional services such as interactivity and telephone to these
customers. The present value of these after-tax cash flows
yields the fair value of the customer relationships.
Substantially all our acquisitions occurred prior to
January 1, 2002. We did not record any value associated
with the customer relationship intangibles related to those
acquisitions. For acquisitions subsequent to January 1,
2002, we did assign a value to the customer relationship
intangible, which is amortized over its estimated useful life.
In September 2004, EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual
Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill, was
issued, which requires the direct method of separately valuing
all intangible assets and does not permit goodwill to be
included in franchise assets. We performed an impairment
assessment as of September 30, 2004, and adopted Topic
D-108 in that assessment resulting in a total franchise
impairment of approximately $3.3 billion. We recorded a
cumulative effect of accounting change of $765 million
(approximately $875 million before tax effects of
$91 million and minority interest effects of
$19 million) for the year ended December 31, 2004
representing the portion of our total franchise impairment
attributable to no longer including goodwill with franchise
assets. The effect of the adoption was to increase net loss and
loss per share by $765 million and $2.55 for the year ended
December 31, 2004. The remaining $2.4 billion of the
total franchise impairment was attributable to the use of lower
projected growth rates and the resulting revised estimates of
future cash flows in our valuation and was recorded as
impairment of franchises in our consolidated statements of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2004. Sustained
analog video customer losses by us and our industry peers in the
third quarter of 2004 primarily as a result of increased
competition from DBS providers and decreased growth rates in our
and our industry peers high speed Internet customers in
the third quarter of 2004, in part as a result of increased
competition from DSL providers, led us to lower our projected
growth rates and accordingly revise our estimates of future cash
flows from those used at October 1, 2003. See
Business Competition.
The valuation completed at October 1, 2003 showed franchise
values in excess of book value and thus resulted in no
impairment. Our annual impairment assessment as of
October 1, 2002, based on revised estimates from
January 1, 2002 of future cash flows and projected
long-term growth rates in our valuation, led to the recognition
of a $4.6 billion impairment charge in the fourth quarter
of 2002.
The valuations used in our impairment assessments involve
numerous assumptions as noted above. While economic conditions,
applicable at the time of the valuation, indicate the
combination of assumptions utilized in the valuations are
reasonable, as market conditions change so will the assumptions
with a resulting impact on the valuation and consequently the
potential impairment charge.
Sensitivity Analysis. The effect on the impairment
charge recognized in the third quarter of 2004 of the indicated
increase/decrease in the selected assumptions is shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage/ | |
|
|
|
|
Percentage Point | |
|
Impairment Charge | |
Assumption |
|
Change | |
|
Increase/(Decrease) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
Annual Operating Cash Flow(1)
|
|
|
+/-5% |
|
|
$ |
(890)/ |
|
|
$ |
921 |
|
Long-Term Growth Rate(2)
|
|
|
+/-1pts |
(3) |
|
|
(1,579)/ |
|
|
|
1,232 |
|
Discount Rate
|
|
|
+/-0.5pts |
(3) |
|
|
1,336/ |
|
|
|
(1,528 |
) |
|
|
(1) |
Operating Cash Flow is defined as revenues less operating
expenses and selling general and administrative expenses. |
|
(2) |
Long-Term Growth Rate is the rate of cash flow growth beyond
year ten. |
|
(3) |
A percentage point change of one point equates to 100 basis
points. |
49
All operations of Charter are held through Charter Holdco and
its direct and indirect subsidiaries, including us and our
subsidiaries. Charter Holdco and the majority of its
subsidiaries are not subject to income tax. However, certain of
these subsidiaries are corporations and are subject to income
tax. All of the taxable income, gains, losses, deductions and
credits of Charter Holdco are passed through to its members:
Charter, Charter Investment, Inc., and Vulcan Cable III
Inc. Charter is responsible for its share of taxable income or
loss of Charter Holdco allocated to it in accordance with the
Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement (the
LLC Agreement) and partnership tax rules and
regulations.
The LLC Agreement provided for certain special allocations of
net tax profits and net tax losses (such net tax profits and net
tax losses being determined under the applicable federal income
tax rules for determining capital accounts). Under the LLC
Agreement, through the end of 2003, net tax losses of Charter
Holdco that would otherwise have been allocated to Charter based
generally on its percentage ownership of outstanding common
units were allocated instead to membership units held by Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. (the
Special Loss Allocations) to the extent of their
respective capital account balances. After 2003, under the LLC
Agreement, net tax losses of Charter Holdco are allocated to
Charter, Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc.
based generally on their respective percentage ownership of
outstanding common units to the extent of their respective
capital account balances. The LLC Agreement further provides
that, beginning at the time Charter Holdco generates net tax
profits, the net tax profits that would otherwise have been
allocated to Charter based generally on its percentage ownership
of outstanding common membership units will instead generally be
allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment,
Inc. (the Special Profit Allocations). The Special
Profit Allocations to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter
Investment, Inc. will generally continue until the cumulative
amount of the Special Profit Allocations offsets the cumulative
amount of the Special Loss Allocations. The amount and timing of
the Special Profit Allocations are subject to the potential
application of, and interaction with, the Curative Allocation
Provisions described in the following paragraph. The LLC
Agreement generally provides that any additional net tax profits
are to be allocated among the members of Charter Holdco based
generally on their respective percentage ownership of Charter
Holdco common membership units.
Because the respective capital account balance of each of Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. was reduced to
zero by December 31, 2002, certain net tax losses of
Charter Holdco that were to be allocated for 2002, 2003, 2004
and possibly later years, subject to resolution of the issue
described in Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions Transactions Arising Out of Our
Organizational Structure and Mr. Allens Investment in
Charter and Its Subsidiaries Equity Put
Rights CC VIII to Vulcan Cable III Inc.
and Charter Investment, Inc. instead have been and will be
allocated to Charter (the Regulatory Allocations).
The LLC Agreement further provides that, to the extent possible,
the effect of the Regulatory Allocations is to be offset over
time pursuant to certain curative allocation provisions (the
Curative Allocation Provisions) so that, after
certain offsetting adjustments are made, each members
capital account balance is equal to the capital account balance
such member would have had if the Regulatory Allocations had not
been part of the LLC Agreement. The cumulative amount of the
actual tax losses allocated to Charter as a result of the
Regulatory Allocations through the year ended December 31,
2004 is approximately $4.0 billion.
As a result of the Special Loss Allocations and the Regulatory
Allocations referred to above, the cumulative amount of losses
of Charter Holdco allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and
Charter Investment, Inc. is in excess of the amount that would
have been allocated to such entities if the losses of Charter
Holdco had been allocated among its members in proportion to
their respective percentage ownership of Charter Holdco common
membership units. The cumulative amount of such excess losses
was approximately $2.1 billion through December 31,
2003 and $1.0 billion through December 31, 2004.
In certain situations, the Special Loss Allocations, Special
Profit Allocations, Regulatory Allocations and Curative
Allocation Provisions described above could result in Charter
paying taxes in an amount that is more or less than if Charter
Holdco had allocated net tax profits and net tax losses among
its members
50
based generally on the number of common membership units owned
by such members. This could occur due to differences in
(i) the character of the allocated income (e.g., ordinary
versus capital), (ii) the allocated amount and timing of
tax depreciation and tax amortization expense due to the
application of section 704(c) under the Internal Revenue
Code, (iii) the potential interaction between the Special
Profit Allocations and the Curative Allocation Provisions,
(iv) the amount and timing of alternative minimum taxes
paid by Charter, if any, (v) the apportionment of the
allocated income or loss among the states in which Charter
Holdco does business, and (vi) future federal and state tax
laws. Further, in the event of new capital contributions to
Charter Holdco, it is possible that the tax effects of the
Special Profit Allocations, Special Loss Allocations, Regulatory
Allocations and Curative Allocation Provisions will change
significantly pursuant to the provisions of the income tax
regulations or the terms of a contribution agreement with
respect to such contributions. Such change could defer the
actual tax benefits to be derived by Charter with respect to the
net tax losses allocated to it or accelerate the actual taxable
income to Charter with respect to the net tax profits allocated
to it. As a result, it is possible under certain circumstances,
that Charter could receive future allocations of taxable income
in excess of its currently allocated tax deductions and
available tax loss carryforwards. The ability to utilize net
operating loss carryforwards is potentially subject to certain
limitations as discussed below.
In addition, under their exchange agreement with Charter, Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. may exchange
some or all of their membership units in Charter Holdco for
Charters Class B common stock, be merged with
Charter, or be acquired by Charter in a non-taxable
reorganization. If such an exchange were to take place prior to
the date that the Special Profit Allocation provisions had fully
offset the Special Loss Allocations, Vulcan Cable III Inc.
and Charter Investment, Inc. could elect to cause Charter Holdco
to make the remaining Special Profit Allocations to Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. immediately
prior to the consummation of the exchange. In the event Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. choose not to
make such election or to the extent such allocations are not
possible, Charter would then be allocated tax profits
attributable to the membership units received in such exchange
pursuant to the Special Profit Allocation provisions.
Mr. Allen has generally agreed to reimburse Charter for any
incremental income taxes that Charter would owe as a result of
such an exchange and any resulting future Special Profit
Allocations to Charter. The ability of Charter to utilize net
operating loss carryforwards is potentially subject to certain
limitations. If Charter were to become subject to such
limitations (whether as a result of an exchange described above
or otherwise), and as a result were to owe taxes resulting from
the Special Profit Allocations, then Mr. Allen may not be
obligated to reimburse Charter for such income taxes.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and 2003, we
have recorded net deferred income tax liabilities of
$214 million, $208 million and $267 million,
respectively. Additionally, as of June 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004 and 2003, we have deferred tax assets of
$103 million, $103 million and $86 million,
respectively, which primarily relate to tax net operating loss
carryforwards of certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries.
We are required to record a valuation allowance when it is more
likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred income
tax assets will not be realized. Given the uncertainty
surrounding our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets,
these items have been offset with a corresponding valuation
allowance of $71 million, $71 million and
$51 million at June 30, 2005 and December 31,
2004 and 2003, respectively.
Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal
Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 2000,
2002 and 2003. Management does not expect the results of this
examination to have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our
liquidity, including our ability to comply with our debt
covenants.
Legal contingencies have a high degree of uncertainty. When a
loss from a contingency becomes estimable and probable, a
reserve is established. The reserve reflects managements
best estimate of the probable cost of ultimate resolution of the
matter and is revised accordingly as facts and circumstances
change and, ultimately when the matter is brought to closure. We
have established reserves for certain
51
matters pending against Charter, including those described in
Business Legal Proceedings. If any of
the litigation matters pending against Charter, including those
described in Business Legal Proceedings
is resolved unfavorably resulting in payment obligations in
excess of managements best estimate of the outcome, such
resolution could have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our
liquidity.
Results of Operations
Six Months Ended June 30, 2005 Compared to Six Months
Ended June 30, 2004
The following table sets forth the percentages of revenues that
items in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations
constituted for the periods presented (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
$ |
2,594 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
2,453 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
44 |
% |
|
|
1,027 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
94 |
% |
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
92 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(283 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest and income taxes
|
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues increased by $141 million, or 6%, from
$2.5 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$2.6 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
This increase is principally the result of an increase of
310,800 and 35,400 high-speed Internet and digital video
customers, respectively, as well as price increases for video
and high-speed Internet services, and is offset partially by a
decrease of 190,100 analog video customers. The cable system
sales to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, which closed in March
and April 2004 (referred to in this section as the System
Sales) reduced the increase in revenues by
$29 million. Our goal is to increase revenues by improving
customer service which we believe will stabilize our analog
video customer base, implementing price increases on certain
services and packages and increasing the number of customers who
purchase high-speed Internet services, digital video and
advanced products and services such as telephone, VOD, high
definition television and digital video recorder service.
52
Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased to
$72.38 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 from $65.39
for the six months ended June 30, 2004 primarily as a
result of incremental revenues from advanced services and price
increases. Average monthly revenue per analog video customer
represents total revenue for the six months ended during the
respective period, divided by six, divided by the average number
of analog video customers during the respective period.
Revenues by service offering were as follows (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
1,703 |
|
|
|
66 |
% |
|
$ |
1,695 |
|
|
|
69 |
% |
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
26 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Commercial
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,594 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
2,453 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
141 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and
digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers.
Video revenues increased by $8 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 compared to the six months ended
June 30, 2004. Approximately $68 million of the
increase was the result of price increases and incremental video
revenues from existing customers and approximately
$8 million resulted from an increase in digital video
customers. The increases were offset by decreases of
approximately $21 million resulting from the System Sales
and approximately an additional $47 million related to a
decrease in analog video customers.
Revenues from high-speed Internet services provided to our
non-commercial customers increased $92 million, or 26%,
from $349 million for the six months ended June 30,
2004 to $441 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005. Approximately $68 million of the increase related to
the increase in the average number of customers receiving
high-speed Internet services, whereas approximately
$27 million related to the increase in average price of the
service. The increase in high-speed Internet revenues was
reduced by approximately $3 million as a result of the
System Sales.
Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from
commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors.
Advertising sales increased $8 million, or 6%, from
$132 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$140 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
primarily as a result of an increase in new advertising sales
customers and in advertising rates. The increase was offset by a
decrease of $1 million as a result of the System Sales. For
the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we received
$7 million and $6 million in advertising sales
revenues from vendors.
Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from cable
video and high-speed Internet services to our commercial
customers. Commercial revenues increased $20 million, or
18%, from $114 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2004 to $134 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, primarily as a result of an increase in
commercial high-speed Internet revenues. The increase was
reduced by approximately $2 million as a result of the
System Sales.
Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees,
telephone revenue, equipment rental, customer installations,
home shopping, dial-up Internet service, late payment fees, wire
maintenance fees and other miscellaneous revenues. Other
revenues increased $13 million, or 8%, from
$163 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$176 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
The increase was primarily the result of an increase in
telephone revenue of $6 million, installation revenue of
$5 million and franchise fees of $4 million and was
partially offset by approximately $2 million as a result of
the System Sales.
53
Operating expenses increased $101 million, or 10%, from
$1.0 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$1.1 billion for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
The increase in operating expenses was reduced by
$12 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming
costs included in the accompanying condensed consolidated
statements of operations were $709 million and
$663 million, representing 29% of total costs and expenses
for each of the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of revenues
were as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
709 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
$ |
663 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
Service
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,128 |
|
|
|
44 |
% |
|
$ |
1,027 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
$ |
101 |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers
for analog, premium, digital channels, VOD and pay-per-view
programming. The increase in programming costs of
$46 million, or 7%, for the six months ended June 30,
2005 over the six months ended June 30, 2004 was a result
of price increases, particularly in sports programming,
partially offset by decreases in analog video customers.
Additionally, the increase in programming costs was reduced by
$9 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming
costs were offset by the amortization of payments received from
programmers in support of launches of new channels of
$18 million and $28 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Programming costs for
the six months ended June 30, 2004 also include a
$4 million reduction related to the settlement of a dispute
with TechTV, Inc. See Note 17 to the condensed consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.
Our cable programming costs have increased in every year we have
operated in excess of U.S. inflation and cost-of-living
increases, and we expect them to continue to increase because of
a variety of factors, including inflationary or negotiated
annual increases, additional programming being provided to
customers and increased costs to purchase programming. In 2005,
programming costs have increased and we expect they will
continue to increase at a higher rate than in 2004. These costs
will be determined in part on the outcome of programming
negotiations in 2005 and will likely be subject to offsetting
events or otherwise affected by factors similar to the ones
mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Our increasing programming
costs will result in declining operating margins for our video
services to the extent we are unable to pass on cost increases
to our customers. We expect to partially offset any resulting
margin compression from our traditional video services with
revenue from advanced video services, increased high-speed
Internet revenues, advertising revenues and commercial service
revenues.
Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to
traditional advertising services provided to advertising
customers, including salaries, benefits and commissions.
Advertising sales expenses increased $2 million, or 4%,
primarily as a result of increased salary, benefit and
commission costs. Service costs consist primarily of service
personnel salaries and benefits, franchise fees, system
utilities, Internet service provider fees, maintenance and pole
rent expense. The increase in service costs of $53 million,
or 17%, resulted primarily from increased labor and maintenance
costs to support our infrastructure, increased equipment
maintenance, an increase in franchise fees as a result of
increased revenues and higher fuel prices. The increase in
service costs was reduced by $3 million as a result of the
System Sales.
|
|
|
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses |
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$10 million, or 2%, from $483 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2004 to $493 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005. The increase
54
in selling, general and administrative expenses was reduced by
$4 million as a result of the System Sales. Key components
of expense as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
427 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
|
$ |
416 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Marketing
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
493 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of
salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center
costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property
taxes. The increase in general and administrative expenses of
$11 million, or 3%, resulted primarily from increases in
professional fees of $15 million and salaries and benefits
of $13 million, offset by the System Sales of
$4 million and decreases in bad debt expense of
$10 million.
Marketing expenses decreased $1 million, or 1%, as a result
of a decrease in expenditures as a result of disciplined
spending and more targeted marketing tactics. We expect
marketing expenditures to increase for the remainder of 2005.
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
Depreciation and amortization expense increased by
$25 million, or 3%, from $734 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2004 to $759 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005. The increase in depreciation
was related to an increase in capital expenditures.
Asset impairment charges for the six months ended June 30,
2005 represent the write-down of assets related to three pending
cable asset sales to fair value less costs to sell. See
Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
(Gain) Loss on Sale of Assets, Net |
Loss on sale of assets of $4 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 primarily represents the loss
recognized on the disposition of plant and equipment. Gain on
sale of assets of $104 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2004 primarily represents the pretax gain realized
on the sale of systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC which
closed on March 1 and April 30, 2004.
|
|
|
Option Compensation Expense, Net |
Option compensation expense of $8 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 primarily represents options
expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Option
compensation expense of $26 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2004 primarily represents the expense of
approximately $8 million related to a stock option exchange
program, under which our employees were offered the right to
exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) issued under
the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per
share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock
or, in some instances, cash. The exchange offer closed in
February 2004. Additionally, during the six months ended
June 30, 2004, we recognized approximately $6 million
related to the performance shares granted under the Charter
Long-Term Incentive Program and approximately $12 million
related to options granted following the adoption of SFAS
No. 123.
55
Special charges of $2 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 represents $4 million of severance and
related costs of our management realignment offset by
approximately $2 million related to an agreed upon cash
discount on settlement of the consolidated Federal
Class Action and Federal Derivative Action. See
Legal Proceedings. Special charges of
$97 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004
represents approximately $85 million as part of the terms
set forth in memoranda of understanding regarding settlement of
the consolidated Federal Class Action and Federal
Derivative Action and approximately $9 million of
litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of the
South Carolina national class action suit, which settlements are
subject to final documentation and court approval and
approximately $3 million of severance and related costs of
our workforce reduction.
Net interest expense increased by $66 million, or 26%, from
$258 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$324 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
The increase in net interest expense was a result of an increase
in our average borrowing rate from 6.40% in the six months ended
June 30, 2004 to 7.39% in the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and an increase of $748 million in
average debt outstanding from $7.6 billion for the six
months ended June 30, 2004 compared to $8.4 billion
for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
|
|
|
Gain on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,
Net |
Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities
decreased $30 million from $56 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2004 to $26 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005. The decrease is primarily a
result of a decrease in gains on interest rate agreements, which
do not qualify for hedge accounting under
SFAS No. 133, which decreased from $54 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to $25 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
Loss on extinguishment of debt of $6 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 primarily represents
approximately $5 million of losses related to the
redemption of our subsidiarys, CC V Holdings, LLC,
11.875% notes due 2008. See Note 6 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements. Loss on extinguishment of
debt of $21 million for the six months ended June 30,
2004 represents the write-off of deferred financing fees and
third party costs related to the Charter Communications
Operating, LLC (Charter Operating) refinancing in
April 2004.
Gain on investments of $21 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 primarily represents a gain realized on an
exchange of our interest in an equity investee for an investment
in a larger enterprise.
Minority interest represents the 2% accretion of the preferred
membership interests in our indirect subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC,
and in 2004, the pro rata share of the profits and losses of CC
VIII, LLC. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased recognizing
minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII for financial
reporting purposes until the dispute between Charter and
Mr. Allen regarding the preferred membership interests in
CC VIII is resolved. See Note 7 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements.
56
Income tax expense of $8 million and $4 million was
recognized for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Income tax expense represents increases in the
deferred tax liabilities and current federal and state income
tax expenses of certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries.
Net loss increased by $90 million, from $46 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to $136 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as a result of the
factors described above.
57
Year Ended December 31, 2004, December 31, 2003 and
December 31, 2002
The following table sets forth the percentages of revenues that
items in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations
constitute for the indicated periods (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
$ |
4,977 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
21 |
% |
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
31 |
% |
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
102 |
% |
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
141 |
% |
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
89 |
% |
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
195 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
)% |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
)% |
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before minority interest, income taxes and
cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,946 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,746 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
3,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2003
Revenues increased by $158 million, or 3%, from
$4.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$5.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004.
This increase is principally the result of an increase of
318,800 and 2,800 high-speed Internet customers and digital
video customers, respectively, as well as price increases for
video and high-speed Internet services, and is offset partially
by a decrease of 439,800 analog video customers. Included
in the reduction in analog video customers and reducing the
increase in digital video and high-speed Internet customers are
230,800 analog video customers, 83,300
58
digital video customers and 37,800 high-speed Internet customers
sold in the cable system sales to Atlantic Broadband Finance,
LLC, which closed in March and April 2004 (collectively, with
the cable system sale to WaveDivision Holdings, LLC in October
2003, referred to in this section as the System
Sales). The System Sales reduced the increase in revenues
by $160 million.
Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased from
$61.92 for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $68.02 for
the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily as a result of
price increases and incremental revenues from advanced services.
Average monthly revenue per analog video customer represents
total annual revenue, divided by twelve, divided by the average
number of analog video customers during the respective period.
Revenues by service offering were as follows (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 over 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
3,373 |
|
|
|
68 |
% |
|
$ |
3,461 |
|
|
|
72 |
% |
|
$ |
(88 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
Commercial
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,977 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
158 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and
digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers.
Video revenues decreased by $88 million, or 3%, from
$3.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$3.4 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Approximately $116 million of the decrease was the result
of the System Sales and approximately an additional
$65 million related to a decline in analog video customers.
These decreases were offset by increases of approximately
$66 million resulting from price increases and incremental
video revenues from existing customers and approximately
$27 million resulting from an increase in digital video
customers.
Revenues from high-speed Internet services provided to our
non-commercial customers increased $185 million, or 33%,
from $556 million for the year ended December 31, 2003
to $741 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Approximately $163 million of the increase related to the
increase in the average number of customers receiving high-speed
Internet services, whereas approximately $35 million
related to the increase in average price of the service. The
increase in high-speed Internet revenues was reduced by
approximately $12 million as a result of the System Sales.
Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from
commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors.
Advertising sales increased $26 million, or 10%, from
$263 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$289 million for the year ended December 31, 2004
primarily as a result of an increase in national advertising
campaigns and election related advertising. The increase was
offset by a decrease of $7 million as a result of the
System Sales. For the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003, we received $16 million and $15 million,
respectively, in advertising revenue from vendors.
Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from cable
video and high-speed Internet services to our commercial
customers. Commercial revenues increased $34 million, or
17%, from $204 million for the year ended December 31,
2003, to $238 million for the year ended December 31,
2004, primarily as a result of an increase in commercial
high-speed Internet revenues. The increase was reduced by
approximately $14 million as a result of the System Sales.
Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees,
telephone revenue, equipment rental, customer installations,
home shopping, dial-up Internet service, late payment fees, wire
maintenance fees and other miscellaneous revenues. For the year
ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, franchise fees represented
59
approximately 49% and 48%, respectively, of total other
revenues. Other revenues increased $1 million from
$335 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$336 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
increase was primarily the result of an increase in home
shopping and infomercial revenue and was partially offset by
approximately $11 million as a result of the System Sales.
Operating expenses increased $128 million, or 7%, from
$2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$2.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
increase in operating expenses was reduced by approximately
$59 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming
costs included in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations were $1.3 billion and $1.2 billion,
representing 63% and 64% of total operating expenses for the
years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Key
expense components as a percentage of revenues were as follows
(dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 over 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
1,319 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
$ |
1,249 |
|
|
|
26 |
% |
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Service
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,080 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
$ |
1,952 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers
for analog, premium and digital channels and pay-per-view
programming. The increase in programming costs of
$70 million, or 6%, for the year ended December 31,
2004 over the year ended December 31, 2003 was a result of
price increases, particularly in sports programming, an
increased number of channels carried on our systems, and an
increase in digital video customers, partially offset by a
decrease in analog video customers. Additionally, the increase
in programming costs was reduced by $42 million as a result
of the System Sales. Programming costs were offset by the
amortization of payments received from programmers in support of
launches of new channels of $59 million and
$62 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003, respectively. Programming costs for the year ended
December 31, 2004 also include a $5 million reduction
related to the settlement of a dispute with TechTV, Inc., a
related party. See Note 22 to the consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.
Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to
traditional advertising services provided to advertising
customers, including salaries, benefits and commissions.
Advertising sales expenses increased $10 million, or 11%,
primarily as a result of increased salary, benefit and
commission costs. The increase in advertising sales expenses was
reduced by $2 million as a result of the System Sales.
Service costs consist primarily of service personnel salaries
and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities, Internet service
provider fees, maintenance and pole rental expense. The increase
in service costs of $48 million, or 8%, resulted primarily
from additional activity associated with ongoing infrastructure
maintenance. The increase in service costs was reduced by
$15 million as a result of the System Sales.
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$31 million, or 3%, from $940 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 to $971 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004. The increase in
60
selling, general and administrative expenses was reduced by
$22 million as a result of the System Sales. Key components
of expense as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 over 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
849 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
833 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Marketing
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
971 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of
salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center
costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property
taxes. The increase in general and administrative expenses of
$16 million, or 2%, resulted primarily from increases in
costs associated with our commercial business of
$21 million, third party call center costs resulting from
increased emphasis on customer service of $10 million and
bad debt expense of $10 million offset by decreases in
costs associated with salaries and benefits of $21 million
and rent expense of $3 million.
Marketing expenses increased $15 million, or 14%, as a
result of an increased investment in marketing and branding
campaigns.
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
Depreciation and amortization expense increased by
$42 million, or 3%, to $1.5 billion in 2004. The
increase in depreciation related to an increase in capital
expenditures, which was partially offset by lower depreciation
as the result of the System Sales.
We performed an impairment assessment during the third quarter
of 2004. The use of lower projected growth rates and the
resulting revised estimates of future cash flows in our
valuation, primarily as a result of increased competition, led
to the recognition of a $2.4 billion impairment charge for
the year ended December 31, 2004.
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net |
Gain on sale of assets of $86 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 primarily represents the pretax gain of
$106 million realized on the sale of systems to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC which closed in March and April 2004
offset by losses recognized on the disposition of plant and
equipment. Loss on sale of assets of $5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 represents the loss recognized
on the disposition of plant and equipment offset by a gain of
$21 million recognized on the sale of cable systems in Port
Orchard, Washington which closed on October 1, 2003.
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net |
Option compensation expense of $31 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 primarily represents
$22 million related to options granted and expensed in
accordance with SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation. Additionally, during the year
ended December 31, 2004, we expensed approximately
$8 million related to a stock option exchange program,
under which our employees were offered the right to exchange all
stock options (vested and unvested) issued under the 1999
Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of
restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some
instances, cash. The exchange offer closed in February 2004.
Option compensation expense of $4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 primarily represents options
expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based
61
Compensation. See Note 19 to our consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus for
more information regarding our option compensation plans.
Special charges of $104 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 represents approximately $85 million
of aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and
warrants to purchase Charter Class A common stock
contemplated to be issued as part of a settlement of the
consolidated federal class actions, state derivative actions and
federal derivative action lawsuits, approximately
$10 million of litigation costs related to the tentative
settlement of a South Carolina national class action suit, all
of which settlements are subject to final documentation and
court approval and approximately $12 million of severance
and related costs of our workforce reduction and realignment.
Special charges for the year ended December 31, 2004 were
offset by $3 million received from a third party in
settlement of a dispute. Special charges of $21 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003 represents approximately
$26 million of severance and related costs of our workforce
reduction partially offset by a $5 million credit from a
settlement from the Internet service provider Excite@Home
related to the conversion of about 145,000 high-speed Internet
customers to our Charter Pipeline service in 2001.
|
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements |
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $5 million
for the year ended December 31, 2004 relates to changes in
estimated legal reserves established in connection with prior
business combinations, which based on an evaluation of current
facts and circumstances, are no longer required.
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $72 million
for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the
settlement of estimated liabilities recorded in connection with
prior business combinations. The majority of this benefit
(approximately $52 million) is due to the renegotiation in
2003 of a major programming contract, for which a liability had
been recorded for the above market portion of that agreement in
connection with a 1999 and a 2000 acquisition. The remaining
benefit relates to the reversal of previously recorded
liabilities, which are no longer required.
Net interest expense increased by $60 million, or 12%, from
$500 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$560 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
increase in net interest expense was a result of an increase in
our average borrowing rate from 5.72% in the year ended
December 31, 2003 to 6.79% in the year ended
December 31, 2004 offset by a decrease of $476 million
in average debt outstanding from $8.2 billion in 2003 to
$7.8 billion in 2004.
|
|
|
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities,
net |
Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities
increased $4 million from a gain of $65 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003 to a gain of
$69 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
increase is primarily the result of an increase in gains on
interest rate agreements that do not qualify for hedge
accounting under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, which
increased from a gain of $57 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 to a gain of $65 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. This was coupled with a
decrease in gains on interest rate agreements, as a result of
hedge ineffectiveness on designated hedges, which decreased from
$8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to
$4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
Loss on extinguishment of debt of $21 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 represents the write-off of
deferred financing fees and third party costs related to the
Charter Operating refinancing in April 2004.
62
Net other expense decreased by $12 million from
$9 million in 2003 to income of $3 million in 2004.
Other expense in 2003 included $11 million associated with
amending a revolving credit facility of our subsidiaries and
costs associated with terminated debt transactions that did not
recur in 2004. In addition, gains on equity investments
increased $3 million in 2004 over 2003.
Minority interest represents the 2% accretion of the preferred
membership interests in our indirect subsidiary, CC VIII, and
since June 6, 2003, the pro rata share of the profits and
losses of CC VIII.
|
|
|
Income tax benefit (expense) |
Income tax benefit of $35 million and income tax expense of
$13 million was recognized for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
The income tax benefit recognized in the year ended
December 31, 2004 was directly related to the impairment of
franchises as discussed above. The deferred tax liabilities of
our indirect corporate subsidiaries decreased as a result of the
write-down of franchise assets for financial statement purposes,
but not for tax purposes. We do not expect to recognize a
similar benefit associated with the impairment of franchises in
future periods. However, the actual tax provision calculations
in future periods will be the result of current and future
temporary differences, as well as future operating results.
The income tax expense recognized in the year ended
December 31, 2003 represents increases in the deferred tax
liabilities and current federal and state income tax expenses of
certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries.
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax |
Cumulative effect of accounting change of $840 million (net
of minority interest effects of $19 million and tax effects
of $16 million) in 2004 represents the impairment charge
recorded as a result of our adoption of EITF Topic D-108.
Net loss increased by $3.4 billion from net income of
$30 million in 2003 to net loss of $3.3 billion in
2004 as a result of the factors described above. The impact to
net loss in 2004 of the impairment of franchises and cumulative
effect of accounting change was to increase net loss by
approximately $3.0 billion. The impact to net income in
2003 of the gain on sale of systems and unfavorable contracts
and settlements, net of income tax impacts, was to increase net
income by $93 million.
Year Ended December 31, 2003 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2002
Revenues increased by $253 million, or 6%, from
$4.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to
$4.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This increase is principally the result of an increase of
427,500 high-speed Internet customers, as well as price
increases for video and high-speed Internet services, and is
offset partially by a decrease of 147,500 and 10,900 in analog
and digital video customers, respectively. Included within the
decrease of analog and digital video customers and reducing the
increase of high-speed Internet customers are 25,500 analog
video customers, 12,500 digital video customers and 12,200
high-speed Internet customers sold in the Port Orchard,
Washington sale on October 1, 2003.
Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased from
$56.91 for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $61.92 for
the year ended December 31, 2003 primarily as a result of
price increases and incremental revenues from advanced services.
Average monthly revenue per analog video
63
customer represents total annual revenue, divided by twelve,
divided by the average number of analog video customers during
the respective period.
Revenues by service offering were as follows (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 over 2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
3,461 |
|
|
|
72 |
% |
|
$ |
3,420 |
|
|
|
75 |
% |
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
65 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
)% |
Commercial
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
253 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and
digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers.
Video revenues increased by $41 million, or 1%, for the
year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2002. Video revenues increased approximately
$65 million due to price increases and incremental video
revenues from existing customers and $82 million as a
result of increases in the average number of digital video
customers, which were partially offset by a decrease of
approximately $106 million as a result of a decline in
analog video customers.
Revenues from high-speed Internet services provided to our
non-commercial customers increased $219 million, or 65%,
from $337 million for the year ended December 31, 2002
to $556 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
Approximately $206 million of the increase related to the
increase in the average number of customers, whereas
approximately $13 million related to the increase in the
average price of the service. The increase in customers was
primarily due to the addition of high-speed Internet customers
in our existing service areas. We were also able to offer this
service to more of our customers, as the estimated percentage of
homes passed that could receive high-speed Internet service
increased from 82% as of December 31, 2002 to 87% as of
December 31, 2003 as a result of our system upgrades.
Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from
commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors.
Advertising sales decreased $39 million, or 13%, from
$302 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, to
$263 million for the year ended December 31, 2003,
primarily as a result of a decrease in advertising from vendors
of approximately $64 million, offset partially by an
increase in local advertising sales revenues of approximately
$25 million. For the years ended December 31, 2003 and
2002, we received $15 million and $79 million,
respectively, in advertising revenue from vendors.
Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from video and
high-speed Internet services to our commercial customers.
Commercial revenues increased $43 million, or 27%, from
$161 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, to
$204 million for the year ended December 31, 2003,
primarily due to an increase in commercial high-speed Internet
revenues.
Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees,
equipment rental, customer installations, home shopping, dial-up
Internet service, late payment fees, wire maintenance fees and
other miscellaneous revenues. For the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, franchise fees represented
approximately 48% and 46%, respectively, of total other
revenues. Other revenues decreased $11 million, or 3%, from
$346 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to
$335 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
decrease was due primarily to a decrease in franchise fees after
an FCC ruling in March 2002, no longer requiring the collection
of franchise fees for high-speed Internet services. Franchise
fee revenues are collected from customers and remitted to
franchise authorities.
64
The decrease in accounts receivable of 29% compared to the
increase in revenues of 6% is primarily due to the timing of
collection of receivables from programmers for fees associated
with the launching of their networks, coupled with our tightened
credit and collections policy. These fees from programmers are
not recorded as revenue but, rather, are recorded as reductions
of programming expense on a straight-line basis over the term of
the contract. Programmer receivables decreased $40 million,
or 57%, from $70 million as of December 31, 2002 to
$30 million as of December 31, 2003.
Operating expenses increased $145 million, or 8%, from
$1.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to
$2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003.
Programming costs included in the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations were $1.2 billion and
$1.2 billion, representing 64% and 65% of total operating
expenses for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of revenues
were as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 over 2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
1,249 |
|
|
|
26 |
% |
|
$ |
1,166 |
|
|
|
26 |
% |
|
$ |
83 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
Service
|
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
554 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,952 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
$ |
1,807 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
$ |
145 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers
for analog, premium and digital channels and pay-per-view
programs. The increase in programming costs of $83 million,
or 7%, was due to price increases, particularly in sports
programming, and due to an increased number of channels carried
on our systems, partially offset by decreases in analog and
digital video customers. Programming costs were offset by the
amortization of payments received from programmers in support of
launches of new channels against programming costs of
$62 million and $57 million for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to
traditional advertising services provided to advertising
customers, including salaries and benefits and commissions.
Advertising sales expenses increased $1 million, or 1%,
primarily due to increased sales commissions, taxes and
benefits. Service costs consist primarily of service personnel
salaries and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities,
Internet service provider fees, maintenance and pole rental
expense. The increase in service costs of $61 million, or
11%, resulted primarily from additional activity associated with
ongoing infrastructure maintenance and customer service,
including activities associated with our promotional programs.
|
|
|
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses |
Selling, general and administrative expenses decreased by
$23 million, or 2%, from $963 million for the year
ended December 31, 2002 to $940 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003. Key components of expense as a
percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 over 2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
833 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
|
$ |
810 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Marketing
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
963 |
|
|
|
21 |
% |
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of
salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center
costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property
taxes. The increase in general and administrative expenses of
$23 million, or 3%, resulted primarily from increases in
salaries and benefits of $4 million, call center costs of
$25 million and internal network costs of $16 million.
These increases were partially offset by a decrease in bad debt
and collection expense of $27 million as a result of our
strengthened credit policies.
Marketing expenses decreased $46 million, or 30%, due to
reduced promotional activity related to our service offerings
including reductions in advertising, telemarketing and direct
sales activities.
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
Depreciation and amortization expense increased by
$17 million, or 1%, from $1.4 billion in 2002 to
$1.5 billion in 2003 due primarily to an increase in
depreciation expense related to additional capital expenditures
in 2003 and 2002.
We performed our annual impairment assessments as of
October 1, 2002 and 2003. Revised estimates of future cash
flows and the use of a lower projected long-term growth rate in
our valuation led to a $4.6 billion impairment charge in
the fourth quarter of 2002. Our 2003 assessment performed on
October 1, 2003 did not result in an impairment.
|
|
|
Loss on Sale of Assets, Net |
Loss on sale of assets for the year ended December 31, 2003
represents $26 million of losses related to the disposition
of fixed assets offset by the $21 million gain recognized
on the sale of cable systems in Port Orchard, Washington on
October 1, 2003. Loss on sale of assets for the year ended
December 31, 2002 represents losses related to the
disposition of fixed assets.
|
|
|
Option Compensation Expense, Net |
Option compensation expense decreased by $1 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2002. Option compensation expense includes
expense related to exercise prices on certain options that were
issued prior to Charters initial public offering in 1999
that were less than the estimated fair values of Charters
Class A common stock at the time of grant. Compensation
expense was recognized over the vesting period of such options
and was recorded until the last vesting period lapsed in April
2004. On January 1, 2003, we adopted
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, using the prospective method under which we
will recognize compensation expense of a stock-based award to an
employee over the vesting period based on the fair value of the
award on the grant date.
Special charges of $21 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 represent approximately $26 million
of severance and related costs of our ongoing initiative to
reduce our workforce partially offset by a $5 million
credit from a settlement from the Internet service provider
Excite@Home related to the conversion of about 145,000
high-speed Internet customers to our Charter Pipeline service in
2001. In the fourth quarter of 2002, we recorded a special
charge of $35 million, of which $31 million was
associated with our workforce reduction program. The remaining
$4 million is related to legal and other costs associated
with our shareholder lawsuits and governmental investigations.
|
|
|
Unfavorable Contracts and Other Settlements |
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $72 million
for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the
settlement of estimated liabilities recorded in connection with
prior business combinations.
66
The majority of this benefit (approximately $52 million) is
due to the renegotiation in 2003 of a major programming
contract, for which a liability had been recorded for the
above-market portion of that agreement in connection with a 1999
and a 2000 acquisition. The remaining benefit relates to the
reversal of previously recorded liabilities, which, based on an
evaluation of current facts and circumstances, are no longer
required.
Net interest expense decreased by $12 million, or 2%, from
$512 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to
$500 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
decrease in net interest expense was a result of a decrease in
our average borrowing rate from 5.9% in 2002 to 5.7% in 2003,
partially offset by increased average debt outstanding in 2003
of $8.2 billion compared to $7.5 billion in 2002. The
increased debt was primarily used for capital expenditures.
|
|
|
Gain (Loss) on Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, Net |
Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities
increased $180 million from a loss of $115 million for
the year ended December 31, 2002 to a gain of
$65 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
increase is primarily due to an increase in gains on interest
rate agreements, which do not qualify for hedge accounting under
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities, which increased from a loss of
$101 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to a
gain of $57 million for the year ended December 31,
2003.
Other expense increased by $12 million from income of
$3 million in 2002 to expense of $9 million in 2003.
This increase is primarily due to increases in costs associated
with amending a revolving credit facility of our subsidiaries
and costs associated with terminated debt transactions.
Minority interest expense represents the 10% dividend on
preferred membership units in our indirect subsidiary, Charter
Helicon, LLC and the 2% accretion of the preferred membership
interests in CC VIII and, since June 6, 2003, the pro rata
share of the profits of CC VIII. See Certain Relationships
and Related Transactions Transactions Arising Out of
Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allens
Investment in Charter and Its Subsidiaries Equity
Put Rights CC VIII.
|
|
|
Income Tax Benefit (Expense) |
Income tax expense of $13 million was recognized for the
year ended December 31, 2003. The income tax expense is
realized through increases in deferred tax liabilities and
federal and state income taxes related to our indirect corporate
subsidiaries. The income tax benefit of $216 million
recognized for the year ended December 31, 2002 was the
result of changes in deferred tax liabilities of certain of our
indirect corporate subsidiaries related to differences in
accounting for franchises.
|
|
|
Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change, Net of Tax |
Cumulative effect of accounting change in 2002 represents the
impairment charge recorded as a result of adopting
SFAS No. 142.
Net loss decreased by $5.3 billion, or 101%, from net loss
of $5.3 billion in 2002 to net income of $30 million
in 2003 as a result of the factors described above. The impact
of the gain on sale of system and unfavorable contracts and
settlements, net of income tax impacts, was to decrease net loss
by
67
$93 million in 2003. The impact of the impairment of
franchises and the cumulative effect of accounting change, net
of income tax impacts, was to increase net loss by
$5.1 billion in 2002.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
This section contains a discussion of our liquidity and capital
resources, including a discussion of our cash position, sources
and uses of cash, access to credit facilities and other
financing sources, historical financing activities, cash needs,
capital expenditures and outstanding debt.
Our business requires significant cash to fund debt service
costs, capital expenditures and ongoing operations. We have
historically funded our debt service costs, operating activities
and capital requirements through cash flows from operating
activities, borrowings under our credit facilities, equity
contributions from our parent companies, borrowings from our
parent companies, sales of assets, issuances of debt securities
and cash on hand. However, the mix of funding sources changes
from period to period. For the six months ended June 30,
2005, we generated $552 million of net cash flows from
operating activities after paying cash interest of
$308 million. In addition, we used approximately
$542 million for purchases of property, plant and
equipment. Finally, we had net cash flows used in financing
activities of $604 million, which included, among other
things, approximately $705 million in repayment of
borrowings under the Charter Operating revolving credit
facility. This repayment was the primary reason cash on hand
decreased by $524 million to $22 million at
June 30, 2005. We expect that our mix of sources of funds
will continue to change in the future based on overall needs
relative to our cash flow and on the availability of funds under
our credit facilities, our access to the debt markets, the
timing of possible asset sales and our ability to generate cash
flows from operating activities. We continue to explore asset
dispositions as one of several possible actions that we could
take in the future to improve our liquidity, but we do not
presently consider future asset sales as a significant source of
liquidity.
We expect that cash on hand, cash flows from operating
activities and the amounts available under our credit facilities
will be adequate to meet our and our parent companies cash
needs for the remainder of 2005. Cash flows from operating
activities and amounts available under our credit facilities may
not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy our and our
parent companies interest and principal repayment
obligations that come due in 2006 and, we believe, such amounts
will not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy such
interest and principal repayment obligations thereafter.
It is likely that we and our parent companies will require
additional funding to repay debt maturing after 2006. We have
been advised that Charter is working with its financial advisors
to address such funding requirements. However, there can be no
assurance that such funding will be available to us. Although
Mr. Allen and his affiliates have purchased equity from
Charter and Charter Holdco in the past, Mr. Allen and his
affiliates are not obligated to purchase equity from, contribute
to or loan funds to us or our parent companies in the future.
|
|
|
Credit Facilities and Covenants |
Our ability to operate depends upon, among other things, our
continued access to capital, including credit under the Charter
Operating credit facilities. These credit facilities, along with
our indentures, contain certain restrictive covenants, some of
which require us to maintain specified financial ratios and meet
financial tests and to provide audited financial statements with
an unqualified opinion from our independent auditors. As of
June 30, 2005, we are in compliance with the covenants
under our indentures and credit facilities and we expect to
remain in compliance with those covenants for the next twelve
months. As of June 30, 2005, we had borrowing availability
under our credit facilities of $870 million, none of which
was restricted due to covenants. Continued access to our credit
facilities is subject to our remaining in compliance with the
covenants of these credit facilities, including covenants tied
to our operating performance. If our operating performance
results in non-compliance with these covenants, or if
68
any of certain other events of non-compliance under these credit
facilities or indentures governing our debt occurs, funding
under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on
some or potentially all of our debt obligations could occur. An
event of default under the covenants governing any of our debt
instruments could result in the acceleration of our payment
obligations under that debt and, under certain circumstances, in
cross-defaults under our other debt obligations, which could
have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial
condition and results of operations.
The Charter Operating credit facilities required us to redeem
the CC V Holdings, LLC notes as a result of the Charter Holdings
leverage ratio becoming less than 8.75 to 1.0. In satisfaction
of this requirement, in March 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed
all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount,
plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. The
total cost of the redemption including accrued and unpaid
interest was approximately $122 million. We funded the
redemption with borrowings under the Charter Operating credit
facilities.
|
|
|
Parent Company Debt Obligations |
Any financial or liquidity problems of our parent companies
could cause serious disruption to our business and have a
material adverse effect on our business and results of
operations. A failure by Charter Holdings to satisfy its debt
payment obligations or a bankruptcy filing with respect to
Charter Holdings would give the lenders under the Charter
Operating credit facilities the right to accelerate the payment
obligations under these facilities. Any such acceleration would
be a default under the indenture governing our notes. As of
June 30, 2005, Charter had approximately $888 million
principal amount of senior convertible notes outstanding with
approximately $25 million and $863 million maturing in
2006 and 2009, respectively. During the six months ended
June 30, 2005, we distributed $450 million to
CCH II of which $60 million was subsequently
distributed to Charter Holdco. As of June 30, 2005, Charter
Holdco was owed $62 million in intercompany loans from its
subsidiaries, which amount was available to pay interest and
principal on Charters convertible senior notes. In
addition, Charter has $122 million of governmental
securities pledged as security for the next five semi-annual
interest payments on Charters 5.875% convertible
senior notes.
On September 28, 2005, Charter Holdings and its wholly owned
subsidiaries, CCH I and CIH, completed the exchange of
approximately $6.8 billion total principal amount of
outstanding debt securities of Charter Holdings in a private
placement for new debt securities. Holders of Charter Holdings
notes due in 2009-2010 tendered $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I notes due 2015. Holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $845 million principal amount of
notes for $662 million principal amount of 11% CCH I
notes due 2015. In addition, holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $2.5 billion principal amount of
notes for $2.5 billion principal amount of new CIH notes.
Each series of new CIH notes have the same coupon and provisions
for payment of cash interest as the series of old Charter
Holdings notes for which such CIH notes were exchanged. In
addition, the maturities for each series were extended three
years. In addition, on August 17, 2005, CCO Holdings issued
$300 million in debt securities, the proceeds of which will
be used for general corporate purposes, including the potential
payment of dividends or distributions to its parent companies,
including Charter Holdings, to pay interest expense.
As of June 30, 2005, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and
CCH II had approximately $10.1 billion principal
amount of high-yield notes outstanding with approximately
$105 million, $3.4 billion and $6.6 billion
maturing in 2007, 2009 and thereafter, respectively. As of
June 30, 2005, after giving effect to the exchange of
$3.4 billion principal amount of Charter Holdings
notes scheduled to mature in 2009 and 2010 for CCH I notes and
the exchange of $3.4 billion principal amount of Charter
Holdings notes scheduled to mature in 2011 and 2012 for
CIH notes and CCH I notes, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and
CCH II had approximately $9.4 billion principal amount
of high-yield notes outstanding with approximately
$105 million, $685 million and $8.6 billion
maturing in 2007, 2009 and thereafter, respectively. Charter,
Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and CCH II will need to raise
additional capital or receive distributions or payments from us
in order to satisfy their debt obligations. However, because of
their significant indebtedness, the ability of the parent
companies to raise additional capital at reasonable rates is
uncertain. Distributions by Charters subsidiaries to a
parent company (including Charter, Charter
69
Holdco, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and CCH II) for
payment of principal on the parent companies debt
obligations, however, are restricted by the indentures governing
the CIH notes, CCH I notes, CCH II notes, CCO Holdings, LLC
(CCO Holdings) notes, and Charter Operating notes,
unless under their respective indentures there is no default and
a specified leverage ratio test is met at the time of such event.
In accordance with the registration rights agreement entered
into with their initial sale, Charter was required to register
for resale by April 21, 2005 its 5.875% convertible
senior notes due 2009, issued in November 2004. Since these
convertible notes were not registered by that date, Charter paid
or will pay liquidated damages totaling $0.5 million
through July 14, 2005, the day prior to the effective date
of the registration statement. In addition, in accordance with
the share lending agreement entered into in connection with the
initial sale of Charters 5.875% convertible senior
notes due 2009, Charter was required to register by
April 1, 2005 150 million shares of its Class A
common stock that Charter was obligated to lend to Citigroup
Global Markets Limited (CGML) at CGMLs
request. Because this registration statement was not declared
effective by such date, Charter paid liquidated damages totaling
$11 million from April 2, 2005 through July 17,
2005, the day before the effective date of the registration
statement. The liquidated damages were recorded as interest
expense in Charters condensed consolidated statements of
operations included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
Specific Limitations at Charter Holdings |
The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit
Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for
payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior
notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter
Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under Charter Holdings
indentures and other specified tests are met. For the quarter
ended June 30, 2005, there was no default under Charter
Holdings indentures and other specified tests were met.
However, Charter Holdings did not meet the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0 based on June 30, 2005 financial results. As a
result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or
Charter Holdco are currently restricted and will continue to be
restricted until that test is met. During this restriction
period, the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes
permit Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to make specified
investments in Charter Holdco or Charter, up to an amount
determined by a formula, as long as there is no default under
the indentures.
In the past, our parent companies have accessed the equity and
high-yield debt markets as a source of capital to fund their
subsidiaries operations. We believe that our parent
companies continued access to the debt markets will depend
on market conditions in light of, among other things, their
significant levels of debt, their debt ratings, general economic
conditions, and the business condition of the cable,
telecommunications and technology industry. If they are unable
to raise the required capital on reasonable terms, our parent
companies could elect to cause us to distribute or otherwise pay
to them (to the extent available and permitted by the indentures
governing our notes) the necessary funds to pay principal and
interest amounts due on Charters, Charter Holdings,
CIHs, CCH Is or CCH IIs debt, which could
negatively impact our liquidity. If, at any time, additional
capital or borrowing capacity is required beyond amounts
internally generated or available under our credit facilities or
through additional debt financings, we would consider:
|
|
|
|
|
issuing debt or equity at the parent companies, the proceeds of
which could be loaned or contributed to us; |
|
|
|
issuing debt securities that may have structural or other
priority over our original notes; |
|
|
|
further reducing our expenses and capital expenditures, which
may impair our ability to increase revenue; |
|
|
|
selling assets; or |
|
|
|
requesting waivers or amendments with respect to our credit
facilities, the availability and terms of which would be subject
to market conditions. |
70
If the above strategies are not successful, we could be forced
to restructure our obligations or seek protection under the
bankruptcy laws. In addition, if we find it necessary to engage
in a recapitalization or other similar transaction, our
noteholders might not receive principal and interest payments to
which they are contractually entitled.
In March 2004, we closed the sale of certain cable systems in
Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia to
Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC. We closed the sale of an
additional cable system in New York to Atlantic Broadband
Finance, LLC in April 2004. The total net proceeds from the sale
of all of these systems were approximately $735 million.
The proceeds were used to repay a portion of amounts outstanding
under our revolving credit facility.
|
|
|
Issuance of Charter Operating Notes in Exchange for
Charter Holdings Notes. |
In March and June 2005, our subsidiary, Charter Operating,
consummated exchange transactions with a small number of
institutional holders of Charter Holdings 8.25% Senior
Notes due 2007 pursuant to which Charter Operating issued, in
private placement, approximately $333 million principal
amount of its 8.375% senior second lien Notes due 2014 in
exchange for approximately $346 million of the Charter
Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007. The Charter Holdings
notes received in the exchange were thereafter distributed to
Charter Holdings and cancelled.
|
|
|
Summary of Outstanding Contractual Obligations |
The following table summarizes our payment obligations as of
December 31, 2004 under our long-term debt and certain
other contractual obligations and commitments (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments by Period | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Less than | |
|
1-3 | |
|
3-5 | |
|
More than | |
|
|
Total | |
|
1 Year | |
|
Years | |
|
Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Contractual Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt Principal Payments(1)
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
310 |
|
|
$ |
1,637 |
|
|
$ |
6,315 |
|
Long-Term Debt Interest Payments(2)
|
|
|
3,942 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
|
|
1,154 |
|
|
|
976 |
|
Payments on Interest Rate Instruments(3)
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital and Operating Lease Obligations(1)
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Programming Minimum Commitments(4)
|
|
|
1,579 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other(5)
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
14,254 |
|
|
$ |
1,056 |
|
|
$ |
2,426 |
|
|
$ |
3,396 |
|
|
$ |
7,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The table presents maturities of long-term debt outstanding as
of December 31, 2004 and does not reflect the effects of
the March 2005 redemption of the CC V Holdings, LLC notes. Refer
to Description of Other Indebtedness and
Notes 9 and 23 to our December 31, 2004 consolidated
financial statements included in this prospectus for a
description of our long-term debt and other contractual
obligations and commitments. |
|
(2) |
Interest payments on variable debt are estimated using amounts
outstanding at December 31, 2004 and the average implied
forward London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) rates
applicable for the quarter during the interest rate reset based
on the yield curve in effect at December 31, 2004. Actual
interest payments will differ based on actual LIBOR rates and
actual amounts outstanding for applicable periods. |
|
(3) |
Represents amounts we will be required to pay under our interest
rate hedge agreements estimated using the average implied
forward LIBOR rates applicable for the quarter during the
interest rate reset based on the yield curve in effect at
December 31, 2004. |
71
|
|
(4) |
We pay programming fees under multi-year contracts generally
ranging from three to six years typically based on a flat fee
per customer, which may be fixed for the term or may in some
cases, escalate over the term. Programming costs included in the
accompanying statements of operations were $1.3 billion,
$1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Certain of
our programming agreements are based on a flat fee per month or
have guaranteed minimum payments. The table sets forth the
aggregate guaranteed minimum commitments under our programming
contracts. |
|
(5) |
Other represents other guaranteed minimum
commitments, which consist primarily of commitments to our
billing services vendors. |
The following items are not included in the contractual
obligations table because the obligations are not fixed and/or
determinable due to various factors discussed below. However, we
incur these costs as part of our operations:
|
|
|
|
|
We also rent utility poles used in our operations. Generally,
pole rentals are cancelable on short notice, but we anticipate
that such rentals will recur. Rent expense incurred for pole
rental attachments for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, was $43 million, $40 million and
$41 million, respectively. |
|
|
|
We pay franchise fees under multi-year franchise agreements
based on a percentage of revenues earned from video service per
year. We also pay other franchise-related costs, such as public
education grants under multi-year agreements. Franchise fees and
other franchise-related costs included in the accompanying
statements of operations were $164 million,
$162 million and $160 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. |
|
|
|
We also have $166 million in letters of credit, primarily
to our various workers compensation, property casualty and
general liability carriers as collateral for reimbursement of
claims. These letters of credit reduce the amount we may borrow
under our credit facilities. |
|
|
|
Historical Operating, Financing and Investing
Activities |
We held $22 million in cash and cash equivalents as of
June 30, 2005 compared to $546 million as of
December 31, 2004. The decrease in cash and cash
equivalents reflects the repayment of approximately
$705 million of borrowings under our revolving credit
facility through a series of transactions in February 2005.
Operating Activities. Net cash provided by
operating activities increased $74 million, or 15%, from
$478 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to
$552 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, net cash provided
by operating activities increased primarily as a result of
changes in operating assets and liabilities that used
$91 million less cash during the six months ended
June 30, 2005 than the corresponding period in 2004
combined with an increase in revenue over cash costs year over
year partially offset by an increase in cash interest expense of
$59 million over the corresponding prior period.
Net cash provided by operating activities decreased
$149 million, or 11%, from $1.3 billion for the year
ended December 31, 2003 to $1.2 billion for the year
ended December 31, 2004. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, net cash provided by operating
activities decreased primarily as a result of changes in
operating assets and liabilities that used $70 million more
cash during the year ended December 31, 2004 than the
corresponding period in 2003 and an increase in cash interest
expense of $73 million over the corresponding prior period.
The change in operating assets and liabilities is primarily the
result of the benefit in the year ended December 31, 2003
from collection of receivables from programmers related to
network launches, while accounts receivable remained essentially
flat in the year ended December 31, 2004.
Net cash flows from operating activities provided
$9 million less cash in 2003 than in 2002 primarily due to
changes in operating assets and liabilities that provided
$155 million less cash in 2003 than in 2002, partially
offset by an increase in revenue over cash costs year over year.
72
Investing Activities. Net cash used by investing
activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was
$472 million and net cash provided by investing activities
for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was
$307 million. Investing activities used $779 million
more cash during the six months ended June 30, 2005 than
the corresponding period in 2004 primarily as a result of
proceeds from the sale of certain cable systems to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC in 2004 and increased cash used for
capital expenditures in 2005.
Net cash used in investing activities for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $191 million and
$757 million, respectively. Investing activities used
$566 million less cash during the year ended
December 31, 2004 than the corresponding period in 2003
primarily as a result of cash provided by proceeds from the sale
of certain cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC
offset by increased cash used for capital expenditures.
Net cash flows from investing activities used $1.5 billion
less cash in 2003 than in 2002 primarily as a result of
reductions in capital expenditures and acquisitions. Purchases
of property, plant and equipment used $1.3 billion less
cash in 2003 than in 2002 as a result of reduced rebuild and
upgrade activities and our efforts to reduce capital
expenditures. Payments for acquisitions used $139 million
less cash in 2003 than in 2002.
Financing Activities. Net cash used in financing
activities decreased $178 million from $782 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2004 to $604 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2005. The decrease in
cash used during the six months ended June 30, 2005 as
compared to the corresponding period in 2004, was primarily the
result of a decrease in payments for debt issuance costs and in
net repayments of long-term debt offset partially by an increase
in distributions to parent company.
Net cash used in financing activities for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $515 million and
$784 million, respectively. The decrease in cash used
during the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the
corresponding period in 2003, was primarily the result of an
increase in borrowings of long-term debt and proceeds from
issuance of debt reduced by repayments of long-term debt.
Net cash flows from financing activities provided
$2.1 billion less cash in 2003 than in 2002. The decrease
in cash provided in 2003 compared to 2002 was primarily due to a
decrease in borrowings of long-term debt.
We have significant ongoing capital expenditure requirements.
However, we experienced a significant decline in such
requirements starting in 2003. This decline was primarily the
result of a substantial reduction in rebuild costs as our
network had been largely upgraded and rebuilt in prior years.
Capital expenditures, excluding acquisitions of cable systems,
were $542 million, $380 million $893 million,
$804 million and $2.1 billion for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The
majority of the capital expenditures in 2004 and 2003 related to
our customer premise equipment costs. The majority of the
capital expenditures in 2002 related to our rebuild and upgrade
program and purchases of customer premise equipment. Capital
expenditures for the six months ended June 30, 2005
increased as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004
as a result of increased spending on support capital related to
our investment in service improvements; scalable infrastructure
related to telephone services, VOD and digital simulcast; and
customer premise equipment primarily related to the continued
demand for advanced digital set-top terminals. See the table
below for more details.
Upgrading our cable systems has enabled us to offer digital
television, high-speed Internet services, VOD, interactive
services, additional channels and tiers, expanded pay-per-view
options and telephone service to a larger customer base. Our
capital expenditures are funded primarily from cash flows from
operating activities, the issuance of debt and borrowings under
credit facilities. In addition, during the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, our
73
liabilities related to capital expenditures increased
$48 million and decreased $38 million,
$33 million, $41 million and $49 million,
respectively.
During 2005, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately
$1 billion. The increase in capital expenditures for 2005
compared to 2004 is the result of expected increases in
telephone services and deployment of advanced digital set-top
terminals. We expect that the nature of these expenditures will
continue to be composed primarily of purchases of customer
premise equipment, support capital and for scalable
infrastructure costs. We expect to fund capital expenditures for
2005 primarily from cash flows from operating activities and
borrowings under our credit facilities.
We have adopted capital expenditure disclosure guidance, which
was developed by eleven publicly traded cable system operators,
including Charter, with the support of the National
Cable & Telecommunications Association
(NCTA). The disclosure is intended to provide more
consistency in the reporting of operating statistics in capital
expenditures and customers among peer companies in the cable
industry. These disclosure guidelines are not required
disclosure under GAAP, nor do they impact our accounting for
capital expenditures under GAAP.
The following table presents our major capital expenditures
categories in accordance with NCTA disclosure guidelines for the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
For the Years Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Customer premise equipment(a)
|
|
$ |
228 |
|
|
$ |
217 |
|
|
$ |
451 |
|
|
$ |
380 |
|
|
$ |
740 |
|
Scalable infrastructure(b)
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
Line extensions(c)
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Upgrade/ Rebuild(d)
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
Support capital(e)
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital expenditures(f)
|
|
$ |
542 |
|
|
$ |
380 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
804 |
|
|
$ |
2,095 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Customer premise equipment includes costs incurred at the
customer residence to secure new customers, revenue units and
additional bandwidth revenues. It also includes customer
installation costs in accordance with SFAS 51 and customer
premise equipment (e.g., set-top terminals and cable modems,
etc.). |
|
(b) |
Scalable infrastructure includes costs, not related to customer
premise equipment or our network, to secure growth of new
customers, revenue units and additional bandwidth revenues or
provide service enhancements (e.g., headend equipment). |
|
(c) |
Line extensions include network costs associated with entering
new service areas (e.g., fiber/coaxial cable, amplifiers,
electronic equipment, make-ready and design engineering). |
|
(d) |
Upgrade/rebuild includes costs to modify or replace existing
fiber/coaxial cable networks, including betterments. |
|
(e) |
Support capital includes costs associated with the replacement
or enhancement of non-network assets due to technological and
physical obsolescence (e.g., non-network equipment, land,
buildings and vehicles). |
|
|
(f) |
Represents all capital expenditures made during the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. |
74
Interest Rate Risk
We are exposed to various market risks, including fluctuations
in interest rates. We use interest rate risk management
derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements
and interest rate collar agreements (collectively referred to
herein as interest rate agreements) as required under the terms
of the credit facilities of our subsidiaries. Our policy is to
manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate
debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, we agree to exchange,
at specified intervals through 2007, the difference between
fixed and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to
an agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar
agreements are used to limit our exposure to, and to derive
benefits from, interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt
to within a certain range of rates. Interest rate risk
management agreements are not held or issued for speculative or
trading purposes.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, long-term
debt totaled approximately $8.4 billion and
$8.3 billion, respectively. This debt was comprised of
approximately $5.4 billion and $5.5 billion of credit
facility debt and $3.0 billion and $2.8 billion
accreted value of high-yield notes, respectively. As of
June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the weighted
average interest rate on the credit facility debt, was
approximately 7.2% and 6.8%, respectively, and the weighted
average interest rate on the high-yield notes was approximately
8.2% and 8.2%, respectively, resulting in a blended weighted
average interest rate of 7.5% and 7.3%, respectively. The
interest rate on approximately 55% and 59% of the total
principal amount of our debt was effectively fixed including the
effects of our interest rate hedge agreements as of
June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The
fair value of our high-yield notes was $2.9 billion and
$2.9 billion at June 30, 2005 and December 31,
2004, respectively. The fair value of our credit facilities was
$5.4 billion and $5.5 billion at June 30, 2005
and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of
high-yield notes is based on quoted market prices and the fair
value of the credit facilities is based on dealer quotations.
We do not hold or issue derivative instruments for trading
purposes. We do, however, have certain interest rate derivative
instruments that have been designated as cash flow hedging
instruments. Such instruments effectively convert variable
interest payments on certain debt instruments into fixed
payments. For qualifying hedges, SFAS No. 133 allows
derivative gains and losses to offset related results on hedged
items in the consolidated statement of operations. We have
formally documented, designated and assessed the effectiveness
of transactions that receive hedge accounting. For the six
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on
derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of
$1 million, $2 million, $4 million and
$8 million and losses of $14 million, respectively,
which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate
hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical
terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations.
Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated
as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows
associated with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the
effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133 are reported in
accumulated other comprehensive loss. For the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, a gain of
$9 million, $29 million, $42 million and
$48 million and losses of $65 million, respectively,
related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow
hedges, was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss and
minority interest. The amounts are subsequently reclassified
into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period
in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt
obligations affects earnings (losses).
Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated
as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria
specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management
believes such instruments are closely correlated with the
respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate
derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to
fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on
derivative instruments and hedging activities in our statements
of operations. For the six months ended June 30, 2005 and
2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities
includes gains of $25 million, $54 million,
$65 million and $57 million and losses of
$101 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative
instruments not designated as hedges.
75
The table set forth below summarizes the fair values and
contract terms of financial instruments subject to interest rate
risk maintained by us as of December 31, 2004 (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2008 | |
|
2009 | |
|
Thereafter | |
|
Total | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
227 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,227 |
|
|
$ |
2,313 |
|
|
|
Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.93 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.26 |
% |
|
|
8.54 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Variable Rate
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
280 |
|
|
$ |
630 |
|
|
$ |
780 |
|
|
$ |
4,315 |
|
|
$ |
6,065 |
|
|
$ |
6,052 |
|
|
|
Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
6.47 |
% |
|
|
7.08 |
% |
|
|
7.17 |
% |
|
|
7.45 |
% |
|
|
7.73 |
% |
|
|
8.40 |
% |
|
|
8.14 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable to Fixed Swaps
|
|
$ |
990 |
|
|
$ |
873 |
|
|
$ |
775 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,638 |
|
|
$ |
69 |
|
|
|
Average Pay Rate
|
|
|
7.94 |
% |
|
|
8.23 |
% |
|
|
8.04 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.07 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Receive Rate
|
|
|
6.36 |
% |
|
|
7.08 |
% |
|
|
7.20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.85 |
% |
|
|
|
|
The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not
represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a
measure of our exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged
are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other
terms of the contracts. The estimated fair value approximates
the costs (proceeds) to settle the outstanding contracts.
Interest rates on variable debt are estimated using the average
implied forward London Interbank Offering Rate
(LIBOR) rates for the year of maturity based on the yield
curve in effect at December 31, 2004.
At June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, we had
outstanding $2.2 billion and $2.7 billion and
$20 million and $20 million, respectively, in notional
amounts of interest rate swaps and collars, respectively. The
notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent
amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of
exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by
reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the
contracts.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued SFAS No. 153, Exchanges of
Non-monetary Assets An Amendment of APB No. 29.
This statement eliminates the exception to fair value for
exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it with a
general exception for exchange transactions that do not have
commercial substance that is, transactions that are
not expected to result in significant changes in the cash flows
of the reporting entity. We adopted this pronouncement effective
April 1, 2005. The exchange transaction discussed in
Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements included
elsewhere in this prospectus, was accounted for under this
standard.
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
issued the revised SFAS No. 123, Share-Based Payment,
which addresses the accounting for share-based payment
transactions in which a company receives employee services in
exchange for (a) equity instruments of that company or
(b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the
companys equity instruments or that may be settled by the
issuance of such equity instruments. This statement will be
effective for us beginning January 1, 2006. Because we
adopted the fair value recognition provisions of
SFAS No. 123 on January 1, 2003, we do not expect
this revised standard to have a material impact on our financial
statements.
We do not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet
effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would have a
material effect on our accompanying financial statements.
76
BUSINESS
Overview
CCO Holdings is an indirect subsidiary of Charter and Charter
Holdings, and a direct subsidiary of CCH II. We are a
broadband communications company operating in the United States,
with approximately 6.19 million customers at June 30,
2005. Through our broadband network of coaxial and fiber optic
cable, we offer our customers traditional cable video
programming (analog and digital, which we refer to as
video service), high-speed cable Internet access,
advanced broadband cable services (such as video on demand
(VOD), high definition television service and
interactive television) and, in some of our markets, we offer
telephone service. See Business Products and
Services for further description of these terms, including
customers.
At June 30, 2005, we served approximately 5.94 million
analog video customers, of which approximately 2.69 million
were also digital video customers. We also served approximately
2.02 million high-speed Internet customers (including
approximately 234,600 who received only high-speed Internet
services). We also provided telephone service to approximately
67,800 customers as of that date.
At June 30, 2005, our investment in cable properties,
long-term debt and total members equity was
$15.9 billion, $8.4 billion and $5.6 billion,
respectively. Our working capital deficit was $831 million
at June 30, 2005. For the six months ended June 30,
2005, our revenues were approximately $2.6 billion.
We have a history of net losses. Further, we expect to continue
to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses
are principally attributable to insufficient revenue to cover
the interest costs we incur because of our high level of debt,
the depreciation expenses that we incur resulting from the
capital investments we have made in our cable properties, and
the amortization and impairment of our franchise intangibles. We
expect that these expenses (other than impairment of franchises)
will remain significant, and we therefore expect to continue to
report net losses for the foreseeable future.
Charter was organized as a Delaware corporation in 1999 and
completed an initial public offering of its Class A common
stock in November 1999. Charter is a holding company whose
principal assets are an approximate 47% equity interest and a
100% voting interest in Charter Holdco, the direct parent of
Charter Holdings. Charter also holds certain preferred equity
and indebtedness of Charter Holdco that mirror the terms of
securities issued by Charter. Charters only business is to
act as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries.
As sole manager, Charter controls the affairs of Charter Holdco
and its subsidiaries. Certain of our subsidiaries commenced
operations under the Charter Communications name in
1994, and our growth to date has been primarily due to
acquisitions and business combinations, most notably
acquisitions completed from 1999 through 2001, pursuant to which
we acquired a total of approximately 5.5 million customers.
We do not expect to make any significant acquisitions in the
foreseeable future, but plan to evaluate opportunities to
consolidate our operations through exchanges of cable systems
with other cable operators, as they arise. We may also sell
certain assets from time to time. Paul G. Allen owns
approximately 53% of Charter Holdco through affiliated entities.
His membership units are convertible at any time for shares of
Charters Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis.
Paul G. Allen controls Charter with an as-converted common
equity interest of approximately 57% and a beneficial voting
control interest of approximately 93% as of June 30, 2005.
Business Strategy
Our principal financial goal is to maximize our return on
invested capital. To do so, we will focus on increasing
revenues, growing our customer base, improving customer
retention and enhancing customer satisfaction by providing
reliable, high-quality service offerings, superior customer
service and attractive bundled offerings.
77
Specifically, in the near term, we are focusing on:
|
|
|
|
|
improving the overall value to our customers of our service
offerings, relative to pricing; |
|
|
|
developing more sophisticated customer care capabilities through
investment in our customer care and marketing infrastructure,
including targeted marketing capabilities; |
|
|
|
executing growth strategies for new services, including digital
simulcast, VOD, telephone, and digital video recorder service
(DVR); |
|
|
|
managing our operating costs by exercising discipline in capital
and operational spending; and |
|
|
|
identifying opportunities to continue to improve our balance
sheet and liquidity. |
We have begun an internal operational improvement initiative
aimed at helping us gain new customers and retain existing
customers, which is focused on customer care, technical
operations and sales. We intend to increase efforts to focus
management attention on instilling a customer service oriented
culture throughout the company and to give those areas of our
operations increased priority of resources for staffing levels,
training budgets and financial incentives for employee
performance in those areas.
We believe that our high-speed Internet service will continue to
provide a substantial portion of our revenue growth in the near
future. We also plan to continue to expand our marketing of
high-speed Internet service to the business community, which we
believe has shown an increasing interest in high-speed Internet
service and private network services. Additionally, we plan to
continue to prepare additional markets for telephone launches in
2005.
We believe we offer our customers an excellent choice of
services through a variety of bundled packages, particularly
with respect to our digital video and high-speed Internet
services as well as telephone in certain markets. Our digital
platform enables us to offer a significant number and variety of
channels, and we offer customers the opportunity to choose among
groups of channel offerings, including premium channels, and to
combine selected programming with other services such as
high-speed Internet, high definition television (in selected
markets) and VOD (in selected markets).
We and our parent companies continue to pursue opportunities to
improve our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in
the completion of a number of transactions in 2004 and 2005, as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the September 2005 exchange by Charter Holdings, CCH I and
CIH, our indirect parent companies, of approximately
$6.8 billion in total principal amount of outstanding debt
securities of Charter Holdings in a private placement for new
debt securities; |
|
|
|
the August 2005 sale by us of $300 million of original
notes due 2013; |
|
|
|
the March and June 2005 issuance of $333 million of Charter
Communications Operating, LLC (Charter Operating)
notes in exchange for $346 million of Charter Holdings
notes; |
|
|
|
the March and June 2005 repurchase of $131 million of
Charters 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006
leaving $25 million in principal amount outstanding; |
|
|
|
the March 2005 redemption of all of CC V Holdings,
LLCs outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due
2008 at a total cost of $122 million; |
|
|
|
the December 2004 sale by us of $550 million of senior
floating rate notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the November 2004 sale by Charter, our indirect parent company,
of $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes
due 2009 and the December 2004 redemption of all of
Charters outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes
due 2005 ($588 million principal amount); |
|
|
|
the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second lien
notes by our subsidiary, Charter Operating, together with the
concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and |
|
|
|
the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for
a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to
reduce indebtedness. |
78
Charter Background
In 1998, Mr. Allen acquired approximately 99% of the
non-voting economic interests in Marcus Cable, which owned
various operating subsidiaries that served approximately
1.1 million customers. Thereafter, in December 1998,
Mr. Allen acquired, through a series of transactions,
approximately 94% of the equity interests of Charter Investment,
Inc., which controlled various operating subsidiaries that
serviced approximately 1.2 million customers.
In March and April of 1999, Mr. Allen acquired the
remaining interests in Marcus Cable and, through a series of
transactions, combined the Marcus companies with the Charter
companies. As a consequence, the former operating subsidiaries
of Marcus Cable and all of the cable systems they owned came
under the ownership of Charter Holdings.
In July 1999, Charter was formed as a wholly owned subsidiary of
Charter Investment, Inc., and in November 1999, Charter
completed its initial public offering.
During 1999 and 2000, Charter completed 16 cable system
acquisitions for a total purchase price of $14.7 billion
including $9.1 billion in cash, $3.3 billion of
assumed debt, $1.9 billion of equity interests issued and
Charter cable systems valued at $420 million. These
transactions resulted in a net total increase of approximately
3.9 million customers as of their respective dates of
acquisition.
In February 2001, Charter entered into several agreements with
AT&T Broadband, LLC involving several strategic cable system
transactions that resulted in a net addition of customers for
our systems. In the AT&T transactions, which closed in June
2001, Charter acquired cable systems from AT&T Broadband
serving approximately 551,000 customers for a total of
$1.74 billion consisting of $1.71 billion in cash and
a Charter cable system valued at $25 million. In 2001,
Charter also acquired all of the outstanding stock of
Cable USA, Inc. and the assets of certain of its related
affiliates in exchange for consideration valued at
$100 million (consisting of Series A preferred stock
with a face amount of $55 million and the remainder in cash
and assumed debt).
During 2002, Charter purchased additional cable systems in
Illinois serving approximately 28,000 customers, for a total
cash purchase price of approximately $63 million.
For additional information regarding Charters acquisitions
see Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Acquisitions.
In 2003 and 2004, Charter sold certain non-core cable systems
serving approximately 264,100 customers in Florida,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, West Virginia and Washington
for an aggregate consideration of approximately
$826 million.
Products and Services
We offer our customers traditional cable video programming
(analog and digital video) as well as high-speed Internet
services and in some areas advanced broadband services such as
high definition television, VOD and interactive television. We
sell our video programming and high-speed Internet services on a
subscription basis, with prices and related charges, that vary
primarily based on the types of service selected, whether the
services are sold as a bundle versus on an a
la carte basis, and the equipment necessary to receive the
services, with some variation in prices depending on geographic
location. In addition, we offer telephone service to a limited
number of customers.
79
The following table summarizes our customer statistics for
analog and digital video, residential high-speed Internet, and
residential telephone as of June 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate as of | |
|
|
| |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2005(a) | |
|
2004(a) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cable Video Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog Video:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential (non-bulk) analog video customers(b)
|
|
|
5,683,400 |
|
|
|
5,892,600 |
|
|
|
Multi-dwelling (bulk) and commercial unit customers(c)
|
|
|
259,700 |
|
|
|
240,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog video customers(b)(c)
|
|
|
5,943,100 |
|
|
|
6,133,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital Video:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital video customers(d)
|
|
|
2,685,600 |
|
|
|
2,650,200 |
|
Non-Video Cable Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential high-speed Internet customers(e)
|
|
|
2,022,200 |
|
|
|
1,711,400 |
|
|
|
Telephone customers(f)
|
|
|
67,800 |
|
|
|
31,200 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Customers include all persons our corporate billing
records show as receiving service (regardless of their payment
status), except for complimentary accounts (such as our
employees). In addition, at June 30, 2005 and 2004,
customers include approximately 45,100 and
58,700 persons whose accounts were over 60 days past
due in payment, approximately 8,200 and 6,300 persons whose
accounts were over 90 days past due in payment, and
approximately 4,500 and 2,000 of which were over 120 days
past due in payment, respectively. |
|
(b) |
|
Residential (non-bulk) analog video customers
include all customers who receive video services, except for
complimentary accounts (such as our employees). |
|
(c) |
|
Included within video customers are those in
commercial and multi-dwelling structures, which are calculated
on an equivalent bulk unit (EBU) basis. EBU is
calculated for a system by dividing the bulk price charged to
accounts in an area by the most prevalent price charged to
non-bulk residential customers in that market for the comparable
tier of service. The EBU method of estimating analog video
customers is consistent with the methodology used in determining
costs paid to programmers and has been consistently applied year
over year. As we increase our effective analog prices to
residential customers without a corresponding increase in the
prices charged to commercial service or multi-dwelling
customers, our EBU count will decline even if there is no real
loss in commercial service or multi-dwelling customers. |
|
(d) |
|
Digital video customers include all households that
have one or more digital set-top terminals. Included in
digital video customers on June 30, 2005 and
2004 are approximately 9,700 and 11,400 customers,
respectively, that receive digital video service directly
through satellite transmission. |
|
(e) |
|
High-speed Internet customers represent those
customers who subscribe to our high-speed Internet service. At
June 30, 2005 and 2004, approximately 1,787,600 and
1,543,000 of these high-speed Internet customers, respectively,
also receive video services from us and are included within our
video statistics above. |
|
(f) |
|
Telephone customers include all households receiving
telephone service. |
Video Services
Our video service offerings include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Analog Video. All of our video customers
receive a package of basic programming, which generally consists
of local broadcast television, local community programming,
including governmental and public access, and limited
satellite-delivered or non-broadcast channels, such as weather,
shopping and religious services. Our basic channel line-up
generally has between 15 and 30 channels. |
80
|
|
|
|
|
Expanded Basic Video. This expanded programming
level includes a package of satellite-delivered or non-broadcast
channels and generally has between 30 and 50 channels in
addition to the basic channel line-up. |
|
|
|
Premium Channels. These channels provide
commercial-free movies, sports and other special event
entertainment programming. Although we offer subscriptions to
premium channels on an individual basis, we offer an increasing
number of premium channel packages and we offer premium channels
with our advanced services. |
|
|
|
Pay-Per-View. These channels allow customers to
pay on a per event basis to view a single showing of a recently
released movie, a one-time special sporting event, music concert
or similar event on a commercial-free basis. |
|
|
|
Digital Video. We offer digital video service to
our customers in several different service combination packages.
All of our digital packages include a digital set-top terminal,
an interactive electronic programming guide, an expanded menu of
pay-per-view channels and the option to also receive digital
packages which range from 4 to 30 additional video
channels. We also offer our customers certain digital packages
with one or more premium channels that give customers access to
several different versions of the same premium channel. Some
digital tier packages focus on the interests of a particular
customer demographic and emphasize, for example, sports, movies,
family or ethnic programming. In addition to video programming,
digital video service enables customers to receive our advanced
services such as VOD and high definition television. Other
digital packages bundle digital television with our advanced
services, such as high-speed Internet services. |
|
|
|
Video On Demand and Subscription Video On Demand.
We offer VOD service, which allows customers to access hundreds
of movies and other programming at any time with digital picture
quality. In some systems we also offer subscription VOD
(SVOD) for a monthly fee or included in a digital tier
premium channel subscription. |
|
|
|
High Definition Television. High definition
television offers our digital customers video programming at a
higher resolution than the standard analog or digital video
image. |
|
|
|
Digital Video Recorder. DVR service enables
customers to digitally record programming and to pause and
rewind live programming. |
|
|
|
High-Speed Internet Services |
We offer high-speed Internet services to our residential and
commercial customers primarily via cable modems attached to
personal computers. We generally offer our high-speed Internet
service as Charter High-Speed
Internettm.
We also offer traditional dial-up Internet access in a very
limited number of our markets.
We ended the second quarter of 2005 with 18% penetration of
high-speed Internet homes passed, an increase from 16%
penetration of high-speed Internet homes passed at June 30,
2004. This gave us a percentage increase in high-speed Internet
customers of 18% and an increase in high-speed Internet revenues
of 26% in the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to
the six months ended June 30, 2004.
We continue to deploy voice communications services using VoIP
to transmit digital voice signals over our systems. At
June 30, 2005, our telephone service was available to
approximately 1.7 million homes and we were marketing to
approximately 60% of those homes. We will continue to prepare
additional markets for VoIP launches in 2005.
81
We offer integrated network solutions to commercial and
institutional customers. These solutions include high-speed
Internet and video services. In addition, we offer high-speed
Internet services to small businesses.
We receive revenues from the sale of local advertising on
satellite-delivered networks such as MTV, CNN and ESPN. In any
particular market, we generally insert local advertising on up
to 39 channels. Our system rebuilds have increased the
number of available channels on which we are able to insert
local advertising. We also provide cross-channel advertising to
some programmers.
From time to time, certain of our vendors, including equipment
vendors, have purchased advertising from us. For the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and the years ending December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002, we had advertising revenues from vendors of
approximately $7 million, $16 million,
$15 million and $79 million, respectively. These
revenues resulted from purchases at market rates pursuant to
binding agreements.
Pricing of Our Products and Services
Our revenues are derived principally from the monthly fees our
customers pay for the services we offer. A one-time installation
fee, which is sometimes waived or discounted during certain
promotional periods, is charged to new customers. The prices we
charge vary based on the level of service the customer chooses
and the geographic market. Most of our pricing is reviewed and
adjusted on an annual basis.
In accordance with the Federal Communications Commissions
rules, the prices we charge for cable-related equipment, such as
set-top terminals and remote control devices, and for
installation services are based on actual costs plus a permitted
rate of return.
Although our cable service offerings vary across the markets we
serve because of various factors including competition and
regulatory factors, our services, when offered on a stand-alone
basis, are typically offered at monthly price ranges, excluding
franchise fees and other taxes, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price Range as of | |
Service |
|
June 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
Analog video packages
|
|
$ |
7.00 - $ 54.00 |
|
Premium channels
|
|
$ |
10.00 - $ 15.00 |
|
Pay-per-view events
|
|
$ |
2.99 - $179.00 |
|
Digital video packages (including high-speed Internet service
for higher tiers)
|
|
$ |
34.00 - $112.00 |
|
High-speed Internet service
|
|
$ |
21.95 - $ 59.99 |
|
Video on demand (per selection)
|
|
$ |
0.99 - $ 29.99 |
|
High definition television
|
|
$ |
3.99 - $ 6.99 |
|
Digital video recorder (DVR)
|
|
$ |
6.99 - $ 9.99 |
|
In addition, from time to time we offer free service or
reduced-price service during promotional periods in order to
attract new customers.
Our Network Technology
The following table sets forth the technological capacity of our
systems as of June 30, 2005 based on a percentage of homes
passed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
550 megahertz | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than | |
|
to | |
|
|
|
|
|
Two-way | |
|
Two-way | |
550 megahertz | |
|
660 megahertz | |
|
750 megahertz | |
|
870 megahertz | |
|
capability | |
|
enabled | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
8 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
42 |
% |
|
|
45 |
% |
|
|
92 |
% |
|
|
87 |
% |
82
As a result of the upgrade of our systems over the past several
years, approximately 92% of the homes passed by our systems have
bandwidth of 550 megahertz or greater. This bandwidth
capacity enables us to offer digital television, high-speed
Internet services and other advanced services. It also enables
us to offer up to 82 analog channels, and even more
channels when our bandwidth is used for digital signal
transmissions. Our increased bandwidth also permits two-way
communication for Internet access, interactive services, and
potentially, telephone services.
As part of our systems upgrade and partly as a result of system
sales, we reduced the number of headends that serve our
customers from 1,138 at January 1, 2001 to 744 at
June 30, 2005. Because headends are the control centers of
a cable system, where incoming signals are amplified, converted,
processed and combined for transmission to the customer,
reducing the number of headends reduces related equipment,
service personnel and maintenance expenditures. We believe that
the headend consolidation, together with our other upgrades,
allows us to provide enhanced picture quality and greater system
reliability. As a result of the upgrade, approximately 84% of
our customers were served by headends serving at least 10,000
customers as of June 30, 2005.
As of June 30, 2005, our cable systems consisted of
approximately 222,300 strand miles, including approximately
53,600 strand miles of fiber optic cable, passing approximately
12.3 million households and serving approximately
6.2 million customers.
We adopted the hybrid fiber coaxial cable (HFC)
architecture as the standard for our systems upgrades. HFC
architecture combines the use of fiber optic cable with coaxial
cable. Fiber optic cable is a communication medium that uses
glass fibers to transmit signals over long distances with
minimum signal loss or distortion. Fiber optic cable has
excellent broadband frequency characteristics, noise immunity
and physical durability and can carry hundreds of video, data
and voice channels over extended distances. Coaxial cable is
less expensive and requires a more extensive signal
amplification in order to obtain the desired transmission levels
for delivering channels. In most systems, we deliver our signals
via fiber optic cable from the headend to a group of nodes, and
use coaxial cable to deliver the signal from individual nodes to
the homes passed served by that node. Our system design enables
a maximum of 500 homes passed to be served by a single
node. Currently, our average node serves approximately 385 homes
passed. Our system design provides for six strands of fiber to
each node, with two strands activated and four strands reserved
for spares and future services. The design also provides reserve
capacity for the addition of future services.
The primary advantages of HFC architecture over traditional
coaxial-only cable networks include:
|
|
|
|
|
increased bandwidth capacity, for more channels and other
services; |
|
|
|
dedicated bandwidth for two-way services, which avoids reverse
signal interference problems that can occur with two-way
communication capability; and |
|
|
|
improved picture quality and service reliability. |
We currently maintain a national network operations center to
monitor our data networks and to further our strategy of
providing high quality service. Centralized monitoring is
increasingly important as we increase the number of high-speed
Internet customers utilizing two-way high-speed Internet
service. Our local dispatch centers focus primarily on
monitoring the HFC plant.
Management of Our Systems
Many of the functions associated with our financial management
are centralized, including accounting, billing, finance and
acquisitions, payroll, accounts payable and benefits
administration, information system design and support, internal
audit, purchasing, marketing, programming contract
administration and Internet service, network and circuits
administration. We operate with four divisions. Each division is
supported by operational, financial, marketing and engineering
functions.
83
Customer Care
We have 36 customer service locations, including 14 divisional
contact centers that serve approximately 97% of our customers.
Our customer care centers are managed divisionally by a Vice
President of Customer Care and are supported by a corporate care
team, which oversees and supports deployment and execution of
care strategies and initiatives on a company-wide basis. This
reflects a substantial consolidation of our customer care
function from over 300 service centers in 2001. We believe that
this consolidation will allow us to improve the consistency of
our service delivery and customer satisfaction by reducing or
eliminating the logistical challenges and poor economies of
scale inherent in maintaining and supervising a larger number of
separately managed service centers.
Specifically, through this consolidation, we are now able to
service our customers 24 hours a day, seven days a week and
utilize technologically advanced equipment that we believe
enhances interactions with our customers through more
intelligent call routing, data management, and forecasting and
scheduling capabilities. We believe this consolidation also
allows us to more effectively provide our customer care
specialists with ongoing training intended to improve complaint
resolution, equipment troubleshooting, sales of new and
additional services, and customer retention.
We believe that, despite our consolidation, we have not yet
sufficiently improved in the area of customer care, and that
this lack of improvement has in part led to a continued net loss
of customers. Accordingly, we have begun an internal operational
improvement initiative aimed at helping us gain new customers
and retain existing customers, which is focused on customer
care, among other areas. We have and we intend to continue to
increase our efforts to focus management attention on instilling
a customer service oriented culture throughout the company and
to give those areas of our operations increased priority of
resources for staffing levels, training budgets and financial
incentives for employee performance in those areas.
In a further effort to better serve our customers, we have also
entered into outsource partnership agreements with two key
outsource providers. We believe the establishment of these
relationships expands our ability to achieve our service
objectives and increases our ability to support marketing
activities by providing additional capacity available to support
customer inquiries.
We also utilize our website to enhance customer care by enabling
customers to view and pay their bills online, obtain useful
information and perform various equipment troubleshooting
procedures.
Sales and Marketing
In the third quarter of 2004, Charter shifted primary
responsibility for implementing sales and marketing strategies
to the divisional and system level, with a single corporate team
to ensure compliance with guidelines established by the
corporate marketing department designed to promote national
branding consistency. Our marketing infrastructure is intended
to promote interaction, information flow and sharing of best
practices between our corporate office and our field offices,
which make strategic decisions as to when and how marketing
programs will be implemented.
Due to our focus in 2003 on certain other operational matters
and due to certain financial constraints, we reduced spending in
2003 on marketing our products and services. Marketing
expenditures increased 14% for the year ended December 31,
2004 to $122 million. Although marketing expenditures
decreased 1% to $66 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, as compared to the six months ended
June 30, 2004, we expect marketing expenditures to increase
for the remainder of 2005.
We monitor government regulation, customer perception,
competition, pricing and product preferences, among other
factors, to increase our responsiveness to our customers. Our
coordinated marketing strategies include door-to-door
solicitation, telemarketing, media advertising, e-marketing,
direct mail solicitation and retail locations. In 2004, we
increased our focus on marketing and selling our services
through consumer electronics retailers and other retailers that
sell televisions or cable modems.
84
In January 2004, we introduced the first national branding
campaign in Charters history. The Get Hooked
branding initiative was a key focal point of our national
marketing campaigns in 2004, with the aim of promoting deeper
market penetration and increased revenue per customer. In 2004,
our corporate team produced eight national Get
Hooked marketing campaigns designed to:
|
|
|
|
|
Promote awareness and loyalty among existing customers and
attract new customers; |
|
|
|
Announce the availability of our advanced services as we roll
them out in our systems; |
|
|
|
Promote our advanced services (such as DVR, high definition
television, telephone, VOD and SVOD) with the goal that our
customers will view their cable connection as one-stop shopping
for video, voice, high-speed internet and interactive
services; and |
|
|
|
Promote our bundling of digital video and high-speed Internet
services and pricing strategies. |
Programming
We believe that offering a wide variety of programming is an
important factor that influences a customers decision to
subscribe to and retain our cable services. We rely on market
research, customer demographics and local programming
preferences to determine channel offerings in each of our
markets. We obtain basic and premium programming from a number
of suppliers, usually pursuant to a written contract. Our
programming contracts generally continue for a fixed period of
time, usually from three to ten years, and are subject to
negotiated renewal. Some program suppliers offer financial
incentives to support the launch of a channel and ongoing
marketing support or launch fees. We also negotiate volume
discount pricing structures. Programming costs are usually
payable each month based on calculations performed by us and are
subject to adjustment based on the results of periodic audits by
the programmers.
Programming tends to be made available to us for a license fee,
which is generally paid based on the number of customers to whom
we make such programming available. Such license fees may
include volume discounts available for higher
numbers of customers, as well as discounts for channel placement
or service penetration. Some channels are available without cost
to us for a limited period of time, after which we pay for the
programming. For home shopping channels, we receive a percentage
of the amount our customers spend on home shopping purchases.
Our cable programming costs have increased, in every year we
have operated, in excess of customary inflationary and
cost-of-living type increases. We expect them to continue to
increase due to a variety of factors, including annual increases
imposed by programmers and additional programming being provided
to customers as a result of system rebuilds and bandwidth
reallocation, both of which increase channel capacity.
In particular, sports programming costs have increased
significantly over the past several years. In addition,
contracts to purchase sports programming sometimes contain
built-in cost increases for programming added during the term of
the contract.
Historically, we have absorbed increased programming costs in
large part through increased prices to our customers. However,
with the impact of competition and other marketplace factors,
there is no assurance that we will be able to continue to do so.
In order to maintain or mitigate reductions of margins despite
increasing programming costs, we plan to continue to migrate
certain program services from our analog level of service to our
digital tiers. As we migrate our programming to our digital tier
packages, certain programming that was previously available to
all of our customers via an analog signal, may be part of an
elective digital tier package. As a result, the customer base
upon which we pay programming fees will proportionately
decrease, and the overall expense for providing that service
would likewise decrease. Reductions in the size of certain
programming customer bases may result in the loss of specific
volume discount benefits.
85
As measured by programming costs, and excluding premium services
(substantially all of which were renegotiated and renewed in
2003), as of July 7, 2005 approximately 9% of our current
programming contracts were expired, and approximately another
21% are scheduled to expire at or before the end of 2005. We
plan to seek to renegotiate the terms of our agreements with
certain programmers as these agreements come due for renewal.
There can be no assurance that these agreements will be renewed
on favorable or comparable terms. To the extent that we are
unable to reach agreement with certain programmers on terms that
we believe are reasonable, we may be forced to remove such
programming channels from our line-up, which could result in a
further loss of customers. In addition, our inability to fully
pass these programming cost increases on to our customers would
have an adverse impact on our cash flow and operating margins.
Franchises
As of June 30, 2005, our systems operated pursuant to a
total of approximately 4,100 franchises, permits and similar
authorizations issued by local and state governmental
authorities. Each franchise, permit or similar authorization is
awarded by a governmental authority and such governmental
authority often must approve a transfer to another party. Most
franchises are subject to termination proceedings in the event
of a material breach. In addition, most franchises require us to
pay the granting authority a franchise fee of up to 5.0% of
revenues as defined in the various agreements, which is the
maximum amount that may be charged under the applicable federal
law. We are entitled to and generally do pass this fee through
to the customer.
Prior to the scheduled expiration of most franchises, we
initiate renewal proceedings with the granting authorities. This
process usually takes three years but can take a longer period
of time. The Communications Act provides for an orderly
franchise renewal process in which granting authorities may not
unreasonably withhold renewals. In connection with the franchise
renewal process, many governmental authorities require the cable
operator to make certain commitments. Historically we have been
able to renew our franchises without incurring significant
costs, although any particular franchise may not be renewed on
commercially favorable terms or otherwise. Our failure to obtain
renewals of our franchises, especially those in the major
metropolitan areas where we have the most customers, could have
a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial
condition, results of operations or our liquidity, including our
ability to comply with our debt covenants. Approximately 11% of
our franchises, covering approximately 11% of our analog video
customers were expired as of June 30, 2005. Approximately
4% of additional franchises, covering approximately 5% of
additional analog video customers will expire on or before
December 31, 2005, if not renewed prior to expiration. We
expect to renew substantially all of these franchises.
Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the 1996 Telecom
Act), state and local authorities are prohibited from
limiting, restricting or conditioning the provision of
telecommunications services. They may, however, impose
competitively neutral requirements and manage the
public rights-of-way. Granting authorities may not require a
cable operator to provide telecommunications services or
facilities, other than institutional networks, as a condition of
an initial franchise grant, a franchise renewal, or a franchise
transfer. The 1996 Telecom Act also limits franchise fees to an
operators cable-related revenues and clarifies that they
do not apply to revenues that a cable operator derives from
providing new telecommunications services. In a March 2002
decision, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) held that revenue derived from the provision
of cable modem service should not be added to franchise fee
payments already limited by federal law to 5% of traditional
cable service revenue. The same decision tentatively limited
local franchising authority regulation of cable modem service.
The FCC decision was appealed and ultimately affirmed by the
Supreme Court in a June 2005 ruling.
Different legislative proposals have been introduced in the
United States Congress and in some state legislatures that would
greatly streamline cable franchising. This legislation is
intended to facilitate entry by new competitors, particularly
local telephone companies. Such legislation has already passed
in at least one state but is now subject to court challenge.
Although various legislative proposals provide certain
regulatory relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals
are generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants.
86
Competition
We face competition in the areas of price, service offerings,
and service reliability. We compete with other providers of
television signals and other sources of home entertainment. In
addition, as we continue to expand into additional services such
as high-speed Internet access and telephone, we face competition
from other providers of each type of service. We operate in a
very competitive business environment, which can adversely
affect our business and operations.
In terms of competition for customers, we view ourselves as a
member of the broadband communications industry, which
encompasses multi-channel video for television and related
broadband services, such as high-speed Internet and other
interactive video services. In the broadband industry, our
principal competitor for video services throughout our territory
is direct broadcast satellite (DBS), and in markets
where it is available, our principal competitor for Internet
services is digital subscriber line (DSL). We do not
consider other cable operators to be significant one-on-one
competitors in the market overall, as traditional overbuilds are
infrequent and spotty geographically (although in a particular
market, a cable operator overbuilder would likely be a
significant competitor at the local level). As of June 30,
2005, we are aware of traditional overbuild situations in
service areas covering approximately 5% of our total homes
passed and potential overbuilds in areas servicing approximately
2% of our total homes passed.
Although cable operators tend not to be direct competitors for
customers, their relative size may affect the competitive
landscape in terms of how a cable company competes against
non-cable competitors in the marketplace as well as in
relationships with vendors who deal with cable operators. For
example, a larger cable operator might have better access to and
pricing for the multiple types of services cable companies
offer. Also, a larger entity might have different access to
financial resources and acquisition opportunities.
Our key competitors include:
|
|
|
Direct Broadcast Satellite |
Direct broadcast satellite (DBS) is a significant
competitor to cable systems. The DBS industry has grown rapidly
over the last several years, far exceeding the growth rate of
the cable television industry, and now serves more than
24 million subscribers nationwide. DBS service allows the
subscriber to receive video services directly via satellite
using a relatively small dish antenna. Consistent with
increasing consolidation in the communications industry, News
Corp., one of the worlds largest media companies, acquired
a controlling interest in DIRECTV, Inc. (DirecTV) in
2003, the largest domestic DBS company. This business
combination could further strengthen DirecTVs competitive
posture, particularly through favorable programming arrangements
with various News Corp. affiliates and subsidiaries, such as the
Fox television network. Additionally, EchoStar Communications
Corporation (EchoStar) and DirecTV both have entered
into joint marketing agreements with major telecommunications
companies to offer bundled packages combining phone, data and
video services.
Video compression technology and high powered satellites allow
DBS providers to offer more than 200 digital channels from a
single satellite, thereby surpassing the typical analog cable
system. In 2003, major DBS competitors offered a greater variety
of channel packages, and were especially competitive at the
lower end pricing, such as a monthly price of approximately $30
for 75 channels compared to approximately $40 for the closest
comparable package in most of our markets. In addition, while we
continue to believe that the initial investment by a DBS
customer exceeds that of a cable customer, the initial equipment
cost for DBS has decreased substantially, as the DBS providers
have aggressively marketed offers to new customers of incentives
for discounted or free equipment, installation and multiple
units. DBS providers are able to offer service nationwide and
are able to establish a national image and branding with
standardized offerings, which together with their ability to
avoid franchise fees of up to 5%
87
of revenues and property tax, leads to greater efficiencies and
lower costs in the lower tiers of service. However, we believe
that many consumers continue to prefer our stronger local
presence in our markets. We believe that cable-delivered VOD and
SVOD service are superior to DBS service because cable headends
can store thousands of titles which customers can access and
control independently, whereas DBS technology can only make
available a much smaller number of titles with DVR-like customer
control. We also believe that our higher tier products,
particularly our bundled premium packages, are price-competitive
with DBS packages and that many consumers prefer our ability to
economically bundle video packages with data packages. Further,
cable providers have the potential in some areas to provide a
more complete whole house communications package
when combining video, high-speed Internet and voice. We believe
that this ability to bundle, combined with the introduction of
more new products that DBS cannot readily offer (local high
definition television and local interactive television)
differentiates us from DBS competitors and could enable us to
win back some of our former customers who migrated to satellite.
However, recent joint marketing arrangements between DBS
providers and telecommunications carriers allow similar bundling
of services in certain areas. Competition from DBS service
providers may also present greater challenges in areas of lower
population density, and we believe that our systems serve a
higher concentration of such areas than those of other major
cable service providers.
DBS companies historically were prohibited from retransmitting
popular local broadcast programming. However, a change to the
copyright laws in 1999, which was continued in 2004, eliminated
this legal impediment. As a result, DBS companies now may
retransmit such programming, once they have secured
retransmission consent from the popular broadcast stations they
wish to carry, and honor mandatory carriage obligations of less
popular broadcast stations in the same television markets. In
response to the legislation, DirecTV and EchoStar have been
carrying the major network stations in many of the nations
television markets. DBS, however, is limited in the local
programming it can provide because of the current capacity
limitations of satellite technology. DBS companies do not offer
local broadcast programming in every U.S. market, although
the number of markets covered is substantial and increasing.
DBS providers have made attempts at widespread deployment of
high-speed Internet access services via satellite but those
services have been technically constrained and of limited
appeal. However, DBS providers have entered into joint marketing
arrangements with telecommunications carriers allowing them to
offer terrestrial DSL services in many markets.
|
|
|
DSL and Other Broadband Services |
Digital subscriber line (DSL) service allows
Internet access to subscribers at data transmission speeds
greater than those available over conventional telephone lines.
DSL service therefore is competitive with high-speed Internet
access over cable systems. Most telephone companies which
already have plant, an existing customer base, and other
operational functions in place (such as, billing, service
personnel, etc.) offer DSL service. DSL actively markets its
service and many providers have offered promotional pricing with
a one-year service agreement. The FCC has determined that DSL
service is an information service,which will remove
DSL service from many traditional telecommunications
regulations. It is also possible that federal legislation could
reduce regulation of Internet services offered by incumbent
telephone companies. Legislative action and the FCCs
decisions and policies in this area are subject to change. We
expect DSL to remain a significant competitor to our data
services. In addition, the further deployment of fiber by
telephone companies into their networks will enable them to
provide higher bandwidth Internet service than provided over
traditional DSL lines.
In addition to terrestrially based DSL, satellite-based delivery
options are in development. Local wireless Internet services
have also begun to operate in many markets using unlicensed
radio spectrum. This service option, popularly known as
wi-fi, offers another alternative to cable-based
Internet access.
High-speed Internet access facilitates the streaming of video
into homes and businesses. As the quality and availability of
video streaming over the Internet improves, video streaming
likely will compete with the traditional delivery of video
programming services over cable systems. It is possible that
88
programming suppliers will consider bypassing cable operators
and market their services directly to the consumer through video
streaming over the Internet.
We believe that pricing for residential and commercial Internet
services on our system is generally comparable to that for
similar DSL services and that some residential customers prefer
our ability to bundle Internet services with video services.
However, DSL providers may currently be in a better position to
offer data services to businesses since their networks tend to
be more complete in commercial areas. They also have the ability
to bundle telephone with Internet services for a higher
percentage of their customers, and that ability is appealing to
many consumers. Joint marketing arrangements between DSL
providers and DBS providers may allow some additional bundling
of services. Moreover, major telephone companies, such as SBC
and Verizon, are now deploying fiber deep into their networks
that will enable them to offer high bandwidth video services
over their networks, in addition to established voice and
Internet services.
Cable television has long competed with broadcast television,
which consists of television signals that the viewer is able to
receive without charge using an off-air antenna. The
extent of such competition is dependent upon the quality and
quantity of broadcast signals available through
off-air reception compared to the services provided
by the local cable system. Traditionally, cable television has
provided a higher picture quality and more channel offerings
than broadcast television. However, the recent licensing of
digital spectrum by the FCC will provide traditional
broadcasters with the ability to deliver high definition
television pictures and multiple digital-quality program
streams, as well as advanced digital services such as
subscription video and data transmission.
Cable systems are operated under non-exclusive franchises
granted by local authorities. More than one cable system may
legally be built in the same area. It is possible that a
franchising authority might grant a second franchise to another
cable operator and that such a franchise might contain terms and
conditions more favorable than those afforded us. In addition,
entities willing to establish an open video system, under which
they offer unaffiliated programmers non-discriminatory access to
a portion of the systems cable system, may be able to
avoid local franchising requirements. Well financed businesses
from outside the cable industry, such as public utilities that
already possess fiber optic and other transmission lines in the
areas they serve, may over time become competitors. There are a
number of cities that have constructed their own cable systems,
in a manner similar to city-provided utility services. There
also has been interest in traditional overbuilds by private
companies. Constructing a competing cable system is a capital
intensive process which involves a high degree of risk. We
believe that in order to be successful, a competitors
overbuild would need to be able to serve the homes and
businesses in the overbuilt area on a more cost-effective basis
than we can. Any such overbuild operation would require either
significant access to capital or access to facilities already in
place that are capable of delivering cable television
programming.
As of June 30, 2005, we are aware of overbuild situations
impacting approximately 5% of our total homes passed and
potential overbuild situations in areas servicing approximately
2% of our total homes passed. Additional overbuild situations
may occur in other systems. In response to such overbuilds,
these systems have been designated priorities for the upgrade of
cable plant and the launch of new and enhanced services. As of
June 30, 2005, we have upgraded many of these systems to at
least 750 megahertz two-way HFC architecture.
|
|
|
Telephone Companies and Utilities |
The competitive environment has been significantly affected by
technological developments and regulatory changes enacted under
the 1996 Telecom Act, which is designed to enhance competition
in the cable television and local telephone markets. Federal
cross-ownership restrictions historically limited entry by local
telephone companies into the cable business. The 1996 Telecom
Act modified this cross-
89
ownership restriction, making it possible for local exchange
carriers, who have considerable resources, to provide a wide
variety of video services competitive with services offered by
cable systems.
Telephone companies can lawfully enter the cable television
business, and although activity in this area historically has
been quite limited, recent announcements by telephone companies
indicate a growing interest in offering a video product. Local
exchange carriers do already provide facilities for the
transmission and distribution of voice and data services,
including Internet services, in competition with our existing or
potential interactive services ventures and businesses. Some
telephone companies have begun more extensive deployment of
fiber in their networks that will enable them to begin providing
video services, as well as telephone and Internet access
service. At least one major telephone company, SBC, plans to
provide Internet protocol video over its upgraded network. SBC
contends that its use of this technology should allow it to
provide video service without a cable franchise as required
under Title VI of the Communications Act. Telephone
companies deploying fiber more extensively are attempting
through various means (including federal and state legislation)
to weaken or streamline the franchising requirements applicable
to them.
If telephone companies are successful in avoiding or weakening
the franchise and other regulatory requirements that are
applicable to cable operators like Charter, their competitive
posture would be enhanced. We cannot predict the likelihood of
success of the broadband services offered by our competitors or
the impact on us of such competitive ventures. The large scale
entry of major telephone companies as direct competitors in the
video marketplace could adversely affect the profitability and
valuation of established cable systems.
As we expand our offerings to include Internet access and other
telecommunications services, we will be subject to competition
from other telecommunications providers. The telecommunications
industry is highly competitive and includes competitors with
greater financial and personnel resources, who have brand name
recognition and long-standing relationships with regulatory
authorities and customers. Moreover, mergers, joint ventures and
alliances among franchise, wireless or private cable operators,
local exchange carriers and others may result in providers
capable of offering cable television, Internet, and
telecommunications services in direct competition with us. For
example, major local exchange carriers have entered into
arrangements with EchoStar and DirecTV in which they will market
packages combining phone service, DSL and DBS services.
Additionally, we are subject to competition from utilities which
possess fiber optic transmission lines capable of transmitting
signals with minimal signal distortion. Utilities are also
developing broadband over power line technology, which will
allow the provision of Internet and other broadband services to
homes and offices.
Private Cable
Additional competition is posed by satellite master antenna
television systems, or SMATV systems, serving multiple dwelling
units, or MDUs, such as condominiums, apartment complexes, and
private residential communities. These private cable systems may
enter into exclusive agreements with such MDUs, which may
preclude operators of franchise systems from serving residents
of such private complexes. Private cable systems can offer both
improved reception of local television stations and many of the
same satellite-delivered program services that are offered by
cable systems. SMATV systems currently benefit from operating
advantages not available to franchised cable systems, including
fewer regulatory burdens and no requirement to service low
density or economically depressed communities. Exemption from
regulation may provide a competitive advantage to certain of our
current and potential competitors.
Wireless Distribution
Cable systems also compete with wireless program distribution
services such as multi-channel multipoint distribution systems
or wireless cable, known as MMDS, which uses
low-power microwave frequencies to transmit television
programming over-the-air to paying customers. MMDS services,
90
however, require unobstructed line of sight
transmission paths and MMDS ventures have been quite limited to
date.
The FCC has completed its auction of Multichannel Video
Distribution & Data Service (MVDDS)
licenses. MVDDS is a new terrestrial video and data fixed
wireless service that the FCC hopes will spur competition to the
cable and DBS industries.
Properties
Our principal physical assets consist of cable distribution
plant and equipment, including signal receiving, encoding and
decoding devices, headend reception facilities, distribution
systems and customer drop equipment for each of our cable
systems.
Our cable plant and related equipment are generally attached to
utility poles under pole rental agreements with local public
utilities and telephone companies and in certain locations are
buried in underground ducts or trenches. We own or lease real
property for signal reception sites and own most of our service
vehicles.
Historically, our subsidiaries have owned the real property and
buildings for our data centers, customer contact centers and our
divisional administrative offices. Since early 2003 we have
reduced our total real estate portfolio square footage by
approximately 17% and have decreased our operating annual lease
costs by approximately 30%. We plan to continue reducing our
number of administrative offices and lease the space, where
possible, while attempting to sell those existing locations that
we believe are no longer required. Our subsidiaries generally
have leased space for business offices throughout our operating
divisions. Our headend and tower locations are located on owned
or leased parcels of land, and we generally own the towers on
which our equipment is located. Charter Holdco owns the real
property and building for our principal executive offices.
The physical components of our cable systems require maintenance
as well as periodic upgrades to support the new services and
products we introduce. See Business Our
Network Technology. We believe that our properties are
generally in good operating condition and are suitable for our
business operations.
Employees
As of June 30, 2005, we had approximately
16,500 full-time equivalent employees. At June 30,
2005, approximately 100 of our employees were represented by
collective bargaining agreements. We have never experienced a
work stoppage.
The corporate office, which includes employees of Charter and
Charter Holdco, is responsible for coordinating and overseeing
our operations. The corporate office performs certain financial
and administrative functions on a centralized basis such as
accounting, taxes, billing, finance and acquisitions, payroll
and benefit administration, information system design and
support, internal audit, purchasing, marketing and programming
contract administration and oversight and coordination of
external auditors and consultants. The corporate office performs
these services on a cost reimbursement basis pursuant to a
management services agreement. See Certain Relationships
and Related Transactions Transactions Arising Out of
Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allens
Investment in Charter and Its Subsidiaries
Intercompany Management Arrangements and
Mutual Services Agreements.
Legal Proceedings
|
|
|
Securities Class Actions and Derivative Suits |
Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the
Federal Class Actions) were filed against
Charter and certain of its former and present officers and
directors in various jurisdictions allegedly on behalf of all
purchasers of Charters securities during the period from
either November 8 or November 9, 1999 through July 17 or
July 18, 2002. Unspecified damages were sought by the
plaintiffs. In general, the
91
lawsuits alleged that Charter utilized misleading accounting
practices and failed to disclose these accounting practices
and/or issued false and misleading financial statements and
press releases concerning Charters operations and
prospects. The Federal Class Actions were specifically and
individually identified in public filings made by Charter prior
to the date of this prospectus. On March 12, 2003, the
Panel transferred the six Federal Class Actions not filed
in the Eastern District of Missouri to that district for
coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the eight
Federal Class Actions already pending there. The Court
subsequently consolidated the Federal Class Actions into a
single action (the Consolidated Federal
Class Action) for pretrial purposes. On
August 5, 2004, the plaintiffs representatives,
Charter and the individual defendants who were the subject of
the suit entered into a Memorandum of Understanding setting
forth agreements in principle to settle the Consolidated Federal
Class Action. These parties subsequently entered into
Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005
(described more fully below) which incorporate the terms of the
August 5, 2004 Memorandum of Understanding.
The Consolidated Federal Class Action is entitled:
|
|
|
|
|
In re Charter Communications, Inc. Securities Litigation, MDL
Docket No. 1506 (All Cases), StoneRidge Investments
Partners, LLC, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, v. Charter Communications, Inc., Paul
Allen, Jerald L. Kent, Carl E. Vogel, Kent Kalkwarf, David G.
Barford, Paul E. Martin, David L. McCall, Bill Shreffler, Chris
Fenger, James H. Smith, III, Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.,
Motorola, Inc. and Arthur Andersen, LLP, Consolidated Case
No. 4:02-CV-1186-CAS. |
On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the
State Derivative Action) was filed in the Circuit
Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the
Missouri State Court), against Charter and its then
current directors, as well as its former auditors. The
plaintiffs alleged that the individual defendants breached their
fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate
internal controls and procedures.
The consolidated State Derivative Action is entitled:
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Stacey, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant
Charter Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G.
Allen, Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William Savoy,
John H. Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, Arthur Andersen,
LLP and Charter Communications, Inc. |
On March 12, 2004, an action substantively identical to the
State Derivative Action was filed in Missouri State Court
against Charter and certain of its current and former directors,
as well as its former auditors. On July 14, 2004, the Court
consolidated this case with the State Derivative Action.
This action is entitled:
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Schimmel, Derivatively on behalf on Nominal Defendant
Charter Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G.
Allen, Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William D. Savoy,
John H. Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, and Arthur
Andersen, LLP, and Charter Communications, Inc. |
Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative
suit (the Federal Derivative Action), was filed
against Charter and its then current directors in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The
plaintiff in that suit alleged that the individual defendants
breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter
by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls
and procedures.
The Federal Derivative Action is entitled:
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur Cohn, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant Charter
Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G. Allen,
Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William Savoy, John H.
Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, and Charter
Communications, Inc. |
92
As noted above, Charter and the individual defendants entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding on August 5, 2004
setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of
the Consolidated Federal Class Action, the State Derivative
Action(s) and the Federal Derivative Action (the
Actions). Charter and various other defendants in
those actions subsequently entered into Stipulations of
Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005, setting forth a
settlement of the Actions in a manner consistent with the terms
of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Stipulations of
Settlement, along with various supporting documentation, were
filed with the Court on February 2, 2005. On May 23,
2005 the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri conducted the final fairness hearing for the
Actions, and on June 30, 2005, the Court issued its final
approval of the settlements. Members of the class had
30 days from the issuance of the June 30 order
approving the settlement to file an appeal challenging the
approval. Two notices of appeal were filed relating to the
settlement. Those appeals were directed to the amount of fees
that the attorneys for the class were to receive and to the
fairness of the settlement. On September 26, 2005, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit entered
Judgment dismissing the appeals pursuant to stipulation by the
parties.
As amended, the Stipulations of Settlement provide that, in
exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against
Charter and its former and present officers and directors named
in the Actions, Charter would pay to the plaintiffs a
combination of cash and equity collectively valued at
$144 million, which will include the fees and expenses of
plaintiffs counsel. Of this amount, $64 million would
be paid in cash (by Charters insurance carriers) and the
$80 million balance was to be paid (subject to
Charters right to substitute cash therefor described
below) in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to
purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate warrant value of $40 million, with such values in
each case being determined pursuant to formulas set forth in the
Stipulations of Settlement. However, Charter had the right, in
its sole discretion, to substitute cash for some or all of the
aforementioned securities on a dollar for dollar basis. Pursuant
to that right, Charter elected to fund the $80 million
obligation with 13.4 million shares of Charter Class A
common stock (having an aggregate value of approximately
$15 million pursuant to the formula set forth in the
Stipulations of Settlement) with the remaining balance (less an
agreed upon $2 million discount in respect of that portion
allocable to plaintiffs attorneys fees) to be paid
in cash. In addition, Charter had agreed to issue additional
shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier
having an aggregate value of $5 million; however, by
agreement with its carrier Charter has paid $4.5 million in
cash in lieu of issuing such shares. Charter delivered the
settlement consideration to the claims administrator on
July 8, 2005, and it will be held in escrow pending any
appeals of the approval. On July 14, 2005, the Circuit
Court for the City of St. Louis dismissed with prejudice
the State Derivative Action.
As part of the settlements, Charter has committed to a variety
of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public
disclosures, some of which have already been undertaken and none
of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in
connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation.
|
|
|
Government Investigations |
In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury
investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorneys
Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its
accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter
reported customer numbers, and its reporting of amounts received
from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The
U.S. Attorneys Office publicly stated that Charter
was not a target of the investigation. Charter was also advised
by the U.S. Attorneys Office that no current officer
or member of its board of directors was a target of the
investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury
charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail
and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting
practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal
suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Each of the
indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts
related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and were
sentenced April 22, 2005. Charter has advised us that it
has fully cooperated with the investigation, and following the
sentencings,
93
the U.S. Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of
Missouri announced that its investigation was concluded and that
no further indictments would issue.
Charter was generally required to indemnify, under certain
conditions, each of the named individual defendants in
connection with the matters described above pursuant to the
terms of its bylaws and (where applicable) such individual
defendants employment agreements. In accordance with these
documents, in connection with the grand jury investigation, a
now-settled SEC investigation and the above-described lawsuits,
some of Charters current and former directors and current
and former officers have been advanced certain costs and
expenses incurred in connection with their defense. See
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Other Miscellaneous Relationships Indemnification
Advances. On February 22, 2005, Charter filed suit
against four of its former officers who were indicted in the
course of the grand jury investigation. These suits seek to
recover the legal fees and other related expenses advanced to
these individuals. One of these former officers has
counterclaimed against Charter alleging, among other things,
that Charter owes him additional indemnification for legal fees
that Charter did not pay and another of these former officers
has counterclaimed against Charter for accrued sick leave.
In addition to the matters set forth above, Charter is also
party to other lawsuits and claims that arose in the ordinary
course of conducting its business. In the opinion of management,
after taking into account recorded liabilities, the outcome of
these other lawsuits and claims are not expected to have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition,
results of operations or our liquidity.
94
REGULATION AND LEGISLATION
The following summary addresses the key regulatory and
legislative developments affecting the cable industry. Cable
system operations are extensively regulated by the FCC, some
state governments and most local governments. A failure to
comply with these regulations could subject us to substantial
penalties. Our business can be dramatically impacted by changes
to the existing regulatory framework, whether triggered by
legislative, administrative, or judicial rulings. Congress and
the FCC have expressed a particular interest in increasing
competition in the communications field generally and in the
cable television field specifically. The 1996 Telecom Act
altered the regulatory structure governing the nations
communications providers. It removed barriers to competition in
both the cable television market and the local telephone market.
We could be materially disadvantaged in the future if we are
subject to regulations that do not equally impact our key
competitors. Congress and the FCC have frequently revisited the
subject of communications regulation, and they are likely to do
so in the future. In addition, franchise agreements with local
governments must be periodically renewed, and new operating
terms may be imposed. Future legislative, regulatory, or
judicial changes could adversely affect our operations. We can
provide no assurance that the already extensive regulation of
our business will not be expanded in the future.
The cable industry has operated under a federal rate regulation
regime for more than a decade. The regulations currently
restrict the prices that cable systems charge for basic service
and associated equipment. All other cable offerings are now
universally exempt from rate regulation. Although rate
regulation operates pursuant to a federal formula, local
governments, commonly referred to as local franchising
authorities, are primarily responsible for administering this
regulation. The majority of our local franchising authorities
have never certified to regulate basic cable rates, but they
retain the right to do so (and order rate reductions and
refunds), except in those specific communities facing
effective competition. Federal law defines effective
competition as existing in a variety of circumstances that
historically were rarely satisfied, but are increasingly likely
to be satisfied with the recent increase in DBS competition. We
already have secured official recognition by the FCC of
effective competition in many of our communities.
There have been frequent calls to impose expanded rate
regulation on the cable industry. Confronted with rapidly
increasing cable programming costs, it is possible that Congress
may adopt new constraints on the retail pricing or packaging of
cable programming. Such constraints could adversely affect our
operations.
The federal rate regulations also require cable operators to
maintain a geographically uniform rate within each
community, except in those communities facing effective
competition. As we attempt to respond to a changing marketplace
with competitive pricing practices, we may face legal restraints
and challenges that impede our ability to compete.
|
|
|
Must Carry/Retransmission Consent |
Federal law currently includes must carry
regulations, which require cable systems to carry certain local
broadcast television stations that the cable operator would not
select voluntarily. Alternatively, popular commercial television
stations can prohibit cable carriage unless the cable operator
first negotiates for retransmission consent, which
may be conditioned on significant payments or other concessions.
Either option has a potentially adverse effect on our business.
The burden associated with must carry could increase
significantly if cable systems were required to simultaneously
carry both the analog and digital signals of each television
station (dual carriage), as the broadcast industry transitions
from an analog to a digital format.
The burden could also increase significantly if cable systems
become required to carry multiple program streams included
within a single digital broadcast transmission (multicast
carriage). Additional government-mandated broadcast carriage
obligations could disrupt existing programming commitments,
interfere with our preferred use of limited channel capacity and
limit our ability to offer services that
95
would maximize customer appeal and revenue potential. Although
the FCC issued a decision in February 2005, confirming an
earlier ruling against mandating either dual carriage or
multicast carriage, that decision has been appealed. In
addition, the FCC could modify its position or Congress could
legislate additional carriage obligations. In particular,
broadcast carriage burdens may increase as Congress and the FCC
attempt to transition broadcasters to digital spectrum and
reclaim analog spectrum.
There are indications that broadcasters invoking retransmission
consent may be even more forceful in upcoming negotiations.
These negotiations could result in increased broadcast carriage
burdens or the loss of popular programming.
Local franchise agreements often require cable operators to set
aside certain channels for public, educational and governmental
access programming. Federal law also requires cable systems to
designate a portion of their channel capacity for commercial
leased access by unaffiliated third parties. Increased activity
in this area could further burden the channel capacity of our
cable systems.
The FCC recently extended a regulation prohibiting video
programmers affiliated with cable companies from favoring cable
operators over new competitors and requiring such programmers to
sell their satellite-delivered programming to other multichannel
video distributors. This provision limits the ability of
vertically integrated cable programmers to offer exclusive
programming arrangements to cable companies. DBS providers
traditionally had no similar restriction on exclusive
programming, but the FCC recently imposed that restriction as
part of its approval of the DirecTV-News Corp. merger. The FCC
has also adopted regulations to avoid unreasonable conduct in
retransmission consent negotiations between broadcasters and
multichannel video programming distributors, including cable and
DBS. It imposed special conditions on the DirectTV-News Corp.
merger, including a requirement that Fox affiliated broadcast
stations enter into commercial arbitration for disputes over
retransmission consent. Given the heightened competition and
media consolidation that Charter faces, it is possible that we
will find it increasingly difficult to gain access to popular
programming at favorable terms. Such difficulty could adversely
impact our business.
Federal regulation of the communications field traditionally
included a host of ownership restrictions, which limited the
size of certain media entities and restricted their ability to
enter into competing enterprises. Through a series of
legislative, regulatory, and judicial actions, most of these
restrictions recently were eliminated or substantially relaxed.
For example, historic restrictions on local exchange carriers
offering cable service within their telephone service area, as
well as those prohibiting broadcast stations from owning cable
systems within their broadcast service area, no longer exist.
Changes in this regulatory area could alter the business
landscape in which we operate, as formidable new competitors
(including electric utilities, local exchange carriers, and
broadcast/media companies) may increasingly choose to offer
cable services.
The FCC previously adopted regulations precluding any cable
operator from serving more than 30% of all domestic multichannel
video subscribers and from devoting more than 40% of the
activated channel capacity of any cable system to the carriage
of affiliated national video programming services. These cable
ownership restrictions were invalidated by the courts, and the
FCC is now considering adoption of replacement regulations.
Over the past several years, proposals have been advanced that
would require cable operators offering Internet service to
provide non-discriminatory access to unaffiliated Internet
service providers. In a June 2005 ruling, commonly referred to
as Brand X, the Supreme Court upheld an FCC decision (and
96
overruled a conflicting Ninth Circuit opinion) making it much
less likely that any non-discriminatory open access
requirements (which are generally associated with common carrier
regulation of telecommunications services) will be
imposed on the cable industry by local, state or federal
authorities. The Supreme Court held that the FCC was correct in
classifying cable-provided Internet service as an
information service, rather than a
telecommunications service. This favorable
regulatory classification limits the ability of various
governmental authorities to impose open access requirements on
cable-provided Internet service. Given the recency of the
Brand X decision, however, the nature of any legislative
or regulatory response remains uncertain. The imposition of open
access requirements could materially affect our business.
As the Internet has matured, it has become the subject of
increasing regulatory interest. There is now a host of federal
laws affecting Internet service, including the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act, which affords copyright owners certain
rights against us that could adversely affect our relationship
with any customer accused of violating copyright laws. Recently
enacted Anti-Spam legislation also imposes new obligations on
our operations. The adoption of new Internet regulations could
adversely affect our business.
The 1996 Telecom Act created a more favorable regulatory
environment for us to provide telecommunications services. In
particular, it limited the regulatory role of local franchising
authorities and established requirements ensuring that we could
interconnect with other telephone companies to provide a viable
service. Many implementation details remain unresolved, and
there are substantial regulatory changes being considered that
could impact, in both positive and negative ways, our primary
telecommunications competitors and our own entry into the field
of phone service. The FCC and state regulatory authorities are
considering, for example, whether common carrier regulation
traditionally applied to incumbent local exchange carriers
should be modified. The FCC recently decided that alternative
voice technologies, like certain types of VoIP, should be
regulated only at the federal level, rather than by individual
states. While this decision appears to be a positive development
for VoIP offerings, it is unclear whether and how the FCC will
apply certain types of common carrier regulations, such as
intercarrier compensation and universal service obligations to
alternative voice technology. The FCC recently imposed
traditional 911 emergency service obligations (E911)
on VoIP provided telephone services, as well as certain
additional notice requirements. The treatment of these
regulations and other regulatory matters will affect our
potential expansion into phone service.
The Communications Act requires most utilities to provide cable
systems with access to poles and conduits and simultaneously
regulates the rates charged for this access. The Act specifies
that significantly higher rates apply if the cable plant is
providing telecommunications service, as well as traditional
cable service. The FCC has clarified that a cable
operators favorable pole rates are not endangered by the
provision of Internet access, and that determination was upheld
by the United States Supreme Court. It remains possible that the
underlying pole attachment formula, or its application to
Internet and telecommunications offerings, will be modified in a
manner that substantially increases our pole attachment costs.
The FCC has undertaken several steps to promote competition in
the delivery of cable equipment and compatibility with new
digital technology. The FCC has expressly ruled that cable
customers must be allowed to purchase set-top terminals from
third parties and established a multi-year phase-in during which
security functions (which would remain in the operators
exclusive control) would be unbundled from the basic converter
functions, which could then be provided by third party vendors.
The first phase of implementation has already passed. A
prohibition on cable operators leasing digital set-top terminals
that integrate security and basic navigation functions was
scheduled to go into effect as of July 1, 2006, but the FCC
extended the deadline for one year to July 1, 2007.
97
The FCC has adopted rules implementing an agreement between
major cable operators and manufacturers of consumer electronics
on plug and play specifications for one-way digital
televisions. The rules require cable operators to provide
CableCard security modules and support to customer
owned digital televisions and similar devices already equipped
with built-in set-top terminal functionality. Cable operators
must support basic home recording rights and copy protection
rules for digital programming content. The FCCs plug and
play rules are under appeal, although the appeal has been stayed
pending FCC reconsideration.
The FCC adopted companion broadcast flag rules,
requiring cable carriage of a code embedded in digital broadcast
programming that will regulate the further use of copyright
programming. However, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for
the D.C. Circuit recently held that the FCC lacks jurisdiction
to impose the broadcast flag rules.
The FCC is conducting additional related rulemakings, and the
cable and consumer electronics industries are currently
negotiating an agreement that would establish additional
plug and play specifications for two-way digital
televisions.
The FCC rules are subject to challenge and inter-industry
negotiations are ongoing. It is unclear how this process will
develop and how it will affect our offering of cable equipment
and our relationship with our customers.
|
|
|
Other Communications Act Provisions and FCC Regulatory
Matters |
In addition to the Communications Act provisions and FCC
regulations noted above, there are other statutory provisions
and FCC regulations affecting our business. The Communications
Act, for example, includes cable-specific privacy obligations.
The Act carefully limits our ability to collect and disclose
personal information.
FCC regulations include a variety of additional areas,
including, among other things: (1) equal employment
opportunity obligations; (2) customer service standards;
(3) technical service standards; (4) mandatory
blackouts of certain network, syndicated and sports programming;
(5) restrictions on political advertising;
(6) restrictions on advertising in childrens
programming; (7) restrictions on origination cablecasting;
(8) restrictions on carriage of lottery programming;
(9) sponsorship identification obligations;
(10) closed captioning of video programming;
(11) licensing of systems and facilities;
(12) maintenance of public files; and (13) emergency
alert systems.
It is possible that Congress or the FCC will expand or modify
its regulation of cable systems in the future, and we cannot
predict at this time how that might impact our business. For
example, there have been recent discussions about imposing
indecency restrictions directly on cable programming.
Cable systems are subject to federal copyright licensing
covering carriage of television and radio broadcast signals. The
possible modification or elimination of this compulsory
copyright license is the subject of continuing legislative
review and could adversely affect our ability to obtain desired
broadcast programming. We cannot predict the outcome of this
legislative activity. Moreover, the Copyright Office has not yet
provided any guidance as to the how the compulsory copyright
license should apply to newly offered digital broadcast signals.
Copyright clearances for non-broadcast programming services are
arranged through private negotiations. Cable operators also must
obtain music rights for locally originated programming and
advertising from the major music performing rights
organizations. These licensing fees have been the source of
litigation in the past, and we cannot predict with certainty
whether license fee disputes may arise in the future.
98
Cable systems generally are operated pursuant to nonexclusive
franchises granted by a municipality or other state or local
government entity in order to cross public rights-of-way. Cable
franchises generally are granted for fixed terms and in many
cases include monetary penalties for noncompliance and may be
terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with material
provisions.
The specific terms and conditions of cable franchises vary
materially between jurisdictions. Each franchise generally
contains provisions governing cable operations, franchise fees,
system construction, maintenance, technical performance, and
customer service standards. A number of states subject cable
systems to the jurisdiction of centralized state government
agencies, such as public utility commissions. Although local
franchising authorities have considerable discretion in
establishing franchise terms, there are certain federal
protections. For example, federal law caps local franchise fees
and includes renewal procedures designed to protect incumbent
franchisees from arbitrary denials of renewal. Even if a
franchise is renewed, however, the local franchising authority
may seek to impose new and more onerous requirements as a
condition of renewal. Similarly, if a local franchising
authoritys consent is required for the purchase or sale of
a cable system, the local franchising authority may attempt to
impose more burdensome requirements as a condition for providing
its consent.
Different legislative proposals have been introduced in the
United States Congress and in some state legislatures that would
greatly streamline cable franchising. This legislation is
intended to facilitate entry by new competitors, particularly
local telephone companies. Such legislation has already passed
in at least one state but is now subject to court challenge.
Although various legislative proposals provide certain
regulatory relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals
are generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants.
99
MANAGEMENT
Directors
CCO Holdings is a holding company with no operations. CCO
Holdings Capital is a direct, wholly owned finance subsidiary of
CCO Holdings that exists solely for the purpose of serving as
co-obligor of the original notes and the new notes. Neither CCO
Holdings nor CCO Holdings Capital has any employees. We and our
direct and indirect subsidiaries are managed by Charter. See
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter and Its
Subsidiaries Intercompany Management
Arrangements.
Robert P. May and Jo Allen Patton are the directors of CCO
Holdings and Robert P. May is the sole director of CCO Holdings
Capital.
The persons listed below are directors of Charter, Charter
Holdco, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I, CCH II, CCO
Holdings, or CCO Holdings Capital as indicated.
|
|
|
Directors |
|
Position(s) |
|
|
|
Paul G. Allen
|
|
Chairman of the board of directors of Charter and director of
Charter Holdco |
W. Lance Conn
|
|
Director of Charter |
Nathaniel A. Davis
|
|
Director of Charter |
Jonathan L. Dolgen
|
|
Director of Charter |
Robert P. May
|
|
Director of Charter and CCO Holdings |
David C. Merritt
|
|
Director of Charter |
Marc B. Nathanson
|
|
Director of Charter |
Jo Allen Patton
|
|
Director of Charter and CCO Holdings |
Neil Smit
|
|
Director of Charter, President and Chief Executive Officer of
Charter, Charter Holdco, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I,
CCH II, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital |
John H. Tory
|
|
Director of Charter |
Larry W. Wangberg
|
|
Director of Charter |
The following sets forth certain biographical information with
respect to the directors listed above.
Paul G. Allen, 52, has been Chairman of
Charters board of directors since July 1999, and Chairman
of the board of directors of Charter Investment, Inc. (a
predecessor to, and currently an affiliate of, Charter) since
December 1998. Mr. Allen, co-founder of Microsoft
Corporation, has been a private investor for more than
15 years, with interests in over 50 technology,
telecommunications, content and biotech companies.
Mr. Allens investments include Vulcan Inc., Vulcan
Productions, Inc., the Portland Trail Blazers NBA and Seattle
Seahawks NFL franchises, and investments in DreamWorks LLC and
Oxygen Media. In addition, Mr. Allen is a director of
Vulcan Programming Inc., Vulcan Ventures, Vulcan Inc., Vulcan
Cable III Inc., numerous privately held companies and,
until its sale in May 2004 to an unrelated third party, TechTV
L.L.C.
W. Lance Conn, 37, was elected to the board
of directors of Charter in September 2004. Since July 2004,
Mr. Conn has served as Executive Vice President, Investment
Management for Vulcan Inc., the investment and project
management company that oversees a diverse multi-billion dollar
portfolio of investments by Paul G. Allen. Prior to joining
Vulcan Inc., Mr. Conn was employed by America Online, Inc.,
an interactive online services company, from March 1996 to May
2003. From 1997 to 2000, Mr. Conn served in various senior
business development roles at America Online. In 2000,
Mr. Conn began supervising all of America Onlines
European investments, alliances and business initiatives. In
2002, he became Senior Vice President of America Online
U.S. where he led a company-wide effort to restructure and
optimize America Onlines operations. From September 1994
until February 1996, Mr. Conn was an attorney with the Shaw
Pittman law firm in Washington, D.C. Mr. Conn holds a
J.D.
100
degree from the University of Virginia, a masters degree
in history from the University of Mississippi and an A.B. in
history from Princeton University.
Nathaniel A. Davis, 51, was elected to the board
of directors of Charter on August 23, 2005. Since June
2003, Mr. Davis has been Managing Director and owner of
RANND Advisory Group, a technology Consulting Group, which
advises venture capital, telecom and other technology related
firms. From January 2000 through May of 2003, he was President
and Chief Operating Officer of XO Communication, Inc. XO
Communications filed a petition to reorganize under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in June 2002 and
completed its restructuring and emerged from Chapter 11 in
January 2003. From October 1998 to December 1999 he was
Executive Vice President, Network and Technical Services of
Nextel Communications, Inc. Prior to that, he worked for MCI
Communications from 1982 until 1998 in a number of positions,
including as Chief Financial Officer of MCIT from November 1996
until October 1998. Prior to that, Mr. Davis served in a
variety of roles that include Senior Vice President of Network
Operations, Chief Operating Officer of MCImetro, Sr. Vice
President of Finance, Vice President of Systems Development.
Mr. Davis holds a B.S. degree from Stevens Institute of
Technology, an M.S. from Moore School of Engineering and an
M.B.A. from the Wharton School at the University of
Pennsylvania. He is a member of the boards of XM Satellite Radio
Holdings, Inc. and of Mutual of America Capital Management
Corporation.
Jonathan L. Dolgen, 60, was elected to the board
of directors of Charter in October 2004. Since July 2004,
Mr. Dolgen has also been a Senior Advisor to Viacom, Inc. a
worldwide entertainment and media company, where he provides
advisory services to the current Chairman and Chief Executive of
Viacom, or others designated by him, on an as requested basis.
Since July 2004, Mr. Dolgen has been a private investor and
since September 2004, Mr. Dolgen has been a principal of
Wood River Ventures, LLC, a private start-up entity that seeks
investment and other opportunities primarily in the media
sector. Mr. Dolgen is also a member of the board of
directors of Expedia, Inc. From April 1994 to July 2004,
Mr. Dolgen served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
of the Viacom Entertainment Group, a unit of Viacom, where he
oversaw various operations of Viacoms businesses, which
during 2003 and 2004 primarily included the operations engaged
in motion picture production and distribution, television
production and distribution, regional theme parks, theatrical
exhibition and publishing. Mr. Dolgen began his career in
the entertainment industry in 1976, and until joining the Viacom
Entertainment Group, served in executive positions at Columbia
Pictures Industries, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox and Fox, Inc.,
and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Mr. Dolgen holds a B.S.
degree from Cornell University and a J.D. degree from New York
University.
Robert P. May, 56, was elected to Charters
board of directors in October 2004 and was Charters
Interim President and Chief Executive Officer from January until
August 2005. Mr. May has served on the board of directors
of HealthSouth Corporation, a national provider of healthcare
services, since October 2002, and has been its Chairman since
July 2004. Mr. May also served as HealthSouth
Corporations Interim Chief Executive Officer from March
2003 until May 2004, and as Interim President of its Outpatient
and Diagnostic Division from August 2003 to January 2004. In
September 2005, Mr. May announced that he will resign from
the board of directors of HealthSouth Corporation effective
October 1, 2005. Since March 2001, Mr. May has been a
private investor and principal of RPM Systems, which provides
strategic business consulting services. From March 1999 to March
2001, Mr. May served on the board of directors and was
Chief Executive of PNV Inc., a national telecommunications
company. PNV Inc. filed for bankruptcy in December 2000. Prior
to his employment at PNV Inc., Mr. May was Chief Operating
Officer and a member of the board of directors of Cablevision
Systems Corporation from October 1996 to February 1998, and from
1973 to 1993 he held several senior executive positions with
Federal Express Corporation, including President, Business
Logistics Services. Mr. May was educated at Curry College
and Boston College and attended Harvard Business Schools
Program for Management Development.
David C. Merritt, 51, was elected to the board of
directors of Charter in July 2003, and was also appointed as
Chairman of Charters Audit Committee at that time. Since
October 2003, Mr. Merritt has been a Managing Director of
Salem Partners, LLC, an investment banking firm. He was a
Managing
101
Director in the Entertainment Media Advisory Group at Gerard
Klauer Mattison & Co., Inc., a company that provided
financial advisory services to the entertainment and media
industries, from January 2001 through April 2003. From July 1999
to November 2000, he served as Chief Financial Officer of CKE
Associates, Ltd., a privately held company with interests in
talent management, film production, television production, music
and news media. He also served as a director of Laser-Pacific
Media Corporation from January 2001 until October 2003 and
served as Chairman of its audit committee. In December 2003, he
became a director of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc.
Mr. Merritt joined KPMG in 1975 and served in a variety of
capacities during his years with the firm, including national
partner in charge of the media and entertainment practice and
before joining CKE Associates, Mr. Merritt was an audit and
consulting partner of KPMG for 14 years. Mr. Merritt
holds a B.S. degree in Business and Accounting from California
State University Northridge.
Marc B. Nathanson, 60, has been a director of
Charter since January 2000 and serves as Vice Chairman of
Charters board of directors, a non-executive position.
Mr. Nathanson is the Chairman of Mapleton Investments LLC,
an investment vehicle formed in 1999. He also founded and served
as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Falcon Holding Group,
Inc., a cable operator, and its predecessors, from 1975 until
1999. He served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Enstar Communications Corporation, a cable operator, from 1988
until November 1999. Prior to 1975, Mr. Nathanson held
executive positions with Teleprompter Corporation, Warner Cable
and Cypress Communications Corporation. In 1995, he was
appointed by the President of the United States to the
Broadcasting Board of Governors, and from 1998 through September
2002, served as its Chairman. Mr. Nathanson holds a
bachelors degree in Mass Communications from the University of
Denver and a masters degree in Political Science from University
of California/ Santa Barbara.
Jo Allen Patton, 47, has been a director of
Charter since April 2004. Ms. Patton joined Vulcan Inc. as
Vice President in 1993, and since that time she has served as an
officer and director of many affiliates of Mr. Allen,
including her current position as President and Chief Executive
Officer of Vulcan Inc. since July 2001. Ms. Patton is also
President of Vulcan Productions, an independent feature film and
documentary production company, Vice Chair of First &
Goal, Inc., which developed and operated the Seattle Seahawks
NFL stadium, and serves as Executive Director of the six Paul G.
Allen Foundations. Ms. Patton is a co-founder of the
Experience Music Project museum, as well as the Science Fiction
Museum and Hall of Fame. Ms. Patton is the sister of
Mr. Allen.
Neil Smit, 46, was elected a director and
President and Chief Executive Officer of Charter on
August 22, 2005. He had previously worked at Time Warner,
Inc. since 2000, most recently serving as the President of Time
Warners America Online Access Business. He also served at
America Online (AOL) as Executive Vice President,
Member Development, Senior Vice President of AOLs product
and programming team, Chief Operating Officer of AOL Local,
Chief Operating Officer of MapQuest. Prior to that he was a
regional vice president with Nabisco and was with Pillsbury in a
number of management positions. Mr. Smit has a
bachelors of science degree from Duke University and a
masters degree with a focus in international business from
Tufts Universitys Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.
John H. Tory, 51, has been a director of Charter
since December 2001. Mr. Tory served as the Chief Executive
Officer of Rogers Cable Inc., Canadas largest broadband
cable operator, from 1999 until 2003. From 1995 to 1999,
Mr. Tory was President and Chief Executive Officer of
Rogers Media Inc., a broadcasting and publishing company. Prior
to joining Rogers, Mr. Tory was a Managing Partner and
member of the executive committee at Tory Tory
DesLauriers & Binnington, one of Canadas largest
law firms. Mr. Tory serves on the board of directors of
Rogers Telecommunications Limited and Cara Operations Limited
and is Chairman of Cara Operations Audit Committee.
Mr. Tory was educated at University of Toronto Schools,
Trinity College (University of Toronto) and Osgoode Hall Law
School. Effective September 18, 2004, Mr. Tory was
elected Leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party. On
March 17, 2005, he was elected a Member of the Provincial
Parliament and on March 29, 2005, became the Leader of Her
Majestys Loyal Opposition. On June 29, 2005,
Mr. Tory formally notified
102
Charter that he intends to resign from the board of directors.
The date for his departure has not yet been determined, but he
has indicated that he will continue to serve on Charters
board, as well as the audit committee, at least until a
replacement director is named.
Larry W. Wangberg, 63, has been a director of
Charter since January 2002. From August 1997 to May 2004,
Mr. Wangberg was a director of TechTV L.L.C., a cable
television network controlled by Paul Allen. He also served as
its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from August 1997
through July 2002. In May 2004, TechTV L.L.C. was sold to an
unrelated party. Prior to joining TechTV L.L.C.,
Mr. Wangberg was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
StarSight Telecast Inc., an interactive navigation and program
guide company which later merged with Gemstar International,
from 1994 to 1997. Mr. Wangberg was Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of Times Mirror Cable Television and Senior
Vice President of its corporate parent, Times Mirror Co., from
1983 to 1994. He currently serves on the boards of Autodesk Inc.
and ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Mr. Wangberg holds a
bachelors degree in Mechanical Engineering and a
masters degree in Industrial Engineering, both from the
University of Minnesota.
Audit Committee
Charters Audit Committee, which has a written charter
approved by the board of directors, consisted of three directors
as of March 28, 2005: Charles Lillis, John Tory and David
Merritt, all of whom are independent in accordance with the
applicable corporate governance listing standards of the NASDAQ
National Market. Charters board of directors has
determined that, in its judgment, David Merritt is an audit
committee financial expert within the meaning of the applicable
federal regulations.
Mr. Lillis resigned from Charters board of directors,
effective March 28, 2005. Mr. Lillis was one of three
independent members of the Audit Committee. On August 23,
2005, Nathaniel Davis, who is independent in accordance with the
applicable corporate governance listing standards of the NASDAQ
National Market, was elected to the Audit Committee.
On June 29, 2005, Mr. Tory formally notified Charter
that he intends to resign from its board of directors and the
board committees on which he serves. The date for
Mr. Torys departure has not yet been determined, but
he has indicated that he will continue to serve on
Charters board and its committees at least until a
replacement director is named.
Director Compensation
Each non-employee member of Charters board receives an
annual retainer of $40,000 in cash plus restricted stock,
vesting one year after the date of grant, with a value on the
date of grant of $50,000. In addition, Charters Audit
Committee chair receives $25,000 per year, and the chair of
each other committee receives $10,000 per year. Prior to
February 22, 2005, all committee members also received
$1,000 for attendance at each committee meeting. Beginning on
February 22, 2005 each director also receives $1,000 for
telephonic attendance at each meeting of the full board and
$2,000 for in-person attendance. Each director of Charter is
entitled to reimbursement for costs incurred in connection with
attendance at board and committee meetings. Vulcan has informed
us that, in accordance with its internal policy, Mr. Conn
turns over to Vulcan all cash compensation he receives for his
participation on Charters board of directors or committees
thereof. Mr. May and Ms. Patton do not receive
additional compensation for serving as directors of CCO Holdings.
Directors who were employees did not receive additional
compensation in 2003 or 2004. Mr. Vogel, who was
Charters President and Chief Executive Officer in 2004,
was the only director who was also an employee during 2004.
Charters Bylaws provide that all directors are entitled to
indemnification to the maximum extent permitted by law from and
against any claims, damages, liabilities, losses, costs or
expenses incurred in
103
connection with or arising out of the performance by them of
their duties for Charter or its subsidiaries. In addition, we
have been informed by Vulcan that the bylaws of Vulcan, Inc.
also provide that Ms. Patton and Messrs. Allen and
Conn are entitled to similar indemnification by Vulcan in
connection with their service on Charters board of
directors and committees thereof.
Executive Officers
The following persons are executive officers of Charter and
other than Mr. Allen, also hold similar positions with
Charter Holdco, Charter Holdings, CCH II, CCO Holdings, CCO
Holdings Capital and Charter Operating:
|
|
|
Executive Officers |
|
Position |
|
|
|
Paul G. Allen
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors |
Neil Smit
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer |
Sue Ann R. Hamilton
|
|
Executive Vice President, Programming |
Thomas J. Hearity
|
|
Senior Vice President, Acting General Counsel and Secretary |
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
Paul E. Martin
|
|
Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller |
Lynne F. Ramsey
|
|
Senior Vice President, Human Resources |
Information regarding our executive officers who do not serve as
directors is set forth below.
Wayne H. Davis, 51, Executive Vice President and
Chief Technical Officer. Prior to his current position,
Mr. Davis served as Senior Vice President, Engineering and
Technical Operations, and as Assistant to the President/ Vice
President of Management Services since July 2002 and prior to
that, he was Vice President of Engineering/ Operations for
Charters National Region from December 2001. Before
joining Charter, Mr. Davis held the position of Vice
President of Engineering for Comcast Corporation, Inc. Prior to
that, he held various engineering positions including Vice
President of Engineering for Jones Intercable Inc. He began his
career in the cable industry in 1980. He attended the State
University of New York at Albany. Mr. Davis serves as an
advisory board member of Cedar Point Communications, and as a
board member of @Security Broadband Corp., a company in which
Charter owns an equity investment interest. Mr. Davis is
also a member of the Society of Cable Telecommunications
Engineers.
Sue Ann R. Hamilton, 44, Executive Vice President,
Programming. Ms. Hamilton joined Charter as Senior Vice
President of Programming in March 2003 and was promoted to her
current position in April 2005. From March 1999 to November
2002, Ms. Hamilton served as Vice President of Programming
for AT&T Broadband, L.L.C. Prior to that, from October 1993
to March 1999, Ms. Hamilton held numerous management
positions at AT&T Broadband, L.L.C. and Tele-Communications,
Inc. (TCI), which was acquired by AT&T Broadband, L.L.C. in
1999. Prior to her cable television career with TCI, she was a
partner with Kirkland & Ellis representing domestic and
international clients in complex commercial transactions and
securities matters. A magna cum laude graduate of Carleton
College in Northfield, Minnesota, Ms. Hamilton received a
J.D. degree from Stanford Law School, where she was Associate
Managing Editor of the Stanford Law Review and Editor of
the Stanford Journal of International Law.
Thomas J. Hearity, 58, Senior Vice President,
Acting General Counsel and Secretary. Mr. Hearity joined
Charter as Vice President and Associate General counsel in
September 2003 and was promoted to Senior Vice President and
Associate General Counsel in August 2004. He was appointed to
Acting General Counsel in April 2005 and appointed Secretary in
May 2005. Prior to joining Charter, Mr. Hearity served as
outside counsel for Charter and several other major wireline and
wireless telecommunications firms from 1996 to 2003.
Mr. Hearity served as counsel for the NYNEX Corporation
104
from 1984 to 1996. Mr. Hearity graduated with honors and
received a B.A. degree in History and a J.D. degree from the
University of Iowa.
Michael J. Lovett, 44, Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Lovett was promoted to his
current position in April 2005. Prior to that he served as
Executive Vice President, Operations and Customer Care from
September 2004 through March 2005, and as Senior Vice President,
Midwest Division Operations and as Senior Vice President of
Operations Support, since joining Charter in August 2003 until
September 2004. Mr. Lovett was Chief Operating Officer of
Voyant Technologies, Inc., a voice conferencing hardware/
software solutions provider, from December 2001 to August 2003.
From November 2000 to December 2001, he was Executive Vice
President of Operations for OneSecure, Inc., a startup company
delivering management/monitoring of firewalls and virtual
private networks. Prior to that, Mr. Lovett was Regional
Vice President at AT&T from June 1999 to November 2000 where
he was responsible for operations. Mr. Lovett was Senior
Vice President at Jones Intercable from October 1989 to June
1999 where he was responsible for operations in nine states.
Mr. Lovett began his career in cable television at Centel
Corporation where he held a number of positions.
Paul E. Martin, 45, Senior Vice President, Interim
Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
Corporate Controller. Mr. Martin has been employed by
Charter since March 2000, when he joined Charter as Vice
President and Corporate Controller. In April 2002,
Mr. Martin was promoted to Senior Vice President, Principal
Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller and in August 2004
was named Interim co-Chief Financial Officer and in April 2005
was named Interim Chief Financial Officer. Prior to joining us
in March 2000, Mr. Martin was Vice President and Controller
for Operations and Logistics for Fort James Corporation, a
manufacturer of paper products. From 1995 to February 1999,
Mr. Martin was Chief Financial Officer of Rawlings Sporting
Goods Company, Inc. Mr. Martin received a B.S. degree with
honors in Accounting from the University of Missouri
St. Louis.
Lynne F. Ramsey, 48, Senior Vice President, Human
Resources. Ms. Ramsey joined Charters Human Resources
group in March 2001 and served as Corporate Vice President,
Human Resources. She was promoted to her current position in
July 2004. Before joining Charter, Ms. Ramsey was Executive
Vice President of Human Resources for Broadband Infrastructure
Group from March 2000 through November 2000. From 1994 to 1999,
Ms. Ramsey served as Senior Vice President of Human
Resources for Firstar Bank, previously Mercantile Bank of
St. Louis. She served as Vice President of Human Resources
for United Postal Savings from 1982 through 1994, when it was
acquired by Mercantile Bank of St. Louis. Ms. Ramsey
received a bachelors degree in Education from Maryville
College and a masters degree in Human Resources Management
from Washington University.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
Until April 2004, when Mr. Savoy resigned from
Charters board of directors, Charters Compensation
Committee was comprised of Messrs. Allen, Savoy and
Nathanson. In 2004, Ms. Peretsman and Mr. Merritt
served as the Option Plan Committee that administered the 1999
Charter Communications Option Plan and the Charter
Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan until
Mr. Lillis replaced Ms. Peretsman on the Option Plan
Committee in July 2004. The Option Plan Committee and the
Compensation Committee merged in February 2005. The Compensation
Committee is currently comprised of Messrs. Allen, May,
Merritt and Nathanson.
105
No member of Charters Compensation Committee or its Option
Plan Committee was an officer or employee of Charter or any of
its subsidiaries during 2004, except for Mr. Allen who
served as a non-employee chairman of the Compensation Committee.
Also, Mr. Nathanson was an officer of certain of our
subsidiaries prior to their acquisition by Charter in 1999 and
held the title of Vice Chairman of Charters board of
directors, a non-executive, non-salaried position, in 2004.
Mr. Allen is the 100% owner and a director of Vulcan Inc.
and certain of its affiliates, which employed Mr. Savoy,
one of our directors until April 27, 2004, as an executive
officer in the past and currently employs Mr. Conn and
Ms. Patton as executive officers. Mr. Allen also was a
director of and indirectly owned 98% of TechTV, of which
Mr. Wangberg, one of Charters directors, was a
director until the sale of TechTV to an unrelated third party in
May 2004. Transactions between Charter and members of the
Compensation Committee are more fully described in
Director Compensation and in
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Other Miscellaneous Relationships.
During 2004, (1) none of Charters executive officers
served on the compensation committee of any other company that
has an executive officer currently serving on Charters
board of directors, Compensation Committee or Option Plan
Committee and (2) except for Carl Vogel who served as a
director of Digeo, Inc., an entity of which Paul Allen is a
director and by virtue of his position as Chairman of the board
of directors of Digeo, Inc. is also a non-employee executive
officer. None of Charters executive officers served as a
director of another entity, one of whose executive officers
served on Charters Compensation Committee or Option Plan
Committee.
106
Executive Compensation
Summary
Compensation Table
Charter is CCO Holdings sole manager. The following table
sets forth information regarding the compensation to those
executive officers of Charter listed below for services rendered
for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and
2004. These officers consist of the Chief Executive Officer,
each of the other four most highly compensated executive
officers as of December 31, 2004, and one other highly
compensated executive officer who served during 2004 but was not
an executive officer on December 31, 2004. Pursuant to a
mutual services agreement, each of Charter and Charter Holdco
provides its personnel and provides services to the other,
including the knowledge and expertise of their respective
officers, that are reasonably requested to manage Charter
Holdco, CCH II, CCO Holdings and the cable systems owned by
their subsidiaries. See Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions Transactions Arising Out of Our
Organizational Structure and Mr. Allens Investment in
Charter and Its Subsidiaries Intercompany Management
Arrangements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation | |
|
Compensation Award | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted | |
|
Securities | |
|
|
|
|
Year | |
|
|
|
Other Annual | |
|
Stock | |
|
Underlying | |
|
All Other | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Salary | |
|
Bonus | |
|
Compensation | |
|
Awards | |
|
Options | |
|
Compensation | |
Name and Principal Position |
|
Dec. 31 | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
(#) | |
|
($)(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carl E. Vogel(2)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
1,038,462 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
(8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,658,000 |
(18) |
|
|
580,000 |
|
|
|
42,426 |
(24) |
|
Former President and |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
(9) |
|
|
30,345 |
(15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
750,000 |
|
|
|
12,639 |
(24) |
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
980,769 |
|
|
|
330,000 |
(9) |
|
|
214,961 |
(15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
10,255 |
(24) |
Margaret A. Bellville(3)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
478,366 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,309 |
(16) |
|
|
612,000 |
(19) |
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
204,408 |
(25) |
|
Former Executive Vice |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
581,730 |
|
|
|
203,125 |
(9) |
|
|
30,810 |
(16) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
109,139 |
(25) |
|
President, Chief Operating Officer |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
9,615 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
(9)(10) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Chang(4)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
448,077 |
|
|
|
85,700 |
(11) |
|
|
7,255 |
(17) |
|
|
395,250 |
(20) |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
5,510 |
|
|
Former Executive Vice President of Finance and Strategy,
Interim
co-Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
15,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
192,000 |
(20) |
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Steven A. Schumm(5)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
467,308 |
|
|
|
15,815 |
(12) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
862,952 |
(21) |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
12,360 |
|
|
Former Executive Vice |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
448,077 |
|
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
9,889 |
|
|
President and Chief |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
436,058 |
|
|
|
588,000 |
(13) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
5,255 |
|
|
Administrative Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Curtis S. Shaw(6)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
422,115 |
|
|
|
16,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
395,250 |
(22) |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
12,592 |
|
|
Former Executive Vice |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
275,782 |
|
|
|
37,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
9,411 |
(26) |
|
President, General Counsel and Secretary |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
249,711 |
|
|
|
281,500 |
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
3,096 |
|
Michael J. Lovett(7)
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
291,346 |
|
|
|
241,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
351,570 |
(23) |
|
|
172,000 |
|
|
|
15,150 |
(27) |
|
Executive Vice President, |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
81,731 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
2,400 |
(27) |
|
Operations and Customer Care |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Except as noted in notes 24 through 27 below, these amounts
consist of matching contributions under Charters 401(k)
plan, premiums for supplemental life insurance available to
executives, and long-term disability available to executives. |
|
|
(2) |
Mr. Vogel resigned from all of his positions with Charter
and its subsidiaries on January 17, 2005. |
|
|
(3) |
Ms. Bellville became the Chief Operating Officer of Charter
in December 2002 and terminated her employment, effective
September 30, 2004. |
|
|
(4) |
Mr. Chang was hired as Executive Vice President of Finance
and Strategy in December 2003, and was appointed Interim
co-Chief Financial Officer in August 2004. Mr. Chang
resigned from all positions with Charter and its subsidiaries
effective April 15, 2005. |
107
|
|
|
|
(5) |
Mr. Schumms position with Charter and its
subsidiaries was eliminated, resulting in the termination of his
employment on January 28, 2005. |
|
|
(6) |
Mr. Shaw resigned from all positions with Charter and its
subsidiaries effective April 15, 2005. |
|
|
(7) |
Mr. Lovett joined Charter in August 2003 and was promoted
to Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer in April
2005. |
|
|
(8) |
Mr. Vogels bonus for 2004 was a mid-year
discretionary bonus. |
|
|
(9) |
Mr. Vogels and Ms. Bellvilles 2002 and
2003 bonuses were determined in accordance with the terms of
their respective employment agreements. |
|
|
(10) |
Includes a one-time signing bonus of $150,000 pursuant to an
employment agreement. |
|
(11) |
Mr. Changs bonus for 2004 represents the 2004 portion
of a $150,000 special bonus which was paid in connection with
his continued service as Interim co-Chief Financial Officer
through April 15, 2005. |
|
(12) |
Mr. Schumms bonus for 2004 was determined in
accordance with his separation agreement. |
|
(13) |
Includes a stay bonus representing the principal and
interest forgiven under employees promissory note,
amounting to $363,000 for 2002; and $225,000 awarded as a bonus
for services performed in 2002. |
|
(14) |
Includes a stay bonus representing the principal and
interest forgiven under employees promissory note,
amounting to $181,500 for 2002; and $100,000 awarded as a bonus
for services performed in 2002. |
|
(15) |
Amount attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane in
2003 and $100,000 attributed to personal use and commuting in
the corporate airplane in 2002 and $114,961 for purchase of a
car in 2002. |
|
(16) |
Includes (i) for 2004, reimbursement for taxes (on a
grossed up basis) paid in respect of prior
reimbursements for relocation expenses, and (ii) for 2003,
$26,010 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane and
$4,800 for car allowance. |
|
(17) |
Includes reimbursement for taxes (on a grossed up
basis) paid in respect of prior reimbursements for relocation
expenses. |
|
(18) |
Includes 340,000 performance shares granted in January 2004
under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to vest on the
third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets
certain performance criteria. Also includes 680,000 restricted
shares issued in exchange for stock options held by the named
officer pursuant to the February 2004 option exchange program
described below, one half of which constituted performance
shares which were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant
date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria, and the
other half of which were to vest over three years in equal
one-third installments. At December 31, 2004, the value of
all of the named officers unvested restricted stock
holdings (including performance shares) was $2,310,468, based on
a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for
Charters Class A common stock on December 31,
2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon termination of
employment. The remainder of the restricted shares will vest in
part on the terms described below under Employment
Arrangements. |
|
(19) |
These restricted shares consisted solely of performance shares
granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to have
vested on the third anniversary of the grant date only if
Charter meets certain performance criteria. At December 31,
2004, the value of all of the named officers unvested
restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $0,
since all performance shares were previously forfeited upon the
termination of employment. |
|
(20) |
Restricted shares granted in 2003 vest over four years in equal
one-fourth installments. Restricted shares granted in 2004
represent 77,500 performance shares granted under our Long-Term
Incentive Program that were to vest on the third anniversary of
the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance
criteria. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the
named officers unvested restricted stock holdings
(including performance shares) was $257,600 based on a per share
market |
108
|
|
|
value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for Charters
Class A common stock on December 31, 2004. All
performance shares were forfeited upon termination of
employment. The remainder of restricted shares will vest in part
on the terms described below under Employment
Arrangements. |
|
(21) |
Includes 77,500 performance shares granted in January 2004 under
our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to vest on the third
anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain
performance criteria. Also includes restricted shares issued in
exchange for stock options held by the named officer pursuant to
the February 2004 option exchange program described below. One
half of these restricted shares constitutes performance shares
which were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date
only if Charter meets certain performance criteria and the other
half of which were to vest over three years in equal one-third
installments. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the
named officers unvested restricted stock holdings
(including performance shares) was $417,240, based on a per
share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for
Charters Class A common stock on December 31,
2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon the termination
of employment. The remainder of the restricted shares will vest
in part on the terms described below under Employment
Arrangements. |
|
(22) |
These restricted shares consist solely of performance shares
granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that will vest on
the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets
certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the
value of all of the named officers unvested restricted
stock holdings (including performance shares) was $173,600 based
on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for
Charters Class A common stock on December 31,
2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon termination of
employment. |
|
(23) |
These restricted shares consist solely of performance shares
granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that will vest on
the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets
certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the
value of all of the named officers unvested restricted
stock holdings (including performance shares) was $197,120,
based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24
for Charters Class A common stock on
December 31, 2004. |
|
(24) |
In addition to items in note 1 above, includes (i) for
2004, $28,977 attributed to personal use of the corporate
airplane, $10,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory services and
(ii) for 2003, $10,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory
services; and (iii) for 2002, $10,000 as reimbursement for
tax advisory services. |
|
(25) |
In addition to items in note 1 above, includes (i) for
2004, $183,899 for severance and accrued vacation at termination
of employment, $10,299 for COBRA payments following termination,
$4,650 for automobile allowance and $2,831 attributed to
personal use of the corporate airplane, and (ii) for 2003,
$5,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory services, $7,500 for
legal services and $93,684 paid in relation to relocation
expenses. |
|
(26) |
In addition to items in note 1 above, includes for 2003,
$2,287 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane. |
|
(27) |
In addition to items in note 1 above, includes,
(i) for 2004, $7,200 for automobile allowance, and $597
attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane and
(ii) for 2003, $2,400 for automobile allowance. |
109
2004 Option Grants
The following table shows individual grants of options made to
individuals named in the Summary Compensation Table during 2004.
All such grants were made under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
and the exercise price was based upon the fair market value of
the Charter Class A common stock on the respective grant
dates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential Realizable Value | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at Assumed Annual Rate | |
|
|
Securities | |
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
of Stock Price | |
|
|
Underlying | |
|
Options | |
|
|
|
|
|
Appreciation for | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Granted to | |
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Option Term(2) | |
|
|
Granted | |
|
Employees | |
|
Price | |
|
Expiration | |
|
| |
Name |
|
(#)(1) | |
|
in 2004 | |
|
($/Sh) | |
|
Date | |
|
5%($) | |
|
10%($) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carl E. Vogel(3)
|
|
|
580,000 |
|
|
|
6.17 |
% |
|
$ |
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
1,885,803 |
|
|
|
4,778,996 |
|
Margaret A. Bellville(4)
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
% |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
650,277 |
|
|
|
1,647,930 |
|
Derek Chang(5)
|
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
% |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
438,937 |
|
|
|
1,112,353 |
|
Steven A. Schumm(6)
|
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
% |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
438,937 |
|
|
|
1,112,353 |
|
Curtis S. Shaw(7)
|
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
% |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
438,937 |
|
|
|
1,112,353 |
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
77,000 |
|
|
|
0.82 |
% |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
1/27/14 |
|
|
|
251,982 |
|
|
|
638,573 |
|
|
|
|
12,500 |
|
|
|
0.13 |
% |
|
|
4.555 |
|
|
|
4/27/14 |
|
|
|
35,808 |
|
|
|
90,744 |
|
|
|
|
82,000 |
|
|
|
0.87 |
% |
|
|
2.865 |
|
|
|
10/26/14 |
|
|
|
147,746 |
|
|
|
374,418 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Options are transferable under limited conditions, primarily to
accommodate estate planning purposes. These options generally
vest in four equal installments commencing on the first
anniversary following the grant date. |
|
(2) |
This column shows the hypothetical gains on the options granted
based on assumed annual compound price appreciation of 5% and
10% over the full ten-year term of the options. The assumed
rates of 5% and 10% appreciation are mandated by the SEC and do
not represent our estimate or projection of future prices. |
|
(3) |
Mr. Vogels employment terminated on January 17,
2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options
will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all
vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days
thereafter. |
|
(4) |
Ms. Bellvilles employment terminated on
September 30, 2004. Under the terms of the separation
agreement, her options will continue to vest until
December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable
until sixty (60) days thereafter. |
|
(5) |
Mr. Chang resigned effective April 15, 2005.
Mr. Changs agreement provided that one half of his
unvested restricted shares would immediately vest, and one half
of his unvested options of the initial option grant would vest
if he elected to terminate his employment due to a change in our
Chief Executive Officer. |
|
(6) |
Mr. Schumms employment terminated on January 28,
2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options
will continue to vest until April 28, 2006, and all vested
options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter. |
|
(7) |
Mr. Shaw resigned, effective April 15, 2005. All of
his options expired by June 15, 2005. |
|
|
|
2004 Aggregated Option Exercises and Option Value |
The following table sets forth, for the individuals named in the
Summary Compensation Table, (i) information concerning
options exercised during 2004, (ii) the number of shares of
Charters Class A common stock underlying unexercised
options at year-end 2004, and (iii) the value of
unexercised in-the-
110
money options (i.e., the positive spread between the
exercise price of outstanding options and the market value of
Charters Class A common stock) on December 31,
2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Underlying | |
|
Value of Unexercised | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Unexercised Options at | |
|
In-the-Money Options at | |
|
|
Acquired on | |
|
Value | |
|
December 31, 2004(#)(1) | |
|
December 31, 2004($)(2) | |
|
|
Exercise | |
|
Realized | |
|
| |
|
| |
Name |
|
(#) | |
|
($) | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carl E. Vogel(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,499,999 |
|
|
|
3,230,001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret A. Bellville(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
385,416 |
|
|
|
314,584 |
|
|
|
254,375 |
|
|
|
75,625 |
|
Derek Chang(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,500 |
|
|
|
397,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven A. Schumm(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
182,500 |
|
|
|
502,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Curtis S. Shaw(7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
438,833 |
|
|
|
420,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
247,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Options granted prior to 2001 and under the 1999 Charter
Communications Option Plan, when vested, are exercisable for
membership units of Charter Holdco which are immediately
exchanged on a one-for-one basis for shares of Charters
Class A common stock upon exercise of the option. Options
granted under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and after 2000 are
exercisable for shares of Charters Class A common
stock. |
|
(2) |
Based on a per share market value (closing price) of $2.24 as of
December 31, 2004 for Charters Class A common
stock. |
|
(3) |
Mr. Vogels employment terminated on January 17,
2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options
will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all
vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days
thereafter. |
|
(4) |
Ms. Bellvilles employment terminated on
September 30, 2004. Under the terms of the separation
agreement, her options will continue to vest until
December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable
until sixty (60) days thereafter. |
|
(5) |
Mr. Chang resigned from all of his positions with Charter
effective April 15, 2005. One-half of the remainder of his
options will vest on the terms described below under
Employment Arrangements. |
|
(6) |
Mr. Schumms employment terminated on January 28,
2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options
will continue to vest until April 28, 2006, and all vested
options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter. |
|
(7) |
Mr. Shaw resigned from all of his positions with Charter
effective April 15, 2005. All of his options expired by
June 15, 2005. |
111
Long-Term Incentive Plans Awards in Last Fiscal
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts Under | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Stock Price-Based Plans | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Shares, Units or | |
|
Performance or Other Period | |
|
Threshold | |
|
Target | |
|
Maximum | |
Name |
|
Other Rights(#) | |
|
Until Maturation or Payout | |
|
(#) | |
|
(#) | |
|
(#) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carl E. Vogel
|
|
|
340,000 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
238,000 |
|
|
|
340,000 |
|
|
|
680,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret A. Bellville
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
84,000 |
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Chang
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
54,250 |
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven A. Schumm
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
54,250 |
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Curtis S. Shaw
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
54,250 |
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
88,000 |
|
|
|
3 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
61,600 |
|
|
|
88,000 |
|
|
|
176,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option/ Stock Incentive Plans
The Plans. Charter has granted stock options,
restricted stock and other incentive compensation under two
plans the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan
and the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. The 1999 Charter
Communications Option Plan provided for the grant of options to
purchase membership units in Charter Holdco to current and
prospective employees and consultants of Charter Holdco and its
affiliates and to Charters current and prospective
non-employee directors. Membership units received upon exercise
of any options are immediately exchanged for shares of
Charters Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis.
The 2001 Stock Incentive Plan provides for the grant of
non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, dividend
equivalent rights, performance units and performance shares,
share awards, phantom stock and/or shares of restricted stock
(not to exceed 20,000,000 shares) as each term is defined
in the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Employees, officers,
consultants and directors of Charter and its subsidiaries and
affiliates are eligible to receive grants under the 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan. Generally, options expire 10 years from the
grant date. Unless sooner terminated by Charters board of
directors, the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan will terminate on
February 12, 2011, and no option or award can be granted
thereafter.
Together, the plans allow for the issuance of up to a total of
90,000,000 shares of Charters Class A common
stock (or units exchangeable for Charters Class A
common stock). Any shares covered by options that are terminated
under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan will be
transferred to the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan, and no new options
will be granted under the 1999 Charter Communications Option
Plan. At June 30, 2005, 1,310,020 shares had been
issued under the plans upon exercise of options, 685,476 had
been issued upon vesting of restricted stock granted under the
plans, and 1,307,612 shares were subject to future vesting
under restricted stock agreements. Of the remaining
86,696,892 shares covered by the plans, as of June 30,
2005, 26,782,312 were subject to outstanding options (32% of
which were vested), and there were 11,506,410 performance shares
granted under Charters Long-Term Incentive Program, which
will vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant
conditional upon Charters performance against certain
financial targets approved by Charters board of directors
at the time of the award. As of June 30, 2005,
48,408,170 shares remained available for future grants
under the plans. As of June 30, 2005, there were 5,720
participants in the plans.
The plans authorize the repricing of options, which could
include reducing the exercise price per share of any outstanding
option, permitting the cancellation, forfeiture or tender of
outstanding options in
112
exchange for other awards or for new options with a lower
exercise price per share, or repricing or replacing any
outstanding options by any other method.
Long-Term Incentive Plan. In January 2004, the
Compensation Committee of Charters board of directors
approved Charters Long-Term Incentive Program, or LTIP,
which is a program administered under the 2001 Stock Incentive
Plan. Under the LTIP, employees of Charter and its subsidiaries
whose pay classifications exceed a certain level are eligible to
receive stock options, and more senior level employees were
eligible to receive stock options and performance shares. The
stock options vest 25% on each of the first four anniversaries
of the date of grant. The performance shares vest on the third
anniversary of the date of grant shares of Class A common
stock are issued, conditional upon Charters performance
against financial performance measures established by
Charters management and approved by its board of directors
or Compensation Committee as of the time of the award. We
granted 6,899,600 performance shares in January 2004 under this
program and recognized expense of $8 million in the first
three quarters of 2004. However, in the fourth quarter of 2004,
we reversed the entire $8 million of expense based on our
assessment of the probability of achieving the financial
performance measures established by management and required to
be met for the performance shares to vest. In March and April
2005, Charter granted 2.8 million performance shares under
the LTIP.
The 2001 Stock Incentive Plan must be administered by, and
grants and awards to eligible individuals must be approved by
Charters board of directors or a committee thereof
consisting solely of non-employee directors as defined in
Section 16b-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. The board of directors or such committee determines the
terms of each stock option grant, restricted stock grant or
other award at the time of grant, including the exercise price
to be paid for the shares, the vesting schedule for each option,
the price, if any, to be paid by the grantee for the restricted
stock, the restrictions placed on the shares, and the time or
times when the restrictions will lapse. The board of directors
or such committee also has the power to accelerate the vesting
of any grant or extend the term thereof.
Upon a change of control of Charter, the board of directors of
Charter or the administering committee can shorten the exercise
period of any option, have the survivor or successor entity
assume the options with appropriate adjustments, or cancel
options and pay out in cash. If an optionees or
grantees employment is terminated without
cause or for good reason following a
change in control (as those terms are defined in the
plans), unless otherwise provided in an agreement, with respect
to such optionees or grantees awards under the
plans, all outstanding options will become immediately and fully
exercisable, all outstanding stock appreciation rights will
become immediately and fully exercisable, the restrictions on
the outstanding restricted stock will lapse, and all of the
outstanding performance shares will vest and the restrictions on
all of the outstanding performance shares will lapse as if all
performance objectives had been satisfied at the maximum level.
February 2004 Option Exchange. In January 2004,
Charter offered employees of Charter and its subsidiaries the
right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) under
the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per
share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock
or, in some instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio,
which varied depending on the exercise price of an
employees outstanding options, if an employee would have
received more than 400 shares of restricted stock in
exchange for tendered options, Charter issued to that employee
shares of restricted stock in the exchange. If, based on the
exchange ratios, an employee would have received 400 or fewer
shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options,
Charter instead paid to the employee cash in an amount equal to
the number of shares the employee would have received multiplied
by $5.00. The offer applied to options to purchase a total of
22,929,573 shares of Charter Class A common stock, or
approximately 48% of our 47,882,365 total options (vested and
unvested) issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2003.
Participation by employees was voluntary. Non-employee members
of the board of directors of Charter or any of its subsidiaries
were not eligible to participate in the exchange offer.
113
In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004,
Charter accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase
approximately 18,137,664 shares of Charters
Class A common stock. In exchange, Charter granted
approximately 1,966,686 shares of restricted stock,
including 460,777 performance shares to eligible employees of
the rank of senior vice president and above, and paid a total
cash amount of approximately $4 million (which amount
includes applicable withholding taxes) to those employees who
received cash rather than shares of restricted stock. The
restricted stock was granted on February 25, 2004.
Employees tendered approximately 79% of the options eligible to
be exchanged under the program.
Carl E. Vogel received 680,000 restricted shares in exchange for
3,400,000 options granted on October 8, 2001 with an
exercise price of $13.68 per share. Steven A. Schumm
received 108,768 restricted shares in exchange for 25,000
options granted on February 12, 2001 with an exercise price
of $23.09 per share and 140,000 options granted on
September 28, 2001 with an exercise price of
$11.99 per share and 782,681 options granted on
February 9, 1999 with an exercise price of $20.00 per
share.
The cost to Charter of the stock option exchange program was
approximately $10 million, with a 2004 cash compensation
expense of approximately $4 million and a non-cash
compensation expense of approximately $6 million to be
expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period of the
restricted stock issued in the exchange.
The participation of the Named Executive Officers in this
exchange offer is reflected in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities | |
|
Market Price of | |
|
|
|
New | |
|
Length of Original | |
|
|
|
|
Underlying | |
|
Stock at Time | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Exercise | |
|
Option Term | |
|
|
|
|
Options | |
|
of Exchange | |
|
at Time of | |
|
Price | |
|
Remaining at | |
Name |
|
Date | |
|
Exchanged | |
|
($) | |
|
Exchange ($) | |
|
($) | |
|
Date of Exchange | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carl E. Vogel
|
|
|
2/25/04 |
|
|
|
3,400,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
13.68 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
7 years 7 months |
|
|
Former President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven A. Schumm
|
|
|
2/25/04 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
23.09 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
7 years 0 months |
|
|
Former Executive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
11.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 years 7 months |
|
|
Vice President and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
782,681 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
20.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 years 11 months |
|
|
Chief Administrative Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
On February 25, 2004, in exchange for 3,400,000 options
tendered, 340,000 performance shares were granted with a three
year performance cycle and three year vesting were granted along
with 340,000 restricted stock units with one-third of the Shares
vesting on each of the first three anniversaries of the Date of
Grant. On the grant date, the price of the Companys common
stock was $4.37. |
|
|
(2) |
On February 25, 2004, in exchange for 108,768 options
tendered, 54,384 performance shares were granted with a three
year performance cycle and three year vesting were granted along
with 54,384 restricted stock units with one-third of the Shares
vesting on each of the first three anniversaries of the Date of
Grant. On the grant date, the price of the Companys common
stock was $4.37. |
2005 Executive Cash Award Plan
On June 9, 2005, Charter adopted the 2005 Executive Cash
Award Plan to provide additional incentive to, and retain the
services of, certain officers of Charter and its subsidiaries,
to achieve the highest level of individual performance and
contribute to the success of Charter. Eligible participants are
employees of Charter or any of its subsidiaries who have been
recommended by the CEO and designated and approved as Plan
participants by the Compensation Committee of Charters
board of directors. At the time the Plan was adopted, the
interim CEO recommended and the Compensation Committee
designated and approved as Plan participants the permanent
President and Chief Executive Officer position, Executive Vice
President positions and selected Senior Vice President positions.
The Plan provides that each participant be granted an award
which represents an opportunity to receive cash payments in
accordance with the Plan. An award will be credited in book
entry format to a
114
participants account in an amount equal to 100% of a
participants base salary on the date of Plan approval in
2005 and 20% of participants base salary in each year 2006
through 2009, based on that participants base salary as of
May 1 of the applicable year. The Plan awards will vest at
the rate of 50% of the plan award balance at the end of 2007 and
100% of the plan award balance at the end of 2009. Participants
will be entitled to receive payment of the vested portion of the
award if the participant remains employed by Charter
continuously from the date of the participants initial
participation through the end of the calendar year in which his
or her award becomes vested, subject to payment of pro-rated
award balances to a participant who terminates due to death or
disability or in the event Charter elects to terminate the Plan.
A participants eligibility for, and right to receive, any
payment under the Plan (except in the case of intervening death)
is conditioned upon the participant first executing and
delivering to Charter an agreement releasing and giving up all
claims that participant may have against Charter and related
parties arising out of or based upon any facts or conduct
occurring prior to the payment date, and containing additional
restrictions on post-employment use of confidential information,
non-competition and nonsolicitation and recruitment of customers
and employees.
Employment Arrangements and Related Agreements
Charter and Neil Smit entered into an agreement as of
August 9, 2005 whereby Mr. Smit will serve as
Charters President and Chief Executive Officer (the
Employment Agreement) for a term expiring on
December 31, 2008, unless extended for an additional two
years at Charters option. Under the Employment Agreement,
Mr. Smit will receive a $1,200,000 base salary per year,
through the third anniversary of the agreement, and thereafter
$1,440,000 per year for the remainder of the Employment
Agreement. Mr. Smit shall be eligible to receive a
performance-based target bonus of 125% of annualized salary,
with a maximum bonus of 200% of annualized salary, as determined
by the Compensation Committee of Charters Board of
Directors. However, for 2005 only, he will receive a minimum
bonus of $1,200,000, provided that he is employed by Charter on
December 31, 2005. Under Charters Long-Term Incentive
Plan he will receive options to
purchase 3,333,333 shares of Class A common
stock, exercisable for 10 years, with annual vesting of
one-third of the grant in each of the three years from the
employment date; a performance share award for a maximum of
4,123,720 shares of Class A common stock, to be earned
during a three-year performance cycle starting January 2006; and
a restricted stock award of 1,562,500 shares of
Class A common stock, with annual vesting over three years
following employment date. In addition, Mr. Smit will
receive another restricted stock award for 1,250,000 shares
of Class A common stock vesting on the first anniversary of
employment date.
Mr. Smit will receive full reimbursement for his relocation
expenses and employee benefits consistent with those made
generally available to other senior executives. In the event
that Mr. Smit is terminated by Charter without
cause or for good reason termination, as
those terms are defined in the Employment Agreement, he will
receive the greater of two times base salary or salary through
the remainder to the term of the Employment Agreement; a pro
rata bonus for the year of termination; full vesting of options
and restricted shares; vesting of performance stock if targets
are achieved; and twelve months of COBRA payments. The
Employment Agreement contains non-compete provisions from six
months to two years, depending on the type of termination.
Charter will gross up federal taxes in the event that
Mr. Smit is subject to any additional tax under
Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.
Charter entered into an agreement with Robert P. May, effective
January 17, 2005, whereby Mr. May served as
Charters Interim President and Chief Executive Officer
(the May Executive Services Agreement). Under the
May Executive Services Agreement, Mr. May received a
$1,250,000 base fee per year. Mr. May continued to receive
the compensation and reimbursement of expenses to which he was
entitled in his capacity as a member of Charters board of
directors. Mr. Mays employment agreement provided
that Charter would provide equity incentives commensurate with
his position and responsibilities, as determined by
Charters board of directors. Accordingly, Mr. May was
granted 100,000 shares of restricted stock under
Charters 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. The 100,000 restricted
shares vested on the date on which Mr. Mays interim
service as President and Chief Executive Officer terminated,
August 22,
115
2005. Mr. May served as an independent contractor and was
not entitled to any vacation or eligible to participate in any
employee benefit programs of Charter. Charter reimbursed
Mr. May for reasonable transportation costs from
Mr. Mays residence in Florida or other locations to
Charters offices and provided temporary living quarters or
reimbursed expenses related thereto.
On April 1, 2005, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Mr. Lovett, pursuant to which he will be
employed as Charters Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer for a term commencing April 1, 2005 and
expiring on April 1, 2008. The contract will be reviewed
every 18 months thereafter and may be extended pursuant to
such reviews. Under the agreement, Mr. Lovett will receive
an annual base salary of $575,000 and will be eligible to
receive an annual bonus targeted at 80% of his base salary under
our senior management bonus plan. Charter agreed to provide
Mr. Lovett with equity incentives commensurate with his
position and responsibilities, as determined by Charters
board of directors in its discretion. Accordingly,
Mr. Lovett has been granted 75,000 shares of
restricted stock under Charters 2001 Stock Incentive Plan.
The 75,000 restricted shares will vest one third on each of the
first three anniversaries of the date of grant (unless there is
an earlier termination event for Cause, as defined in
Charters 2001 Stock Incentive Plan). If his employment is
terminated without cause or if he terminates his employment due
to a change in control or for good reason (as defined in the
agreement), Charter will pay Mr. Lovett an amount equal to
the aggregate base salary due to Mr. Lovett during the
remainder of the term, within fifteen days of termination. In
addition, if Charter terminates his employment without cause,
Mr. Lovett will be entitled to receive a pro rated bonus
for the fiscal year in which he is terminated based upon
financial results through the month of termination.
Mr. Lovetts agreement includes a covenant not to
compete for the balance of the term and for two years
thereafter. The agreement further provides that Mr. Lovett
is entitled to receive certain relocation expenses and to
participate in any benefit plan generally afforded to, and to
receive vacation and sick pay on such terms as are offered to,
Charters other senior executive officers.
On September 7, 2005, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Wayne Davis, Executive Vice President and Chief
Technical Officer. The agreement provides that Mr. Davis
shall be employed in an executive capacity to perform such
duties as are assigned or delegated by the President and Chief
Executive Officer or the designee thereof, at a salary of
$450,000. The term of this agreement is two years from the date
of the agreement. Mr. Davis shall be eligible to
participate in Charters Long-Term Incentive Plan, Stock
Option Plan and to receive such employee benefits as are
available to other senior executives. In the event that he is
terminated by Charter without cause or for
good reason termination, as those terms are defined
in the agreement, he will receive his salary for the remainder
of the term of the agreement or twelve months salary,
whichever is greater; a pro rata bonus for the year of
termination; twelve months of COBRA payments; and the vesting of
options and restricted stock for as long as severance payments
are made. The agreement contains one-year, non-compete
provisions (or until the end of the term of the agreement, if
longer) in a Competitive Business, as such term is defined in
the agreements, and two-year non-solicitation clauses.
On September 2, 2005, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Mr. Martin, Senior Vice President, Interim
Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
Corporate Controller. The agreement provides that
Mr. Martin shall be employed in an executive capacity to
perform such duties as are assigned or delegated by the
President and Chief Executive Officer or the designee thereof,
at a salary of $240,625. The term of this agreement is two years
from the date of the agreement. Mr. Martin shall be
eligible to participate in Charters Long-Term Incentive
Plan, Stock Option Plan and to receive such employee benefits as
are available to other senior executives. In the event that he
is terminated by Charter without cause or for
good reason termination, as those terms are defined
in the agreement, he will receive his salary for the remainder
of the term of the agreement or twelve months salary,
whichever is greater; a pro rata bonus for the year of
termination; twelve months of COBRA payments; and the vesting of
options and restricted stock for as long as severance payments
are made. The agreement contains one-year, non-compete
provisions (or until the end of the term of the agreement, if
longer) in a Competitive Business, as such term is defined in
the agreements, and two-year non-solicitation clauses.
116
Effective April 15, 2005, Charter also entered into an
agreement governing the terms of the service of Mr. Paul E.
Martin as Interim Chief Financial Officer. Under the terms of
the agreement, Mr. Martin will receive approximately
$13,700 each month for his service in the capacity of Interim
Chief Financial Officer until a permanent Chief Financial
Officer is employed. Under the agreement, Mr. Martin will
also be eligible to receive an additional bonus opportunity of
up to approximately $13,600 per month served as Interim
Chief Financial Officer, payable in accordance with
Charters 2005 Executive Bonus Plan. The amounts payable to
Mr. Martin under the agreement are in addition to all other
amounts Mr. Martin receives for his services in his
capacity as Senior Vice President, Principal Accounting Officer
and Corporate Controller. In addition, Mr. Martin received
an additional special bonus of $50,000 for his service as
Interim co-Chief Financial Officer prior to April 15, 2005.
This amount is in addition to the bonus agreed upon in 2004 for
his service in that capacity through March 31, 2005.
Until his resignation effective April 15, 2005,
Mr. Chang was employed under the terms contained in an
offer letter effective December 2, 2003 providing for an
annual base salary of $400,000 (which was increased to
$450,000 per year) and eligibility for an annual incentive
target of 100% of the base salary (based on a combination of
personal performance goals and overall company performance).
Mr. Chang was also eligible to participate in our 2001
Stock Incentive Plan. Under this plan, Mr. Chang was
granted 350,000 options to purchase Class A common stock
and 50,000 restricted shares on December 9, 2003.
Mr. Chang was also entitled to participate in our LTIP.
Mr. Changs agreement provided that one-half of his
unvested restricted shares would immediately vest, and one-half
of his unvested options of the initial option grant would vest
if he was terminated without cause or if he elected to terminate
his employment due to (1) a change in Charters Chief
Executive Officer, (2) a change in reporting relationship
to anyone other than the Chief Executive Officer, (3) a
requirement that the employee relocate, or (4) a change of
control of Charter, if terminated without cause. In addition,
Mr. Chang was entitled to eighteen months of full severance
benefits at his current compensation rate, plus the pro rata
portion of his bonus amounts within thirty days after
termination because of any of these events. In light of
Mr. Vogels resignation, Charter and Mr. Chang
agreed that he would have until April 15, 2005 to exercise
his right to terminate his employment and receive the foregoing
vesting, severance and other benefits. In addition, Charter
agreed that it would pay Mr. Chang a special $150,000
bonus, in addition to any other bonuses to which he would be
otherwise entitled, conditioned on Mr. Changs
continued service as Interim co-Chief Financial Officer through
March 31, 2005, which was paid in April 2005.
Until his resignation in January 2005, Mr. Vogel was
employed as President and Chief Executive Officer, earning a
base annual salary of $1,000,000 and was eligible to receive an
annual bonus of up to $500,000, a portion of which was based on
personal performance goals and a portion of which was based on
company performance measured against criteria established by the
board of directors of Charter with Mr. Vogel. Pursuant to
his employment agreement, Mr. Vogel was granted 3,400,000
options to purchase Charter Class A common stock and
50,000 shares of restricted stock under Charters 2001
Stock Incentive Plan. In the February 2004 option exchange
Mr. Vogel exchanged his 3,400,000 options for
340,000 shares of restricted stock and 340,000 performance
shares. Mr. Vogels initial 50,000 restricted shares
vested 25% on the grant date, with the remainder vesting in 36
equal monthly installments beginning December 2002. The
340,000 shares of restricted stock were to vest over a
three-year period, with one-third of the shares vesting on each
of the first three anniversaries of the grant date. The 340,000
performance shares were to vest at the end of a three-year
period if certain financial criteria were met.
Mr. Vogels agreement provided that, if Mr. Vogel
is terminated without cause or if Mr. Vogel terminated the
agreement for good reason, he is entitled to his aggregate base
salary due during the remainder of the term and full prorated
benefits and bonus for the year in which termination occurs.
Mr. Vogels agreement included a covenant not to
compete for the balance of the initial term or any renewal term,
but no more than one year in the event of termination without
cause or by Mr. Vogel with good reason.
Mr. Vogels agreement entitled him to participate in
any disability insurance, pensions or other benefit plans
afforded to employees generally or to executives of Charter,
including Charters LTIP. Charter agreed to reimburse
Mr. Vogel annually for the cost of term life insurance in
the amount of $5 million, although he declined this
reimbursement in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Mr. Vogel was
entitled to reimbursement of fees and dues for his membership in
a country club of his choice, which he declined in 2002, 2003
and 2004, and reimbursement for up to
117
$10,000 per year for tax, legal and financial planning
services. His agreement also provided for a car and associated
expenses for Mr. Vogels use. Mr. Vogels
agreement provided for automatic one-year renewals and also
provided that Charter would cause him to be elected to its board
of directors without any additional compensation.
In February 2005, Charter entered into an agreement with
Mr. Vogel setting forth the terms of his resignation. Under
the terms of the agreement, Mr. Vogel received in February
2005 all accrued and unpaid base salary and vacation pay through
the date of resignation and a lump sum payment equal to the
remainder of his base salary during 2005 (totaling $953,425). In
addition, he will receive a lump sum cash payment of $500,000 at
December 31, 2005, which is subject to reduction to the
extent of compensation attributable to certain competitive
activities.
Mr. Vogel will continue to receive certain health benefits
during 2005 and COBRA premiums for such health insurance
coverage for 18 months thereafter. All of his outstanding
stock options, as well as his restricted stock granted in 2004
(excluding 340,000 shares of restricted stock granted as
performance units, which will automatically be
forfeited), will continue to vest through December 31,
2005. In addition, one-half of the remaining unvested portion of
his 2001 restricted stock grant vested upon the effectiveness of
the agreement, and the other half was forfeited. Mr. Vogel
had 60 days after December 31, 2005 to exercise any
outstanding vested stock options. Under the agreement,
Mr. Vogel waived any further right to any bonus or
incentive plan participation and provided certain releases of
claims against Charter and its subsidiaries from any claims
arising out of or based upon any facts occurring prior to the
date of the agreement, but Charter will continue to provide
Mr. Vogel certain indemnification rights and to include
Mr. Vogel in its director and officer liability insurance
for a period of six years. Charter and its subsidiaries also
agreed to provide releases of certain claims against
Mr. Vogel with certain exceptions reserved. Mr. Vogel
has also agreed, with limited exceptions that he will continue
to be bound by the covenant not to compete, confidentiality and
non-disparagement provisions contained in his 2001 employment
agreement.
Ms. Bellville was employed as Executive Vice President,
Chief Operating Officer. Until her resignation in September
2004, she was employed under an employment agreement entered
into as of April 27, 2003, that would have terminated on
September 1, 2007. Her annual base salary was $625,000 and
she was eligible to receive an annual bonus in an amount to be
determined by Charters board of directors, with a
contractual minimum for 2003 of $203,125. Commencing in 2004,
Ms. Bellville would have been eligible to receive a target
annual bonus equal to 100% of her base salary for the applicable
year at the discretion of Charters board of directors, 50%
to be based on personal performance goals and 50% to be based on
overall company performance. Under a prior offer letter dated
December 3, 2002, Ms. Bellville was granted 500,000
options to purchase shares of Charters Class A common
stock, which vested 25% on the date of the grant
(December 9, 2002), with the balance to vest in 36 equal
installments commencing January 2003. Ms. Bellvilles
employment agreement provided that if she was terminated without
cause or if she terminated the agreement for good reason
(including due to a change in control or if Ms. Bellville
was required to report, directly or indirectly, to persons other
than the Chief Executive Officer), Charter would pay
Ms. Bellville an amount equal to the aggregate base salary
due to Ms. Bellville during the remainder of the term, or
renewal term and a full prorated bonus for the year in which the
termination occurs, within thirty days of termination.
Ms. Bellvilles agreement included a covenant not to
compete for the balance of the initial term or any renewal term,
but no more than one year, in the event of termination without
cause or by her with good reason. Her agreement further provided
that she was entitled to participate in any disability
insurance, pension or other benefit plan afforded to employees
generally or to executives of Charter, including Charters
LTIP. Ms. Bellville was entitled to a monthly car allowance
and reimbursement for all business expenses associated with the
use of such car. Ms. Bellvilles agreement provided
that she was entitled to the reimbursement of dues for her
membership in a country club of her choice, and reimbursement
for up to $5,000 per year for tax, legal and financial
planning services.
On September 16, 2004, Charter entered into an agreement
with Ms. Bellville governing the terms and conditions of
her resignation as an officer and employee of Charter. Under the
terms of this
118
agreement, Ms. Bellville has the right to receive
65 weeks of base pay based on an annual base of $625,000,
plus usual compensation for all accrued vacation and other leave
time. Her options to purchase 700,000 shares of
Charters Class A common stock will continue to vest
during the salary continuation period. Ms. Bellville will
have 60 days after the expiration of the salary
continuation period to exercise any outstanding vested options
at the applicable exercise prices established at each grant
date. To date, Ms. Bellville has exercised her options to
purchase 350,000 shares. Ms. Bellville was
entitled to and received relocation benefits under
Charters current relocation policy with respect to a move
to a specified geographic area and was provided outplacement
assistance for 6 months following the date of her
separation from Charter. Her resignation was effective
September 30, 2004. The agreement provides that the
previously existing employment agreement would terminate, except
for certain ongoing obligations on Ms. Bellvilles
part concerning confidentiality, non-solicitation and
non-disparagement. The contractual restriction on her ability to
solicit current Charter employees does not apply to persons who,
at the time of solicitation, have not worked for Charter in the
prior 6 months and are not receiving severance from
Charter. In addition, the non-competition provisions of her
employment agreement were waived. Under the agreement,
Ms. Bellville waived a right to any bonus or incentive plan
and released Charter from any claims arising out of or based
upon any facts occurring prior to the date of the agreement, but
Charter will continue to provide Ms. Bellville certain
indemnification rights for that period.
In addition to the indemnification provisions which apply to all
employees under Charters bylaws, Mr. Vogels and
Ms. Bellvilles agreements provide that Charter will
indemnify and hold harmless each employee to the maximum extent
permitted by law from and against any claims, damages,
liabilities, losses, costs or expenses in connection with or
arising out of the performance by the applicable employee of his
or her duties. Each of the above agreements also contains
confidentiality and non-solicitation provisions.
Effective January 28, 2005, Charter eliminated the position
of Chief Administrative Officer, resulting in the termination of
employment of Steven A. Schumm, Executive Vice President and
Chief Administrative Officer from Charter and each of
Charters subsidiaries for which Mr. Schumm served as
an officer. Pursuant to a Separation Agreement executed on
February 8, 2005, Charter will continue to pay
Mr. Schumms base salary for 65 weeks at an
annual rate of $450,000, and Mr. Schumm was paid a bonus of
$15,815 at the time other executives received their bonuses in
April 2005. Mr. Schumms stock options will continue
to vest during the 65-week severance period, and he will have
60 days thereafter to exercise any vested options.
Thomas A. Cullen resigned, effective April 30, 2005, from
his position as Executive Vice President of Advanced Services
and Business Development of Charter and each of Charters
subsidiaries for which Mr. Cullen served as an officer.
Pursuant to a Separation Agreement and Release executed on
March 15, 2005, Charter will continue to pay
Mr. Cullens base salary for 65 weeks following
the termination of his employment at a rate of $5,769 per
week, and Mr. Cullen will be paid a one time payment of
$10,347 to cover COBRA payments. Mr. Cullens stock
options will continue to vest during the 65-week severance
period, and he will have 60 days thereafter to exercise any
vested options.
Charter has established separation guidelines which generally
apply to all employees in situations where management determines
that an employee is entitled to severance benefits. Severance
benefits are granted solely in managements discretion and
are not an employee entitlement or guaranteed benefit. The
guidelines provide that persons employed at the level of Senior
Vice President may be eligible to receive between six and
fifteen months of severance benefits and persons employed at the
level of Executive Vice President may be eligible to receive
between nine and eighteen months of severance benefits in the
event of separation under certain circumstances generally
including elimination of a position, work unit or general staff
reduction. Separation benefits are contingent upon the signing
of a separation agreement containing certain provisions
including a release of all claims against Charter. Severance
amounts paid under these guidelines are distinct and separate
from any one-time, special or enhanced severance programs that
may be approved by Charter from time to time.
119
Charters senior executives are eligible to receive bonuses
according to our 2005 Executive Bonus Plan. Under this plan,
Charters executive officers and certain other management
and professional employees are eligible to receive an annual
bonus. Each participating employee would receive his or her
target bonus if Charter (or such employees division) meets
specified performance measures for revenues, operating cash
flow, free cash flow and customer satisfaction.
Limitation of Directors Liability and Indemnification
Matters
Charters certificate of incorporation limits the liability
of directors to the maximum extent permitted by Delaware law.
The Delaware General Corporation Law provides that a corporation
may eliminate or limit the personal liability of a director for
monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director,
except for liability for:
|
|
|
(1) any breach of the directors duty of loyalty to
the corporation and its shareholders; |
|
|
(2) acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; |
|
|
(3) unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock
purchases or redemptions; or |
|
|
(4) any transaction from which the director derived an
improper personal benefit. |
Charters bylaws provide that we will indemnify all persons
whom we may indemnify pursuant thereto to the fullest extent
permitted by law.
The limited liability company agreement of CCO Holdings and the
bylaws of CCO Holdings Capital may require CCO Holdings and CCO
Holdings Capital, respectively to indemnify Charter and the
individual named defendants in connection with the matters set
forth in Business Legal Proceedings.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or
persons controlling us pursuant to the foregoing provisions, we
have been informed that in the opinion of the SEC, such
indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the
Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.
Charter has reimbursed certain of its current and former
directors, officers and employees in connection with their
defense in certain legal actions. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Other
Miscellaneous Relationships Indemnification
Advances.
120
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT
The following table sets forth certain information regarding
beneficial ownership of Charters Class A common stock
(Class A common stock) as of August 31,
2005 by:
|
|
|
|
|
each current director of CCO Holdings or Charter; |
|
|
|
the current chief executive officer and individuals named in the
Summary Compensation Table; |
|
|
|
all persons currently serving as directors and officers of CCO
Holdings or Charter, as a group; and |
|
|
|
each person known by us to own beneficially 5% or more of
Charters outstanding Class A common stock as of
August 31, 2005. |
With respect to the percentage of voting power set forth in the
following table:
|
|
|
|
|
each holder of Class A common stock is entitled to one vote
per share; and |
|
|
|
each holder of Charters Class B common stock
(Class B common stock) is entitled to
(i) ten votes per share of Class B common stock held
by such holder and its affiliates and (ii) ten votes per
share of Class B Common Stock for which membership units in
Charter Holdco held by such holder and its affiliates are
exchangeable. |
The 50,000 shares of Class B common stock owned by
Mr. Allen represents 100% of the outstanding Class B
common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested | |
|
Receivable | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
Restricted | |
|
on Exercise | |
|
|
|
Class B | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A | |
|
Class A | |
|
of Vested | |
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
% of Class A | |
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
Shares | |
|
Options or | |
|
Number of | |
|
Issuable upon | |
|
Shares | |
|
% of | |
|
|
(Voting and | |
|
(Voting | |
|
Other | |
|
Class B | |
|
Exchange or | |
|
(Voting and | |
|
Voting | |
Name and Address of |
|
Investment | |
|
Power | |
|
Convertible | |
|
Shares | |
|
Conversion of | |
|
Investment | |
|
Power | |
Beneficial Owner |
|
Power)(1) | |
|
Only)(2) | |
|
Securities(3) | |
|
Owned | |
|
Units(4) | |
|
Power)(4)(5) | |
|
(5)(6) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Paul G. Allen(7)
|
|
|
29,126,463 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
339,132,031 |
|
|
|
53.55 |
% |
|
|
91.46 |
% |
Charter Investment, Inc.(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222,818,858 |
|
|
|
38.99 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Vulcan Cable III Inc.(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,313,173 |
|
|
|
25.02 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Robert P. May
|
|
|
119,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
John H. Tory
|
|
|
30,005 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Marc B. Nathanson
|
|
|
425,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
David C. Merritt
|
|
|
25,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jo Allen Patton
|
|
|
10,977 |
|
|
|
40,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
W. Lance Conn
|
|
|
19,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jonathan L. Dolgen
|
|
|
19,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Larry W. Wangberg
|
|
|
28,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Nathaniel A. Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,215 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Neil Smit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,812,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
93,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
All current directors and executive officers as a group
(17 persons)
|
|
|
29,824,848 |
|
|
|
3,189,330 |
|
|
|
774,125 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
339,132,031 |
|
|
|
54.17 |
% |
|
|
91.57 |
% |
Carl E. Vogel(10)
|
|
|
208,126 |
|
|
|
226,666 |
|
|
|
1,120,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Margaret A. Bellville(11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179,166 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Derek Chang(12)
|
|
|
41,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Curtis S. Shaw(12)
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Steven A. Schumm(13)
|
|
|
30,568 |
|
|
|
36,256 |
|
|
|
276,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Amaranth L.L.C.(14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,322,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.76 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Scott A. Bommer(15)
|
|
|
18,237,744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.23 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Glenview Capital Management, LLC(16)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.71 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Glenview Capital GP, LLC(16)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.71 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Lawrence M. Robbins(16)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.71 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Steelhead Partners (17)
|
|
|
24,835,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.12 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested | |
|
Receivable | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
Restricted | |
|
on Exercise | |
|
|
|
Class B | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A | |
|
Class A | |
|
of Vested | |
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
% of Class A | |
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
Shares | |
|
Options or | |
|
Number of | |
|
Issuable upon | |
|
Shares | |
|
% of | |
|
|
(Voting and | |
|
(Voting | |
|
Other | |
|
Class B | |
|
Exchange or | |
|
(Voting and | |
|
Voting | |
Name and Address of |
|
Investment | |
|
Power | |
|
Convertible | |
|
Shares | |
|
Conversion of | |
|
Investment | |
|
Power | |
Beneficial Owner |
|
Power)(1) | |
|
Only)(2) | |
|
Securities(3) | |
|
Owned | |
|
Units(4) | |
|
Power)(4)(5) | |
|
(5)(6) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
J-K Navigator Fund, L.P.(17)
|
|
|
18,447,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.29 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
James Michael Johnston(17)
|
|
|
24,835,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.12 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Brian Katz Klein(17)
|
|
|
24,835,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.12 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
FMR Corp.(18)
|
|
|
38,515,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.05 |
% |
|
|
1.03 |
% |
Fidelity Management & Research Company(18)
|
|
|
14,961,471 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,487,601 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.60 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Edward C. Johnson 3d(18)
|
|
|
38,515,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.05 |
% |
|
|
1.03 |
% |
|
* Less than 1%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes shares for which the named person has sole voting and
investment power; or shared voting and investment power with a
spouse. Does not include shares that may be acquired through
exercise of options. |
|
|
(2) |
Includes unvested shares of restricted stock issued under the
Charter Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
(including those issued in the February 2004 option exchange for
those eligible employees who elected to participate), as to
which the applicable director or employee has sole voting power
but not investment power. Excludes certain performance units
granted under the Charter 2001 Stock Incentive Plan with respect
to which shares will not be issued until the third anniversary
of the grant date and then only if Charter meets certain
performance criteria (and which consequently do not provide the
holder with any voting rights). |
|
|
(3) |
Includes shares of Class A common stock issuable
(a) upon exercise of options that have vested or will vest
on or before October 31, 2005 under the 1999 Charter
Communications Option Plan and the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan or
(b) upon conversion of other convertible securities. |
|
|
(4) |
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with
Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act. The beneficial owners at
August 31, 2005 of Class B common stock, Charter
Holdco membership units and convertible senior notes of Charter
are deemed to be beneficial owners of an equal number of shares
of Class A common stock because such holdings are either
convertible into Class A shares (in the case of
Class B shares and convertible senior notes) or
exchangeable (directly or indirectly) for Class A shares
(in the case of the membership units) on a one-for-one basis.
Unless otherwise noted, the named holders have sole investment
and voting power with respect to the shares listed as
beneficially owned. An issue has arisen as to whether the
documentation for the Bresnan transaction was correct and
complete with regard to the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII,
LLC membership interests following the consummation of the
Bresnan put transaction on June 6, 2003. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter Communications, Inc.
and Its Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights
CC VIII. |
|
|
(5) |
The calculation of this percentage assumes for each person that: |
|
|
|
|
|
348,551,063 shares of Class A common stock are issued
and outstanding as of August 31, 2005; |
|
|
|
50,000 shares of Class B common stock held by
Mr. Allen have been converted into shares of Class A
common stock; |
|
|
|
the acquisition by such person of all shares of Class A
common stock that such person or affiliates of such person has
the right to acquire upon exchange of membership units in
subsidiaries or conversion of Series A Convertible
Redeemable Preferred Stock or 5.875% or 4.75% convertible
senior notes; |
|
|
|
the acquisition by such person of all shares that may be
acquired upon exercise of options to purchase shares or
exchangeable membership units that have vested or will vest by
October 31, 2005; and |
|
|
|
that none of the other listed persons or entities has received
any shares of Class A common stock that are issuable to any
of such persons pursuant to the exercise of options or otherwise. |
122
|
|
|
A person is deemed to have the right to acquire shares of
Class A common stock with respect to options vested under
the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan. When vested, these
options are exercisable for membership units of Charter Holdco,
which are immediately exchanged on a one-for-one basis for
shares of Class A common stock. A person is also deemed to
have the right to acquire shares of Class A common stock
issuable upon the exercise of vested options under the 2001
Stock Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
|
(6) |
The calculation of this percentage assumes that
Mr. Allens equity interests are retained in the form
that maximizes voting power (i.e., the 50,000 shares of
Class B common stock held by Mr. Allen have not been
converted into shares of Class A common stock; that the
membership units of Charter Holdco owned by each of Vulcan
Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. have not been
exchanged for shares of Class A common stock). |
|
|
(7) |
The total listed includes: |
|
|
|
|
|
222,818,858 membership units in Charter Holdco held by Charter
Investment, Inc.; and |
|
|
|
116,313,173 membership units in Charter Holdco held by Vulcan
Cable III Inc. |
|
|
|
The listed total excludes 24,273,943 shares of Class A
common stock issuable upon exchange of units of Charter Holdco,
which may be issuable to Charter Investment, Inc. (which is
owned by Mr. Allen) as a consequence of the closing of his
purchase of the membership interests in CC VIII, LLC that were
put to Mr. Allen and were purchased by him on June 6,
2003. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of
such CC VIII, LLC membership interests following the
consummation of such put transaction. See Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions Transactions
Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter Communications, Inc.
and Its Subsidiaries Equity Put Rights
CC VIII. The address of this person is: 505 Fifth Avenue
South, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98104. |
|
|
|
|
(8) |
Includes 222,818,858 membership units in Charter Holdco, which
are exchangeable for shares of Class B common stock on a
one-for-one basis, which are convertible to shares of
Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. The address of
this person is: Charter Plaza, 12405 Powerscourt Drive,
St. Louis, MO 63131. |
|
|
(9) |
Includes 116,313,173 membership units in Charter Holdco, which
are exchangeable for shares of Class B common stock on a
one-for-one basis, which are convertible to shares of
Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. The address of
this person is: 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900, Seattle,
WA 98104. |
|
|
(10) |
Mr. Vogel terminated his employment effective on
January 17, 2005. His stock options and restricted stock
shown in this table continue to vest through December 31,
2005, and his options will be exercisable for another
60 days thereafter. |
|
(11) |
Ms. Bellville resigned from Charter effective
September 30, 2004. Under the terms of her separation
agreement, her options will continue to vest until
December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable
until 60 days thereafter. |
|
(12) |
Mr. Chang and Mr. Shaw resigned effective
April 15, 2005. |
|
(13) |
Includes 1,000 shares for which Mr. Schumm has shared
investment and voting power. Mr. Schumms employment
was terminated effective January 28, 2005. His stock
options and restricted stock shown in this table continue to
vest for 65 weeks following his termination, and his
options will be exercisable for another 60 days thereafter. |
|
(14) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC
February 2, 2005. The address of this person is:
c/o Amaranth Advisors L.L.C., One American Lane, Greenwich,
Connecticut 06831. |
|
(15) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC
March 28, 2005. The address of this person is: 712 Fifth
Avenue, 42nd Floor, New York, New York 10019.
Mr. Bommer is the managing member of SAB Capital
Advisors, L.L.C., which serves as general partner of
SAB Capital Partners, L.P. and SAB Capital
Partners II, L.P. (which in turn |
123
|
|
|
collectively hold 10,124,695 shares of Class A common
stock). Mr. Bommer is also the managing member of
SAB Capital Management, L.L.C., which serves as general
partner of SAB Overseas Capital Management, L.P. (which in
turn serves as investment manager to and has investment
discretion over the securities held by a holder of
8,113,049 shares of Class A common stock). |
|
(16) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC June 3,
2005. The address of the principal business office of the
reporting person is: 399 Park Avenue, Floor 39, New York, New
York 10022. The shares shown consist of:
(A) 1,669,400 shares held for the account of Glenview
Capital Partners; (B) 5,991,000 shares held for the
account of Glenview Capital Master Fund; and
(C) 12,243,100 shares held for the account of Glenview
Institutional Partners. Glenview Capital Management serves as
investment manager to each of Glenview Capital Partners,
Glenview Institutional Partners, and Glenview Capital Master
Fund. Glenview Capital GP is the general partner of Glenview
Capital Partners and Glenview Institutional Partners. Glenview
Capital GP also serves as the sponsor of the Glenview Capital
Master Fund. Mr. Robbins is the Chief Executive Officer of
Glenview Capital Management and Glenview Capital GP. |
|
(17) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC May 23,
2005. The business address of the reporting person is: 1301
First Avenue, Suite 201, Seattle, WA 98101. Steelhead
Partners, LLC acts as general partner of J-K Navigator Fund,
L.P., and J. Michael Johnston and Brian K. Klein act as the
member-managers of Steelhead Partners, LLC. Accordingly, shares
shown as beneficially held by Steelhead Partners, LLC,
Mr. Johnston and Mr. Klein include shares beneficially
held by J-K Navigator Fund, L.P. |
|
(18) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based on the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on
September 12, 2005. The address of the person is:
82 Devonshire Street, Boston Massachusetts 02109. Fidelity
Management & Research Company is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of FMR Corp. and is the beneficial owner of
35,449,072 shares as a result of acting as investment
adviser to various investment companies and includes:
20,487,601 shares resulting from the assumed conversion of
5.875% senior notes. Edward C. Johnson 3d,
chairman of FMR Corp., and FMR Corp. each has sole power to
dispose of 38,515,187 shares. |
Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation
Plans
The following information is provided as of December 31,
2004 with respect to equity compensation plans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Exercise | |
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
Price of | |
|
Number of Securities | |
|
|
to be Issued Upon | |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Remaining Available | |
|
|
Exercise of | |
|
Options, | |
|
for Future Issuance | |
|
|
Outstanding Options, | |
|
Warrants and | |
|
Under Equity | |
Plan Category |
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Rights | |
|
Compensation Plans | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
24,834,513 |
(1) |
|
$ |
6.57 |
|
|
|
54,701,158 |
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
475,653 |
(2) |
|
$ |
10.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
|
25,310,166 |
|
|
$ |
6.64 |
|
|
|
54,701,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
This total does not include 2,076,860 shares issued
pursuant to restricted stock grants made under our 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan, which were subject to vesting based on continued
employment or 6,899,600 performance shares issued under our LTIP
plan, which are subject to vesting upon Charters
achievement of certain performance criteria during a three-year
performance cycle ending on December 31, 2007. |
|
(2) |
Includes shares of Class A common stock to be issued upon
exercise of options granted pursuant to an individual
compensation agreement with a consultant. In 2003, Charter
agreed to exchange 186,385 of these options for
18,638 shares of Class A common stock, and that
exchange is scheduled to be consummated in 2005. |
124
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
The following sets forth certain transactions in which we are
involved and in which the directors, executive officers and
affiliates of Charter or us have or may have a material
interest. The transactions fall generally into three broad
categories:
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions in which Mr. Allen has an interest that
arise directly out of Mr. Allens investment in
Charter and Charter Holdco. A large number of the
transactions described below arise out of Mr. Allens
direct and indirect (through Charter Investment, Inc., or the
Vulcan entities, each of which Mr. Allen controls)
investment in Charter and its subsidiaries, as well as
commitments made as consideration for the investments themselves. |
|
|
|
Transactions with third party providers of products,
services and content in which Mr. Allen has or had a
material interest. Mr. Allen has had numerous
investments in the areas of technology and media. We have a
number of commercial relationships with third parties in which
Mr. Allen has or had an interest. |
|
|
|
Other Miscellaneous Transactions. We have a
limited number of transactions in which certain of the officers,
directors and principal shareholders of Charter and its
subsidiaries, other than Mr. Allen, have an interest. |
A number of our debt instruments and those of our subsidiaries
require delivery of fairness opinions for transactions with
Mr. Allen or his affiliates involving more than
$50 million. Such fairness opinions have been obtained
whenever required. All of our transactions with Mr. Allen
or his affiliates have been considered for approval either by
the board of directors of Charter or a committee of the board of
directors. All of our transactions with Mr. Allen or his
affiliates have been deemed by the board of directors or a
committee of the board of directors to be in our best interest.
Related party transactions are approved by Charters Audit
Committee or another independent body of the board of directors
in compliance with the listing requirements applicable to NASDAQ
National Market listed companies. Except where noted below, we
do not believe that these transactions present any unusual risks
for us that would not be present in any similar commercial
transaction.
The chart below summarizes certain information with respect to
these transactions. Additional information regarding these
transactions is provided following the chart.
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
Intercompany Management |
|
|
|
|
Arrangements |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
Subsidiaries of Charter Holdco paid Charter approximately
$79 million, $84 million, $90 million and
$62 million for management services rendered in 2002, 2003
and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. |
|
Mutual Services Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
Charter paid Charter Holdco approximately $70 million,
$73 million, $74 million and $42 million for
services rendered in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Previous Management |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
No fees were paid in 2002, 2003, 2004 or 2005, although total
management fees accrued and payable to Charter Investment, Inc.,
exclusive of interest, were approximately $14 million at
December 31, 2002, 2003, 2004 and June 30, 2005. |
125
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Provisions of Charter |
|
|
|
|
Holdcos Operating Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
In 2002, the operating agreement of Charter Holdco allocated
certain of our tax losses to entities controlled by Paul Allen. |
|
Channel Access Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
At Vulcan Ventures request, we will provide Vulcan
Ventures with exclusive rights for carriage on eight of our
digital cable channels as partial consideration for a 1999
capital contribution of approximately $1.3 billion. |
|
Equity Put Rights |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
Certain sellers of cable systems that we acquired were granted,
or previously had the right, as described below, to put to Paul
Allen equity in us (in the case of Rifkin and Falcon), Charter
Holdco (in the case of Rifkin) and CC VIII, LLC (in the
case of Bresnan) and a preferred membership interest (in the
case of Charter Helicon, LLC) issued to such sellers in
connection with such acquisitions. |
|
Previous Funding Commitment of Vulcan Inc. |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
Pursuant to a commitment letter dated April 14, 2003,
Vulcan Inc., which is an affiliate of Paul Allen, agreed to
lend, under certain circumstances, or cause an affiliate to lend
to Charter Holdings or any of its subsidiaries a total amount of
up to $300 million, which amount included a subfacility of
up to $100 million for the issuance of letters of credit.
In November 2003, the commitment was terminated. We incurred
expenses to Vulcan Inc. totaling $5 million in connection
with the commitment prior to termination. |
|
High Speed Access Corp. Asset |
|
|
|
|
Purchase Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
In February 2002, our subsidiary purchased certain assets of
High Speed Access for $78 million, plus the delivery of
37,000 shares of High Speed Access Series D preferred
stock and certain warrants. In connection with the transaction,
High Speed Access also purchased 38,000 shares of its
Series D preferred stock from Vulcan Ventures for
approximately $8 million, and all of Vulcan Ventures
shares of High Speed Access common stock. |
|
High Speed Access Corp. |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
In January 2002, we granted to High Speed Access a royalty free
right to use intellectual property purchased by Charter Holdco.
We received approximately $4 million in management fees and
approximately $17 million in revenues and paid
approximately $2 million under agreements that have
terminated. |
126
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TechTV Carriage Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton
William D. Savoy
Larry W. Wangberg |
|
We recorded approximately $4 million, $1 million,
$5 million and $0.6 million from TechTV under the
affiliation agreement in 2002, 2003, 2004 and the six months
ended June 30, 2005, respectively, related to launch
incentives as a reduction of programming expense. We paid TechTV
approximately $0.2 million, $80,600, $2 million and
$1 million in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Oxygen Media Corporation |
|
|
|
|
Carriage Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
We paid Oxygen Media approximately $6 million,
$9 million, $13 million and $5 million under a
carriage agreement in exchange for programming in 2002, 2003,
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. We recorded approximately $2 million,
$1 million, $1 million and $0.1 million in 2002,
2003, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively, from Oxygen Media related to launch incentives as
a reduction of programming expense. We received 1 million
shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference
of $33.10 per share in March 2005. We recognized
approximately $6 million, $9 million, $13 million
and $2 million as a reduction of programming expense in
2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six months ended June 30,
2005, respectively, in recognition of the guaranteed value of
the investment. |
|
Portland Trail Blazers Carriage |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
We paid approximately $1 million, $135,200, $96,100 and
$116,500 for rights to carry the cable broadcast of certain
Trail Blazers basketball games in 2002, 2003, 2004 and the six
months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Action Sports Cable Network |
|
|
|
|
Carriage Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
We paid approximately $1 million for rights to carry the
programming of Action Sports Cable Network in 2002. |
|
Click2learn, Inc. Software |
|
|
|
|
License Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
We paid approximately $250,000, $57,100, $0 and $0 under the
Software License Agreement in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six
months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
127
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digeo, Inc. Broadband Carriage |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
William D. Savoy
Carl E. Vogel
Jo Allen Patton
W. Lance Conn |
|
We paid Digeo approximately $3 million, $4 million,
$3 million and $1 million for customized development
of the i-channels and the local content tool kit in 2002, 2003,
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. We entered into a license agreement in 2004 for
the Digeo software that runs DVR units purchased from a third
party. We paid approximately $0.5 million and
$0.2 million in license and maintenance fees in 2004 and
for the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. In
2004 we executed a purchase agreement for the purchase of up to
70,000 DVR units and a related software license agreement, both
subject to satisfaction of certain conditions. We paid
approximately $0 and $2 million in capital purchases in 2004 and
the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Viacom Networks |
|
Jonathan L. Dolgen |
|
We are party to certain affiliation agreements with networks of
Viacom, pursuant to which Viacom provides Charter with
programming for distribution via our cable systems. For the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the
six months ended June 30, 2005, Charter paid Viacom
approximately $177 million, $188 million,
$194 million and $99 million, respectively, for
programming, and Charter recorded as receivables approximately
$5 million, $5 million, $8 million and
$15 million from Viacom for launch incentives and marketing
support for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. |
|
ADC Telecommunications Inc. |
|
Larry W. Wangberg |
|
We paid $759,600, $60,100, $344,800 and $241,100 to purchase
certain access/network equipment in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the
six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
HDNet and HDNet Movies |
|
|
|
|
Network |
|
Mark Cuban |
|
Charter Holdco is party to an agreement to carry two
around-the-clock, high definition networks, HDNet and HDNet
Movies. We paid HDNet and HDNet Movies approximately $21,900,
$609,100 and $1 million in 2003 and 2004 and for the six
months ended June 30, 2005. |
|
Affiliate leases and agreements |
|
Marc B. Nathanson |
|
We paid approximately $76,000, $16,600, $0 and $0 in 2002, 2003
and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively, to companies controlled by Mr. Nathanson
under a warehouse lease agreement. |
|
Carriage fees |
|
David C. Merritt |
|
We paid approximately $1 million, $1 million,
$1 million and $594,900 in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 to carry The Outdoor Channel.
Mr. Merritt is a director of an affiliate of this channel. |
128
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment for relatives services |
|
Carl E. Vogel |
|
Since June 2003, Mr. Vogels brother-in-law has been
an employee of Charter Holdco and has received a salary
commensurate with his position in the engineering department. |
|
Radio advertising |
|
Marc B. Nathanson |
|
We believe that, through a third party advertising agency, we
have paid approximately $112,700, $67,300, $49,300 and $20,200
in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, respectively, to Mapleton Communications, an
affiliate of Mapleton Investments, LLC. |
|
Enstar Limited Partnership Systems Purchase and Management
Services |
|
Charter officers who were appointed by a Charter subsidiary (as
general partner) to serve as officers of Enstar limited
partnerships |
|
Certain of our subsidiaries purchased certain assets of the
Enstar Limited Partnerships for approximately $63 million
in 2002.
We also earned approximately $1 million, $469,300, $0 and
$0 in 2002, 2003, 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, respectively, by providing management
services to the Enstar Limited Partnerships. |
|
Indemnification Advances |
|
Directors and current and former officers named in certain legal
proceedings |
|
Charter reimbursed certain of its current and former directors
and executive officers a total of approximately $3 million,
$8 million, $3 million and $13,400 for costs incurred
in connection with litigation matters in 2002, 2003, 2004 and
for the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. |
The following sets forth additional information regarding the
transactions summarized above.
Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and
Mr. Allens Investment in Charter Communications, Inc.
and Its Subsidiaries
As noted above, a number of our related party transactions arise
out of Mr. Allens investment in Charter and its
subsidiaries, including us. Some of these transactions are with
Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Ventures (both owned 100% by
Mr. Allen), Charter (controlled by Mr. Allen) and
Charter Holdco (approximately 47% owned by us and
53% owned by other affiliates of Mr. Allen). See
Summary Organizational Structure for
more information regarding the ownership by Mr. Allen and
certain of his affiliates.
|
|
|
Intercompany Management Arrangements |
Charter is a party to management arrangements with Charter
Holdco and certain of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements,
Charter provides management services for the cable systems owned
or operated by its subsidiaries. These management agreements
provide for reimbursement to Charter for all costs and expenses
incurred by it for activities relating to the ownership and
operation of the managed cable systems, including overhead,
administration and salary expense.
The total amount paid by Charter Holdco and all of its
subsidiaries is limited to the amount necessary to reimburse
Charter for all of its expenses, costs, losses, liabilities and
damages paid or incurred by it in connection with the
performance of its services under the various management
agreements and in connection with its corporate overhead,
administration, salary expense and similar items. The expenses
subject to reimbursement include fees Charter is obligated to
pay under the mutual services agreement with Charter Investment,
Inc. Payment of management fees by Charters operating
subsidiaries is subject to certain restrictions under the credit
facilities and indentures of such subsidiaries and the
indentures governing the Charter Holdings public debt. If any
portion of the management fee due and payable is not
129
paid, it is deferred by Charter and accrued as a liability of
such subsidiaries. Any deferred amount of the management fee
will bear interest at the rate of 10% per year, compounded
annually, from the date it was due and payable until the date it
is paid. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005, the
subsidiaries of Charter Holdco paid approximately
$79 million, $84 million, $90 million and
$62 million, respectively, in management fees to Charter.
|
|
|
Mutual Services Agreement |
Charter, Charter Holdco and Charter Investment, Inc. are parties
to a mutual services agreement whereby each party shall provide
rights and services to the other parties as may be reasonably
requested for the management of the entities involved and their
subsidiaries, including the cable systems owned by their
subsidiaries all on a cost-reimbursement basis. The officers and
employees of each party are available to the other parties to
provide these rights and services, and all expenses and costs
incurred in providing these rights and services are paid by
Charter. Each of the parties will indemnify and hold harmless
the other parties and their directors, officers and employees
from and against any and all claims that may be made against any
of them in connection with the mutual services agreement except
due to its or their gross negligence or willful misconduct. The
mutual services agreement expires on November 12, 2009, and
may be terminated at any time by any party upon thirty
days written notice to the other. For the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005, Charter paid approximately
$70 million, $73 million, $74 million and
$42 million, respectively, to Charter Holdco for services
rendered pursuant to the mutual services agreement. All such
amounts are reimbursable to Charter pursuant to a management
arrangement with our subsidiaries. See
Intercompany Management Arrangements.
The accounts and balances related to these services eliminate in
consolidation. Charter Investment, Inc. no longer provides
services pursuant to this agreement.
|
|
|
Previous Management Agreement with Charter Investment,
Inc. |
Prior to November 12, 1999, Charter Investment, Inc.
provided management and consulting services to our operating
subsidiaries for a fee equal to 3.5% of the gross revenues of
the systems then owned, plus reimbursement of expenses. The
balance of management fees payable under the previous management
agreement was accrued with payment at the discretion of Charter
Investment, Inc., with interest payable on unpaid amounts. For
the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for
the six months ended June 30, 2005, Charters
subsidiaries did not pay any fees to Charter Investment, Inc. to
reduce management fees payable. As of December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004 and June 30, 2005, total management fees
payable by our subsidiaries to Charter Investment, Inc. were
approximately $14 million, exclusive of any interest that
may be charged and are included in deferred management
fees-related party on our consolidated balance sheets.
|
|
|
Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC Limited
Liability Agreement Taxes |
The limited liability company agreement of Charter Holdco
contains special provisions regarding the allocation of tax
losses and profits among its members Vulcan
Cable III Inc., Charter Investment, Inc. and Charter. In
some situations, these provisions may cause us to pay more tax
than would otherwise be due if Charter Holdco had allocated
profits and losses among its members based generally on the
number of common membership units. See Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Critical Accounting Policies and
Estimates Income Taxes.
|
|
|
Vulcan Ventures Channel Access Agreement |
Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled by Mr. Allen,
Charter, Charter Investment and Charter Holdco are parties to an
agreement dated September 21, 1999 granting to Vulcan
Ventures the right to use up to eight of our digital cable
channels as partial consideration for a prior capital
contribution of $1.325 billion. Specifically, at Vulcan
Ventures request, we will provide Vulcan Ventures with
exclusive rights for carriage of up to eight digital cable
television programming services or channels on each of the
digital cable systems with local and to the extent available,
national control of the digital product owned,
130
operated, controlled or managed by Charter or its subsidiaries
now or in the future of 550 megahertz or more. If the
system offers digital services but has less than
550 megahertz of capacity, then the programming services
will be equitably reduced. Upon request of Vulcan Ventures, we
will attempt to reach a comprehensive programming agreement
pursuant to which it will pay the programmer, if possible, a fee
per digital video customer. If such fee arrangement is not
achieved, then we and the programmer shall enter into a standard
programming agreement. The initial term of the channel access
agreement was 10 years, and the term extends by one
additional year (such that the remaining term continues to be
10 years) on each anniversary date of the agreement unless
either party provides the other with notice to the contrary at
least 60 days prior to such anniversary date. To date,
Vulcan Ventures has not requested to use any of these channels.
However, in the future it is possible that Vulcan Ventures could
require us to carry programming that is less profitable to us
than the programming that we would otherwise carry and our
results would suffer accordingly.
CC VIII. As part of the acquisition of the cable
systems owned by Bresnan Communications Company Limited
Partnership in February 2000, CC VIII, Charters
indirect limited liability company subsidiary, issued, after
adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership units
(collectively, the CC VIII interest) with a
value and an initial capital account of approximately
$630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T
Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (the
Comcast sellers). While held by the Comcast sellers,
the CC VIII interest was entitled to a 2% priority return
on its initial capital account and such priority return was
entitled to preferential distributions from available cash and
upon liquidation of CC VIII. While held by the Comcast sellers,
the CC VIII interest generally did not share in the profits
and losses of CC VIII. Mr. Allen granted the Comcast
sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII interest for
approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest annually from
February 2000 (the Comcast put right). In April
2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right in
full, and this transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003.
Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the holder of the
CC VIII interest, indirectly through an affiliate.
Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in the next
paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter will be allocated
his pro rata share (based on number of membership interests
outstanding) of profits or losses of CC VIII. In the event
of a liquidation of CC VIII, Mr. Allen would be
entitled to a priority distribution with respect to the 2%
priority return (which will continue to accrete). Any remaining
distributions in liquidation would be distributed to CC V
Holdings, LLC and Mr. Allen in proportion to CC V
Holdings, LLCs capital account and Mr. Allens
capital account (which will equal the initial capital account of
the Comcast sellers of approximately $630 million,
increased or decreased by Mr. Allens pro rata share
of CC VIIIs profits or losses (as computed for
capital account purposes) after June 6, 2003). The limited
liability company agreement of CC VIII does not provide for
a mandatory redemption of the CC VIII interest.
An issue has arisen as to whether the documentation for the
Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the
ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following
consummation of the Comcast put right. Specifically, under the
terms of the Bresnan transaction documents that were entered
into in June 1999, the Comcast sellers originally would have
received, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Charter Holdco
membership units, but due to an FCC regulatory issue raised by
the Comcast sellers shortly before closing, the Bresnan
transaction was modified to provide that the Comcast sellers
instead would receive the preferred equity interests in
CC VIII represented by the CC VIII interest. As part of the
last-minute changes to the Bresnan transaction documents, a
draft amended version of the Charter Holdco limited liability
company agreement was prepared, and contract provisions were
drafted for that agreement that would have required an automatic
exchange of the CC VIII interest for 24,273,943 Charter
Holdco membership units if the Comcast sellers exercised the
Comcast put right and sold the CC VIII interest to
Mr. Allen or his affiliates. However, the provisions that
would have required this automatic exchange did not appear in
the final version of the Charter Holdco limited liability
company agreement that was delivered and executed at the closing
of the Bresnan transaction. The law firm that prepared the
documents for the Bresnan transaction brought this matter to the
attention of Charter and representatives of Mr. Allen in
2002.
131
Thereafter, the board of directors of Charter formed a Special
Committee (currently comprised of Messrs. Merritt, Tory and
Wangberg) to investigate the matter and take any other
appropriate action on behalf of Charter with respect to this
matter. After conducting an investigation of the relevant facts
and circumstances, the Special Committee determined that a
scriveners error had occurred in February 2000
in connection with the preparation of the last-minute revisions
to the Bresnan transaction documents and that, as a result,
Charter should seek the reformation of the Charter Holdco
limited liability company agreement, or alternative relief, in
order to restore and ensure the obligation that the CC VIII
interest be automatically exchanged for Charter Holdco units.
The Special Committee further determined that, as part of such
contract reformation or alternative relief, Mr. Allen
should be required to contribute the CC VIII interest to
Charter Holdco in exchange for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco
membership units. The Special Committee also recommended to the
board of directors of Charter that, to the extent the contract
reformation is achieved, the board of directors should consider
whether the CC VIII interest should ultimately be held by
Charter Holdco or Charter Holdings or another entity owned
directly or indirectly by them.
Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committees
determinations described above and has so notified the Special
Committee. Mr. Allen contends that the transaction is
accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and
contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures.
The parties engaged in a process of non-binding mediation to
seek to resolve this matter, without success. The Special
Committee is evaluating what further actions or processes it may
undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further
deliberation, each party has agreed to refrain from initiating
legal proceedings over this matter until it has given at least
ten days prior notice to the other. In addition, the
Special Committee and Mr. Allen have determined to utilize
the Delaware Court of Chancerys program for mediation of
complex business disputes in an effort to resolve the
CC VIII interest dispute. If the Special Committee and
Mr. Allen are unable to reach a resolution through that
mediation process or to agree on an alternative dispute
resolution process, the Special Committee intends to seek
resolution of this dispute through judicial proceedings in an
action that would be commenced, after appropriate notice, in the
Delaware Court of Chancery against Mr. Allen and his
affiliates seeking contract reformation, declaratory relief as
to the respective rights of the parties regarding this dispute
and alternative forms of legal and equitable relief. The
ultimate resolution and financial impact of the dispute are not
determinable at this time.
Rifkin. On September 14, 1999, Mr. Allen
and Charter Holdco entered into a put agreement with certain
sellers of the Rifkin cable systems that received a portion of
their purchase price in the form of 3,006,202 Class A
preferred membership units of Charter Holdco. This put agreement
allowed these holders to compel Charter Holdco to redeem their
Class A preferred membership units at any time before
September 14, 2004 at $1.00 per unit, plus accretion
thereon at 8% per year from September 14, 1999.
Mr. Allen had guaranteed the redemption obligation of
Charter Holdco. These units were put to Charter Holdco for
redemption, and were redeemed on April 18, 2003 for a total
price of approximately $3.9 million.
Mr. Allen also was a party to a put agreement with certain
sellers of the Rifkin cable systems that received a portion of
their purchase price in the form of shares of Class A
common stock of Charter. Under this put agreement, such holders
have the right to sell to Mr. Allen any or all of such
shares of Charters Class A common stock at
$19 per share (subject to adjustments for stock splits,
reorganizations and similar events), plus interest at a rate of
4.5% per year, compounded annually from November 12,
1999. Approximately 4.6 million shares were put to
Mr. Allen under these agreements prior to their expiration
on November 12, 2003.
Falcon. Mr. Allen also was a party to a put
agreement with certain sellers of the Falcon cable systems
(including Mr. Nathanson, one of our directors) that
received a portion of their purchase price in the form of shares
of Class A common stock of Charter. Under the Falcon put
agreement, such holders had the right to sell to Mr. Allen
any or all shares of Class A common stock received in the
Falcon acquisition at $25.8548 per share (subject to
adjustments for stock splits, reorganizations and similar
132
events), plus interest at a rate of 4.5% per year,
compounded annually from November 12, 1999. Approximately
19.4 million shares were put to Mr. Allen under these
agreements prior to their expiration on November 12, 2003.
Helicon. In 1999 we purchased the Helicon cable
systems. As part of that purchase Mr. Allen entered into a
put agreement with a certain seller of the Helicon cable systems
that received a portion of the purchase price in the form of a
preferred membership interest in Charter Helicon LLC with a
redemption price of $25 million plus accrued interest.
Under the Helicon put agreement, such holder has the right to
sell to Mr. Allen any or all of the interest to
Mr. Allen prior to its mandatory redemption in cash on
July 30, 2009. The preferred membership interest is not
convertible. On August 31, 2005, 40% of the preferred
membership interest was put to Mr. Allen. The remaining 60%
of the preferred interest in Charter Helicon LLC remains subject
to the put to Mr. Allen. The Charter Helicon LLC
operating agreement provides for a quarterly distribution on the
preferred interest of 10% annually.
|
|
|
Previous Funding Commitment of Vulcan Inc. |
Effective April 14, 2003, our subsidiary, Charter
Communications VII, LLC entered into a commitment letter with
Vulcan Inc., which is an affiliate of Paul Allen, under which
Vulcan Inc. agreed to lend, under certain circumstances, or
cause an affiliate to lend initially to Charter Communications
VII, LLC, or another subsidiary of Charter Holdings, up to
$300 million, which amount included a subfacility of up to
$100 million for the issuance of letters of credit. No
amounts were ever drawn under the commitment letter. In November
2003, the commitment was terminated. We incurred expenses to
Vulcan Inc. totaling $5 million in connection with the
commitment (including an extension fee) prior to termination.
Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and the President and
Chief Executive Officer of Vulcan Inc., and Mr. Lance Conn
is Executive Vice President of Vulcan Inc.
|
|
|
Allocation of Business Opportunities with
Mr. Allen |
As described under Third Party Business
Relationships in which Mr. Allen has or had an
Interest in this section, Mr. Allen and a number of
his affiliates have interests in various entities that provide
services or programming to our subsidiaries. Given the diverse
nature of Mr. Allens investment activities and
interests, and to avoid the possibility of future disputes as to
potential business, Charter and Charter Holdco, under the terms
of their respective organizational documents, may not, and may
not allow their subsidiaries, to engage in any business
transaction outside the cable transmission business except for
the Digeo, Inc. joint venture; a joint venture to develop a
digital video recorder set-top terminal; an existing investment
in Cable Sports Southeast, LLC, a provider of regional sports
programming; as an owner of the business of Interactive
Broadcaster Services Corporation or, Chat TV; an investment in
@Security Broadband Corp., a company developing broadband
security applications; and incidental businesses engaged in as
of the closing of Charters initial public offering in
November 1999. This restriction will remain in effect until all
of the shares of Charters high-vote Class B
common stock have been converted into shares of Charters
Class A common stock due to Mr. Allens equity
ownership falling below specified thresholds.
Should Charter or Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries
wish to pursue, or allow their subsidiaries to pursue, a
business transaction outside of this scope, it must first offer
Mr. Allen the opportunity to pursue the particular business
transaction. If he decides not to pursue the business
transaction and consents to Charter or its subsidiaries engaging
in the business transaction, they will be able to do so. In any
such case, the restated certificate of incorporation of Charter
and the limited liability company agreement of Charter Holdco
would need to be amended accordingly to modify the current
restrictions on the ability of such entities to engage in any
business other than the cable transmission business. The cable
transmission business means the business of transmitting video,
audio, including telephone, and data over cable systems owned,
operated or managed by Charter, Charter Holdco or any of their
subsidiaries from time to time.
Under Delaware corporate law, each director of Charter,
including Mr. Allen, is generally required to present to
Charter, any opportunity he or she may have to acquire any cable
transmission business or any
133
company whose principal business is the ownership, operation or
management of cable transmission businesses, so that we may
determine whether we wish to pursue such opportunities. However,
Mr. Allen and the other directors generally will not have
an obligation to present other types of business opportunities
to Charter and they may exploit such opportunities for their own
account.
Also, conflicts could arise with respect to the allocation of
corporate opportunities between us and Mr. Allen and his
affiliates in connection with his investments in businesses in
which we are permitted to engage under Charters restated
certificate of incorporation. Certain of the indentures of
Charter and its subsidiaries, require the applicable issuer of
notes to obtain, under certain circumstances, approval of the
board of directors of Charter and, where a transaction or series
of related transactions is valued at or in excess of
$50 million, a fairness opinion with respect to
transactions in which Mr. Allen has an interest. Related
party transactions are approved by our Audit Committee in
compliance with the listing requirements applicable to NASDAQ
National Market listed companies. We have not instituted any
other formal plan or arrangement to address potential conflicts
of interest.
The restrictive provisions of the organizational documents
described above may limit our ability to take advantage of
attractive business opportunities. Consequently, our ability to
offer new products and services outside of the cable
transmission business and enter into new businesses could be
adversely affected, resulting in an adverse effect on our
growth, financial condition and results of operations.
Third Party Business Relationships in Which Mr. Allen
has or had an Interest
As previously noted, Mr. Allen has and has had extensive
investments in the areas of media and technology. We have a
number of commercial relationships with third parties in which
Mr. Allen has an interest. Mr. Allen or his affiliates
own equity interests or warrants to purchase equity interests in
various entities with which we do business or which provide us
with products, services or programming. Mr. Allen owns 100%
of the equity of Vulcan Ventures Incorporated and Vulcan Inc.
and is the president of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo Allen
Patton is a director and the President and Chief Executive
Officer of Vulcan Inc. and is a director and Vice President of
Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President
of Vulcan Inc. and Vulcan Ventures. The various cable, media,
Internet and telephone companies in which Mr. Allen has
invested may mutually benefit one another. We can give no
assurance, nor should you expect, that any of these business
relationships will be successful, that we will realize any
benefits from these relationships or that we will enter into any
business relationships in the future with Mr. Allens
affiliated companies.
Mr. Allen and his affiliates have made, and in the future
likely will make, numerous investments outside of us and our
business. We cannot assure you that, in the event that we or any
of our subsidiaries enter into transactions in the future with
any affiliate of Mr. Allen, such transactions will be on
terms as favorable to us as terms we might have obtained from an
unrelated third party.
High Speed Access Corp. (High Speed Access) was a
provider of high-speed Internet access services over cable
modems. During the period from 1997 to 2000, certain Charter
entities entered into Internet-access related service
agreements, and both Vulcan Ventures, an entity owned by
Mr. Allen, and Charter Holdco made equity investments in
High Speed Access.
On February 28, 2002, our subsidiary, CC Systems, purchased
from High Speed Access the contracts and associated assets, and
assumed related liabilities, that served our customers,
including a customer contact center, network operations center
and provisioning software. At the closing, certain of our
subsidiaries paid $78 million to High Speed Access and
delivered 37,000 shares of High Speed Accesss
Series D convertible preferred stock and all of the
warrants to buy High Speed Access common stock owned by Charter
Holdco (which had been acquired pursuant to two network services
agreements which were cancelled in connection with this
transaction, as described below), and High Speed Access
purchased 38,000 shares of its Series D Preferred
Stock from Vulcan Ventures for $8 million. Additional
purchase price adjustments were made as provided in the asset
purchase agreement. Charter Holdco obtained a
134
fairness opinion from a qualified investment-banking firm
regarding the valuation of the assets purchased. Concurrently
with the closing of the transaction, High Speed Access also
purchased all of its common stock held by Vulcan Ventures.
In conjunction with the High Speed Access asset purchase, on
February 28, 2002, Charter Holdco granted High Speed Access
the right to use certain intellectual property sold by High
Speed Access to Charter Holdco. High Speed Access does not pay
any fees under the agreement. The domestic portion of the
license terminated on June 30, 2002, and the international
portion of the license expired on February 2, 2005. Prior
to closing the asset purchase, Charter performed certain
management services formerly performed by High Speed Access, for
which it received approximately $4 million in January and
February 2002. Concurrently with the asset purchase, all of the
other agreements between Charter Holdco and High Speed Access
Corp. (other than the license agreement described above), namely
the programming content agreement, the services agreement, the
systems access agreement, the 1998 network services
agreement and the May 2000 network services agreement, were
terminated. The revenues we earned from High Speed Access for
the year ended December 31, 2002 were approximately
$17 million. In addition, for the year ended
December 31, 2002, we paid High Speed Access approximately
$2 million under the 1998 network services agreement
and the 2000 network services agreement, representing a per
customer fee to High Speed Access according to agreed pricing
terms and compensation for services exceeding certain minimum
thresholds.
Immediately prior to the asset purchase, Vulcan Ventures
beneficially owned approximately 37%, and Charter Holdco and its
subsidiaries beneficially owned approximately 13%, of the common
stock of High Speed Access (including the shares of common stock
which could be acquired upon conversion of the Series D
preferred stock, and upon exercise of the warrants owned by
Charter Holdco). Following the consummation of the asset
purchase, neither Charter Holdco nor Vulcan Ventures
beneficially owned any securities of, or were otherwise
affiliated with, High Speed Access.
On May 12, 2000, Charter entered into a five-year network
services agreement with High Speed Access, which was assigned by
Charter Communications, Inc. to Charter Holdco on August 1,
2000. With respect to each system launched or intended to be
launched, we paid a per customer fee to High Speed Access
according to agreed pricing terms. In addition, we compensated
High Speed Access for services exceeding certain minimum
thresholds.
In 2001, Charter Holdco was a party to a systems access and
investment agreement with Vulcan Ventures and High Speed Access
and a related network services agreement with High Speed Access.
These agreements provided High Speed Access with exclusive
access to certain of our homes passed. The term of the network
services agreement was, as to a particular cable system, five
years from the date revenue billing commenced for that cable
system. The programming content agreement provided each of
Vulcan Ventures and High Speed Access with a license to use
certain content and materials of the other on a non-exclusive,
royalty-free basis.
Under the above described transactions, we also earned certain
warrants to purchase High Speed Access stock. These warrants
were cancelled in February 2002 in connection with the asset
purchase described above. As a result of the transaction with
High Speed Access described above, we neither paid to, nor
received, any amounts from High Speed Access in 2003.
TechTV, Inc. (TechTV) operated a cable television
network that offered programming mostly related to technology.
Pursuant to an affiliation agreement that originated in 1998 and
that terminates in 2008, TechTV has provided us with programming
for distribution via our cable systems. The affiliation
agreement provides, among other things, that TechTV must offer
Charter Holdco certain terms and conditions that are no less
favorable in the affiliation agreement than are given to any
other distributor that serves the same number of or fewer TechTV
viewing customers. Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation
agreement, we were entitled to incentive payments for channel
launches through December 31, 2003.
135
In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with
Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for
(i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation
agreement which, among other things, revises the description of
the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive
certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of
the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make
payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco
under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to
pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month
period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising
time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in
consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and
waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the
aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of
content relating to technology and video gaming for
Charters interactive television platforms through
December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the
six months ended June 30, 2005 we recognized approximately
$4 million, $1 million, $5 million and
$0.6 million, respectively, of the Vulcan Programming
payment as an offset to programming expense and paid
approximately $0.2 million, $80,600, $2 million and
$1 million, respectively, to TechTV under the affiliation
agreement.
We believe that Vulcan Programming, which is 100% owned by
Mr. Allen, owned an approximate 98% equity interest in
TechTV at the time Vulcan Programming sold TechTV to an
unrelated third party in May 2004. Until September 2003,
Mr. Savoy, a former Charter director, was the president and
director of Vulcan Programming and was a director of TechTV.
Mr. Wangberg, one of Charters directors, was the
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and a director of TechTV.
Mr. Wangberg resigned as the Chief Executive Officer of
TechTV in July 2002. He remained a director of TechTV along with
Mr. Allen until Vulcan Programming sold TechTV.
Oxygen Media LLC (Oxygen) provides programming
content aimed at the female audience for distribution over cable
systems and satellite. On July 22, 2002, Charter Holdco
entered into a carriage agreement with Oxygen, whereby we agreed
to carry programming content from Oxygen. Under the carriage
agreement, we currently make Oxygen programming available to
approximately 5 million of our video customers. The term of
the carriage agreement was retroactive to February 1, 2000,
the date of launch of Oxygen programming by us, and was to run
for a period of five years from that date. For the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005, we paid Oxygen approximately
$6 million, $9 million, $13 million and
$5 million, respectively, for programming content. In
addition, Oxygen pays us marketing support fees for customers
launched after the first year of the term of the carriage
agreement up to a total of $4 million. We recorded
approximately $2 million, $1 million, $1 million
and $0.1 million related to these launch incentives as a
reduction of programming expense for each of the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005, respectively.
Concurrently with the execution of the carriage agreement,
Charter Holdco entered into an equity issuance agreement
pursuant to which Oxygens parent company, Oxygen Media
Corporation (Oxygen Media), granted a subsidiary of
Charter Holdco a warrant to purchase 2.4 million
shares of Oxygen Media common stock for an exercise price of
$22.00 per share. In February 2005, this warrant expired
unexercised. Charter Holdco was also to receive unregistered
shares of Oxygen Media common stock with a guaranteed fair
market value on the date of issuance of $34 million, on or
prior to February 2, 2005, with the exact date to be
determined by Oxygen Media, but this commitment was later
revised as discussed below.
We recognize the guaranteed value of the investment over the
life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of programming
expense. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005, we
recorded approximately $6 million, $9 million,
$13 million and $2 million, respectively, as a
reduction of programming expense. The carrying value of our
investment in Oxygen was approximately $10 million,
$19 million, $32 million and $33 million as of
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and June 30, 2005,
respectively.
136
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into
agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The
amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number
of our customers to which Oxygen programming must be carried and
for which we must pay, (b) releases Charter Holdco from any
claims related to the failure to achieve distribution benchmarks
under the carriage agreement, (c) requires Oxygen to make
payment on outstanding receivables for marketing support fees
due to us under the carriage agreement; and (d) requires
that Oxygen provide its programming content to us on economic
terms no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable
or satellite operator having fewer subscribers than us. The
renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the period
that we will carry Oxygen programming to our customers through
January 31, 2008, and (b) requires license fees to be
paid based on customers receiving Oxygen programming, rather
than for specific customer benchmarks.
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the
equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of
1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a
liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued
dividends to Charter Holdco in place of the $34 million of
unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock. Oxygen Media
delivered these shares in March 2005. The preferred stock is
convertible into common stock after December 31, 2007 at a
conversion ratio, the numerator of which is the liquidation
preference and the denominator which is the fair market value
per share of Oxygen Media common stock on the conversion date.
As of June 30, 2005, through Vulcan Programming,
Mr. Allen owned an approximate 31% interest in Oxygen
assuming no exercises of outstanding warrants or conversion or
exchange of convertible or exchangeable securities. Ms. Jo
Allen Patton is a director and the President of Vulcan
Programming. Mr. Lance Conn is a Vice President of Vulcan
Programming.
Marc Nathanson has an indirect beneficial interest of less than
1% in Oxygen.
|
|
|
Portland Trail Blazers and Action Sports Cable
Network |
On October 7, 1996, the former owner of our Falcon cable
systems entered into a letter agreement and a cable television
agreement with Trail Blazers Inc. for the cable broadcast in the
metropolitan area surrounding Portland, Oregon of pre-season,
regular season and playoff basketball games of the Portland
Trail Blazers, a National Basketball Association basketball
team. Mr. Allen is the 100% owner of the Portland Trail
Blazers and Trail Blazers Inc. After the acquisition of the
Falcon cable systems in November 1999, we continued to operate
under the terms of these agreements until their termination on
September 30, 2001. Under the letter agreement, Trail
Blazers Inc. was paid a fixed fee for each customer in areas
directly served by the Falcon cable systems. Under the cable
television agreement, we shared subscription revenues with Trail
Blazers Inc. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003
and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005, we
paid approximately $1 million, $135,200, $96,100 and
$116,500, respectively, in connection with the cable broadcast
of Portland Trail Blazers basketball games under the October
1996 cable television agreement and subsequent local cable
distribution agreements.
On July 1, 2001, Charter Holdco and Action Sports Cable
Network (Action Sports), which was 100% owned by
Mr. Allen, entered into a new carriage agreement for a
five-year term, which became effective on October 1, 2001
with the expiration of the previous agreement. Under the July
2001 carriage agreement, Charter Holdco pays Action Sports a
fixed fee for each customer receiving the Action Sports
programming, which covered sporting events in the Pacific
Northwest, including the Portland Trail Blazers, the Seattle
Seahawks, a National Football League football team, and the
Portland Fire, a Womens National Basketball Association
basketball team. On November 5, 2002, Action Sports, which
was 100% owned by Mr. Allen, announced that it was
discontinuing its business following its failure to obtain an
acceptable carriage agreement with AT&T Cable, the cable
television provider in Portland, Oregon. Action Sports service
was terminated on November 5, 2002 and Charter Holdco
ceased carriage of the service. For the year ended
December 31, 2002, we paid Action Sports approximately
$1 million for rights to carry its programming.
137
Charter Holdco executed a Software License Agreement effective
September 30, 2002, with Click2learn, Inc.
(Click2learn), a company which provided enterprise
software for organizations seeking to capture, manage and
disseminate knowledge throughout their extended enterprise. As
of December 31, 2003, Mr. Allen owned an approximate
21% interest in Click2learn through 616,120 shares held of
record by Vulcan Ventures and 387,096 shares issuable upon
exercise of a warrant issued to Vulcan Ventures. In March 2004,
Click2learn was merged with an unrelated company, resulting in a
new company, SumTotal Systems, Inc., which is publicly traded.
We have been informed by Vulcan that, as of December 31,
2004, Mr. Allen owned an approximate 10% interest in
SumTotal Systems, Inc. through his ownership in Vulcan Ventures.
Mr. Allen owns 100% of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo Allen
Patton is a director and Vice President of Vulcan Ventures.
Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President of Vulcan
Ventures. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and
2004, we paid approximately $250,000, $57,100 and $0,
respectively, to Click2learn. For the year ended
December 31, 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, we paid approximately $0 and $0,
respectively to SumTotal Systems, Inc.
In March 2001, a subsidiary of Charter, Charter Communications
Ventures, LLC (Charter Ventures) and Vulcan Ventures
Incorporated formed DBroadband Holdings, LLC for the sole
purpose of purchasing equity interests in Digeo, Inc.
(Digeo), an entity controlled by Paul Allen. In
connection with the execution of the broadband carriage
agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC purchased an equity interest
in Digeo funded by contributions from Vulcan Ventures
Incorporated. The equity interest is subject to a priority
return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to the amount
contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures behalf.
After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount contributed and any
cumulative loss allocations, Charter Ventures has a 100% profit
interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC. Charter Ventures is not
required to make any capital contributions, including capital
calls, to Digeo. DBroadband Holdings, LLC is therefore not
included in our consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to
an amended version of this arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures
contributed a total of $29 million to Digeo,
$7 million of which was contributed on Charter
Ventures behalf, subject to Vulcan Ventures
aforementioned priority return. Since the formation of
DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has contributed
approximately $56 million on Charter Ventures behalf.
On March 2, 2001, Charter Ventures entered into a broadband
carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive, LLC (Digeo
Interactive), a wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo. The
carriage agreement provided that Digeo Interactive would provide
to Charter a portal product, which would function as
the television-based Internet portal (the initial point of entry
to the Internet) for Charters customers who received
Internet access from Charter. The agreement term was for
25 years and Charter agreed to use the Digeo portal
exclusively for six years. Before the portal product was
delivered to Charter, Digeo terminated development of the portal
product.
On September 27, 2001, Charter and Digeo Interactive
amended the broadband carriage agreement. According to the
amendment, Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter the
content for enhanced Wink interactive television
services, known as Charter Interactive Channels
(i-channels). In order to provide the i-channels,
Digeo Interactive sublicensed certain Wink technologies to
Charter. Charter is entitled to share in the revenues generated
by the i-channels. Currently, our digital video customers who
receive i-channels receive the service at no additional charge.
On September 28, 2002, Charter entered into a second
amendment to its broadband carriage agreement with Digeo
Interactive. This amendment superseded the amendment of
September 27, 2001. It provided for the development by
Digeo Interactive of future features to be included in the Basic
i-TV service to be provided by Digeo and for Digeos
development of an interactive toolkit to enable
Charter to develop interactive local content. Furthermore,
Charter could request that Digeo Interactive manage local
content for a fee. The amendment provided for Charter to pay for
development of the Basic i-TV service as well as license fees
for customers who would receive the service, and for Charter and
Digeo to
138
split certain revenues earned from the service. In 2002, 2003
and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005, we
paid Digeo Interactive approximately $3 million,
$4 million, $3 million and $1 million,
respectively, for customized development of the i-channels and
the local content tool kit. We received no revenues under the
broadband carriage agreement in 2003. This amendment expired
pursuant to its terms on December 31, 2003. Digeo
Interactive is continuing to provide the Basic i-TV service on a
month-to-month basis.
On June 30, 2003, Charter Holdco entered into an agreement
with Motorola, Inc. for the purchase of 100,000 digital video
recorder (DVR) units. The software for these DVR
units is being supplied by Digeo Interactive under a license
agreement entered into in April 2004. Under the license
agreement Digeo Interactive granted to Charter Holdco the right
to use Digeos proprietary software for the number of DVR
units that Charter deployed from a maximum of 10 headends
through year-end 2004. This maximum number of headends
restriction was expanded and eventually eliminated through
successive agreement amendments and the date for entering into
license agreements for units deployed was extended. The license
granted for each unit deployed under the agreement is valid for
five years. In addition, Charter will pay certain other fees
including a per-headend license fee and maintenance fees.
Maximum license and maintenance fees during the term of the
agreement are expected to be approximately $7 million. The
agreement includes an MFN clause pursuant to which
Charter is entitled to receive contract terms, considered on the
whole, and license fees, considered apart from other contract
terms, no less favorable than those accorded to any other Digeo
customer. An audit of Digeos third party contracts was
conducted by Ernst & Young, LLP in August 2005 and it
was determined that Charter was not due any refund under the MFN
clause. Charter paid approximately $0.5 million and
$0.2 million in license and maintenance fees for the year
ending December 31, 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, respectively.
In April 2004, we launched DVR service using units containing
the Digeo software in our Rochester, Minnesota market using a
broadband media center that is an integrated set-top terminal
with a cable converter, DVR hard drive and connectivity to other
consumer electronics devices (such as stereos, MP3 players, and
digital cameras).
In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet
with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase
of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that
the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to
year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development,
testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would
enter into a license agreement for Digeos proprietary
software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the
license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter
Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and
in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement,
each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet.
Total purchase price and license and maintenance fees during the
term of the definitive agreements are expected to be
approximately $41 million. The definitive agreements are
terminable at no penalty to Charter in certain circumstances.
Charter paid approximately $0 and $2 million in capital
purchases under this agreement for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, respectively.
In late 2003, Microsoft filed suit against Digeo for
$9 million in a breach of contract action, involving an
agreement that Digeo and Microsoft had entered into in 2001.
Digeo informed Charter that it believed it had an
indemnification claim against Charter for half that amount.
Digeo settled with Microsoft agreeing to make a cash payment and
to purchase certain amounts of Microsoft software products and
consulting services through 2008. In consideration of Digeo
agreeing to release Charter from its potential claim against
Charter, after consultation with outside counsel Charter agreed,
in June 2005, to purchase a total of $2.3 million in
Microsoft consulting services through 2008, a portion of which
amounts Digeo has informed Charter will count against
Digeos purchase obligations with Microsoft.
We believe that Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled by
Mr. Allen, owns an approximate 60% equity interest in
Digeo, Inc., on a fully-converted non-diluted basis.
Messrs. Allen and Conn and Ms. Patton are directors of
Digeo, and Mr. Vogel was a director of Digeo in 2004.
During 2004 and 2005, Mr. Vogel held options to
purchase 10,000 shares of Digeo common stock.
139
Other Miscellaneous Relationships
Pursuant to certain affiliation agreements with networks of
Viacom, Inc. (Viacom), including MTV, MTV2,
Nickelodeon, VH1, TVLand, CMT, Spike TV, Comedy Central, Viacom
Digital Suite, CBS-owned and operated broadcast stations,
Showtime, The Movie Channel, and Flix, Viacom provides Charter
with programming for distribution via our cable systems. The
affiliation agreements provide for, among other things, rates
and terms of carriage, advertising on the Viacom networks, which
Charter can sell to local advertisers and marketing support. For
the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for
the six months ended June 30, 2005, Charter paid Viacom
approximately $177 million, $188 million,
$194 million and $99 million, respectively, for
programming. Charter recorded approximately $5 million,
$5 million, $8 million and $15 million as
receivables from Viacom networks related to launch incentives
for certain channels and marketing support, respectively, for
the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for
the six months ended June 30, 2005. From April 1994 to July
2004, Mr. Dolgen served as Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of the Viacom Entertainment Group.
|
|
|
ADC Telecommunications Inc. |
Charter and Charter Holdco purchase certain equipment for use in
our business from ADC Telecommunications, which provides
broadband access and network equipment. Mr. Wangberg serves
as a director for ADC Telecommunications. For the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005, we paid $759,600, $60,100, $344,800
and $241,100, respectively, to ADC Telecommunications under this
arrangement.
|
|
|
HDNet and HDNet Movies Network |
On January 10, 2003 we signed an agreement to carry two
around-the-clock, high-definition networks, HDNet and HDNet
Movies. HDNet Movies delivers a commercial-free schedule of
full-length feature films converted from 35mm to
high-definition, including titles from an extensive library of
Warner Bros. films. HDNet Movies will feature a mix of
theatrical releases, made-for-TV movies, independent films and
shorts. The HDNet channel features a variety of HDTV
programming, including live sports, sitcoms, dramas, action
series, documentaries, travel programs, music concerts and
shows, special events, and news features including the popular
HDNet World Report. HDNet also offers a selection of classic and
recent television series. We paid HDNet and HDNet Movies
approximately $21,900, $609,100 and $1 million in 2003 and
2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. We believe that entities controlled by
Mr. Cuban owned approximately 81% of HDNet as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005. On May 21, 2003, Mark Cuban filed a
Schedule 13G with the SEC stating that he owned
approximately 19,000,000 shares, or 6.5% of the total
common equity in Charter. However, a Schedule 13G/ A filed
on April 25, 2005 reported that Mr. Cuban owned no
shares of Charter.
|
|
|
Affiliate Leases and Agreements |
Companies controlled by Mr. Nathanson, a director of
Charter, leased certain warehouse space in Riverside,
California, to our subsidiaries. For the years ended
December 31, 2002 and 2003, total rent paid for the
Riverside warehouse space was approximately $76,000 and $16,600,
respectively, under a lease agreement which expired
March 15, 2003.
We have carried The Outdoor Channel on a month-to-month basis
since the expiration of an affiliation agreement in July 2002.
We paid approximately $1 million, $1 million,
$1 million and $594,900 to The Outdoor Channel during 2002,
2003 and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30, 2005,
respectively. In December 2003, Mr. Merritt became director
of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc., an affiliate of The Outdoor
Channel, Inc.
140
|
|
|
Payments for Relatives Services |
Since June 2003, Charter Holdco has employed the brother-in-law
of Carl E. Vogel, Charters former President, Chief
Executive Officer and a director. Mr. Vogels
brother-in-law receives a salary commensurate with his position
in the engineering department.
We believe that, through a third party advertising agency, we
have paid approximately $112,700, $67,300, $49,300, $20,200 in
2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30,
2005, respectively, to Mapleton Communications, an affiliate of
Mapleton Investments, LLC that owns radio stations in Oregon and
California. Mr. Nathanson is the Chairman and owner of
Mapleton Investments, LLC.
|
|
|
Purchase of Certain Enstar Limited Partnership Systems;
Management Fees |
In April 2002, Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, Rifkin
Acquisition Partners, LLC and Charter Communications
Entertainment I, LLC, each an indirect, wholly owned
subsidiary of Charter Holdings, completed the cash purchase of
certain assets of Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar
Income/ Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-1,
L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-2, L.P., and Enstar Income
Program IV-3, L.P., serving approximately 21,600 customers, for
a total cash sale price of approximately $48 million. In
September 2002, Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC
purchased all of Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P.s
Illinois cable television systems, serving approximately 6,400
customers, for a cash sale price of $15 million. Enstar
Communications Corporation, a direct subsidiary of Charter
Holdco is a general partner of the Enstar limited partnerships
but does not exercise control over them. The purchase prices
were allocated to assets acquired based on fair values,
including approximately $41 million assigned to franchises
and $4 million assigned to other intangible assets
amortized over a useful life of three years.
In addition, Enstar Cable Corporation, the manager of the Enstar
limited partnerships through a management agreement, engaged
Charter Holdco to manage the Enstar limited partnerships.
Pursuant to the management agreement, Charter Holdco provides
management services to the Enstar limited partnerships in
exchange for management fees. The Enstar limited partnerships
also purchase basic and premium programming for their systems at
cost from Charter Holdco. For the years ended December 31,
2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the six months ended June 30,
2005, Charter Holdco earned approximately $1 million,
$469,300, $0 and $0, respectively, by providing management
services to the Enstar limited partnerships. In September 2003
the Enstar limited partnerships completed sales of all their
remaining assets, and as a result no further management fees
were paid in 2004. In November 2004, the Enstar limited
partnerships were dissolved.
All of the executive officers of Charter (with the exception of
Mr. Allen), Charter Holdco and Charter Holdings act as
officers of Enstar Communications Corporation.
Pursuant to Charters bylaws (and the employment agreements
of certain of our current and former officers), Charter is
obligated (subject to certain limitations) to indemnify and hold
harmless, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any officer,
director or employee against all expense, liability and loss
(including, among other things, attorneys fees) reasonably
incurred or suffered by such officer, director or employee as a
result of the fact that he or she is a party or is threatened to
be made a party or is otherwise involved in any action, suit or
proceeding by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a
director, officer or employee of Charter. In addition, Charter
is obligated to pay, as an advancement of its indemnification
obligation, the expenses (including attorneys fees)
incurred by any officer, director or employee in defending any
such action, suit or proceeding in advance of its final
disposition, subject to an obligation to repay those amounts
under certain circumstances. Pursuant to these indemnification
arrangements and as an advancement of costs, Charter has
reimbursed certain of its current and former
141
directors and executive officers a total of approximately
$3 million, $8 million, $3 million and $13,400 in
respect of invoices received in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the
six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively, in connection
with their defense of certain legal actions described herein.
See Business Legal Proceedings. Those
current and former directors and officers include: Paul G.
Allen, David C. Andersen, David G. Barford, Mary Pat Blake, J.
Christian Fenger, Kent D. Kalkwarf, Ralph G. Kelly, Jerald L.
Kent, Paul E. Martin, David L. McCall, Ronald L. Nelson, Nancy
B. Peretsman, John C. Pietri, William D. Savoy, Steven A.
Schumm, Curtis S. Shaw, William J. Shreffler, Stephen E. Silva,
James Trey Smith and Carl E. Vogel. These amounts were submitted
to Charters director and officer insurance carrier and
have been reimbursed consistent with the terms of the Securities
Class Action and Derivative Action Settlements described in
Business Legal Proceedings. On or about
February 22, 2005, Charter filed lawsuits against the four
former officers who were indicted and pled guilty as part of the
government investigation conducted by the United States
Attorneys Office. These suits seek to recover fees and
related expenses that Charter advanced these former officers
under the indemnification provisions described above. One of
these former officers has counterclaimed against Charter
alleging, among other things, that Charter owes him additional
indemnification for legal fees that Charter did not pay and
another of these former officers has counterclaimed against
Charter for accrued sick leave.
142
DESCRIPTION OF OTHER INDEBTEDNESS
The following description of indebtedness is qualified in its
entirety by reference to the relevant credit facilities,
indentures and related documents governing such indebtedness.
Description of Our Outstanding Debt
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our actual
total debt was approximately $8.4 billion and
$8.3 billion as summarized below (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
|
Start Date for | |
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
|
Cash Interest | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
Interest |
|
Payment on | |
|
|
|
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Payment |
|
Discount | |
|
Maturity | |
Long-Term Debt(b) |
|
Value | |
|
Value(a) | |
|
Value | |
|
Value(a) | |
|
Dates |
|
Notes | |
|
Date(b) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Renaissance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
4/15 & 10/15 |
|
|
10/15/03 |
|
|
|
4/15/08 |
|
CC V Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.875% senior discount notes due 2008(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
6/1 & 12/1 |
|
|
6/1/04 |
|
|
|
12/1/08 |
|
Charter Operating:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit facilities
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8% senior second lien notes due 2012
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
4/30 & 10/30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/30/12 |
|
|
83/8% senior
second lien notes due 2014
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
4/30 & 10/30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/30/14 |
|
CCO Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.750% senior notes due 2013
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/15/13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/15, 6/15, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
9/15 & 12/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/15/10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,442 |
|
|
$ |
8,444 |
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The accreted value presented above represents the face value of
the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale
plus the accretion to the balance sheet date. |
|
(b) |
|
In general, the obligors have the right to redeem all of the
notes set forth in the above table in whole or part at their
option, beginning at various times prior to their stated
maturity dates, subject to certain conditions, upon the payment
of the outstanding principal amount (plus a specified redemption
premium) and all accrued and unpaid interest. For additional
information, see Note 9 to our consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. |
|
(c) |
|
On March 14, 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed all of its
outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued
and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. We are not
required to redeem any of the other notes listed above prior to
their stated maturity dates. |
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, long-term
debt totaled approximately $8.4 billion and
$8.3 billion, respectively. This debt was comprised of
approximately $5.4 billion and $5.5 billion of credit
facility debt and $3.0 billion and $2.8 billion
accreted value of high-yield notes at June 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004, respectively.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the
weighted average interest rate on the credit facility debt was
approximately 7.2% and 6.8%, respectively and the weighted
average interest rate on the high-yield notes was approximately
8.2% and 8.2%, resulting in a blended weighted average interest
rate of 7.5% and 7.3%, respectively. The interest rate on
approximately 55% and 59% of the total principal amount of our
debt was effectively fixed, including the effects of our
interest rate hedge agreements as of June 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our
credit facility debt was approximately
143
$5.4 billion and $5.5 billion at June 30, 2005
and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our
high-yield notes was $2.9 billion and $2.9 billion at
June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The
fair value of high-yield notes is based on quoted market prices,
and the fair value of the credit facilities is based on dealer
quotations.
The following description is a summary of certain material
provisions of the amended and restated Charter Operating credit
facilities and our other notes and those of our subsidiaries
(collectively, the Debt Agreements). The summary
does not restate the terms of the Debt Agreements in their
entirety, nor does it describe all terms of the Debt Agreements.
The agreements and instruments governing each of the Debt
Agreements are complicated and you should consult such
agreements and instruments for more detailed information
regarding the Debt Agreements.
Credit Facilities
|
|
|
Charter Operating Credit Facilities
General |
The Charter Operating credit facilities were amended and
restated concurrently with the sale of $1.5 billion senior
second lien notes in April 2004, among other things, to defer
maturities and increase availability under these facilities and
to enable Charter Operating to acquire the interests of the
lenders under the CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and Falcon
credit facilities, thereby consolidating all credit facilities
under one amended and restated Charter Operating credit
agreement.
The Charter Operating credit facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
provide borrowing availability of up to $6.5 billion; |
|
|
|
provide for two term facilities: |
|
|
|
|
(i) |
a Term A facility with a total principal amount of
$2.0 billion, of which 12.5% matures in 2007, 30% matures
in 2008, 37.5% matures in 2009 and 20% matures in 2010; and |
|
|
|
|
(ii) |
a Term B facility with a total principal amount of
$3.0 billion, which shall be repayable in 27 equal
quarterly installments aggregating in each loan year to 1% of
the original amount of the Term B facility, with the remaining
balance due at final maturity in 2011; and |
|
|
|
|
|
provide for a revolving credit facility, in a total amount of
$1.5 billion, with a maturity date in 2010. |
Amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit
facilities bear interest, at Charter Operatings election,
at a base rate or the Eurodollar rate, as defined, plus a margin
for Eurodollar loans of up to 3.00% for the Term A facility and
revolving credit facility, and up to 3.25% for the Term B
facility, and for base rate loans of up to 2.00% for the Term A
facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 2.25% for the
Term B facility. A quarterly commitment fee of up to .75% is
payable on the average daily unborrowed balance of the revolving
credit facilities.
The obligations of our subsidiaries under the Charter Operating
credit facilities (the Obligations) are guaranteed
by us and the subsidiaries of Charter Operating, except for
immaterial subsidiaries and subsidiaries precluded from
guaranteeing by reason of the provisions of other indebtedness
to which they are subject (the non-guarantor
subsidiaries, primarily Renaissance and its subsidiaries).
The Obligations are also secured by (i) a lien on all of
the assets of Charter Operating and its subsidiaries (other than
assets of the non-guarantor subsidiaries), to the extent such
lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the
filing of a financing statement, and (ii) by a pledge by
CCO Holdings of the equity interests owned by it in Charter
Operating or any of Charter Operatings subsidiaries, as
well as intercompany obligations owing to it by any of such
entities. Upon the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio (as defined
in the indenture governing the Charter Holdings senior notes and
senior discount notes) being under 8.75 to 1.0, the Charter
Operating credit facilities require that the 11.875% notes
due 2008 issued by CC V Holdings, LLC be redeemed. Because such
Leverage Ratio was determined to be under 8.75 to 1.0, CC V
Holdings, LLC redeemed such notes in March 2005, and CC V
Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor
subsidiaries) became guarantors of the Obligations and have
granted a lien on
144
all of their assets as to which a lien can be perfected under
the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing
statement.
|
|
|
Charter Operating Credit Facilities
Restrictive Covenants |
The Charter Operating credit facilities contain representations
and warranties, and affirmative and negative covenants customary
for financings of this type. The financial covenants measure
performance against standards set for leverage, debt service
coverage, and interest coverage, tested as of the end of each
quarter. The maximum allowable leverage ratio is 4.25 to 1.0
until maturity, tested as of the end of each quarter beginning
September 30, 2004. Additionally, the Charter Operating
credit facilities contain provisions requiring mandatory loan
prepayments under specific circumstances, including when
significant amounts of assets are sold and the proceeds are not
reinvested in assets useful in the business of the borrower
within a specified period, and upon the incurrence of certain
indebtedness when the ratio of senior first lien debt to
operating cash flow is greater than 2.0 to 1.0.
The Charter Operating credit facilities permit Charter Operating
and its subsidiaries to make distributions to pay interest on
the Charter Operating senior second lien notes, the CCH II
senior notes, the CCO Holdings senior notes, the Charter
convertible senior notes and the Charter Holdings senior notes,
provided that, among other things, no default has occurred and
is continuing under the Charter Operating credit facilities.
Conditions to future borrowings include absence of a default or
an event of default under the Charter Operating credit
facilities and the continued accuracy in all material respects
of the representations and warranties, including the absence
since December 31, 2003 of any event, development or
circumstance that has had or could reasonably be expected to
have a material adverse effect on our business.
The events of default under the Charter Operating credit
facilities include, among other things:
|
|
|
(i) the failure to make payments when due or within the
applicable grace period, |
|
|
(ii) the failure to comply with specified covenants,
including but not limited to a covenant to deliver audited
financial statements with an unqualified opinion from our
independent auditors, |
|
|
(iii) the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that
cause or permit the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by
CCO Holdings, Charter Operating or Charter Operatings
subsidiaries in amounts in excess of $50 million in
aggregate principal amount, |
|
|
(iv) the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that
result in the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by
certain of CCO Holdings direct and indirect parent
companies in amounts in excess of $200 million in aggregate
principal amount, |
|
|
(v) Paul Allen and/or certain of his family members and/or
their exclusively owned entities (collectively, the Paul
Allen Group) ceasing to have the power, directly or
indirectly, to vote at least 35% of the ordinary voting power of
Charter Operating, |
|
|
(vi) the consummation of any transaction resulting in any
person or group (other than the Paul Allen Group) having power,
directly or indirectly, to vote more than 35% of the ordinary
voting power of Charter Operating, unless the Paul Allen Group
holds a greater share of ordinary voting power of Charter
Operating, |
|
|
(vii) certain of Charter Operatings indirect or
direct parent companies having indebtedness in excess of
$500 million aggregate principal amount which remains
undefeased three months prior to the final maturity of such
indebtedness, and |
|
|
(viii) Charter Operating ceasing to be a wholly-owned
direct subsidiary of CCO Holdings, except in certain very
limited circumstances. |
145
Outstanding Notes
In August 2005, we issued $300 million total principal
amount of
83/4% senior
notes due 2013. The notes offered pursuant to this prospectus
are being offered in exchange for those notes. These notes have
similar terms as the
83/4% senior
notes due 2013 described below. For additional information about
these notes see Description of Notes.
|
|
|
83/4% Senior
Notes Due 2013 |
In November 2003, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
jointly issued $500 million total principal amount of
83/4% senior
notes due 2013. The CCO Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They
rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The
CCO Holdings notes are structurally subordinated to all
obligations of CCO Holdings subsidiaries, including the
Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and
the Charter Operating notes.
Interest on the CCO Holdings senior notes accrues at
83/4% per
year and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each May 15 and
November 15.
At any time prior to November 15, 2006, the issuers of the
CCO Holdings senior notes may redeem up to 35% of the total
principal amount of the CCO Holdings senior notes to the extent
of public equity proceeds they have received on a pro rata basis
at a redemption price equal to 108.75% of the principal amount
of CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus any accrued and
unpaid interest.
On or after November 15, 2008, the issuers of the CCO
Holdings senior notes may redeem all or a part of the notes at a
redemption price that declines ratably from the initial
redemption price of 104.375% to a redemption price on or after
November 15, 2011 of 100.0% of the principal amount of the
CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus, in each case, any
accrued and unpaid interest.
|
|
|
Senior Floating Rate Notes Due 2010 |
In December 2004, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
jointly issued $550 million total principal amount of
senior floating rate notes due 2010. These notes are general
unsecured obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital
Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future
unsubordinated obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings
Capital Corp. The CCO Holdings notes are structurally
subordinated to all obligations of CCO Holdings
subsidiaries, including the Renaissance notes, the Charter
Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes. In
August 2005, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
exchanged these notes for new notes with substantially similar
terms, except that the new senior floating rate notes are
registered under the Securities Act.
The CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes have an annual
interest rate of LIBOR plus 4.125%, reset and payable quarterly.
At any time prior to December 15, 2006, CCO Holdings and
CCO Holdings Capital Corp. may redeem up to 35% of the senior
floating rate notes in an amount not to exceed the amount of
proceeds of one or more public equity offerings at a redemption
price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus a premium
equal to the interest rate per annum applicable to the senior
floating rate notes on the date notice of redemption is given,
plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption
date, provided that at least 65% of the original aggregate
principal amount of the senior floating rate notes issued
remains outstanding after the redemption.
CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. may redeem the
senior floating rate notes due 2010 in whole or in part at their
option from December 15, 2006 until December 14, 2007
for 102% of the principal amount, from December 15, 2007
until December 14, 2008 for 101% of the principal amount
and from and after December 15, 2008, at par, in each case,
plus accrued and unpaid interest.
146
|
|
|
Additional Terms of the CCO Holdings Senior Notes and
Senior Floating Rate Notes |
The CCO Holdings notes described above are general unsecured
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They
rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The
CCO Holdings notes are structurally subordinated to all
obligations of subsidiaries of CCO Holdings, including the
Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating notes and the Charter
Operating credit facilities.
In the event of specified change of control events, CCO Holdings
must offer to purchase the outstanding CCO Holdings senior notes
from the holders at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total
principal amount of the notes, plus any accrued and unpaid
interest.
The indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior notes contains
restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or
activities by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries,
including the covenants summarized below. Substantially all of
CCO Holdings direct and indirect subsidiaries are
currently restricted subsidiaries.
The covenant in the indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior
notes that restricts incurrence of debt and issuance of
preferred stock permits CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries to
incur or issue specified amounts of debt or preferred stock, if,
after giving pro forma effect to the incurrence or issuance, CCO
Holdings could meet a leverage ratio (ratio of consolidated debt
to four times EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent fiscal
quarter for which internal financial reports are available) of
4.5 to 1.0.
In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be
met, so long as no default exists or would result from the
incurrence or issuance, CCO Holdings and its restricted
subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:
|
|
|
|
|
up to $9.75 billion of debt under credit facilities,
including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue
date of the CCO Holdings senior notes; |
|
|
|
up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase
or capital lease of new assets; |
|
|
|
up to $300 million of additional debt for any
purpose; and |
|
|
|
other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as
intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest
rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest
rates. |
The restricted subsidiaries of CCO Holdings are generally not
permitted to issue debt securities contractually subordinated to
other debt of the issuing subsidiary or preferred stock, in
either case in any public or Rule 144A offering.
The CCO Holdings indenture permits CCO Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and
later reclassify that debt into another category. The Charter
Operating credit facilities generally impose more restrictive
limitations on incurring new debt than CCO Holdings
indenture, so our subsidiaries that are subject to credit
facilities are not permitted to utilize the full debt incurrence
that would otherwise be available under the CCO Holdings
indenture covenants.
Generally, under CCO Holdings indenture:
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to
pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make
other specified restricted payments only if CCO Holdings can
incur $1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test, which
requires that CCO Holdings meet a 4.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio
after giving effect to the transaction, and if no default exists
or would exist as a consequence of such incurrence. If those
conditions are met, restricted payments are permitted in a total
amount of up to 100% of CCO Holdings consolidated EBITDA,
as defined, minus 1.3 times its consolidated interest expense,
plus 100% of new cash and appraised non-cash equity proceeds
received by CCO Holdings and not allocated to the debt
incurrence covenant, all cumulatively from the fiscal quarter
commenced on October 1, 2003, plus $100 million. |
147
In addition, CCO Holdings may make distributions or restricted
payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by the
transaction:
|
|
|
|
|
to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to
exceed $10 million per fiscal year; |
|
|
|
to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, pass-through
tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in
Charter Holdings or its restricted subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, interest
when due on Charter Holdings notes and our notes; |
|
|
|
to pay, so long as there is no default, interest on the Charter
convertible notes; |
|
|
|
to purchase, redeem or refinance Charter Holdings notes,
CCH II notes, Charter notes, and other direct or indirect
parent company notes, so long as CCO Holdings could incur $1.00
of indebtedness under the 4.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test
referred to above and there is no default; or |
|
|
|
to make other specified restricted payments including merger
fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using
concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing
subsidiary preferred equity interests. |
The indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior notes restricts
CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries from making
investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating
new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the
indenture or if CCO Holdings could not incur $1.00 of new debt
under the 4.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after
giving effect to the transaction.
Permitted investments include:
|
|
|
|
|
investments by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries in
CCO Holdings and in other restricted subsidiaries, or entities
that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the
investment, |
|
|
|
investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds
received by CCO Holdings since November 10, 2003 to the
extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted
payments covenant described above, |
|
|
|
other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any
time, and |
|
|
|
certain specified additional investments, such as investments in
customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and
investments received in connection with permitted asset sales. |
CCO Holdings is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other
than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens
securing debt and other obligations incurred under our
subsidiaries credit facilities, liens securing the
purchase price of new assets, liens securing indebtedness up to
$50 million and other specified liens incurred in the
ordinary course of business. The lien covenant does not restrict
liens on assets of subsidiaries of CCO Holdings.
CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital, its co-issuer, are
generally not permitted to sell all or substantially all of
their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their
leverage ratio after any such transaction would be no greater
than their leverage ratio immediately prior to the transaction,
or unless CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries could incur $1.00 of
new debt under the 4.50 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described
above after giving effect to the transaction, no default exists,
and the surviving entity is a U.S. entity that assumes the
CCO Holdings senior notes.
CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not
otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted
subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive
consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the
assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash,
assumption of liabilities, securities converted into cash within
60 days or productive assets. CCO Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries are then required within 365 days
after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash
proceeds over a specified threshold to acquire assets, including
current assets, used or useful in their
148
businesses or use the net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to
offer to repurchase the CCO Holdings senior notes with any
remaining proceeds.
CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not
engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the time of
the transaction, CCO Holdings could have incurred secured
indebtedness in an amount equal to the present value of the net
rental payments to be made under the lease, and the sale of the
assets and application of proceeds is permitted by the covenant
restricting asset sales.
CCO Holdings restricted subsidiaries may generally not
enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends or
distributions or transfer assets to CCO Holdings on terms that
are materially more restrictive than those governing their debt,
lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements existing when
they entered into the indenture, unless those restrictions are
on customary terms that will not materially impair CCO
Holdings ability to repay its notes.
The restricted subsidiaries of CCO Holdings are generally not
permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of CCO
Holdings, unless the guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee
of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any
rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from
the guarantee transaction for at least one year.
The indenture also restricts the ability of CCO Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with
affiliates involving consideration in excess of $15 million
without a determination by the board of directors that the
transaction is on terms no less favorable than arms-length, or
transactions with affiliates involving over $50 million
without receiving an independent opinion as to the fairness of
the transaction to the holders of the CCO Holdings notes.
|
|
|
Charter Communications Operating, LLC Notes |
On April 27, 2004, Charter Operating and Charter
Communications Operating Capital Corp. jointly issued
$1.1 billion of 8% senior second lien notes due 2012
and $400 million of
83/8% senior
second lien notes due 2014, for total gross proceeds of
$1.5 billion.
The Charter Operating notes were sold in a private transaction
that was not subject to the registration requirements of the
Securities Act of 1933. The Charter Operating notes are not
expected to have the benefit of any exchange or other
registration rights, except in specified limited circumstances.
In the first quarter of 2005, as a result of the occurrence of
the guarantee and pledge date (generally, upon the Charter
Holdings leverage ratio being below 8.75 to 1.0), CCO Holdings
and those subsidiaries of Charter Operating that are currently
guarantors of, or otherwise obligors with respect to,
indebtedness under the Charter Operating credit facilities and
related obligations provided guarantees of the Charter Operating
notes. The note guarantee of each such existing guarantor is,
and the note guarantee of any additional future subsidiary
guarantor will be:
|
|
|
|
|
a senior obligation of such guarantor; |
|
|
|
structurally senior to the outstanding senior notes of CCO
Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. (except in the case of
CCO Holdings note guarantee, which is structurally pari
passu with such senior notes), the outstanding senior notes
of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp., the outstanding
senior notes and senior discount notes of Charter Holdings, the
outstanding convertible senior notes of Charter and any future
indebtedness of parent companies of CCO Holdings (but subject to
provisions in the Charter Operating indenture that permit
interest and, subject to meeting the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio
test, principal payments to be made thereon); and |
|
|
|
senior in right of payment to any future subordinated
indebtedness of such guarantor. |
All the subsidiaries of Charter Operating (except CCO NR Sub,
LLC, and certain other subsidiaries that are not deemed material
and are designated as nonrecourse subsidiaries under the Charter
Operating credit facilities) are restricted subsidiaries of
Charter Operating under the Charter Operating notes.
149
Unrestricted subsidiaries generally will not be subject to the
restrictive covenants in the Charter Operating indenture.
In the event of specified change of control events, Charter
Operating must offer to purchase the Charter Operating notes at
a purchase price equal to 101% of the total principal amount of
the Charter Operating notes repurchased plus any accrued and
unpaid interest thereon.
The limitations on incurrence of debt contained in the indenture
governing the Charter Operating notes permit Charter Operating
and its restricted subsidiaries that are guarantors of the
Charter Operating notes to incur additional debt or issue shares
of preferred stock if, after giving pro forma effect to the
incurrence, Charter Operating could meet a leverage ratio test
(ratio of consolidated debt to four times EBITDA, as defined,
from the most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial
reports are available) of 4.25 to 1.0.
In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio test could
be met, so long as no default exists or would result from the
incurrence or issuance, Charter Operating and its restricted
subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:
|
|
|
|
|
up to $6.5 billion of debt under credit facilities (but
such incurrence is permitted only by Charter Operating and its
restricted subsidiaries that are guarantors of the Charter
Operating notes, so long as there are such guarantors),
including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue
date of the Charter Operating notes; |
|
|
|
up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase
or capital lease of assets; |
|
|
|
up to $300 million of additional debt for any
purpose, and |
|
|
|
other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as
refinancing of existing debt and interest rate swaps to provide
protection against fluctuation in interest rates and, subject to
meeting the leverage ratio test, debt existing at the time of
acquisition of a restricted subsidiary. |
The indenture governing the Charter Operating notes permits
Charter Operating to incur debt under one of the categories
above, and later reclassify the debt into a different category.
The Charter Operating credit facilities generally impose more
restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than the Charter
Operating indenture, so our subsidiaries that are subject to the
Charter Operating credit facilities are not permitted to utilize
the full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under
the Charter Operating indenture covenants.
Generally, under Charter Operatings indenture, Charter
Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay
dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make
other specified restricted payments only if Charter Operating
could incur $1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test,
which requires that Charter Operating meet a 4.25 to 1.0
leverage ratio after giving effect to the transaction, and if no
default exists or would exist as a consequence of such
incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments are
permitted in a total amount of up to 100% of Charter
Operatings consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.3
times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash
and appraised non-cash equity proceeds received by Charter
Operating and not allocated to the debt incurrence covenant, all
cumulatively from the fiscal quarter commenced April 1,
2004, plus $100 million.
In addition, Charter Operating may make distributions or
restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be
caused by the transaction:
|
|
|
|
|
to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to
exceed $10 million per fiscal year; |
|
|
|
regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through
tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in
Charter Operating or its restricted subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, interest
when due on the Charter Holdings notes, the CCH II notes
and the CCO Holdings notes; |
|
|
|
to pay, so long as there is no default, interest on the Charter
convertible notes; |
150
|
|
|
|
|
to purchase, redeem or refinance the Charter Holdings notes,
CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Charter notes,
and other direct or indirect parent company notes, so long as
Charter Operating could incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the
4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test referred to above and there is
no default, or |
|
|
|
to make other specified restricted payments including merger
fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using
concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing
subsidiary preferred equity interests. |
The indenture governing the Charter Operating notes restricts
Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries from making
investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating
new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the
indenture or if Charter Operating could not incur $1.00 of new
debt under the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above
after giving effect to the transaction.
Permitted investments include:
|
|
|
|
|
investments by Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries
in Charter Operating and in other restricted subsidiaries, or
entities that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the
investment, |
|
|
|
investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds
received by Charter Operating since April 27, 2004 to the
extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted
payments covenant described above, |
|
|
|
other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any
time, and |
|
|
|
certain specified additional investments, such as investments in
customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and
investments received in connection with permitted asset sales. |
Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are not
permitted to grant liens senior to the liens securing the
Charter Operating notes, other than permitted liens, on their
assets to secure indebtedness or other obligations, if, after
giving effect to such incurrence, the senior secured leverage
ratio (generally, the ratio of obligations secured by first
priority liens to four times EBITDA, as defined, from the most
recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports are
available) would exceed 3.75 to 1.0. Permitted liens include
liens securing indebtedness and other obligations under
permitted credit facilities, liens securing the purchase price
of new assets, liens securing indebtedness of up to
$50 million and other specified liens incurred in the
ordinary course of business.
Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital
Corp., its co-issuer, are generally not permitted to sell all or
substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other
companies unless their leverage ratio after any such transaction
would be no greater than their leverage ratio immediately prior
to the transaction, or unless Charter Operating and its
subsidiaries could incur $1.00 of new debt under the 4.25 to 1.0
leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the
transaction, no default exists, and the surviving entity is a
U.S. entity that assumes the Charter Operating notes.
Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries generally may
not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted
subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive
consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the
assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash,
assumption of liabilities, securities converted into cash within
60 days or productive assets. Charter Operating and its
restricted subsidiaries are then required within 365 days
after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash
proceeds over a specified threshold to acquire assets, including
current assets, used or useful in their businesses or use the
net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase the
Charter Operating notes with any remaining proceeds.
Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries may generally
not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the
time of the transaction, Charter Operating could have incurred
secured indebtedness in an amount equal to the present value of
the net rental payments to be made under the lease, and the sale
of the assets and application of proceeds is permitted by the
covenant restricting asset sales.
151
Charter Operatings restricted subsidiaries may generally
not enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends
or distributions or transfer assets to Charter Operating on
terms that are materially more restrictive than those governing
their debt, lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements
existing when Charter Operating entered into the indenture
governing the Charter Operating senior second lien notes unless
those restrictions are on customary terms that will not
materially impair Charter Operatings ability to repay the
Charter Operating notes.
The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Operating are generally
not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of
Charter Operating, unless the guarantying subsidiary issues a
guarantee of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and
waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation
arising from the guarantee transaction for at least one year.
The indenture also restricts the ability of Charter Operating
and its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain
transactions with affiliates involving consideration in excess
of $15 million without a determination by the board of
directors that the transaction is on terms no less favorable
than arms-length, or transactions with affiliates involving over
$50 million without receiving an independent opinion as to
the fairness of the transaction to the holders of the Charter
Operating notes.
Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are generally
not permitted to transfer equity interests in restricted
subsidiaries unless the transfer is of all of the equity
interests in the restricted subsidiary or the restricted
subsidiary remains a restricted subsidiary and net proceeds of
the equity sale are applied in accordance with the asset sales
covenant.
Since the occurrence of the guarantee and pledge date, the
collateral for the Charter Operating notes consists of all of
Charter Operatings and its subsidiaries assets that
secure the obligations of Charter Operating or any subsidiary of
Charter Operating with respect to the Charter Operating credit
facilities and the related obligations. The collateral currently
consists of the capital stock of Charter Operating held by CCO
Holdings, all of the intercompany obligations owing to CCO
Holdings by Charter Operating or any subsidiary of Charter
Operating, and substantially all of Charter Operatings and
the guarantors assets (other than the assets of CCO
Holdings) in which security interests may be perfected under the
Uniform Commercial Code by filing a financing statement
(including capital stock and intercompany obligations),
including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
with certain exceptions, all capital stock (limited in the case
of capital stock of foreign subsidiaries, if any, to 66% of the
capital stock of first tier foreign Subsidiaries) held by
Charter Operating or any guarantor; and |
|
|
|
with certain exceptions, all intercompany obligations owing to
Charter Operating or any guarantor. |
In March 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed in full the notes
outstanding under the CC V indenture. Following that redemption
CC V Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries guaranteed the Charter
Operating credit facilities and the related obligations and
secured those guarantees with first-priority liens, and
guaranteed the notes and secured the Charter Operating senior
second lien notes with second-priority liens, on substantially
all of their assets in which security interests may be perfected
under the Uniform Commercial Code by filing a financing
statement (including capital stock and intercompany obligations).
In addition, if Charter Operating or its subsidiaries exercise
any option to redeem in full the notes outstanding under the
Renaissance indenture, then, provided that the Leverage
Condition remains satisfied, the Renaissance entities will be
required to provide corresponding guarantees of the Charter
Operating credit facilities and related obligations and note
guarantees and to secure the Charter Operating notes and the
Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations with
corresponding liens.
In the event that additional liens are granted by Charter
Operating or its subsidiaries to secure obligations under the
Charter Operating credit facilities or the related obligations,
second priority liens on the same assets will be granted to
secure the Charter Operating notes, which liens will be subject
to the provisions of an intercreditor agreement (to which none
of Charter Operating or its affiliates are parties).
Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, no such second priority
liens need be provided if the time such
152
lien would otherwise be granted is not during a guarantee and
pledge availability period (when the Leverage Condition is
satisfied), but such second priority liens will be required to
be provided in accordance with the foregoing sentence on or
prior to the fifth business day of the commencement of the next
succeeding guarantee and pledge availability period.
These notes were redeemed on March 14, 2005 and are
therefore no longer outstanding.
The 10% senior discount notes due 2008 were issued by
Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee)
LLC and Renaissance Media Holdings Capital Corporation, with
Renaissance Media Group LLC as guarantor and the United States
Trust Company of New York as trustee. Renaissance Media Group
LLC, which is the direct or indirect parent company of these
issuers, is now a subsidiary of Charter Operating. The
Renaissance 10% notes and the Renaissance guarantee are
unsecured, unsubordinated debt of the issuers and the guarantor,
respectively. In October 1998, the issuers of the Renaissance
notes exchanged $163 million of the original issued and
outstanding Renaissance notes for an equivalent value of new
Renaissance notes. The form and terms of the new Renaissance
notes are the same in all material respects as the form and
terms of the original Renaissance notes except that the issuance
of the new Renaissance notes was registered under the Securities
Act.
There was no payment of any interest in respect of the
Renaissance notes prior to October 15, 2003. Since
October 15, 2003, interest on the Renaissance notes is
payable semi-annually in arrears in cash at a rate of
10% per year. On April 15, 2003, the Renaissance notes
became redeemable at the option of the issuers thereof, in whole
or in part, initially at 105% of their principal amount at
maturity, plus accrued interest, declining to 100% of the
principal amount at maturity, plus accrued interest, on or after
April 15, 2006.
Our acquisition of Renaissance triggered change of control
provisions of the Renaissance notes that required us to offer to
purchase the Renaissance notes at a purchase price equal to 101%
of their accreted value on the date of the purchase, plus
accrued interest, if any. In May 1999, we made an offer to
repurchase the Renaissance notes, and holders of Renaissance
notes representing 30% of the total principal amount outstanding
at maturity tendered their Renaissance notes for repurchase.
The limitations on incurrence of debt contained in the indenture
governing the Renaissance notes permit Renaissance Media Group
and its restricted subsidiaries to incur additional debt, so
long as they are not in default under the indenture:
|
|
|
|
|
if, after giving effect to the incurrence, Renaissance Media
Group could meet a leverage ratio (ratio of consolidated debt to
four times consolidated EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent
quarter) of 6.75 to 1.0, and, regardless of whether the leverage
ratio could be met, |
|
|
|
up to the greater of $200 million or 4.5 times
Renaissance Media Groups consolidated annualized EBITDA,
as defined, |
|
|
|
up to an amount equal to 5% of Renaissance Media Groups
consolidated total assets to finance the purchase of new assets, |
|
|
|
up to two times the sum of (a) the net cash proceeds of new
equity issuances and capital contributions, and (b) 80% of
the fair market value of property received by Renaissance Media
Group or an issuer as a capital contribution, in each case
received after the issue date of the Renaissance notes and not
allocated to make restricted payments, and |
|
|
|
other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as
intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt and interest
rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest
rates. |
153
The indenture governing the Renaissance notes permits us to
incur debt under one of the categories above, and reclassify the
debt into a different category.
Under the indenture governing the Renaissance notes, Renaissance
Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay
dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, make
restricted investments, or make other specified restricted
payments only if Renaissance Media Group could incur $1.00 of
additional debt under the debt incurrence test, which requires
that Renaissance Media Group meet the 6.75 to 1.0 leverage
ratio after giving effect to the transaction of the indebtedness
covenant and that no default exists or would occur as a
consequence thereof. If those conditions are met, Renaissance
Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to
make restricted payments in a total amount not to exceed the
result of 100% of Renaissance Media Groups consolidated
EBITDA, as defined, minus 130% of its consolidated interest
expense, plus 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by
Renaissance Media Group and not allocated to the indebtedness
covenant, plus returns on certain investments, all cumulatively
from June 1998. Renaissance Media Group and its restricted
subsidiaries may make permitted investments up to
$2 million in related businesses and other specified
permitted investments, restricted payments up to
$10 million, dividends up to 6% each year of the net cash
proceeds of public equity offerings, and other specified
restricted payments without meeting the foregoing test.
Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are not
permitted to grant liens on their assets other than specified
permitted liens, unless corresponding liens are granted to
secure the Renaissance notes. Permitted liens include liens
securing debt permitted to be incurred under credit facilities,
liens securing debt incurred under the incurrence of
indebtedness test, in amounts up to the greater of
$200 million or 4.5 times Renaissance Media Groups
consolidated EBITDA, as defined, liens as deposits for
acquisitions up to 10% of the estimated purchase price, liens
securing permitted financings of new assets, liens securing debt
permitted to be incurred by restricted subsidiaries, and
specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business.
Renaissance Media Group and the issuers of the Renaissance notes
are generally not permitted to sell or otherwise dispose of all
or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other
companies unless their consolidated net worth after any such
transaction would be equal to or greater than their consolidated
net worth immediately prior to the transaction, or unless
Renaissance Media Group could incur $1.00 of additional debt
under the debt incurrence test, which would require them to meet
a leverage ratio of 6.75 to 1.00 after giving effect to the
transaction.
Renaissance Media Group and its subsidiaries may generally not
otherwise sell assets or, in the case of subsidiaries, equity
interests, unless they receive consideration at least equal to
the fair market value of the assets, consisting of at least 75%
cash, temporary cash investments or assumption of debt. Charter
Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are then required
within 12 months after any asset sale either to commit to
use the net cash proceeds over a specified threshold either to
acquire assets used in their own or related businesses or use
the net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase
the Renaissance notes with any remaining proceeds.
Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries may
generally not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless
the lease term does not exceed three years or the proceeds are
applied in accordance with the covenant limiting asset sales.
Renaissance Media Groups restricted subsidiaries may
generally not enter into restrictions on their abilities to make
dividends or distributions or transfer assets to Renaissance
Media Group except those not more restrictive than is customary
in comparable financings.
The restricted subsidiaries of Renaissance Media Group are not
permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of the
Renaissance Media Group or its restricted subsidiaries, unless
the guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee of the Renaissance
notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any rights of
reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from the
guarantee transaction.
Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are
generally not permitted to issue or sell equity interests in
restricted subsidiaries, except sales of common stock of
restricted subsidiaries so long as
154
the proceeds of the sale are applied in accordance with the
asset sale covenant, and issuances as a result of which the
restricted subsidiary is no longer a restricted subsidiary and
any remaining investment in that subsidiary is permitted by the
covenant limiting restricted payments.
The indenture governing the Renaissance notes also restricts the
ability of Renaissance Media Group and its restricted
subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with affiliates
involving consideration in excess of $2 million without a
determination by the disinterested members of the board of
directors that the transaction is on terms no less favorable
than arms length, or transactions with affiliates involving over
$4 million with affiliates without receiving an independent
opinion as to the fairness of the transaction to Renaissance
Media Group.
All of these covenants are subject to additional specified
exceptions. In general, the covenants of the Charter Operating
credit facilities are more restrictive than those of our
indentures.
Parent Company Debt
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our direct
and indirect parent companies actual total debt was
approximately $10.8 billion, and $11.2 billion (which
does not give effect to the recent exchanges of Charter Holdings
notes for CCH I notes and CIH notes as described elsewhere
in this prospectus) as summarized below (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
|
Start date for | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
cash interest | |
|
|
|
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Interest payment | |
|
payment on | |
|
Maturity | |
|
|
value | |
|
value(a) | |
|
value | |
|
value | |
|
dates | |
|
discount notes | |
|
date(b) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Charter Communications, Inc.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.750% convertible senior notes
due 2006(c)
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
$ |
156 |
|
|
$ |
156 |
|
|
|
12/1 & 6/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6/1/06 |
|
|
5.875% convertible senior notes
due 2009(c)
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
838 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
5/16 & 11/16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/16/09 |
|
Charter Holdings(d):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.250% senior notes due 2007
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/07 |
|
|
8.625% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
1,244 |
|
|
|
1,243 |
|
|
|
1,244 |
|
|
|
1,243 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/09 |
|
|
9.920% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
10/1/04 |
|
|
|
4/1/11 |
|
|
10.000% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/09 |
|
|
10.250% senior notes due 2010
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15/10 |
|
|
11.750% senior discount notes due 2010
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/05 |
|
|
|
1/15/10 |
|
|
10.750% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10/1/09 |
|
|
11.125% senior notes due 2011
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15/11 |
|
|
13.500% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
629 |
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
589 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/06 |
|
|
|
1/15/11 |
|
|
9.625% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/15/09 |
|
|
10.000% senior notes due 2011
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/15/11 |
|
|
11.750% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
939 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
939 |
|
|
|
803 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
11/15/06 |
|
|
|
5/15/11 |
|
|
12.125% senior discount notes due 2012
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/07 |
|
|
|
1/15/12 |
|
CCH II:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.250% senior notes due 2010
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
3/15 & 9/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/15/10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
11,022 |
|
|
$ |
10,803 |
|
|
$ |
11,499 |
|
|
$ |
11,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The accreted value presented above represents the face value of
the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale
plus the accretion to the balance sheet date. |
155
|
|
|
(b) |
|
In general, the obligors have the right to redeem all of the
notes set forth in the above table (except with respect to the
5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 and the Charter
Holdings notes with terms of eight years) in whole or part at
their option, beginning at various times prior to their stated
maturity dates, subject to certain conditions, upon the payment
of the outstanding principal amount (plus a specified redemption
premium) and all accrued and unpaid interest. The
5.875% convertible senior notes are redeemable if the
closing price of Charters Class A common stock
exceeds the conversion price by certain percentages as described
below. |
|
(c) |
|
The 5.875% convertible senior notes and the
4.75% convertible senior notes are convertible at the
option of the holder into shares of Charter Class A common
stock at an initial conversion rate of 413.2231 and
38.0952 shares, respectively, per $1,000 principal amount
of notes, which is equivalent to a price of $2.42 and
$26.25 per share, respectively. Certain anti-dilutive
provisions cause adjustments to occur automatically upon the
occurrence of specified events. Additionally, the conversion
ratio may be adjusted by Charter when deemed appropriate. |
|
(d) |
|
On September 28, 2005, Charter Holdings and its wholly owned
subsidiaries, CCH I and CIH, completed the exchange of
approximately $6.8 billion total principal amount of
outstanding debt securities of Charter Holdings in a private
placement for new debt securities capturing $545 million of
discount and extending maturities. Holders of Charter Holdings
notes due in 2009-2010 tendered $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I notes due 2015. Holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $845 million principal amount of
notes for $662 million principal amount of 11% CCH I
notes due 2015. In addition, holders of Charter Holdings notes
due 2011-2012 tendered $2.5 billion principal amount of
notes for $2.5 billion principal amount of new CIH notes.
Each series of new CIH notes have the same coupon and provisions
for payment of cash interest as the series of old Charter
Holdings notes for which such CIH notes were exchanged. In
addition, the maturities for each series were extended three
years. |
|
|
|
Charter Communications, Inc. Notes |
|
|
|
Charter 5.875% Convertible Senior Notes due
2009 |
In November 2004, Charter issued 5.875% convertible senior
notes due 2009 with a total original principal amount of
$862.5 million. The 5.875% convertible senior notes
are unsecured (except with respect to the collateral as
described below) and rank equally with Charters existing
and future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness (except
with respect to the collateral described below), but are
structurally subordinated to all existing and future
indebtedness and other liabilities of Charters
subsidiaries. Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears.
The 5.875% convertible senior notes are convertible at any
time at the option of the holder into shares of Charters
Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of
413.2231 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which
is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately
$2.42 per share, subject to certain adjustments.
Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions,
which cause adjustments to occur automatically based on the
occurrence of specified events to provide protection rights to
holders of the notes. The conversion rate may also be increased
(but not to exceed 462 shares per $1,000 principal amount
of notes) upon a specified change of control transaction.
Additionally, Charter may elect to increase the conversion rate
under certain circumstances when deemed appropriate and subject
to applicable limitations of the NASDAQ stock market. Holders
who convert their notes prior to November 16, 2007 will
receive an early conversion make whole amount in respect of
their notes based on a proportional share of the portfolio of
pledged securities described below, with specified adjustments.
No holder of notes will be entitled to receive shares of
Charters Class A common stock on conversion to the
extent that receipt of the shares would cause the converting
holder to become, directly or indirectly, a beneficial
holder (within the meaning of Section 13(d) of the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated
thereunder) of more than 4.9% of the outstanding shares of
Charters Class A common stock if such conversion
would take place prior to November 16, 2008, or more than
9.9% thereafter.
156
If a holder tenders a note for conversion, Charter may direct
that holder (unless Charter has called those notes for
redemption) to a financial institution designated by Charter to
conduct a transaction with that institution, on substantially
the same terms that the holder would have received on
conversion. But if any such financial institution does not
accept such notes or does not deliver the required conversion
consideration, Charter remains obligated to convert the notes.
Charter Holdco used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of
the notes to purchase a portfolio of U.S. government
securities in an amount which it believes will be sufficient to
make the first six interest payments on the notes. These
government securities were pledged to us as security for a
mirror note issued by Charter Holdco to Charter and pledged to
the trustee under the indenture governing the notes as security
for Charters obligations thereunder. Charter expects to
use such securities to fund the first six interest payments
under the notes. The pledged securities were valued at
$122 million at June 30, 2005. Any holder that
converts its notes prior to the third anniversary of the issue
date will be entitled to receive, in addition to the requisite
number of shares upon conversion, an interest make whole payment
equal to the cash proceeds from the sale by the trustee of that
portion of the remaining pledged U.S. government securities
which secure interest payments on the notes so converted,
subject to certain limitations with respect to notes that have
not been sold pursuant to an effective registration statement
under the Securities Act of 1933.
Upon a change of control and certain other fundamental changes,
subject to certain conditions and restrictions, Charter may be
required to repurchase the notes, in whole or in part, at 100%
of their principal amount plus accrued interest at the
repurchase date.
Charter was required to have effective a registration statement
by April 1, 2005. Such registration was not declared
effective by that date, and Charter incurred liquidated damages
from April 2, 2005 through July 17, 2005, the day
before the effective date of the registration statement. These
liquidated damages are payable in cash or additional principal
on a monthly basis. These liquidated damages accrued at a rate
of 0.25% per month of the accreted principal amount of the
convertible notes for the first 60 days after April 1,
2005 and 0.50% per month of the accreted principal amount
of the convertible notes thereafter. In April, May, June, July
and August 2005, the liquidated damage payments were made in
cash.
Charter was required to use its reasonable best efforts to cause
a shelf registration statement for resale of its
5.875% convertible senior notes and shares issuable on
conversion of the notes by the holders to be declared effective
on or before April 21, 2005. Such registration statement
was not declared effective by that date and Charter incurred
liquidated damages at a rate from 0.25% per annum of the
accreted principal amount of the notes through July 14,
2005, the day before the effective date of the registration
statement. The liquidated damages were or will be paid by
Charter in cash.
Following the earlier of the sale of the notes pursuant to an
effective registration statement or the date two years following
the issue date, Charter may redeem the notes in whole or in part
for cash at any time at a redemption price equal to 100% of the
aggregate principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest,
deferred interest and liquidated damages, if any, but only if
for any 20 trading days in any 30 consecutive trading day period
the closing price has exceeded 180% of the conversion price, if
such 30 trading day period begins prior to November 16,
2007 or 150% of the conversion price, if such 30 trading period
begins thereafter. Holders who convert notes that Charter has
called for redemption shall receive, in addition to the early
conversion make whole amount, if applicable, the present value
of the interest on the notes converted that would have been
payable for the period from the later of November 17, 2007
and the redemption date through the scheduled maturity date for
the notes, plus any accrued deferred interest.
|
|
|
4.75% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2006 |
In May 2001, Charter issued 4.75% convertible senior notes
with a total principal amount at maturity of $633 million.
As of June 30, 2005, there was $25 million in total
principal amount of these notes outstanding. The
4.75% convertible notes rank equally with any of
Charters future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness,
but are structurally subordinated to all existing and future
indebtedness and other liabilities of Charters
subsidiaries.
157
The 4.75% convertible notes are convertible at the option
of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at a
conversion rate of 38.0952 shares per $1,000 principal
amount of notes, which is equivalent to a price of
$26.25 per share, subject to certain adjustments.
Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions,
which automatically occur based on the occurrence of specified
events to provide protection rights to holders of the notes.
Additionally, Charter may adjust the conversion ratio under
certain circumstances when deemed appropriate. These notes are
redeemable at Charters option at amounts decreasing from
101.9% to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid
interest beginning on June 4, 2004, to the date of
redemption.
Upon a change of control, subject to certain conditions and
restrictions, Charter may be required to repurchase the notes,
in whole or in part, at 100% of their principal amount plus
accrued interest at the repurchase date.
|
|
|
Charter Communications Holdings, LLC Notes |
|
|
|
March 1999 Charter Holdings Notes |
The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three
separate indentures, each dated as of March 17, 1999, among
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY
Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. Charter Holdings and Charter
Capital exchanged these notes for new notes with substantially
similar terms, except that the new March 1999 Charter Holdings
notes are registered under the Securities Act.
The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash
interest on the March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes began
to accrue on April 1, 2004.
The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank
equally with all other current and future unsubordinated
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are
structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter
Holdings subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes,
the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter
Operating notes and the Charter Operating credit facilities.
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to
redeem the March 1999 8.250% Charter Holdings notes prior to
their maturity date on April 1, 2007. Charter Holdings and
Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the March 1999 8.625%
Charter Holdings notes and the March 1999 9.920% Charter
Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The
optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal
amount of March 1999 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after
April 1, 2007.
In the event that a specified change of control event occurs,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase
any then outstanding March 1999 Charter Holdings notes at 101%
of their principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any.
The indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes
contain restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or
activities by Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries.
Substantially all of Charter Holdings direct and indirect
subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries. See
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the
Charter Holdings High Yield Note Indentures.
|
|
|
January 2000 Charter Holdings Notes |
The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three
separate indentures, each dated as of January 12, 2000,
among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and
BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. In June 2000, Charter
Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged these notes for new notes
with substantially similar terms, except that the new January
2000 Charter Holdings notes are registered under the Securities
Act.
158
The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash
interest on the January 2000 11.75% Charter Holdings notes began
to accrue on January 15, 2005.
The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank
equally with all other current and future unsubordinated
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are
structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter
Holdings subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes,
the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, Charter Operating
credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to
redeem the January 2000 10.00% Charter Holdings notes prior to
their maturity on April 1, 2009. Charter Holdings and
Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the January 2000
10.25% Charter Holdings notes and the January 2000 11.75%
Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium.
The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal
amount of the January 2000 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after
January 15, 2008.
In the event that a specified change of control event occurs,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase
any then outstanding January 2000 Charter Holdings notes at 101%
of their total principal amount or accreted value, as
applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.
The indentures governing the January 2000 Charter Holdings notes
contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative
covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the
indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the
Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.
|
|
|
January 2001 Charter Holdings Notes |
The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three
separate indentures, each dated as of January 10, 2001,
each among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers,
and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. In March 2001,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged these notes for
new notes with substantially similar terms, except that the new
notes are registered under the Securities Act.
The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash
interest on the January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes will
not accrue prior to January 15, 2006.
The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank
equally with all other current and future unsubordinated
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are
structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter
Holdings subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes,
the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter
Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to
redeem the January 2001 10.750% Charter Holdings notes prior to
their maturity on October 1, 2009. On or after
January 15, 2006, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may
redeem some or all of the January 2001 11.125% Charter Holdings
notes and the January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes at any
time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price
declines to 100% of the principal amount of the January 2001
Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid
interest, if any, for redemption on or after January 15,
2009.
In the event that a specified change of control event occurs,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase
any then outstanding January 2001 Charter Holdings notes at 101%
of their total principal amount or accreted value, as
applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.
The indentures governing the January 2001 Charter Holdings notes
contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative
covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the
indentures
159
governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the
Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.
|
|
|
May 2001 Charter Holdings Notes |
The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three
separate indentures, each among Charter Holdings and Charter
Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as
trustee. In September 2001, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital
exchanged substantially all of these notes for new notes with
substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are
registered under the Securities Act.
The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash
interest on the May 2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes will not
accrue prior to May 15, 2006.
The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations
of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with
all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally
subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings
subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings
notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit
facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to
redeem the May 2001 9.625% Charter Holdings notes prior to their
maturity on November 15, 2009. On or after May 15,
2006, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or
all of the May 2001 10.000% Charter Holdings notes and the May
2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case,
at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of
the principal amount of the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes
redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for
redemption on or after May 15, 2009.
In the event that a specified change of control event occurs,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase
any then outstanding May 2001 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of
their total principal amount or accreted value, as applicable,
plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.
The indentures governing the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes
contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative
covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the
indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the
Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.
|
|
|
January 2002 Charter Holdings Notes |
The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three
separate indentures, each among Charter Holdings and Charter
Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as
trustee, two of which were supplements to the indentures for the
May 2001 Charter Holdings notes. In July 2002, Charter Holdings
and Charter Capital exchanged substantially all of these notes
for new notes with substantially similar terms, except that the
new notes are registered under the Securities Act.
The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash
interest on the January 2002 12.125% Charter Holdings notes will
not accrue prior to January 15, 2007.
The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt
obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank
equally with the current and future unsecured and unsubordinated
debt of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are
structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter
Holdings subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes,
the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter
Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
The Charter Holdings 12.125% senior discount notes are
redeemable at the option of the issuers at amounts decreasing
from 106.063% to 100% of accreted value beginning
January 15, 2007.
160
In the event that a specified change of control event occurs,
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase
any then outstanding January 2002 Charter Holdings notes at 101%
of their total principal amount or accreted value, as
applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.
The indentures governing the January 2002 Charter Holdings notes
contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative
covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the
indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the
Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.
|
|
|
Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the Charter
Holdings High-Yield Notes |
The limitations on incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred
stock contained in Charter Holdings indentures permit
Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to incur additional debt
or issue preferred stock, so long as there is no default under
the Charter Holdings indentures. These limitations restrict the
incurrence of debt unless, after giving pro forma effect to the
incurrence, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below
8.75 to 1.0. In addition, regardless of whether the leverage
ratio could be met, so long as no default exists or would result
from the incurrence or issuance, Charter Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries are permitted to issue:
|
|
|
|
|
up to $3.5 billion of debt under credit facilities, |
|
|
|
up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase
or capital lease of new assets, |
|
|
|
up to $300 million of additional debt for any purpose, |
|
|
|
additional debt in an amount equal to 200% of new cash equity
proceeds received by Charter Holdings and its restricted
subsidiaries since March 1999, the date of its first indenture,
and not allocated for restricted payments or permitted
investments, and |
|
|
|
other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as
intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest
rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest
rates. |
Indebtedness under a single facility or agreement may be
incurred in part under one of the categories listed above and in
part under another. Accordingly, indebtedness under our credit
facilities is incurred under a combination of the categories of
permitted indebtedness listed above.
The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Holdings are generally
not permitted to issue debt securities contractually
subordinated in right of payment to other debt of the issuing
subsidiary or preferred stock, in either case in any public or
Rule 144A offering.
The Charter Holdings indentures permit Charter Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and
later reclassify that debt into another category. The Charter
Operating credit facilities generally impose more restrictive
limitations on incurring new debt than Charter Holdings
indentures, so our subsidiaries that are subject to the Charter
Operating credit facilities may not be permitted to utilize the
full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the
Charter Holdings indenture covenants.
Generally, under Charter Holdings high-yield indentures:
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are generally
permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase
interests, or make other specified restricted payments only if,
after giving pro forma effect to the transaction, the Charter
Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below 8.75 to 1.0 and if no
default exists or would exist as a consequence of such
incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments in
a total amount of up to 100% of Charter Holdings
consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.2 times its
consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash and
non-cash equity proceeds received by Charter Holdings and not
allocated to the debt incurrence covenant or to permitted
investments, all cumulatively from March 1999, the date of the
first Charter Holdings indenture, plus $100 million. |
161
In addition, Charter Holdings may make distributions or
restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be
caused by transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to
exceed $10 million per fiscal year, |
|
|
|
regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through
tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in
Charter Holdings or its restricted subsidiaries, or |
|
|
|
to make other specified restricted payments including merger
fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using
concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing
subsidiary preferred equity interests. |
Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may not make
investments except permitted investments if there is a default
under the indentures or if, after giving effect to the
transaction, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be above
8.75 to 1.0.
Permitted investments include:
|
|
|
|
|
investments by Charter Holdings in restricted subsidiaries or by
restricted subsidiaries in Charter Holdings, |
|
|
|
investments in productive assets (including through equity
investments) aggregating up to $150 million since March
1999, |
|
|
|
investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds
received by Charter Holdings since March 1999 and not allocated
to the debt incurrence or restricted payments covenant, and |
|
|
|
other investments aggregating up to $50 million since March
1999. |
Charter Holdings is not permitted to grant liens on its assets
other than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include
liens securing debt and other obligations incurred under Charter
Holdings and its subsidiaries credit facilities,
liens securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing
indebtedness of up to $50 million and other specified liens
incurred in the ordinary course of business. The lien covenant
does not restrict liens on assets of subsidiaries of Charter
Holdings.
Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, its co-issuer, are
generally not permitted to sell all or substantially all of
their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their
leverage ratio after any such transaction would be no greater
than their leverage ratio immediately prior to the transaction,
or unless after giving effect to the transaction, the Charter
Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below 8.75 to 1.0, no default
exists, and the surviving entity is a U.S. entity that
assumes the Charter Holdings notes.
Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally
not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted
subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive
consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the
assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash,
assumption of liabilities, securities converted into cash within
60 days or productive assets. Charter Holdings and its
restricted subsidiaries are then required within 365 days
after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash
proceeds over a specified threshold to acquire assets, including
current assets, used or useful in their businesses or use the
net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase the
Charter Holdings notes with any remaining proceeds.
Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally
not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the
time of the transaction, Charter Holdings could have incurred
secured indebtedness in an amount equal to the present value of
the net rental payments to be made under the lease, and the sale
of the assets and application of proceeds is permitted by the
covenant restricting asset sales.
Charter Holdings restricted subsidiaries may generally not
enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends or
distributions or transfer assets to Charter Holdings on terms
that are materially more restrictive than those governing their
debt, lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements existing
when they
162
entered into the indentures, unless those restrictions are on
customary terms that will not materially impair Charter
Holdings ability to repay the high-yield notes.
The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Holdings are generally
not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of
Charter Holdings, unless the guaranteeing subsidiary issues a
guarantee of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and
waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation
arising from the guarantee transaction for at least one year.
The indentures also restrict the ability of Charter Holdings and
its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions
with affiliates involving consideration in excess of
$15 million without a determination by the board of
directors of Charter Holdings that the transaction is on terms
no less favorable than arms length, or transactions with
affiliates involving over $50 million without receiving an
independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction
addressed to the holders of the Charter Holdings notes.
CCH II, LLC
Notes
In September 2003, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp.
jointly issued approximately $1.6 billion total principal
amount of 10.25% senior notes due 2010. The CCH II
notes are general unsecured obligations of CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other
current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp. The CCH II notes are structurally
subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries of CCH II,
including the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, Charter
Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
Interest on the CCH II notes accrues at 10.25% per
annum, and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each
March 15 and September 15, commencing on
March 15, 2004.
At any time prior to September 15, 2006, the issuers of the
CCH II notes may redeem up to 35% of the total principal
amount of the CCH II notes on a pro rata basis at a
redemption price equal to 110.25% of the principal amount of
CCH II notes redeemed, plus any accrued and unpaid interest.
On or after September 15, 2008, the issuers of the
CCH II notes may redeem all or a part of the notes at a
redemption price that declines ratably from the initial
redemption price of 105.125% to a redemption price on or after
September 15, 2009 of 100.0% of the principal amount of the
CCH II notes redeemed, plus, in each case, any accrued and
unpaid interest.
In the event of specified change of control events, CCH II
must offer to purchase the outstanding CCH II notes from
the holders at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total
principal amount of the notes, plus any accrued and unpaid
interest.
The indenture governing the CCH II notes contains
restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or
activities by CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries,
including the covenants summarized below. Substantially all of
CCH IIs direct and indirect subsidiaries are
currently restricted subsidiaries.
The covenant in the indenture governing the CCH II notes
that restricts incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred
stock permits CCH II and its subsidiaries to incur or issue
specified amounts of debt or preferred stock, if, after giving
effect to the incurrence, CCH II could meet a leverage
ratio (ratio of consolidated debt to four times EBITDA from the
most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports
are available) of 5.5 to 1.0.
In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be
met, so long as no default exists or would result from the
incurrence or issuance, CCH II and its restricted
subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:
|
|
|
|
|
up to $9.75 billion of debt under credit facilities,
including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue
date of the CCH II notes, |
|
|
|
up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase
or capital lease of new assets, |
|
|
|
up to $300 million of additional debt for any
purpose, and |
|
|
|
other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as
intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest
rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest
rates. |
163
The restricted subsidiaries of CCH II are generally not
permitted to issue debt securities contractually subordinated to
other debt of the issuing subsidiary or preferred stock, in
either case in any public or Rule 144A offering.
The CCH II indenture permits CCH II and its restricted
subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and later
reclassify that debt into another category. Our and our
subsidiaries credit agreements generally impose more
restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than the
CCH II indenture, so we and our subsidiaries that are
subject to credit agreements are not permitted to utilize the
full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the
CCH II indenture covenants.
Generally, under the CCH II indenture, CCH II and its
restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends on equity
interests, repurchase interests, or make other specified
restricted payments only if CCH II can incur $1.00 of new
debt under the leverage ratio test, which requires that
CCH II meet a 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio after giving effect
to the transaction, and if no default exists or would exist as a
consequence of such incurrence. If those conditions are met,
restricted payments in a total amount of up to 100% of
CCH IIs consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.3
times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash
and non-cash equity proceeds received by CCH II and not
allocated to the debt incurrence covenant, all cumulatively from
the fiscal quarter commenced July 1, 2003, plus
$100 million.
In addition, CCH II may make distributions or restricted
payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by
transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to
exceed $10 million per fiscal year; |
|
|
|
regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through
tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in
CCH II or its restricted subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
regardless of the existence of any default, to pay interest when
due on Charter Holdings notes, to pay, so long as there is no
default, interest on the convertible senior notes of Charter, to
purchase, redeem or refinance, so long as CCH II could
incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio
test referred to above and there is no default, Charter Holdings
notes, Charter notes, and other direct or indirect parent
company notes (including the CCH II notes); |
|
|
|
to make distributions in connection with the private exchanges
pursuant to which the CCH II notes were issued; and |
|
|
|
other specified restricted payments including merger fees up to
1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using concurrent new
issuances, and certain dividends on existing subsidiary
preferred equity interests. |
The indenture governing the CCH II notes restricts
CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries from making
investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating
new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the
indenture or if CCH II could not incur $1.00 of new debt
under the 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after
giving effect to the transaction.
Permitted investments include:
|
|
|
|
|
investments by CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries in
CCH II and in other restricted subsidiaries, or entities
that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the
investment; |
|
|
|
investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds
received by CCH II since September 23, 2003 to the
extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted
payments covenant described above; |
|
|
|
investments resulting from the private exchanges pursuant to
which the CCH II notes were issued; |
|
|
|
other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any
time; and |
|
|
|
certain specified additional investments, such as investments in
customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and
investments received in connection with permitted asset sales. |
164
CCH II is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other
than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens
securing debt and other obligations incurred under our
subsidiaries credit facilities, liens securing the
purchase price of new assets, and liens securing indebtedness up
to $50 million and other specified liens incurred in the
ordinary course of business. The lien covenant does not restrict
liens on assets of subsidiaries of CCH II.
Cross-Defaults
Our indentures and those of certain of our subsidiaries include
various events of default, including cross-default provisions.
Under these provisions, a failure by any of the issuers or any
of their restricted subsidiaries to pay at the final maturity
thereof the principal amount of other indebtedness having a
principal amount of $100 million or more (or any other
default under any such indebtedness resulting in its
acceleration) would result in an event of default under the
indenture governing the applicable notes. The Renaissance
indenture contains a similar cross-default provision with a
$10 million threshold that applies to the issuers of the
Renaissance notes and their restricted subsidiaries. As a
result, an event of default related to the failure to repay
principal at maturity or the acceleration of the indebtedness
under the Charter Holdings notes, CCH II notes,
CCO Holdings notes, Charter Operating notes, the Charter
Operating credit facilities or the Renaissance notes could cause
cross-defaults under our subsidiaries indentures.
165
THE EXCHANGE OFFER
Terms of the Exchange Offer
General. We issued the original notes on
August 17, 2005 in a transaction exempt from the
registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.
In connection with the sale of original notes, the holders of
the original notes became entitled to the benefits of the
exchange and registration rights agreement, dated
August 17, 2005, among us and the purchasers.
Under the exchange and registration rights agreement, we became
obligated to file a registration statement in connection with an
exchange offer within 90 days after August 17, 2005
and to use our reasonable best efforts to have the exchange
offer registration statement declared effective within
210 days after August 17, 2005. The exchange offer
being made by this prospectus, if consummated within the
required time periods, will satisfy our obligations under the
exchange and registration rights agreement. This prospectus,
together with the letter of transmittal, is being sent to all
beneficial holders of original notes known to us.
Upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this
prospectus and in the accompanying letter of transmittal, we
will accept for exchange all original notes properly tendered
and not withdrawn on or prior to the expiration date. We will
issue $1,000 principal amount of new notes in exchange for each
$1,000 principal amount of outstanding original notes accepted
in the exchange offer. Holders may tender some or all of their
original notes pursuant to the exchange offer.
Based on no-action letters issued by the staff of the Securities
and Exchange Commission to third parties, we believe that
holders of the new notes issued in exchange for original notes
may offer for resale, resell and otherwise transfer the new
notes, other than any holder that is an affiliate of ours within
the meaning of Rule 405 under the Securities Act of 1933,
without compliance with the registration and prospectus delivery
provisions of the Securities Act of 1933. This is true as long
as the new notes are acquired in the ordinary course of the
holders business, the holder has no arrangement or
understanding with any person to participate in the distribution
of the new notes and neither the holder nor any other person is
engaging in or intends to engage in a distribution of the new
notes. A broker-dealer that acquired original notes directly
from us cannot exchange the original notes in the exchange
offer. Any holder who tenders in the exchange offer for the
purpose of participating in a distribution of the new notes
cannot rely on the no-action letters of the staff of the
Securities and Exchange Commission and must comply with the
registration and prospectus delivery requirements of the
Securities Act of 1933 in connection with any resale transaction.
Each broker-dealer that receives new notes for its own account
in exchange for original notes, where original notes were
acquired by such broker-dealer as a result of market-making or
other trading activities, must acknowledge that it will deliver
a prospectus in connection with any resale of such new notes.
See Plan of Distribution for additional information.
We shall be deemed to have accepted validly tendered original
notes when, as and if we have given oral or written notice of
the acceptance of such notes to the exchange agent. The exchange
agent will act as agent for the tendering holders of original
notes for the purposes of receiving the new notes from the
issuers and delivering new notes to such holders.
If any tendered original notes are not accepted for exchange
because of an invalid tender or the occurrence of the conditions
set forth under Conditions without
waiver by us, certificates for any such unaccepted original
notes will be returned, without expense, to the tendering holder
of any such original notes as promptly as practicable after the
expiration date.
Holders of original notes who tender in the exchange offer will
not be required to pay brokerage commissions or fees or, subject
to the instructions in the letter of transmittal, or transfer
taxes with respect
166
to the exchange of original notes, pursuant to the exchange
offer. We will pay all charges and expenses, other than certain
applicable taxes in connection with the exchange offer. See
Fees and Expenses.
Shelf Registration Statement. Pursuant to the
exchange and registration rights agreement, if the exchange
offer is not completed prior to the date on which the earliest
of any of the following events occurs:
(a) existing law or applicable policy or interpretations of
the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission do not
permit us to effect the exchange offer,
(b) any holder of notes notifies us that either:
|
|
|
(1) such holder is not eligible to participate in the
exchange offer, or |
|
|
(2) such holder participates in the exchange offer and does
not receive freely transferable new notes in exchange for
tendered original notes, or |
(c) the exchange offer is not completed within
240 days after August 17, 2005, we will, at our cost:
|
|
|
|
|
file a shelf registration statement covering resales of the
original notes, |
|
|
|
use our reasonable best efforts to cause the shelf registration
statement to be declared effective under the Securities Act of
1933 at the earliest possible time, but no later than
90 days after the time such obligation to file
arises, and |
|
|
|
use our reasonable best efforts to keep effective the shelf
registration statement until the earlier of two years after the
date as of which the Securities and Exchange Commission declares
such shelf registration statement effective or the shelf
registration otherwise becomes effective, or the time when all
of the applicable original notes are no longer outstanding. |
If any of the events described occurs, we will refuse to accept
any original notes and will return all tendered original notes.
We will, if and when we file the shelf registration statement,
provide to each holder of the original notes copies of the
prospectus which is a part of the shelf registration statement,
notify each holder when the shelf registration statement has
become effective and take other actions as are required to
permit unrestricted resales of the original notes. A holder that
sells original notes pursuant to the shelf registration
statement generally must be named as a selling security holder
in the related prospectus and must deliver a prospectus to
purchasers, and such a seller will be subject to civil liability
provisions under the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with
these sales. A seller of the original notes also will be bound
by applicable provisions of the registration rights agreements,
including indemnification obligations. In addition, each holder
of original notes must deliver information to be used in
connection with the shelf registration statement and provide
comments on the shelf registration statement in order to have
its original notes included in the shelf registration statement
and benefit from the provisions regarding any liquidated damages
in the registration rights agreement.
Expiration Date; Extensions; Amendment. We will
keep the exchange offer open for not less than 20 business
days, or longer if required by applicable law, after the date on
which notice of the exchange offer is mailed to the holders of
the original notes. The term expiration date means
the expiration date set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, unless we extend the exchange offer, in which case
the term expiration date means the latest date to
which the exchange offer is extended.
In order to extend the expiration date, we will notify the
exchange agent of any extension by oral or written notice and
will issue a public announcement of the extension, each prior to
5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the next business day
after the previously scheduled expiration date.
We reserve the right
(a) to delay accepting any original notes, to extend the
exchange offer or to terminate the exchange offer and not accept
original notes not previously accepted if any of the conditions
set forth under
167
Conditions shall have occurred and shall
not have been waived by us, if permitted to be waived by us, by
giving oral or written notice of such delay, extension or
termination to the exchange agent, or
(b) to amend the terms of the exchange offer in any manner
deemed by us to be advantageous to the holders of the original
notes.
Any delay in acceptance, extension, termination or amendment
will be followed as promptly as practicable by oral or written
notice. If the exchange offer is amended in a manner determined
by us to constitute a material change, we promptly will disclose
such amendment in a manner reasonably calculated to inform the
holders of the original notes of such amendment. Depending upon
the significance of the amendment, we may extend the exchange
offer if it otherwise would expire during such extension period.
Without limiting the manner in which we may choose to make a
public announcement of any extension, amendment or termination
of the exchange offer, we will not be obligated to publish,
advertise, or otherwise communicate any such announcement, other
than by making a timely release to an appropriate news agency.
Procedures for Tendering
To tender in the exchange offer, a holder must complete, sign
and date the letter of transmittal, or a facsimile of the letter
of transmittal, have the signatures on the letter of transmittal
guaranteed if required by instruction 2 of the letter of
transmittal, and mail or otherwise deliver such letter of
transmittal or such facsimile or an agents message in
connection with a book entry transfer, together with the
original notes and any other required documents. To be validly
tendered, such documents must reach the exchange agent before
5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the expiration date.
Delivery of the original notes may be made by book-entry
transfer in accordance with the procedures described below.
Confirmation of such book-entry transfer must be received by the
exchange agent prior to the expiration date.
The term agents message means a message,
transmitted by a book-entry transfer facility to, and received
by, the exchange agent, forming a part of a confirmation of a
book-entry transfer, which states that such book-entry transfer
facility has received an express acknowledgment from the
participant in such book-entry transfer facility tendering the
original notes that such participant has received and agrees to
be bound by the terms of the letter of transmittal and that we
may enforce such agreement against such participant.
The tender by a holder of original notes will constitute an
agreement between such holder and us in accordance with the
terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this prospectus
and in the letter of transmittal.
Delivery of all documents must be made to the exchange agent at
its address set forth below. Holders may also request their
respective brokers, dealers, commercial banks, trust companies
or nominees to effect such tender for such holders.
The method of delivery of original notes and the letter of
transmittal and all other required documents to the exchange
agent is at the election and risk of the holders. Instead of
delivery by mail, it is recommended that holders use an
overnight or hand delivery service. In all cases, sufficient
time should be allowed to assure timely delivery to the exchange
agent before 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the
expiration date. No letter of transmittal or original notes
should be sent to us.
There will be no fixed record date for determining registered
holders of original notes entitled to participate in the
exchange offer.
Any beneficial holder whose original notes are registered in the
name of its broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or
other nominee and who wishes to tender should contact such
registered holder promptly and instruct such registered holder
to tender on its behalf. If such beneficial holder wishes to
tender on its own behalf, such registered holder must, prior to
completing and executing the letter of transmittal and
delivering its original notes, either make appropriate
arrangements to register ownership of
168
the original notes in such holders name or obtain a
properly completed bond power from the registered holder. The
transfer of record ownership may take considerable time.
Signatures on a letter of transmittal or a notice of withdrawal,
must be guaranteed by a member firm of a registered national
securities exchange or of the National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. or a commercial bank or trust company having an
office or correspondent in the United States referred to as an
eligible institution, unless the original notes are
tendered:
(a) by a registered holder who has not completed the box
entitled Special Issuance Instructions or
Special Delivery Instructions on the letter of
transmittal or
(b) for the account of an eligible institution. In the
event that signatures on a letter of transmittal or a notice of
withdrawal, are required to be guaranteed, such guarantee must
be by an eligible institution.
If the letter of transmittal is signed by a person other than
the registered holder of any original notes listed therein, such
original notes must be endorsed or accompanied by appropriate
bond powers and a proxy which authorizes such person to tender
the original notes on behalf of the registered holder, in each
case signed as the name or names of the registered holder or
holders appear on the original notes.
If the letter of transmittal or any original notes or bond
powers are signed by trustees, executors, administrators,
guardians, attorneys-in-fact, officers of corporations or others
acting in a fiduciary or representative capacity, such persons
should so indicate when signing, and unless waived by us,
evidence satisfactory to us of their authority so to act must be
submitted with the letter of transmittal.
All questions as to the validity, form, eligibility, including
time of receipt, and withdrawal of the tendered original notes
will be determined by us in our sole discretion, which
determination will be final and binding. We reserve the absolute
right to reject any and all original notes not properly tendered
or any original notes our acceptance of which, in the opinion of
counsel for us, would be unlawful. We also reserve the right to
waive any irregularities or conditions of tender as to
particular original notes. Our interpretation of the terms and
conditions of the exchange offer, including the instructions in
the letter of transmittal, will be final and binding on all
parties. Unless waived, any defects or irregularities in
connection with tenders of original notes must be cured within
such time as we shall determine. None of us, the exchange agent
or any other person shall be under any duty to give notification
of defects or irregularities with respect to tenders of original
notes, nor shall any of them incur any liability for failure to
give such notification. Tenders of original notes will not be
deemed to have been made until such irregularities have been
cured or waived. Any original notes received by the exchange
agent that are not properly tendered and as to which the defects
or irregularities have not been cured or waived will be returned
without cost to such holder by the exchange agent to the
tendering holders of original notes, unless otherwise provided
in the letter of transmittal, as soon as practicable following
the expiration date.
In addition, we reserve the right in our sole discretion to
(a) purchase or make offers for any original notes that
remain outstanding subsequent to the expiration date or, as set
forth under Conditions, to terminate the
exchange offer in accordance with the terms of the registration
rights agreement and
(b) to the extent permitted by applicable law, purchase
original notes in the open market, in privately negotiated
transactions or otherwise. The terms of any such purchases or
offers may differ from the terms of the exchange offer.
By tendering, each holder will represent to us that, among other
things,
(a) the new notes acquired pursuant to the exchange offer
are being obtained in the ordinary course of business of such
holder or other person,
(b) neither such holder nor such other person is engaged in
or intends to engage in a distribution of the new notes,
169
(c) neither such holder or other person has any arrangement
or understanding with any person to participate in the
distribution of such new notes, and
(d) such holder or other person is not our
affiliate, as defined under Rule 405 of the
Securities Act of 1933, or, if such holder or other person is
such an affiliate, will comply with the registration and
prospectus delivery requirements of the Securities Act of 1933
to the extent applicable.
We understand that the exchange agent will make a request
promptly after the date of this prospectus to establish accounts
with respect to the original notes at The Depository Trust
Company for the purpose of facilitating the exchange offer, and
subject to the establishment of such accounts, any financial
institution that is a participant in The Depository Trust
Companys system may make book-entry delivery of original
notes by causing The Depository Trust Company to transfer such
original notes into the exchange agents account with
respect to the original notes in accordance with The Depository
Trust Companys procedures for such transfer. Although
delivery of the original notes may be effected through
book-entry transfer into the exchange agents account at
The Depository Trust Company, an appropriate letter of
transmittal properly completed and duly executed with any
required signature guarantee, or an agents message in lieu
of the letter of transmittal, and all other required documents
must in each case be transmitted to and received or confirmed by
the exchange agent at its address set forth below on or prior to
the expiration date, or, if the guaranteed delivery procedures
described below are complied with, within the time period
provided under such procedures. Delivery of documents to The
Depository Trust Company does not constitute delivery to the
exchange agent.
Guaranteed Delivery Procedures
Holders who wish to tender their original notes and
(a) whose original notes are not immediately
available or
(b) who cannot deliver their original notes, the letter of
transmittal or any other required documents to the exchange
agent prior to the expiration date, may effect a tender if:
|
|
|
(1) The tender is made through an eligible institution; |
|
|
(2) prior to the expiration date, the exchange agent
receives from such eligible institution a properly completed and
duly executed Notice of Guaranteed Delivery, by facsimile
transmission, mail or hand delivery, setting forth the name and
address of the holder of the original notes, the certificate
number or numbers of such original notes and the principal
amount of original notes tendered, stating that the tender is
being made thereby, and guaranteeing that, within three business
days after the expiration date, the letter of transmittal, or
facsimile thereof or agents message in lieu of the letter
of transmittal, together with the certificate(s) representing
the original notes to be tendered in proper form for transfer
and any other documents required by the letter of transmittal
will be deposited by the eligible institution with the exchange
agent; and |
|
|
(3) such properly completed and executed letter of
transmittal (or facsimile thereof) together with the
certificate(s) representing all tendered original notes in
proper form for transfer and all other documents required by the
letter of transmittal are received by the exchange agent within
three business days after the expiration date. |
Withdrawal of Tenders
Except as otherwise provided in this prospectus, tenders of
original notes may be withdrawn at any time prior to
5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the expiration date.
However, where the expiration date has been extended, tenders of
original notes previously accepted for exchange as of the
original expiration date may not be withdrawn.
170
To withdraw a tender of original notes in the exchange offer, a
written or facsimile transmission notice of withdrawal must be
received by the exchange agent as its address set forth in this
prospectus prior to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on the
expiration date. Any such notice of withdrawal must:
(a) specify the name of the depositor, who is the person
having deposited the original notes to be withdrawn,
(b) identify the original notes to be withdrawn, including
the certificate number or numbers and principal amount of such
original notes or, in the case of original notes transferred by
book-entry transfer, the name and number of the account at The
Depository Trust Company to be credited,
(c) be signed by the depositor in the same manner as the
original signature on the letter of transmittal by which such
original notes were tendered, including any required signature
guarantees, or be accompanied by documents of transfer
sufficient to have the trustee with respect to the original
notes register the transfer of such original notes into the name
of the depositor withdrawing the tender, and
(d) Specify the name in which any such original notes are
to be registered, if different from that of the depositor. All
questions as to the validity, form and eligibility, including
time of receipt, of such withdrawal notices will be determined
by us, and our determination shall be final and binding on all
parties. Any original notes so withdrawn will be deemed not to
have been validly tendered for purposes of the exchange offer
and no new notes will be issued with respect to the original
notes withdrawn unless the original notes so withdrawn are
validly retendered. Any original notes which have been tendered
but which are not accepted for exchange will be returned to its
holder without cost to such holder as soon as practicable after
withdrawal, rejection of tender or termination of the exchange
offer. Properly withdrawn original notes may be retendered by
following one of the procedures described above under
Procedures for Tendering at any time
prior to the expiration date.
Conditions
Notwithstanding any other term of the exchange offer, we will
not be required to accept for exchange, or exchange, any new
notes for any original notes, and may terminate or amend the
exchange offer before the expiration date, if the exchange offer
violates any applicable law or interpretation by the staff of
the Securities and Exchange Commission.
If we determine in our reasonable discretion that the foregoing
condition exists, we may
(1) refuse to accept any original notes and return all
tendered original notes to the tendering holders,
(2) extend the exchange offer and retain all original notes
tendered prior to the expiration of the exchange offer, subject,
however, to the rights of holders who tendered such original
notes to withdraw their tendered original notes, or
(3) waive such condition, if permissible, with respect to
the exchange offer and accept all properly tendered original
notes which have not been withdrawn. If such waiver constitutes
a material change to the exchange offer, we will promptly
disclose such waiver by means of a prospectus supplement that
will be distributed to the holders, and we will extend the
exchange offer as required by applicable law.
171
Exchange Agent
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has been appointed as exchange agent for
the exchange offer. Questions and requests for assistance and
requests for additional copies of this prospectus or of the
letter of transmittal should be directed to Wells Fargo
addressed as follows:
For Information by Telephone:
800-344-5128
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
|
|
|
By Regular Mail or Overnight Courier:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
MAC #N9303-121
Corporate Trust Operations
6th and Marquette Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55479 |
|
By Hand:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
608 Second Avenue South
Corporate Operations, 12th floor
Minneapolis, MN 55402 |
By Registered/ Certified Mail:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
MAC #N9303-121
Corporate Trust Operations
P.O. Box 1517
Minneapolis, MN 55480-1517
By Facsimile Transmission:
612-667-6282
(Telephone Confirmation)
800-344-5128
Fees and Expenses
We have agreed to bear the expenses of the exchange offer
pursuant to the exchange and registration rights agreement. We
have not retained any dealer-manager in connection with the
exchange offer and will not make any payments to brokers,
dealers or others soliciting acceptances of the exchange offer.
We, however, will pay the exchange agent reasonable and
customary fees for its services and will reimburse it for its
reasonable out-of-pocket expenses in connection with providing
the services.
The cash expenses to be incurred in connection with the exchange
offer will be paid by us. Such expenses include fees and
expenses of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as exchange agent, accounting
and legal fees and printing costs, among others.
Accounting Treatment
The new notes will be recorded at the same carrying value as the
original notes as reflected in our accounting records on the
date of exchange. Accordingly, no gain or loss for accounting
purposes will be recognized by us. The expenses of the exchange
offer and the unamortized expenses related to the issuance of
the original notes will be amortized over the term of the notes.
Consequences of Failure to Exchange
Holders of original notes who are eligible to participate in the
exchange offer but who do not tender their original notes will
not have any further registration rights, and their original
notes will continue to be subject to restrictions on transfer.
Accordingly, such original notes may be resold only
|
|
|
|
|
to us, upon redemption of these notes or otherwise, |
|
|
|
so long as the original notes are eligible for resale pursuant
to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, to a person
inside the United States whom the seller reasonably believes is
a qualified |
172
|
|
|
|
|
institutional buyer within the meaning of Rule 144A in a
transaction meeting the requirements of Rule 144A, |
|
|
|
in accordance with Rule 144 under the Securities Act of
1933, or under another exemption from the registration
requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, and based upon an
opinion of counsel reasonably acceptable to us, |
|
|
|
outside the United States to a foreign person in a transaction
meeting the requirements of Rule 904 under the Securities
Act of 1933, or |
|
|
|
under an effective registration statement under the Securities
Act of 1933, |
in each case in accordance with any applicable securities laws
of any state of the United States.
Regulatory Approvals
We do not believe that the receipt of any material federal or
state regulatory approval will be necessary in connection with
the exchange offer, other than the effectiveness of the exchange
offer registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933.
Other
Participation in the exchange offer is voluntary and holders of
original notes should carefully consider whether to accept the
terms and condition of this exchange offer. Holders of the
original notes are urged to consult their financial and tax
advisors in making their own decision on what action to take
with respect to the exchange offer.
173
DESCRIPTION OF THE NOTES
This description of the notes relates to the
83/4% senior
notes due 2013 (the Notes) of CCO Holdings, LLC and
CCO Holdings Capital Corp. In this section, we refer to CCO
Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., which are the
co-obligors with respect to the Notes, as the Issuers, and we
sometimes refer to them each as an Issuer. We may
also refer to CCO Holdings, LLC as CCO Holdings. You
can find the definitions of certain terms used in this
description under the subheading Certain
Definitions.
The original Notes were, and the new Notes will be, issued
pursuant to a supplemental indenture under the indenture dated
November 10, 2003 (as supplemented, the
Indenture), between the Issuers and Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., as trustee. The original Notes were issued in a
private transaction that was not subject to the registration
requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. See Plan of
Distribution. The terms of the Notes include those stated
in the Indenture and those made part of the Indenture by
reference to the Trust Indenture Act of 1939.
The form and terms of the new Notes will be the same in all
material respects as to the form and terms of the original
Notes, except that the new Notes have been registered under the
Securities Act of 1933 and, therefore, will not bear legends
restricting their transfer and will not provide for additional
interest in connection with registration defaults. The original
notes have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933
and are subject to certain transfer restrictions.
The following description is a summary of the material
provisions of the Indenture with respect to the Notes. It does
not restate the Indenture in its entirety. We urge you to read
the Indenture because it, and not this description, defines your
rights as holders of the respective Notes. Copies of the
Indenture are available as set forth under
Additional Information.
Brief Description of the Notes
The Notes are:
|
|
|
|
|
general unsecured obligations of the Issuers; |
|
|
|
effectively subordinated in right of payment to any future
secured Indebtedness of the Issuers, to the extent of the value
of the assets securing such Indebtedness; |
|
|
|
equal in right of payment to our existing senior notes and any
future unsubordinated, unsecured Indebtedness of the Issuers; |
|
|
|
structurally senior to the outstanding senior notes and senior
discount notes of Charter Holdings, the outstanding senior notes
of CCH II, LLC and CCH II Capital Corp. and the outstanding
convertible senior notes of Charter Communications, Inc.; |
|
|
|
senior in right of payment to any future subordinated
Indebtedness of the Issuers; and |
|
|
|
structurally subordinated to all indebtedness and other
liabilities (including trade payables) of the Issuers
subsidiaries, including indebtedness under the Charter Operating
credit facilities and senior second lien notes. |
At June 30, 2005, on a pro forma basis giving effect to the
offering of the original Notes and the application of the net
proceeds therefrom, as if those transactions had occurred on
that date, the outstanding Indebtedness of CCO Holdings and its
subsidiaries would have totaled approximately $8.7 billion,
approximately $7.4 billion of which would have been
Indebtedness of its Subsidiaries and, therefore, structurally
senior to the Notes. See Capitalization.
As of the Issue Date, all the Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings
(except CCOH Sub, LLC and CCONR Sub, LLC) were Restricted
Subsidiaries. Under the circumstances described below
under Certain Covenants
Investments, CCO Holdings will be permitted to designate
additional Subsidiaries as
174
Unrestricted Subsidiaries. Unrestricted Subsidiaries
will generally not be subject to the restrictive covenants in
the Indenture.
Principal, Maturity and Interest
The new Notes will be issued in denominations of $1,000 and
integral multiples of $1,000. The Notes will mature on
November 15, 2013.
Interest on the Notes will accrue at the rate of
83/4% per
annum. Interest on the Notes will accrue from May 15, 2005
or, if interest already has been paid, from the date it was most
recently paid. Interest will be payable semi-annually in arrears
on May 15 and November 15, commencing on
November 15, 2005. The Issuers will make each interest
payment to the holders of record of the Notes on the immediately
preceding May 1 and November 1. Interest will be computed
on the basis of a 360-day year comprised of twelve 30-day months.
The original Notes were issued initially in the aggregate
principal amount of $300 million. Subject to the
limitations set forth under Certain
Covenants Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of
Preferred Stock, the Issuers may issue an unlimited
principal amount of Additional Notes under the Indenture. The
Notes and any Additional Notes subsequently issued under the
Indenture, would be treated as a single class for all purposes
of the Indenture. For purposes of this description, unless
otherwise indicated, references to the Notes include the Notes
issued on the Issue Date and any Additional Notes subsequently
issued under the Indenture.
Optional Redemption
At any time prior to November 15, 2006, the Issuers may, on
any one or more occasions, redeem up to 35% of the aggregate
principal amount of the Notes on a pro rata basis (or nearly as
pro rata as practicable), at a redemption price equal to
108.750% of the principal amount thereof, plus accrued and
unpaid interest to the redemption date, with the net cash
proceeds of one or more Equity Offerings; provided that
(1) at least 65% of the aggregate principal amount of the
Notes remain outstanding immediately after the occurrence of
such redemption (excluding Notes held by the Issuers and their
Subsidiaries), and
(2) the redemption must occur within 60 days of the
date of the closing of such Equity Offering.
Except pursuant to the preceding paragraph, the Notes will not
be redeemable at the option of the Issuers prior to
November 15, 2008.
On or after November 15, 2008, the Issuers may redeem all
or a part of the Notes upon not less than 30 nor more than
60 days notice, at the redemption prices (expressed as
percentages of principal amount of the Notes) set forth below
plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon, if any, to the
applicable redemption date, if redeemed during the twelve-month
period beginning on November 15 of the years indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
2008
|
|
|
104.375% |
|
2009
|
|
|
102.917% |
|
2010
|
|
|
101.458% |
|
2011 and thereafter
|
|
|
100.000% |
|
Repurchase at the Option of Holders
If a Change of Control occurs, each holder of Notes will have
the right to require the Issuers to repurchase all or any part
(equal to $1,000 or an integral multiple thereof) of that
holders Notes pursuant
175
to a Change of Control Offer. In the Change of
Control Offer, the Issuers will offer a Change of Control
Payment in cash equal to 101% of the aggregate principal
amount of the Notes repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid
interest thereon, if any, to the date of purchase.
Within ten days following any Change of Control, the Issuers
will mail a notice to each holder (with a copy to the trustee)
describing the transaction or transactions that constitute the
Change of Control and offering to repurchase Notes on a certain
date (the Change of Control Payment Date) specified
in such notice, pursuant to the procedures required by the
Indenture and described in such notice. The Issuers will comply
with the requirements of Rule 14e-1 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 or any successor rules, and any other
securities laws and regulations thereunder to the extent such
laws and regulations are applicable in connection with the
repurchase of the Notes as a result of a Change of Control. To
the extent that the provisions of any securities laws or
regulations conflict with the provisions of this covenant, the
Issuers compliance with such laws and regulations shall
not in and of itself cause a breach of their obligations under
such covenant.
On the Change of Control Payment Date, the Issuers will, to the
extent lawful:
(1) accept for payment all Notes or portions thereof
properly tendered pursuant to the Change of Control Offer;
(2) deposit with the paying agent an amount equal to the
Change of Control Payment in respect of all Notes or portions
thereof so tendered; and
(3) deliver or cause to be delivered to the trustee the
Notes so accepted together with an officers certificate
stating the aggregate principal amount of Notes or portions
thereof being purchased by the Issuers.
The paying agent will promptly mail to each holder of Notes so
tendered the Change of Control Payment for such Notes, and the
trustee will promptly authenticate and mail, or cause to be
transferred by book entry, to each holder a new Note equal in
principal amount to any unpurchased portion of the Notes
surrendered, if any; provided that each such new Note
will be in a principal amount of $1,000 or an integral multiple
thereof.
The provisions described above that require the Issuers to make
a Change of Control Offer following a Change of Control will be
applicable regardless of whether or not any other provisions of
the Indentures are applicable. Except as described above with
respect to a Change of Control, the Indenture will not contain
provisions that permit the holders of the Notes to require that
the Issuers repurchase or redeem the Notes in the event of a
takeover, recapitalization or similar transaction.
The Issuers will not be required to make a Change of Control
Offer upon a Change of Control if a third party makes the Change
of Control Offer in the manner, at the times and otherwise in
compliance with the requirements set forth in the Indenture
applicable to a Change of Control Offer made by the Issuers and
purchases all Notes validly tendered and not withdrawn under
such Change of Control Offer.
The definition of Change of Control includes a phrase relating
to the sale, lease, transfer, conveyance or other disposition of
all or substantially all of the assets of CCO
Holdings and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or of a Parent
and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole. Although there is a
limited body of case law interpreting the phrase
substantially all, there is no precise established
definition of the phrase under applicable law. Accordingly, the
ability of a holder of Notes to require the Issuers to
repurchase Notes as a result of a sale, lease, transfer,
conveyance or other disposition of less than all of the assets
of CCO Holdings and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or of a
Parent and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, to another Person
or group may be uncertain.
176
Asset Sales
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, consummate an Asset Sale unless:
(1) CCO Holdings or such Restricted Subsidiary receives
consideration at the time of such Asset Sale at least equal to
the fair market value of the assets or Equity Interests issued
or sold or otherwise disposed of;
(2) such fair market value is determined by the Board of
Directors of CCO Holdings and evidenced by a resolution of such
Board of Directors set forth in an officers certificate
delivered to the trustee; and
(3) at least 75% of the consideration therefor received by
CCO Holdings or such Restricted Subsidiary is in the form of
cash, Cash Equivalents or readily marketable securities.
For purposes of this provision, each of the following shall be
deemed to be cash:
(a) any liabilities (as shown on CCO Holdings or such
Restricted Subsidiarys most recent balance sheet) of CCO
Holdings or any Restricted Subsidiary (other than contingent
liabilities and liabilities that are by their terms subordinated
to the Notes) that are assumed by the transferee of any such
assets pursuant to a customary novation agreement that releases
CCO Holdings or such Restricted Subsidiary from further
liability;
(b) any securities, notes or other obligations received by
CCO Holdings or any such Restricted Subsidiary from such
transferee that are converted by the recipient thereof into
cash, Cash Equivalents or readily marketable securities within
60 days after receipt thereof (to the extent of the cash,
Cash Equivalents or readily marketable securities received in
that conversion); and
(c) Productive Assets.
Within 365 days after the receipt of any Net Proceeds from
an Asset Sale, CCO Holdings or a Restricted Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings may apply such Net Proceeds at its option:
(1) to repay debt under the Credit Facilities or any other
Indebtedness of the Restricted Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings
(other than Indebtedness represented by a guarantee of a
Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings); or
(2) to invest in Productive Assets; provided that any such
amount of Net Proceeds which CCO Holdings or a Restricted
Subsidiary has committed to invest in Productive Assets within
365 days of the applicable Asset Sale may be invested in
Productive Assets within two years of such Asset Sale.
The amount of any Net Proceeds received from Asset Sales that
are not applied or invested as provided in the preceding
paragraph will constitute Excess Proceeds. When the aggregate
amount of Excess Proceeds exceeds $25 million, CCO Holdings
will make an Asset Sale Offer to all holders of Notes and all
holders of other Indebtedness that is of equal priority with the
Notes containing provisions requiring offers to purchase or
redeem with the proceeds of sales of assets to purchase the
maximum principal amount of Notes and such other Indebtedness of
equal priority that may be purchased out of the Excess Proceeds,
which amount includes the entire amount of the Net Proceeds. The
offer price in any Asset Sale Offer will be payable in cash and
equal to 100% of the principal amount of the subject Notes plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the date of purchase. If
the aggregate principal amount of Notes and such other
Indebtedness of equal priority tendered into such Asset Sale
Offer exceeds the amount of Excess Proceeds, the trustee shall
select the Notes and such other Indebtedness of equal priority
to be purchased on a pro rata basis.
If any Excess Proceeds remain after consummation of an Asset
Sale Offer, then CCO Holdings or any Restricted Subsidiary
thereof may use such remaining Excess Proceeds for any purpose
not otherwise prohibited by the Indenture. Upon completion of
any Asset Sale Offer, the amount of Excess Proceeds shall be
reset at zero.
177
Selection and Notice
If less than all of the Notes are to be redeemed at any time,
the trustee will select Notes for redemption as follows:
(1) if any Notes are listed, in compliance with the
requirements of the principal national securities exchange on
which the Notes are listed; or
(2) if the Notes are not so listed, on a pro rata basis, by
lot or by such method as the trustee shall deem fair and
appropriate.
No Notes of $1,000 principal amount or less shall be redeemed in
part. Notices of redemption shall be mailed by first class mail
at least 30 but not more than 60 days before the redemption
date to each holder of Notes to be redeemed at its registered
address. Notices of redemption may not be conditional.
If any Note is to be redeemed in part only, the notice of
redemption that relates to that Note shall state the portion of
the principal amount thereof to be redeemed. A new Note in
principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion of the original
Note will be issued in the name of the holder thereof upon
cancellation of the original Note. Notes called for redemption
become irrevocably due and payable on the date fixed for
redemption at the redemption price. On and after the redemption
date, interest ceases to accrue on Notes or portions of them
called for redemption.
Certain Covenants
Set forth in this section are summaries of certain covenants
contained in the Indenture.
During any period of time that (a) any Notes have
Investment Grade Ratings from both Rating Agencies and
(b) no Default or Event of Default has occurred and is
continuing under the applicable Indenture, CCO Holdings and the
Restricted Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings will not be subject to
the provisions of the Indenture described under:
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase at the Option of
Holders Asset Sales, |
|
|
|
Restricted Payments, |
|
|
|
Investments, |
|
|
|
Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of
Preferred Stock, |
|
|
|
Dividend and Other Payment Restrictions
Affecting Subsidiaries, |
|
|
|
clause (D) of the first paragraph of
Merger, Consolidation, or Sale of Assets, |
|
|
|
Transactions with Affiliates and |
|
|
|
Sale and Leaseback Transactions. |
If CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries are not subject
to these covenants for any period of time as a result of the
previous sentence and, subsequently, one, or both, of the Rating
Agencies withdraws its ratings or downgrades the ratings
assigned to the applicable Notes below the required Investment
Grade Ratings, or a Default or Event of Default occurs and is
continuing, then CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries
will thereafter again be subject to these covenants. The ability
of CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries to make
Restricted Payments after the time of such withdrawal,
downgrade, Default or Event of Default will be calculated as if
the covenant governing Restricted Payments had been in effect
during the entire period of time from the Issue Date.
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, directly or indirectly:
(1) declare or pay any dividend or make any other payment
or distribution on account of its or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries Equity Interests (including, without
limitation, any payment in connection
178
with any merger or consolidation involving CCO Holdings or any
of its Restricted Subsidiaries) or to the direct or indirect
holders of CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries Equity Interests in their capacity as such
(other than dividends or distributions payable (x) solely
in Equity Interests (other than Disqualified Stock) of CCO
Holdings or (y), in the case of CCO Holdings and its Restricted
Subsidiaries, to CCO Holdings or a Restricted Subsidiary
thereof);
(2) purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire or retire for
value (including, without limitation, in connection with any
merger or consolidation involving CCO Holdings or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries) any Equity Interests of CCO Holdings or
any direct or indirect Parent of CCO Holdings or any Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings (other than, in the case of CCO
Holdings and their Restricted Subsidiaries, any such Equity
Interests owned by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries); or
(3) make any payment on or with respect to, or purchase,
redeem, defease or otherwise acquire or retire for value, any
Indebtedness of CCO Holdings that is subordinated to the Notes,
except a payment of interest or principal at the Stated Maturity
thereof
(all such payments and other actions set forth in
clauses (1) through (3) above are collectively
referred to as Restricted Payments), unless, at the
time of and after giving effect to such Restricted Payment:
(1) no Default or Event of Default under the Indenture
shall have occurred and be continuing or would occur as a
consequence thereof; and
(2) CCO Holdings would, at the time of such Restricted
Payment and after giving pro forma effect thereto as if such
Restricted Payment had been made at the beginning of the
applicable quarter period, have been permitted to incur at least
$1.00 of additional Indebtedness pursuant to the Leverage Ratio
test set forth in the first paragraph of the covenant described
below under the caption Incurrence of
Indebtedness and Issuance of Preferred Stock; and
(3) such Restricted Payment, together with the aggregate
amount of all other Restricted Payments made by CCO Holdings and
its Restricted Subsidiaries from and after the Issue Date
(excluding Restricted Payments permitted by clauses (2),
(3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (10) of the next
succeeding paragraph), shall not exceed, at the date of
determination, the sum of:
|
|
|
(a) an amount equal to 100% of the Consolidated EBITDA of
CCO Holdings for the period beginning on the first day of the
fiscal quarter commencing October 1, 2003 to the end of CCO
Holdings most recently ended full fiscal quarter for which
internal financial statements are available, taken as a single
accounting period, less the product of 1.3 times the
Consolidated Interest Expense of CCO Holdings for such period,
plus |
|
|
(b) an amount equal to 100% of Capital Stock Sale Proceeds
less any amount of such Capital Stock Sale Proceeds used in
connection with an Investment made on or after the Issue Date
pursuant to clause (5) of the definition of Permitted
Investments, plus |
|
|
(c) $100 million. |
So long as no Default under the Indenture has occurred and is
continuing or would be caused thereby, the preceding provisions
will not prohibit:
(1) the payment of any dividend within 60 days after
the date of declaration thereof, if at said date of declaration
such payment would have complied with the provisions of the
Indenture;
(2) the redemption, repurchase, retirement, defeasance or
other acquisition of any subordinated Indebtedness of CCO
Holdings in exchange for, or out of the net proceeds of, the
substantially concurrent sale (other than to a Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings) of Equity Interests of CCO Holdings (other than
Disqualified Stock); provided that the amount of any such
net cash proceeds that are utilized for any such redemption,
repurchase, retirement, defeasance or other acquisition shall be
excluded from clause (3)(b) of the preceding paragraph;
179
(3) the defeasance, redemption, repurchase or other
acquisition of subordinated Indebtedness of CCO Holdings or any
of its Restricted Subsidiaries with the net cash proceeds from
an incurrence of Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness;
(4) regardless of whether a Default then exists, the
payment of any dividend or distribution to the extent necessary
to permit direct or indirect beneficial owners of shares of
Capital Stock of CCO Holdings to pay federal, state or local
income tax liabilities that would arise solely from income of
CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries, as the case
may be, for the relevant taxable period and attributable to them
solely as a result of CCO Holdings (and any intermediate entity
through which the holder owns such shares) or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries being a limited liability company,
partnership or similar entity for federal income tax purposes;
(5) regardless of whether a Default then exists, the
payment of any dividend by a Restricted Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings to the holders of its common Equity Interests on a pro
rata basis;
(6) the payment of any dividend on the Helicon Preferred
Stock or the redemption, repurchase, retirement or other
acquisition of the Helicon Preferred Stock in an amount not in
excess of its aggregate liquidation value;
(7) the repurchase, redemption or other acquisition or
retirement for value, or the payment of any dividend or
distribution to the extent necessary to permit the repurchase,
redemption or other acquisition or retirement for value, of any
Equity Interests of CCO Holdings or a Parent of CCO Holdings
held by any member of CCO Holdings or such Parents
management pursuant to any management equity subscription
agreement or stock option agreement entered into in accordance
with the policies of CCO Holdings or any Parent; provided that
the aggregate price paid for all such repurchased, redeemed,
acquired or retired Equity Interests shall not exceed
$10 million in any fiscal year of the Issuers;
(8) payment of fees in connection with any acquisition,
merger or similar transaction in an amount that does not exceed
an amount equal to 1.25% of the transaction value of such
acquisition, merger or similar transaction; and
(9) additional Restricted Payments directly or indirectly
to CCO Holdings or any Parent (i) regardless of whether a
Default exists (other than a Default described in
paragraphs (1), (2), (7) or (8) under the caption
Events of Default and Remedies), for the purpose of
enabling Charter Holdings, CCH II and/or any Charter
Refinancing Subsidiary to pay interest when due on Indebtedness
under the Charter Holdings Indentures, the CCH II
Indentures and/or any Charter Refinancing Indebtedness,
(ii) for the purpose of enabling CCI and/or any Charter
Refinancing Subsidiary to pay interest when due on Indebtedness
under the CCI Indentures and/or any Charter Refinancing
Indebtedness and (iii) so long as CCO Holdings would have
been permitted, at the time of such Restricted Payment and after
giving pro forma effect thereto as if such Restricted Payment
had been made at the beginning of the applicable quarter period,
to incur at least $1.00 of additional Indebtedness pursuant to
the Leverage Ratio test set forth in the first paragraph of the
covenant described below under the caption
Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of
Preferred Stock, (A) consisting of dividends or
distributions to the extent required to enable CCH II,
Charter Holdings, CCI or any Charter Refinancing Subsidiary to
defease, redeem, repurchase, prepay, repay, discharge or
otherwise acquire or retire for value Indebtedness under the
CCH II Indentures, the Charter Holdings Indentures, the CCI
Indentures or any Charter Refinancing Indebtedness (including
any expenses incurred by any Parent in connection therewith) or
(B) consisting of purchases, redemptions or other
acquisitions by CCO Holdings or its Restricted Subsidiaries of
Indebtedness under the CCH II Indentures, the Charter
Holdings Indentures, the CCI Indentures or any Charter
Refinancing Indebtedness (including any expenses incurred by CCO
Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries in connection
therewith) and the distribution, loan or investment to any
Parent of Indebtedness so purchased, redeemed or acquired.
The amount of all Restricted Payments (other than cash) shall be
the fair market value on the date of the Restricted Payment of
the asset(s) or securities proposed to be transferred or issued
by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries pursuant
to the Restricted Payment. The fair market value
180
of any assets or securities that are required to be valued by
this covenant shall be determined by the Board of Directors of
CCO Holdings, whose resolution with respect thereto shall be
delivered to the trustee. Such Board of Directors
determination must be based upon an opinion or appraisal issued
by an accounting, appraisal or investment banking firm of
national standing if the fair market value exceeds
$100 million.
Not later than the date of making any Restricted Payment
involving an amount or fair market value in excess of
$10 million, the Issuers shall deliver to the trustee an
officers certificate stating that such Restricted Payment
is permitted and setting forth the basis upon which the
calculations required by this Restricted Payments
covenant were computed, together with a copy of any fairness
opinion or appraisal required by the Indenture.
Investments
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, directly or indirectly:
(1) make any Restricted Investment; or
(2) allow any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to become an
Unrestricted Subsidiary, unless, in each case:
|
|
|
(a) no Default or Event of Default under the Indenture
shall have occurred and be continuing or would occur as a
consequence thereof; and |
|
|
(b) CCO Holdings would, at the time of, and after giving
effect to, such Restricted Investment or such designation of a
Restricted Subsidiary as an Unrestricted Subsidiary, have been
permitted to incur at least $1.00 of additional Indebtedness
pursuant to the applicable Leverage Ratio test set forth in the
first paragraph of the covenant described below under the
caption Incurrence of Indebtedness and
Issuance of Preferred Stock. |
An Unrestricted Subsidiary may be redesignated as a Restricted
Subsidiary if such redesignation would not cause a Default.
Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of Preferred
Stock
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, directly or indirectly, create, incur, issue,
assume, guarantee or otherwise become directly or indirectly
liable, contingently or otherwise, with respect to
(collectively, incur) any Indebtedness (including
Acquired Debt) and CCO Holdings will not issue any Disqualified
Stock and will not permit any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to
issue any shares of Disqualified Stock or Preferred Stock,
provided that CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries may incur Indebtedness, CCO Holdings may issue
Disqualified Stock and subject to the final paragraph of this
covenant below, Restricted Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings may
incur Preferred Stock if the Leverage Ratio of CCO Holdings and
its Restricted Subsidiaries would have been not greater than 4.5
to 1.0 determined on a pro forma basis (including a pro forma
application of the net proceeds therefrom), as if the additional
Indebtedness had been incurred, or the Disqualified Stock or
Preferred Stock had been issued, as the case may be, at the
beginning of the most recently ended fiscal quarter.
So long as no Default under the Indenture shall have occurred
and be continuing or would be caused thereby, the first
paragraph of this covenant will not prohibit the incurrence of
any of the following items of Indebtedness (collectively,
Permitted Debt):
(1) the incurrence by CCO Holdings and its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Indebtedness under the Credit Facilities;
provided that the aggregate principal amount of all
Indebtedness of CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries
outstanding under this clause (1) for all Credit Facilities
of CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries after giving
effect to such incurrence does not exceed an amount equal to
$9.75 billion less the aggregate amount of all Net Proceeds
from Asset Sales applied by CCO Holdings or
181
any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to repay Indebtedness under a
Credit Facility pursuant to the covenant described under
Repurchase at the Option of
Holders Asset Sales;
(2) the incurrence by CCO Holdings and its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Existing Indebtedness (other than under the
Credit Facilities);
(3) the incurrence on the Issue Date by CCO Holdings and
its Restricted Subsidiaries of Indebtedness represented by the
Notes (other than any Additional Notes);
(4) the incurrence by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Indebtedness represented by Capital Lease
Obligations, mortgage financings or purchase money obligations,
in each case, incurred for the purpose of financing all or any
part of the purchase price or cost of construction or
improvement (including, without limitation, the cost of design,
development, construction, acquisition, transportation,
installation, improvement, and migration) of Productive Assets
of CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries in an
aggregate principal amount not to exceed $75 million at any
time outstanding pursuant to this clause (4);
(5) the incurrence by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness in exchange
for, or the net proceeds of which are used to refund, refinance
or replace, in whole or in part, Indebtedness (other than
intercompany Indebtedness) that was permitted by the Indenture
to be incurred under this clause (5), the first paragraph
of this covenant or clauses (2) or (3) of this
paragraph;
(6) the incurrence by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of intercompany Indebtedness between or among CCO
Holdings and any of its Restricted Subsidiaries; provided that:
|
|
|
(a) if CCO Holdings is the obligor on such Indebtedness,
such Indebtedness must be expressly subordinated to the prior
payment in full in cash of all obligations with respect to the
Notes; and |
|
|
(b) (i) any subsequent issuance or transfer of Equity
Interests that results in any such Indebtedness being held by a
Person other than CCO Holdings or a Restricted Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings and (ii) any sale or other transfer of any such
Indebtedness to a Person that is not either CCO Holdings or a
Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings, shall be deemed, in each
case, to constitute an incurrence of such Indebtedness that was
not permitted by this clause (6); |
(7) the incurrence by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Hedging Obligations that are incurred for the
purpose of fixing or hedging interest rate risk with respect to
any floating rate Indebtedness that is permitted by the terms of
the Indenture to be outstanding;
(8) the guarantee by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of Indebtedness of a Restricted Subsidiary that was
permitted to be incurred by another provision of this covenant;
(9) the incurrence by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries of additional Indebtedness in an aggregate
principal amount at any time outstanding under this
clause (9), not to exceed $300 million; and
(10) the accretion or amortization of original issue
discount and the write up of Indebtedness in accordance with
purchase accounting.
For purposes of determining compliance with this
Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of Preferred
Stock covenant, any Indebtedness under Credit Facilities
outstanding on the Issue Date shall be deemed to have been
incurred pursuant to clause (1) above and, in the event
that an item of proposed Indebtedness (other than any
Indebtedness initially deemed on the Issue Date to be incurred
under clause (1) above) (a) meets the criteria of more
than one of the categories of Permitted Debt described in
clauses (1) through (10) above or (b) is entitled
to be incurred pursuant to the first paragraph of this covenant,
CCO Holdings will be permitted to classify and from time to time
to reclassify such item of Indebtedness in any manner that
complies with this covenant. Once any item of Indebtedness is so
reclassified, it will no longer be deemed outstanding under the
category of Permitted Debt, where initially incurred or
previously reclassified. For avoidance of doubt, Indebtedness
incurred pursuant to a single
182
agreement, instrument, program, facility or line of credit may
be classified as Indebtedness arising in part under one of the
clauses listed above or under the first paragraph of this
covenant, and in part under any one or more of the clauses
listed above, to the extent that such Indebtedness satisfies the
criteria for such classification.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall any Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings consummate a Subordinated Debt
Financing or a Preferred Stock Financing. A Subordinated
Debt Financing or a Preferred Stock Financing,
as the case may be, with respect to any Restricted Subsidiary of
CCO Holdings shall mean a public offering or private placement
(whether pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act or
otherwise) of Subordinated Notes or Preferred Stock (whether or
not such Preferred Stock constitutes Disqualified Stock), as the
case may be, of such Restricted Subsidiary to one or more
purchasers (other than to one or more Affiliates of CCO
Holdings). Subordinated Notes with respect to any
Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings shall mean Indebtedness of
such Restricted Subsidiary that is contractually subordinated in
right of payment to any other Indebtedness of such Restricted
Subsidiary (including, without limitation, Indebtedness under
the Credit Facilities). The foregoing limitation shall not apply
to
|
|
|
(a) any Indebtedness or Preferred Stock of any Person
existing at the time such Person is merged with or into or
becomes a Subsidiary of CCO Holdings; provided that such
Indebtedness or Preferred Stock was not incurred or issued in
connection with, or in contemplation of, such Person merging
with or into, or becoming a Subsidiary of, CCO Holdings, and |
|
|
(b) any Indebtedness or Preferred Stock of a Restricted
Subsidiary issued in connection with, and as part of the
consideration for, an acquisition, whether by stock purchase,
asset sale, merger or otherwise, in each case involving such
Restricted Subsidiary, which Indebtedness or Preferred Stock is
issued to the seller or sellers of such stock or assets;
provided that such Restricted Subsidiary is not obligated
to register such Indebtedness or Preferred Stock under the
Securities Act or obligated to provide information pursuant to
Rule 144A under the Securities Act. |
Liens
The Indenture will provide that CCO Holdings will not, directly
or indirectly, create, incur, assume or suffer to exist any Lien
of any kind securing Indebtedness, Attributable Debt or trade
payables on any asset of CCO Holdings, whether owned on the
Issue Date or thereafter acquired, except Permitted Liens.
Dividend and Other Payment Restrictions Affecting
Subsidiaries
CCO Holdings will not, directly or indirectly, create or permit
to exist or become effective any encumbrance or restriction on
the ability of any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to:
(1) pay dividends or make any other distributions on its
Capital Stock to CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries, or with respect to any other interest or
participation in, or measured by, its profits, or pay any
Indebtedness owed to CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries;
(2) make loans or advances to CCO Holdings or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries; or
(3) transfer any of its properties or assets to CCO
Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries.
However, the preceding restrictions will not apply to
encumbrances or restrictions existing under or by reason of:
(1) Existing Indebtedness as in effect on the Issue Date
(including, without limitation, the Indebtedness under any of
the Credit Facilities) and any amendments, modifications,
restatements, renewals, increases, supplements, refundings,
replacements or refinancings thereof; provided that such
amendments, modifications, restatements, renewals, increases,
supplements, refundings, replacements or refinancings are no
more restrictive, taken as a whole, with respect to such
dividend and other payment restrictions than those contained in
the most restrictive Existing Indebtedness, as in effect on the
Issue Date;
183
(2) the Indenture and the Notes;
(3) applicable law;
(4) any instrument governing Indebtedness or Capital Stock
of a Person acquired by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries as in effect at the time of such acquisition
(except to the extent such Indebtedness was incurred in
connection with or in contemplation of such acquisition), which
encumbrance or restriction is not applicable to any Person, or
the properties or assets of any Person, other than the Person,
or the property or assets of the Person, so acquired; provided
that, in the case of Indebtedness, such Indebtedness was
permitted by the terms of the Indenture to be incurred;
(5) customary non-assignment provisions in leases,
franchise agreements and other commercial agreements entered
into in the ordinary course of business and consistent with past
practices;
(6) purchase money obligations for property acquired in the
ordinary course of business that impose restrictions on the
property so acquired of the nature described in clause (3)
of the preceding paragraph;
(7) any agreement for the sale or other disposition of a
Restricted Subsidiary that restricts distributions by such
Restricted Subsidiary pending its sale or other disposition;
(8) Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness; provided that the
restrictions contained in the agreements governing such
Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness are no more restrictive,
taken as a whole, than those contained in the agreements
governing the Indebtedness being refinanced;
(9) Liens securing Indebtedness or other obligations
otherwise permitted to be incurred pursuant to the provisions of
the covenant described above under the caption
Liens that limit the right of CCO
Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to dispose of the
assets subject to such Lien;
(10) provisions with respect to the disposition or
distribution of assets or property in joint venture agreements
and other similar agreements entered into in the ordinary course
of business;
(11) restrictions on cash or other deposits or net worth
imposed by customers under contracts entered into in the
ordinary course of business;
(12) restrictions contained in the terms of Indebtedness
permitted to be incurred under the covenant described under the
caption Incurrence of Indebtedness and
Issuance of Preferred Stock; provided that such
restrictions are no more restrictive, taken as a whole, than the
terms contained in the most restrictive, together or
individually, of the Credit Facilities as in effect on the Issue
Date; and
(13) restrictions that are not materially more restrictive,
taken as a whole, than customary provisions in comparable
financings and that the management of CCO Holdings determines,
at the time of such financing, will not materially impair the
Issuers ability to make payments as required under the
Notes.
Merger, Consolidation or Sale of Assets
Neither Issuer may, directly or indirectly, (1) consolidate
or merge with or into another Person or (2) sell, assign,
transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of all or substantially
all of its properties or assets, in one or more related
transactions, to another Person; unless:
(A) either:
|
|
|
(i) such Issuer is the surviving Person; or |
|
|
(ii) the Person formed by or surviving any such
consolidation or merger (if other than such Issuer) or to which
such sale, assignment, transfer, conveyance or other disposition
shall have been made is a Person organized or existing under the
laws of the United States, any state thereof or the District of
Columbia, provided that if the Person formed by or
surviving any such consolidation or merger with such Issuer is a
limited liability company or a Person other than a corporation,
a corporate co-issuer shall also be an obligor with respect to
the Notes; |
184
(B) the Person formed by or surviving any such
consolidation or merger (if other than such Issuer) or the
Person to which such sale, assignment, transfer, conveyance or
other disposition shall have been made assumes all the
obligations of such Issuer under the Notes and the Indenture
pursuant to agreements reasonably satisfactory to the trustee;
(C) immediately after such transaction no Default or Event
of Default exists; and
(D) such Issuer or the Person formed by or surviving any
such consolidation or merger (if other than such Issuer) will,
on the date of such transaction after giving pro forma effect
thereto and any related financing transactions as if the same
had occurred at the beginning of the applicable four-quarter
period,
|
|
|
(x) be permitted to incur at least $1.00 of additional
Indebtedness pursuant to the Leverage Ratio test set forth in
the first paragraph of the covenant described above under the
caption Incurrence of Indebtedness and
Issuance of Preferred Stock; or |
|
|
(y) have a Leverage Ratio immediately after giving effect
to such consolidation or merger no greater than the Leverage
Ratio immediately prior to such consolidation or merger. |
In addition, CCO Holdings may not, directly or indirectly, lease
all or substantially all of its properties or assets, in one or
more related transactions, to any other Person. The foregoing
clause (D) of this Merger, Consolidation, or
Sale of Assets covenant will not apply to a sale,
assignment, transfer, conveyance or other disposition of assets
between or among CCO Holdings and any of its Wholly Owned
Restricted Subsidiaries.
Transactions with Affiliates
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, make any payment to, or sell, lease, transfer
or otherwise dispose of any of its properties or assets to, or
purchase any property or assets from, or enter into or make or
amend any transaction, contract, agreement, understanding, loan,
advance or guarantee with, or for the benefit of, any Affiliate
(each, an Affiliate Transaction), unless:
(1) such Affiliate Transaction is on terms that are no less
favorable to CCO Holdings or the relevant Restricted Subsidiary
than those that would have been obtained in a comparable
transaction by CCO Holdings or such Restricted Subsidiary with
an unrelated Person; and
(2) CCO Holdings delivers to the trustee:
|
|
|
(a) with respect to any Affiliate Transaction or series of
related Affiliate Transactions involving aggregate consideration
given or received by CCO Holdings or any such Restricted
Subsidiary in excess of $15 million, a resolution of the
Board of Directors of CCO Holdings or CCI set forth in an
officers certificate certifying that such Affiliate
Transaction complies with this covenant and that such Affiliate
Transaction has been approved by a majority of the members of
such Board of Directors; and |
|
|
(b) with respect to any Affiliate Transaction or series of
related Affiliate Transactions involving aggregate consideration
given or received by CCO Holdings or any such Restricted
Subsidiary in excess of $50 million, an opinion as to the
fairness to the holders of such Affiliate Transaction from a
financial point of view issued by an accounting, appraisal or
investment banking firm of national standing. |
The following items shall not be deemed to be Affiliate
Transactions and, therefore, will not be subject to the
provisions of the prior paragraph:
(1) any existing employment agreement entered into by CCO
Holdings or any of its Subsidiaries and any employment agreement
entered into by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries in the ordinary course of business and consistent
with the past practice of CCO Holdings or any Parent or such
Restricted Subsidiary;
(2) transactions between or among CCO Holdings and/or its
Restricted Subsidiaries;
185
(3) payment of reasonable directors fees to Persons who are
not otherwise Affiliates of CCO Holdings, and customary
indemnification and insurance arrangements in favor of
directors, regardless of affiliation with CCO Holdings or any of
its Restricted Subsidiaries;
(4) payment of Management Fees;
(5) Restricted Payments that are permitted by the
provisions of the covenant described above under the caption
Restricted Payments and Restricted
Investments that are permitted by the provisions of the covenant
described above under the caption
Investments;
(6) Permitted Investments; and
(7) transactions pursuant to agreements existing on the
Issue Date, as in effect on the Issue Date, or as subsequently
modified, supplemented, or amended, to the extent that any such
modifications, supplements, or amendments complied with the
applicable provisions of the first paragraph of this covenant.
Sale and Leaseback Transactions
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to, enter into any sale and leaseback transaction;
provided that CCO Holdings and its Restricted
Subsidiaries may enter into a sale and leaseback transaction if:
(1) CCO Holdings or such Restricted Subsidiary could have
|
|
|
(a) incurred Indebtedness in an amount equal to the
Attributable Debt relating to such sale and leaseback
transaction under the Leverage Ratio test in the first paragraph
of the covenant described above under the caption
Incurrence of Additional Indebtedness and
Issuance of Preferred Stock; and |
|
|
(b) incurred a Lien to secure such Indebtedness pursuant to
the covenant described above under the caption
Liens or the definition of
Permitted Liens; and |
(2) the transfer of assets in that sale and leaseback
transaction is permitted by, and CCO Holdings or such Restricted
Subsidiary applies the proceeds of such transaction in
compliance with, the covenant described above under the caption
Repurchase at the Option of
Holders Asset Sales.
The foregoing restrictions do not apply to a sale and leaseback
transaction if the lease is for a period, including renewal
rights, of not in excess of three years.
Limitations on Issuances of Guarantees of
Indebtedness
CCO Holdings will not permit any of its Restricted Subsidiaries,
directly or indirectly, to Guarantee or pledge any assets to
secure the payment of any other Indebtedness of CCO Holdings,
except in respect of the Credit Facilities (the Guaranteed
Indebtedness), unless
(1) such Restricted Subsidiary simultaneously executes and
delivers a supplemental indenture providing for the Guarantee (a
Subsidiary Guarantee) of the payment of the Notes by
such Restricted Subsidiary, and
(2) until one year after all the Notes have been paid in
full in cash, such Restricted Subsidiary waives and will not in
any manner whatsoever claim or take the benefit or advantage of,
any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation or any
other rights against CCO Holdings or any other Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings as a result of any payment by such
Restricted Subsidiary under its Subsidiary Guarantee;
provided that this paragraph shall not be applicable to
any Guarantee or any Restricted Subsidiary that existed at the
time such Person became a Restricted Subsidiary and was not
incurred in connection with, or in contemplation of, such Person
becoming a Restricted Subsidiary.
186
If the Guaranteed Indebtedness is subordinated to the Notes,
then the Guarantee of such Guaranteed Indebtedness shall be
subordinated to the Subsidiary Guarantee at least to the extent
that the Guaranteed Indebtedness is subordinated to the Notes.
Payments for Consent
CCO Holdings will not, and will not permit any of its
Subsidiaries to, directly or indirectly, pay or cause to be paid
any consideration to or for the benefit of any holder of Notes
for or as an inducement to any consent, waiver or amendment of
any of the terms or provisions of the Indenture or the Notes
unless such consideration is offered to be paid and is paid to
all holders of the Notes that consent, waive or agree to amend
in the time frame set forth in the solicitation documents
relating to such consent, waiver or agreement.
Reports
Whether or not required by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, so long as any Notes are outstanding, the Issuers
will furnish to the holders of the Notes, within the time
periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and regulations:
(1) all quarterly and annual financial information that
would be required to be contained in a filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on Forms 10-Q
and 10-K if the Issuers were required to file such forms,
including a Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations section and,
with respect to the annual information only, a report on the
annual consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings of its
independent public accountants; and
(2) all current reports that would be required to be filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K if
the Issuers were required to file such reports.
If CCO Holdings has designated any of its Subsidiaries as
Unrestricted Subsidiaries, then the quarterly and annual
financial information required by the preceding paragraph shall
include a reasonably detailed presentation, either on the face
of the financial statements or in the footnotes thereto, and in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations, of the financial condition and
results of operations of CCO Holdings and its Restricted
Subsidiaries separate from the financial condition and results
of operations of the Unrestricted Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings.
In addition, after consummation of the exchange offer, whether
or not required by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Issuers will file a copy of all of the information and reports
referred to in clauses (1) and (2) above with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for public availability
within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and regulations, unless the Securities
and Exchange Commission will not accept such a filing, and make
such information available to securities analysts and
prospective investors upon request.
Events of Default and Remedies
Each of the following is an Event of Default with respect to the
Notes:
(1) default for 30 consecutive days in the payment when due
of interest on the Notes;
(2) default in payment when due of the principal of or
premium, if any, on the Notes;
(3) failure by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to comply with the provisions of the Indenture
described under the captions Repurchase at the
Option of Holders Change of Control or
Certain Covenants Merger,
Consolidation, or Sale of Assets;
(4) failure by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries for 30 consecutive days after written notice
thereof has been given to CCO Holdings by the trustee or to CCO
Holdings and the trustee by holders of at least 25% of the
aggregate principal amount of the applicable series of Notes
outstanding to comply with any of their other covenants or
agreements in the Indenture;
187
(5) default under any mortgage, indenture or instrument
under which there may be issued or by which there may be secured
or evidenced any Indebtedness for money borrowed by CCO Holdings
or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries (or the payment of which
is guaranteed by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries) whether such Indebtedness or guarantee now exists,
or is created after the Issue Date, if that default:
|
|
|
(a) is caused by a failure to pay at final stated maturity
the principal amount on such Indebtedness prior to the
expiration of the grace period provided in such Indebtedness on
the date of such default (a Payment Default); or |
|
|
(b) results in the acceleration of such Indebtedness prior
to its express maturity, |
and, in each case, the principal amount of any such
Indebtedness, together with the principal amount of any other
such Indebtedness under which there has been a Payment Default
or the maturity of which has been so accelerated, aggregates
$100 million or more;
(6) failure by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to pay final judgments which are non-appealable
aggregating in excess of $100 million, net of applicable
insurance which has not been denied in writing by the insurer,
which judgments are not paid, discharged or stayed for a period
of 60 days; and
(7) CCO Holdings or any of its Significant Subsidiaries
pursuant to or within the meaning of bankruptcy law:
|
|
|
(a) commences a voluntary case, |
|
|
(b) consents to the entry of an order for relief against it
in an involuntary case, |
|
|
(c) consents to the appointment of a custodian of it or for
all or substantially all of its property, or |
|
|
(d) makes a general assignment for the benefit of its
creditors; or |
(8) a court of competent jurisdiction enters an order or
decree under any bankruptcy law that:
|
|
|
(a) is for relief against CCO Holdings or any of its
Significant Subsidiaries in an involuntary case; |
|
|
(b) appoints a custodian of CCO Holdings or any of its
Significant Subsidiaries or for all or substantially all of the
property of CCO Holdings or any of its Significant
Subsidiaries; or |
|
|
(c) orders the liquidation of CCO Holdings or any of its
Significant Subsidiaries; |
and the order or decree remains unstayed and in effect for 60
consecutive days.
In the case of an Event of Default described in the foregoing
clauses (7) and (8) with respect to CCO Holdings, all
outstanding Notes will become due and payable immediately
without further action or notice. If any other Event of Default
occurs and is continuing, the trustee or the holders of at least
25% in principal amount of the then outstanding Notes may
declare the Notes to be due and payable immediately.
Holders of the Notes may not enforce the Indenture or the Notes
except as provided in the Indenture. Subject to certain
limitations, the holders of a majority in principal amount of
the then outstanding Notes may direct the trustee in its
exercise of any trust or power. The trustee may withhold from
holders of the Notes notice of any continuing Default or Event
of Default under the Indenture (except a Default or Event of
Default relating to the payment of principal or interest) if it
determines that withholding notice is in their interest.
The holders of a majority in aggregate principal amount of the
Notes then outstanding by notice to the trustee may on behalf of
the holders of all of the Notes waive any existing Default or
Event of Default
188
and its consequences under the Indenture except a continuing
Default or Event of Default in the payment of interest on, or
the principal of, or premium, if any, on, the Notes.
The Issuers will be required to deliver to the trustee annually
a statement regarding compliance with the Indenture. Upon
becoming aware of any Default or Event of Default, the Issuers
will be required to deliver to the trustee a statement
specifying such Default or Event of Default and what action the
Issuers are taking or propose to take with respect thereto.
No Personal Liability of Directors, Officers, Employees,
Members and Stockholders
No director, officer, employee or incorporator of the Issuers,
as such, and no member or stockholder of the Issuers, as such,
shall have any liability for any obligations of the Issuers
under the Notes or the Indenture, or for any claim based on, in
respect of, or by reason of, such obligations or their creation.
Each holder of Notes by accepting a Note waives and releases all
such liability. The waiver and release will be part of the
consideration for issuance of the Notes. The waiver may not be
effective to waive liabilities under the federal securities laws.
Legal Defeasance and Covenant Defeasance
The Issuers may, at their option and at any time, elect to have
all of their obligations discharged with respect to any
outstanding Notes (Legal Defeasance) except for:
(1) the rights of holders of outstanding Notes to receive
payments in respect of the principal of, premium, if any, and
interest on the Notes when such payments are due from the trust
referred to below;
(2) the Issuers obligations with respect to the Notes
concerning issuing temporary Notes, registration of Notes,
mutilated, destroyed, lost or stolen Notes and the maintenance
of an office or agency for payment and money for security
payments held in trust;
(3) the rights, powers, trusts, duties and immunities of
the trustee, and the Issuers obligations in connection
therewith; and
(4) the Legal Defeasance provisions of the Indenture.
In addition, the Issuers may, at their option and at any time,
elect to have the obligations of the Issuers released with
respect to certain covenants that are described in the Indenture
(Covenant Defeasance) and thereafter any omission to
comply with those covenants shall not constitute a Default or
Event of Default with respect to the Notes. In the event
Covenant Defeasance occurs, certain events (not including
non-payment, bankruptcy, receivership, rehabilitation and
insolvency events) described under Events of Default
will no longer constitute an Event of Default with respect to
the Notes.
In order to exercise either Legal Defeasance or Covenant
Defeasance:
(1) the Issuers must irrevocably deposit with the trustee,
in trust, for the benefit of the holders of the Notes, cash in
U.S. dollars, non-callable Government Securities, or a
combination thereof, in such amounts as will be sufficient, in
the opinion of a nationally recognized firm of independent
public accountants, to pay the principal of, premium, if any,
and interest on the outstanding Notes on the stated maturity or
on the applicable redemption date, as the case may be, and the
Issuers must specify whether the Notes are being defeased to
maturity or to a particular redemption date;
(2) in the case of Legal Defeasance, the Issuers shall have
delivered to the trustee an opinion of counsel reasonably
acceptable to the trustee confirming that
|
|
|
(a) the Issuers have received from, or there has been
published by, the Internal Revenue Service a ruling or |
|
|
(b) since the Issue Date, there has been a change in the
applicable federal income tax law, |
in either case to the effect that, and based thereon such
opinion of counsel shall confirm that, the holders of the
outstanding Notes will not recognize income, gain or loss for
federal income tax purposes as a result
189
of such Legal Defeasance and will be subject to federal income
tax on the same amounts, in the same manner and at the same
times as would have been the case if such Legal Defeasance had
not occurred;
(3) in the case of Covenant Defeasance, the Issuers shall
have delivered to the trustee an opinion of counsel reasonably
acceptable to the trustee confirming that the holders of the
outstanding Notes will not recognize income, gain or loss for
federal income tax purposes as a result of such Covenant
Defeasance and will be subject to federal income tax on the same
amounts, in the same manner and at the same times as would have
been the case if such Covenant Defeasance had not occurred;
(4) no Default or Event of Default under the Indenture
shall have occurred and be continuing either:
|
|
|
(a) on the date of such deposit (other than a Default or
Event of Default resulting from the borrowing of funds to be
applied to such deposit); or |
|
|
(b) insofar as Events of Default from bankruptcy or
insolvency events are concerned, at any time in the period
ending on the 91st day after the date of deposit; |
(5) such Legal Defeasance or Covenant Defeasance will not
result in a breach or violation of, or constitute a default
under any material agreement or instrument (other than the
Indenture) to which the Issuers or any of their Restricted
Subsidiaries is a party or by which the Issuers or any of their
Restricted Subsidiaries is bound;
(6) the Issuers must have delivered to the trustee an
opinion of counsel to the effect that after the 91st day,
assuming no intervening bankruptcy, that no holder is an insider
of either of the Issuers following the deposit and that such
deposit would not be deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction
a transfer for the benefit of the Issuers in their capacities as
such, the trust funds will not be subject to the effect of any
applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization or similar
laws affecting creditors rights generally;
(7) the Issuers must deliver to the trustee an
officers certificate stating that the deposit was not made
by the Issuers with the intent of preferring the holders of the
Notes over the other creditors of the Issuers with the intent of
defeating, hindering, delaying or defrauding creditors of the
Issuers or others; and
(8) the Issuers must deliver to the trustee an
officers certificate and an opinion of counsel, each
stating that all conditions precedent relating to the Legal
Defeasance or the Covenant Defeasance have been complied with.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the opinion of counsel required
by clause (2) above with respect to a Legal Defeasance need
not be delivered if all applicable Notes not theretofore
delivered to the trustee for cancellation
|
|
|
(a) have become due and payable or |
|
|
(b) will become due and payable on the maturity date within
one year under arrangements satisfactory to the trustee for the
giving of notice of redemption by the trustee in the name, and
at the expense, of the Issuers. |
Amendment, Supplement and Waiver
Except as provided below, the Indenture or Notes may be amended
or supplemented with the consent of the holders of at least a
majority in aggregate principal amount of the then outstanding
Notes. This includes consents obtained in connection with a
purchase of Notes, a tender offer for Notes or an exchange offer
for Notes. Any existing Default or compliance with any provision
of the Indenture or the Notes (other than any provision relating
to the right of any holder of a Note to bring suit for the
enforcement of any payment of principal, premium, if any, and
interest on the Note, on or after the scheduled due dates
expressed in the Notes) may be waived with the consent of the
holders of a majority in aggregate principal amount of the then
outstanding Notes. This includes consents obtained in connection
with a purchase of Notes, a tender offer for Notes or an
exchange offer for Notes.
190
Without the consent of each holder affected, an amendment or
waiver may not (with respect to any Notes held by a
non-consenting holder):
(1) reduce the principal amount of Notes whose holders must
consent to an amendment, supplement or waiver;
(2) reduce the principal of or change the fixed maturity of
any Note or alter the payment provisions with respect to the
redemption of the Notes (other than provisions relating to the
covenants described above under the caption
Repurchase at the Option of Holders);
(3) reduce the rate of or extend the time for payment of
interest on any Note;
(4) waive a Default or an Event of Default in the payment
of principal of or premium, if any, or interest on the Notes
(except a rescission of acceleration of the Notes by the holders
of at least a majority in aggregate principal amount of the
Notes and a waiver of the payment default that resulted from
such acceleration);
(5) make any Note payable in money other than that stated
in the Notes;
(6) make any change in the provisions of the Indenture
relating to waivers of past Defaults or the rights of holders of
Notes to receive payments of principal of, or premium, if any,
or interest on the Notes;
(7) waive a redemption payment with respect to any Note
(other than a payment required by one of the covenants described
above under the caption Repurchase at the
Option of Holders); or
(8) make any change in the preceding amendment and waiver
provisions.
Notwithstanding the preceding, without the consent of any holder
of Notes, the Issuers and the trustee may amend or supplement
the Indenture or the Notes:
(1) to cure any ambiguity, defect or inconsistency;
(2) to provide for uncertificated Notes in addition to or
in place of certificated Notes;
(3) to provide for or confirm the issuance of Additional
Notes;
(4) to provide for the assumption of the Issuers
obligations to holders of Notes in the case of a merger or
consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of the
Issuers assets;
(5) to make any change that would provide any additional
rights or benefits to the holders of Notes or that does not
adversely affect the legal rights under the Indenture of any
such holder; or
(6) to comply with requirements of the Securities and
Exchange Commission in order to effect or maintain the
qualification of the Indenture under the Trust Indenture Act or
otherwise as necessary to comply with applicable law.
Governing Law
The Indenture and the Notes will be governed by the laws of the
State of New York.
Concerning the Trustee
If the trustee becomes a creditor of the Issuers, the Indenture
will limit its right to obtain payment of claims in certain
cases, or to realize on certain property received in respect of
any such claim as security or otherwise. The trustee will be
permitted to engage in other transactions; however, if it
acquires any conflicting interest it must eliminate such
conflict within 90 days, apply to the Securities and
Exchange Commission for permission to continue or resign.
The holders of a majority in principal amount of the then
outstanding Notes will have the right to direct the time, method
and place of conducting any proceeding for exercising any remedy
available to the trustee, subject to certain exceptions. The
Indenture will provide that in case an Event of Default shall
occur and be continuing, the trustee will be required, in the
exercise of its power, to use the degree of care
191
of a prudent man in the conduct of his own affairs. Subject to
such provisions, the trustee will be under no obligation to
exercise any of its rights or powers under the Indenture at the
request of any holder of Notes, unless such holder shall have
offered to the trustee indemnity satisfactory to it against any
loss, liability or expense.
Additional Information
Anyone who receives this prospectus may obtain a copy of the
Indenture without charge by writing to the Issuers at Charter
Plaza, 12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63131,
Attention: Corporate Secretary.
Book-Entry, Delivery and Form
Except as set forth below, new Notes will be issued in
registered, global form in minimum denominations of $1,000 and
integral multiples of $1,000 in excess thereof.
The new Notes initially will be issued in the form of global
securities filed in book-entry form. The new Notes will be
deposited upon issuance with the trustee, as custodian for The
Depository Trust Company (DTC), in New York, New
York, and registered in the name of DTC or its nominee,
Cede & Co., and DTC or its nominee will initially be
the sole registered holder of the notes for all purposes under
the Indenture. Unless it is exchanged in whole or in part for
debt securities in definitive form as described below, a global
security may not be transferred. However, transfers of the whole
security between DTC and its nominee or their respective
successors are permitted.
Upon the issuance of a global security, DTC or its nominee will
credit on its internal system the principal amount at maturity
of the individual beneficial interest represented by the global
security acquired by the persons in sale of the original notes.
Ownership of beneficial interests in a global security will be
limited to persons that have accounts with DTC or persons that
hold interests through participants. Ownership of beneficial
interests will be shown on, and the transfer of such ownership
will be effected only through, records maintained by DTC or its
nominee with respect to interests of participants and the
records of participants with respect to interests of persons
other than participants. The laws of some jurisdictions require
that some purchasers of securities take physical delivery of the
securities in definitive form. These limits and laws may impair
the ability to transfer beneficial interests in a global
security. Principal and interest payments on global securities
registered in the name of DTCs nominee will be made in
immediate available funds to DTCs nominee as the
registered owner of the global securities. The Issuers and the
trustee will treat DTCs nominee as the owner of the global
securities for all other purchasers will have no direct
responsibility or liability for any aspect of the records
relating to payments made on account of beneficial interests in
the global securities or for maintaining, supervising or
reviewing any records relating to these beneficial interests. It
is DTCs current practice, upon receipt of any payment of
principal or interest, to credit direct participants
accounts on the payment date according to their respective
holdings of beneficial interests in the global securities. These
payments will be the responsibility of the direct and indirect
participants and not of DTC, the Issuers, the trustee or the
initial purchasers.
So long as DTC or its nominee is the registered owner or holder
of the global security, DTC or its nominee, as the case may be,
will be considered the sole owner or holder of the Notes
represented by the global security for the purposes of:
(1) receiving payment on the Notes;
(2) receiving notices; and
(3) for all other purposes under the Indenture and the
Notes.
Beneficial interests in the new Notes will be evidenced only by,
and transfers of the Notes will be effected only through records
maintained by DTC and its participants.
Except as described above, owners of beneficial interests in a
global security will not be entitled to receive physical
delivery of certificated Notes in definitive form and will not
be considered the holders of
192
the global security for any purposes under the Indenture.
Accordingly, each person owning a beneficial interest in a
global security must rely on the procedures of DTC. And, if that
person is not a participant, the person must rely on the
procedures of the participant through which that person owns its
interest, to exercise any rights of a holder under the
Indenture. Under existing industry practices, if the issuers
request any action of holders or an owner of a beneficial
interest in a global security desires to take any action under
the Indenture, DTC would authorize the participants holding the
relevant beneficial interest to take that action. The
participants then would authorize beneficial owners owning
through the participants to take the action or would otherwise
act upon the instructions of beneficial owners owning through
them.
DTC has advised the Issuers that it will take any action
permitted to be taken by a holder of Notes only at the direction
of one or more participants to whose account the DTC interests
in the global security are credited. Further, DTC will take
action only as to the portion of the aggregate principal amount
of the Notes as to which the participant or participants has or
have given the direction.
DTC has provided the following information to us. DTC is a:
(1) limited-purpose trust company organized under the New
York Banking Law;
(2) a banking organization within the meaning of the New
York Banking Law;
(3) a member of the United States Federal Reserve System;
(4) a clearing corporation within the meaning of the New
York Uniform Commercial Code; and
(5) a clearing agency registered under the provisions of
Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act.
DTC has further advised us that:
(1) DTC holds securities that its direct participants
deposit with DTC and facilitates the settlement among direct
participants of securities transactions, such as transfers and
pledges, in deposited securities through electronic computerized
book-entry changes in direct participants accounts,
thereby eliminating the need for physical movement of securities
certificates;
(2) direct participants include securities brokers and
dealers, trust companies, clearing corporations and other
organizations;
(3) DTC is owned by a number of its direct participants and
by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the American Stock
Exchange LLC and the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc.;
(4) access to the DTC system is also available to indirect
participants such as securities brokers and dealers, banks and
trust companies that clear through or maintain a custodial
relationship with direct participants, either directly or
indirectly; and
(5) the rules applicable to DTC and its direct and indirect
participants are on file with the SEC.
Although DTC has agreed to the procedures described above in
order to facilitate transfers of interests in global securities
among participants of DTC, it is under no obligation to perform
these procedures, and the procedures may be discontinued at any
time. None of the Issuers, the trustee, any agent of the Issuers
or the purchasers of the original notes will have any
responsibility for the performance by DTC or its participants or
indirect participants of their respective obligations under the
rules and procedures governing their operations, including
maintaining, supervising or reviewing the records relating to,
payments made on account of, or beneficial ownership interests
in, global notes.
According to DTC, the foregoing information with respect to DTC
has been provided to its participants and other members of the
financial community for informational purposes only and is not
intended to serve as a representation, warranty or contract
modification of any kind. We have provided the foregoing
descriptions of the operations and procedures of DTC solely as a
matter of convenience. DTCs operations and procedures are
solely within DTCs control and are subject to change by
DTC from time to time. Neither we, the initial purchasers nor
the trustee take any responsibility for these operations or
procedures, and you are urged to contact DTC or its participants
directly to discuss these matters.
193
Exchange of Book-Entry Notes for Certificated Notes
A Global Note is exchangeable for definitive Notes in registered
certificated form (Certificated Notes) if
(i) DTC (x) notifies the Issuers that it is unwilling
or unable to continue as depositary for the Global Notes and the
Issuers thereupon fail to appoint a successor depositary or
(y) has ceased to be a clearing agency registered under the
Exchange Act, (ii) the Issuers, at their option, notify the
trustee in writing that they elect to cause the issuance of the
Certificated Notes or (iii) there shall have occurred and
be continuing a Default or Event of Default with respect to the
Notes. In addition, beneficial interests in a Global Note may be
exchanged for Certificated Notes upon request but only upon
prior written notice given to the trustee by or on behalf of DTC
in accordance with the Indenture and in accordance with the
certification requirements set forth in the Indenture. In all
cases, Certificated Notes delivered in exchange for any Global
Note or beneficial interests therein will be registered in the
names, and issued in any approved denominations, requested by or
on behalf of DTC (in accordance with its customary procedures)
and will bear the applicable restrictive legend referred to in
Notice to Investors, unless the Issuers determine
otherwise in compliance with applicable law.
Exchange of Certificated Notes for Book-Entry Notes
Notes issued in certificated form may not be exchanged for
beneficial interests in any Global Note unless the transferor
first delivers to the trustee a written certificate (in the form
provided in the Indenture) to the effect that such transfer will
comply with the appropriate transfer restrictions applicable to
such Notes. See Notice to Investors.
Same-Day Settlement and Payment
Payments in respect of the Notes represented by the Global Notes
(including principal, premium, if any, and interest) will be
made by wire transfer of immediately available funds to the
accounts specified by the Global Note holder. With respect to
Notes in certificated form, the Issuers will make all payments
of principal, premium, if any, and interest, by wire transfer of
immediately available funds to the accounts specified by the
holders thereof or, if no such account is specified, by mailing
a check to each such holders registered address. The Notes
represented by the Global Notes are expected to be eligible to
trade in the
PORTALsm
market and to trade in DTCs Same-Day Funds Settlement
System, and any permitted secondary market trading activity in
such Notes will, therefore, be required by DTC to be settled in
immediately available funds. The Issuers expect that secondary
trading in any certificated Notes will also be settled in
immediately available funds.
Because of time zone differences, the securities account of a
Euroclear or Clearstream participant purchasing an interest in a
Global Note from a Participant in DTC will be credited, and any
such crediting will be reported to the relevant Euroclear or
Clearstream participant, during the securities settlement
processing day (which must be a business day for Euroclear and
Clearstream) immediately following the settlement date of DTC.
DTC has advised the Issuers that cash received in Euroclear or
Clearstream as a result of sales of interests in a Global Note
by or through a Euroclear or Clearstream participant to a
Participant in DTC will be received with value on the settlement
date of DTC but will be available in the relevant Euroclear or
Clearstream cash account only as of the business day for
Euroclear or Clearstream following DTCs settlement date.
Certain Definitions
This section sets forth certain defined terms used in the
Indenture. Reference is made to the Indenture for a full
disclosure of all such terms, as well as any other capitalized
terms used herein for which no definition is provided.
Acquired Debt means, with respect to
any specified Person:
(1) Indebtedness of any other Person existing at the time
such other Person is merged with or into or became a Subsidiary
of such specified Person, whether or not such Indebtedness is
incurred in connection
194
with, or in contemplation of, such other Person merging with or
into, or becoming a Subsidiary of, such specified
Person; and
(2) Indebtedness secured by a Lien encumbering any asset
acquired by such specified Person.
Additional Notes means the
Issuers
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 issued under the Indenture (other than certain
Notes identified in the Indenture that were issued prior to the
original Notes). The original Notes and the new Notes constitute
Additional Notes under the Indenture.
Affiliate of any specified Person
means any other Person directly or indirectly controlling or
controlled by or under direct or indirect common control with
such specified Person. For purposes of this definition,
control, as used with respect to any Person, shall
mean the possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to
direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of
such Person, whether through the ownership of voting securities,
by agreement or otherwise; provided that beneficial ownership of
10% or more of the Voting Stock of a Person shall be deemed to
be control. For purposes of this definition, the terms
controlling, controlled by and
under common control with shall have correlative
meanings.
Asset Acquisition means
(a) an Investment by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries in any other Person pursuant to which such Person
shall become a Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings or any of
its Restricted Subsidiaries or shall be merged with or into CCO
Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries, or
(b) the acquisition by CCO Holdings or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries of the assets of any Person which
constitute all or substantially all of the assets of such
Person, any division or line of business of such Person or any
other properties or assets of such Person other than in the
ordinary course of business.
Asset Sale means:
(1) the sale, lease, conveyance or other disposition of any
assets or rights, other than sales of inventory in the ordinary
course of the Cable Related Business consistent with applicable
past practices; provided that the sale, conveyance or other
disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of CCO
Holdings and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, will be
governed by the provisions of the Indenture described above
under the caption Repurchase at the Option of
Holders Change of Control and/or the
provisions described above under the caption
Certain Covenants Merger,
Consolidation, or Sale of Assets and not by the provisions
of the Asset Sale covenant; and
(2) the issuance of Equity Interests by any Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings or the sale of Equity Interests in
any Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings.
Notwithstanding the preceding, the following items shall not be
deemed to be Asset Sales:
(1) any single transaction or series of related
transactions that:
|
|
|
(a) involves assets having a fair market value of less than
$100 million; or |
|
|
(b) results in net proceeds to CCO Holdings and its
Restricted Subsidiaries of less than $100 million; |
(2) a transfer of assets between or among CCO Holdings and
its Restricted Subsidiaries;
(3) an issuance of Equity Interests by a Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings to CCO Holdings or to another Wholly
Owned Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings;
(4) a Restricted Payment that is permitted by the covenant
described above under the caption Certain
Covenants Restricted Payments, a Restricted
Investment that is permitted by the covenant described above
under the caption Certain
Covenants Investments or a Permitted
Investment;
195
(5) the incurrence of Liens not prohibited by the Indenture
and the disposition of assets related to such Liens by the
secured party pursuant to a foreclosure; and
(6) any disposition of cash or Cash Equivalents.
Attributable Debt in respect of a sale
and leaseback transaction means, at the time of determination,
the present value of the obligation of the lessee for net rental
payments during the remaining term of the lease included in such
sale and leaseback transaction, including any period for which
such lease has been extended or may, at the option of the
lessee, be extended. Such present value shall be calculated
using a discount rate equal to the rate of interest implicit in
such transaction, determined in accordance with GAAP.
Beneficial Owner has the meaning
assigned to such term in Rule 13d-3 and Rule 13d-5
under the Exchange Act, except that in calculating the
beneficial ownership of any particular person (as
such term is used in Section 13(d)(3) of the Exchange Act)
such person shall be deemed to have beneficial
ownership of all securities that such person has the
right to acquire, whether such right is currently exercisable or
is exercisable only upon the occurrence of a subsequent
condition.
Board of Directors means the board of
directors or comparable governing body of CCI or if so specified
CCO Holdings, in either case, as constituted as of the date of
any determination required to be made, or action required to be
taken, pursuant to the Indenture.
Cable Related Business means the
business of owning cable television systems and businesses
ancillary, complementary and related thereto.
Capital Corp. means, CCO Holdings
Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation, and any successor Person
thereto.
Capital Lease Obligation means, at the
time any determination thereof is to be made, the amount of the
liability in respect of a capital lease that would at that time
be required to be capitalized on a balance sheet in accordance
with GAAP.
Capital Stock means:
(1) in the case of a corporation, corporate stock;
(2) in the case of an association or business entity, any
and all shares, interests, participations, rights or other
equivalents (however designated) of corporate stock;
(3) in the case of a partnership or limited liability
company, partnership or membership interests (whether general or
limited); and
(4) any other interest (other than any debt obligation) or
participation that confers on a Person the right to receive a
share of the profits and losses of, or distributions of assets
of, the issuing Person.
Capital Stock Sale Proceeds means the
aggregate net cash proceeds (including the fair market value of
the non-cash proceeds, as determined by an independent appraisal
firm) received by CCO Holdings or its Restricted Subsidiaries
from and after November 10, 2003, in each case
(x) as a contribution to the common equity capital or from
the issue or sale of Equity Interests (other than Disqualified
Stock and other than issuances or sales to a Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings) of CCO Holdings after November 10, 2003, or
(y) from the issue or sale of convertible or exchangeable
Disqualified Stock or convertible or exchangeable debt
securities of CCO Holdings that have been converted into or
exchanged for such Equity Interests (other than Equity Interests
(or Disqualified Stock or debt securities) sold to a Subsidiary
of CCO Holdings).
196
Cash Equivalents means:
(1) United States dollars;
(2) securities issued or directly and fully guaranteed or
insured by the United States government or any agency or
instrumentality thereof (provided that the full faith and credit
of the United States is pledged in support thereof) having
maturities of not more than twelve months from the date of
acquisition;
(3) certificates of deposit and eurodollar time deposits
with maturities of twelve months or less from the date of
acquisition, bankers acceptances with maturities not
exceeding six months and overnight bank deposits, in each case,
with any domestic commercial bank having combined capital and
surplus in excess of $500 million and a Thompson Bank Watch
Rating at the time of acquisition of B or better;
(4) repurchase obligations with a term of not more than
seven days for underlying securities of the types described in
clauses (2) and (3) above entered into with any
financial institution meeting the qualifications specified in
clause (3) above;
(5) commercial paper having a rating at the time of
acquisition of at least P-1 from Moodys or at
least A-1 from S&P and in each case maturing
within twelve months after the date of acquisition;
(6) corporate debt obligations maturing within twelve
months after the date of acquisition thereof, rated at the time
of acquisition at least Aaa or P-1 by
Moodys or AAA or A-1 by S&P;
(7) auction-rate Preferred Stocks of any corporation
maturing not later than 45 days after the date of
acquisition thereof, rated at the time of acquisition at least
Aaa by Moodys or AAA by S&P;
(8) securities issued by any state, commonwealth or
territory of the United States, or by any political subdivision
or taxing authority thereof, maturing not later than six months
after the date of acquisition thereof, rated at the time of
acquisition at least A by Moodys or
S&P; and
(9) money market or mutual funds at least 90% of the assets
of which constitute Cash Equivalents of the kinds described in
clauses (1) through (8) of this definition.
CCH I means CCH I, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, and any successor Person
thereto.
CCH II means CCH II, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, and any successor Person
thereto.
CCH II Indentures means,
collectively, the indenture entered into by CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation, with respect
to their 10.25% Senior Notes due 2010 and any indentures,
note purchase agreements or similar documents entered into by
CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. for the purpose of
incurring Indebtedness in exchange for, or the proceeds for
which are used to refinance, any of the Indebtedness described
above, in each case, together with all instruments and other
agreements entered into by CCH II and CCH II Capital
Corp. in connection therewith, as any of the foregoing may be
refinanced, replaced, amended, supplemented or otherwise
modified from time to time.
CCI means Charter Communications,
Inc., a Delaware corporation, and any successor Person thereto.
CCI Indentures means, collectively,
the indentures entered into by CCI with respect to its
4.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2006, its
5.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2009, and any
indentures, note purchase agreements or similar documents
entered into by CCI after the Issue Date for the purpose of
incurring Indebtedness in exchange for, or the proceeds of which
are used to refinance, any of the Indebtedness described above,
in each case, together with all instruments and other agreements
entered into by CCI in connection therewith, as any of the
foregoing may be refinanced, replaced, amended, supplemented or
otherwise modified from time to time.
CCO Holdings means CCO Holdings, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company, and any successor Person
thereto.
197
Change of Control means the occurrence
of any of the following:
(1) the sale, transfer, conveyance or other disposition
(other than by way of merger or consolidation), in one or a
series of related transactions, of all or substantially all of
the assets of CCO Holdings and its Subsidiaries, taken as a
whole, or of a Parent and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, to
any person (as such term is used in
Section 13(d)(3) of the Exchange Act) other than
Paul G. Allen or a Related Party;
(2) the adoption of a plan relating to the liquidation or
dissolution of CCO Holdings or a Parent (except the liquidation
of any Parent into any other Parent);
(3) the consummation of any transaction, including, without
limitation, any merger or consolidation, the result of which is
that any person (as defined above) other than Paul
G. Allen and Related Parties becomes the Beneficial Owner,
directly or indirectly, of more than 35% of the Voting Stock of
CCO Holdings or a Parent, measured by voting power rather than
the number of shares, unless Paul G. Allen or a Related Party
Beneficially Owns, directly or indirectly, a greater percentage
of Voting Stock of CCO Holdings or such Parent, as the case may
be, measured by voting power rather than the number of shares,
than such person;
(4) after the Issue Date, the first day on which a majority
of the members of the Board of Directors of CCO Holdings or
CCI or the board of directors, if any, of any other Parent are
not Continuing Directors;
(5) CCO Holdings or a Parent consolidates with, or merges
with or into, any Person, or any Person consolidates with, or
merges with or into, CCO Holdings or a Parent, in any such event
pursuant to a transaction in which any of the outstanding Voting
Stock of CCO Holdings or such Parent is converted into or
exchanged for cash, securities or other property, other than any
such transaction where the Voting Stock of CCO Holdings or such
Parent outstanding immediately prior to such transaction is
converted into or exchanged for Voting Stock (other than
Disqualified Stock) of the surviving or transferee Person
constituting a majority of the outstanding shares of such Voting
Stock of such surviving or transferee Person immediately after
giving effect to such issuance; or
(6) (i) Charter Communications Holdings Company, LLC
shall cease to own beneficially, directly or indirectly, 100% of
the Capital Stock of Charter Holdings or (ii) Charter
Holdings shall cease to own beneficially, directly or
indirectly, 100% of the Capital Stock of CCO Holdings.
Charter Holdings means Charter
Communications Holdings, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company, and any successor Person thereto.
Charter Holdings Indentures means,
collectively (a) the indentures entered into by Charter
Holdings and Charter Communications Holdings Capital Corporation
in connection with the issuance of each 8.250% Senior Notes
Due 2007 dated March 1999, 8.625% Senior Notes Due 2009
dated March 1999, 9.920% Senior Discount Notes Due 2011
dated March 1999, 10.000% Senior Notes Due 2009 dated
January 2000, 10.250% Senior Notes Due 2010 dated January
2000, 11.750% Senior Discount Notes Due 2010 dated January
2000, 10.750% Senior Notes Due 2009 dated January 2001,
11.125% Senior Notes Due 2011 dated January 2001,
13.500% Senior Discount Notes Due 2011 dated January 2001,
9.625% Senior Notes Due 2009 dated May 2001,
10.000% Senior Notes Due 2011 dated May 2001,
11.750% Senior Discount Notes Due 2011 dated May 2001,
9.625% Senior Notes Due 2009 dated January 2002,
10.000% Senior Notes Due 2011 dated January 2002, and
12.125% Senior Discount Notes Due 2012 dated January 2002,
and (b) any indentures, note purchase agreements or similar
documents entered into by Charter Holdings and/or Charter
Communications Holdings Capital Corporation after the Issue Date
for the purpose of incurring Indebtedness in exchange for, or
proceeds of which are used to refinance, any of the Indebtedness
described in the foregoing clause (a), in each case,
together with all instruments and other agreements entered into
by Charter Holdings or Charter Communications Holdings Capital
Corporation in connection therewith, as the same may be
refinanced, replaced, amended, supplemented or otherwise
modified from time to time.
198
Charter Refinancing Indebtedness means
any Indebtedness of a Charter Refinancing Subsidiary issued in
exchange for, or the net proceeds of which are used within
90 days after the date of issuance thereof to extend,
refinance, renew, replace, defease, purchase, acquire or refund
(including successive extensions, refinancings, renewals,
replacements, defeasances, purchases, acquisitions or refunds),
Indebtedness initially incurred under any one or more of the
Charter Holdings Indentures, the CCI Indentures, the CCH II
Indentures or the Indenture; provided that:
(1) the principal amount (or accreted value, if applicable)
of such Charter Refinancing Indebtedness does not exceed the
principal amount of (or accreted value, if applicable) plus
accrued interest and premium, if any, on the Indebtedness so
extended, refinanced, renewed, replaced, defeased, purchased,
acquired or refunded (plus the amount of reasonable fees,
commissions and expenses incurred in connection
therewith); and
(2) such Charter Refinancing Indebtedness has a final
maturity date later than the final maturity date of, and has a
Weighted Average Life to Maturity equal to or greater than the
Weighted Average Life to Maturity of, the Indebtedness being
extended, refinanced, renewed, replaced, defeased or refunded.
Charter Refinancing Subsidiary means
CCH I, CCH II or any other directly or indirectly
wholly owned Subsidiary (and any related corporate co-obligor if
such Subsidiary is a limited liability company or other
association not taxed as a corporation) of CCI or Charter
Communications Holding Company, LLC, which is or becomes a
Parent.
Consolidated EBITDA means with respect
to any Person, for any period, the net income of such Person and
its Restricted Subsidiaries for such period plus, to the extent
such amount was deducted in calculating such net income:
(1) Consolidated Interest Expense;
(2) income taxes;
(3) depreciation expense;
(4) amortization expense;
(5) all other non-cash items, extraordinary items,
nonrecurring and unusual items and the cumulative effects of
changes in accounting principles reducing such net income, less
all non-cash items, extraordinary items, nonrecurring and
unusual items and cumulative effects of changes in accounting
principles increasing such net income, all as determined on a
consolidated basis for such Person and its Restricted
Subsidiaries in conformity with GAAP;
(6) amounts actually paid during such period pursuant to a
deferred compensation plan; and
(7) for purposes of the covenant described above under the
caption Incurrence of Indebtedness and
Issuance of Preferred Stock, relating to permitted debt
(as defined therein), only, Management Fees;
provided that Consolidated EBITDA shall not include:
(x) the net income (or net loss) of any Person that is not
a Restricted Subsidiary (Other Person), except
|
|
|
(i) with respect to net income, to the extent of the amount
of dividends or other distributions actually paid to such Person
or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries by such Other Person
during such period; and |
|
|
(ii) with respect to net losses, to the extent of the
amount of investments made by such Person or any Restricted
Subsidiary of such Person in such Other Person during such
period; |
(y) solely for the purposes of calculating the amount of
Restricted Payments that may be made pursuant to clause (3)
of the covenant described under the caption
Certain Covenants Restricted
Payments (and in such case, except to the extent
includable pursuant to clause (x) above), the net
income (or net loss) of any Other Person accrued prior to the
date it becomes a Restricted Subsidiary or
199
is merged into or consolidated with such Person or any
Restricted Subsidiaries or all or substantially all of the
property and assets of such Other Person are acquired by such
Person or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries; and
(z) the net income of any Restricted Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings to the extent that the declaration or payment of
dividends or similar distributions by such Restricted Subsidiary
of such net income is not at the time permitted by the operation
of the terms of such Restricted Subsidiarys charter or any
agreement, instrument, judgment, decree, order, statute, rule or
governmental regulation applicable to such Restricted Subsidiary
(other than any agreement or instrument evidencing Indebtedness
or Preferred Stock (i) outstanding on the Issue Date or
(ii) incurred or issued thereafter in compliance with the
covenant described under the caption Certain
Covenants Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of
Preferred Stock; provided that (a) the terms
of any such agreement or instrument restricting the declaration
and payment of dividends or similar distributions apply only in
the event of a default with respect to a financial covenant or a
covenant relating to payment, beyond any applicable period of
grace, contained in such agreement or instrument, (b) such
terms are determined by such Person to be customary in
comparable financings and (c) such restrictions are
determined by CCO Holdings not to materially affect the
Issuers ability to make principal or interest payments on
the applicable Notes when due).
Consolidated Indebtedness means, with
respect to any Person as of any date of determination, the sum,
without duplication, of:
(1) the total amount of outstanding Indebtedness of such
Person and its Restricted Subsidiaries, plus
(2) the total amount of Indebtedness of any other Person
that has been Guaranteed by the referent Person or one or more
of its Restricted Subsidiaries, plus
(3) the aggregate liquidation value of all Disqualified
Stock of such Person and all Preferred Stock of Restricted
Subsidiaries of such Person, in each case, determined on a
consolidated basis in accordance with GAAP.
Consolidated Interest Expense means,
with respect to any Person for any period, without duplication,
the sum of:
(1) the consolidated interest expense of such Person and
its Restricted Subsidiaries for such period, whether paid or
accrued (including, without limitation, amortization or original
issue discount, non-cash interest payments, the interest
component of any deferred payment obligations, the interest
component of all payments associated with Capital Lease
Obligations, commissions, discounts and other fees and charges
incurred in respect of letter of credit or bankers
acceptance financings, and net payments (if any) pursuant to
Hedging Obligations); and
(2) the consolidated interest expense of such Person and
its Restricted Subsidiaries that was capitalized during such
period; and
(3) any interest expense on Indebtedness of another Person
that is guaranteed by such Person or one of its Restricted
Subsidiaries or secured by a Lien on assets of such Person or
one of its Restricted Subsidiaries (whether or not such
Guarantee or Lien is called upon);
excluding, however, any amount of such interest of any
Restricted Subsidiary of the referent Person if the net income
of such Restricted Subsidiary is excluded in the calculation of
Consolidated EBITDA pursuant to clause (z) of the
definition thereof (but only in the same proportion as the net
income of such Restricted Subsidiary is excluded from the
calculation of Consolidated EBITDA pursuant to
clause (z) of the definition thereof), in each case,
on a consolidated basis and in accordance with GAAP.
200
Continuing Directors means, as of any
date of determination, any member of the Board of Directors of
CCO Holdings or CCI or the board of directors of any other
Parent who:
(1) was a member of the Board of Directors of CCO Holdings
or CCI, or as applicable, of the board of directors of such
other Parent on the Issue Date; or
(2) was nominated for election or elected to the Board of
Directors of CCO Holdings or CCI, or as applicable, of the board
of directors of such other Parent, with the approval of a
majority of the Continuing Directors who were members of such
Board of Directors of CCO Holdings or CCI, or as applicable, of
the board of directors of such other Parent at the time of such
nomination or election or whose election or appointment was
previously so approved.
Credit Facilities means, with respect
to CCO Holdings and/or its Restricted Subsidiaries, one or more
debt facilities or commercial paper facilities, in each case
with banks or other lenders (other than a Parent of the Issuers)
providing for revolving credit loans, term loans, receivables
financing (including through the sale of receivables to such
lenders or to special purpose entities formed to borrow from
such lenders against such receivables) or letters of credit, in
each case, as amended, restated, modified, renewed, refunded,
replaced or refinanced in whole or in part from time to time.
Default means any event that is, or
with the passage of time or the giving of notice or both would
be, an Event of Default.
Disposition means, with respect to any
Person, any merger, consolidation or other business combination
involving such Person (whether or not such Person is the
Surviving Person) or the sale, assignment, transfer, lease or
conveyance, or other disposition of all or substantially all of
such Persons assets or Capital Stock.
Disqualified Stock means any Capital
Stock that, by its terms (or by the terms of any security into
which it is convertible, or for which it is exchangeable, in
each case at the option of the holder thereof) or upon the
happening of any event, matures or is mandatorily redeemable,
pursuant to a sinking fund obligation or otherwise, or
redeemable at the option of the holder thereof, in whole or in
part, on or prior to the date that is 91 days after the
date on which the Notes mature. Notwithstanding the preceding
sentence, any Capital Stock that would constitute Disqualified
Stock solely because the holders thereof have the right to
require CCO Holdings to repurchase such Capital Stock upon the
occurrence of a change of control or an asset sale shall not
constitute Disqualified Stock if the terms of such Capital Stock
provide that CCO Holdings may not repurchase or redeem any such
Capital Stock pursuant to such provisions unless such repurchase
or redemption complies with the covenant described above under
the caption Certain Covenants
Restricted Payments.
Equity Interests means Capital Stock
and all warrants, options or other rights to acquire Capital
Stock (but excluding any debt security that is convertible into,
or exchangeable for, Capital Stock).
Equity Offering means any private or
underwritten public offering of Qualified Capital Stock of CCO
Holdings or a Parent of which the gross proceeds to CCO Holdings
or received by CCO Holdings as a capital contribution from such
Parent (directly or indirectly), as the case may be, are at
least $25 million.
Existing Indebtedness means
Indebtedness of CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries in
existence on the Issue Date, until such amounts are repaid.
GAAP means generally accepted
accounting principles set forth in the opinions and
pronouncements of the Accounting Principles Board of the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and
statements and pronouncements of the Financial Accounting
Standards Board or in such other statements by such other entity
as have been approved by a significant segment of the accounting
profession, which are in effect on the Issue Date.
Guarantee or guarantee
means a guarantee other than by endorsement of negotiable
instruments for collection in the ordinary course of business,
direct or indirect, in any manner including, without limitation,
by way of a pledge of assets or through letters of credit or
reimbursement agreements in respect
201
thereof, of all or any part of any Indebtedness, measured as the
lesser of the aggregate outstanding amount of the Indebtedness
so guaranteed and the face amount of the guarantee.
Hedging Obligations means, with
respect to any Person, the obligations of such Person under:
(1) interest rate swap agreements, interest rate cap
agreements and interest rate collar agreements;
(2) interest rate option agreements, foreign currency
exchange agreements, foreign currency swap agreements; and
(3) other agreements or arrangements designed to protect
such Person against fluctuations in interest and currency
exchange rates.
Helicon Preferred Stock means the
preferred limited liability company interest of Charter-Helicon
LLC with an aggregate liquidation value of $25 million.
Indebtedness means, with respect to
any specified Person, any indebtedness of such Person, whether
or not contingent:
(1) in respect of borrowed money;
(2) evidenced by bonds, notes, debentures or similar
instruments or letters of credit (or reimbursement agreements in
respect thereof);
(3) in respect of bankers acceptances;
(4) representing Capital Lease Obligations;
(5) in respect of the balance deferred and unpaid of the
purchase price of any property, except any such balance that
constitutes an accrued expense or trade payable; or
(6) representing the notional amount of any Hedging
Obligations,
if and to the extent any of the preceding items (other than
letters of credit and Hedging Obligations) would appear as a
liability upon a balance sheet of the specified Person prepared
in accordance with GAAP. In addition, the term
Indebtedness includes all Indebtedness of others
secured by a Lien on any asset of the specified Person (whether
or not such Indebtedness is assumed by the specified Person)
and, to the extent not otherwise included, the guarantee by such
Person of any indebtedness of any other Person.
The amount of any Indebtedness outstanding as of any date shall
be:
(1) the accreted value thereof, in the case of any
Indebtedness issued with original issue discount; and
(2) the principal amount thereof, together with any
interest thereon that is more than 30 days past due, in the
case of any other Indebtedness.
Investment Grade Rating means a rating
equal to or higher than Baa3 (or the equivalent) by Moodys
and BBB- (or the equivalent) by S&P.
Investments means, with respect to any
Person, all investments by such Person in other Persons,
including Affiliates, in the forms of direct or indirect loans
(including guarantees of Indebtedness or other obligations),
advances or capital contributions (excluding commission, travel
and similar advances to officers and employees made in the
ordinary course of business) and purchases or other acquisitions
for consideration of Indebtedness, Equity Interests or other
securities, together with all items that are or would be
classified as investments on a balance sheet prepared in
accordance with GAAP.
Issue Date means August 17, 2005.
202
Leverage Ratio means, as to CCO
Holdings, as of any date, the ratio of:
(1) the Consolidated Indebtedness of CCO Holdings on such
date to
(2) the aggregate amount of Consolidated EBITDA for CCO
Holdings for the most recently ended fiscal quarter for which
internal financial statements are available multiplied by four
(the Reference Period).
In addition to the foregoing, for purposes of this definition,
Consolidated EBITDA shall be calculated on a pro
forma basis after giving effect to
(1) the issuance of the Notes;
(2) the incurrence of the Indebtedness or the issuance of
the Disqualified Stock or other Preferred Stock (and the
application of the proceeds therefrom) giving rise to the need
to make such calculation and any incurrence or issuance (and the
application of the proceeds therefrom) or repayment of other
Indebtedness, Disqualified Stock or Preferred Stock, other than
the incurrence or repayment of Indebtedness for ordinary working
capital purposes, at any time subsequent to the beginning of the
Reference Period and on or prior to the date of determination,
as if such incurrence (and the application of the proceeds
thereof), or the repayment, as the case may be, occurred on the
first day of the Reference Period;
(3) any Dispositions or Asset Acquisitions (including,
without limitation, any Asset Acquisition giving rise to the
need to make such calculation as a result of such Person or one
of its Restricted Subsidiaries (including any person that
becomes a Restricted Subsidiary as a result of such Asset
Acquisition) incurring, assuming or otherwise becoming liable
for or issuing Indebtedness, Disqualified Stock or Preferred
Stock) made on or subsequent to the first day of the Reference
Period and on or prior to the date of determination, as if such
Disposition or Asset Acquisition (including the incurrence,
assumption or liability for any such Indebtedness, Disqualified
Stock or Preferred Stock and also including any Consolidated
EBITDA associated with such Asset Acquisition, including any
cost savings adjustments in compliance with Regulation S-X
promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission) had
occurred on the first day of the Reference Period.
Lien means, with respect to any asset,
any mortgage, lien, pledge, charge, security interest or
encumbrance of any kind in respect of such asset, whether or not
filed, recorded or otherwise perfected under applicable law,
including any conditional sale or other title retention
agreement, any lease in the nature thereof, any option or other
agreement to sell or give a security interest in and any filing
of or agreement to give any financing statement under the
Uniform Commercial Code (or equivalent statutes) of any
jurisdiction.
Management Fees means the fees payable
to CCI pursuant to the management and mutual services agreements
between any Parent of CCO Holdings and/or Charter Communications
Operating, LLC and between any Parent of CCO Holdings and other
Restricted Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings and pursuant to the
limited liability company agreements of certain Restricted
Subsidiaries as such management, mutual services or limited
liability company agreements exist on the Issue Date (or, if
later, on the date any new Restricted Subsidiary is acquired or
created), including any amendment or replacement thereof,
provided, that any such new agreements or amendments or
replacements of existing agreements is not more disadvantageous
to the holders of the Notes in any material respect than such
management agreements existing on the Issue Date and further
provided, that such new, amended or replacement management
agreements do not provide for percentage fees, taken together
with fees under existing agreements, any higher than 3.5% of
CCIs consolidated total revenues for the applicable
payment period.
Moodys means Moodys
Investors Service, Inc. or any successor to the rating agency
business thereof.
Net Proceeds means the aggregate cash
proceeds received by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries in respect of any Asset Sale (including, without
limitation, any cash received upon the sale or other disposition
of any non-cash consideration received in any Asset Sale), net
of the direct costs relating
203
to such Asset Sale, including, without limitation, legal,
accounting and investment banking fees, and sales commissions,
and any relocation expenses incurred as a result thereof or
taxes paid or payable as a result thereof (including amounts
distributable in respect of owners, partners or
members tax liabilities resulting from such sale), in each
case after taking into account any available tax credits or
deductions and any tax sharing arrangements and amounts required
to be applied to the repayment of Indebtedness.
Non-Recourse Debt means Indebtedness:
(1) as to which neither CCO Holdings nor any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries
|
|
|
(a) provides credit support of any kind (including any
undertaking, agreement or instrument that would constitute
Indebtedness); |
|
|
(b) is directly or indirectly liable as a guarantor or
otherwise; or |
|
|
(c) constitutes the lender; |
(2) no default with respect to which (including any rights
that the holders thereof may have to take enforcement action
against an Unrestricted Subsidiary) would permit upon notice,
lapse of time or both any holder of any other Indebtedness
(other than the Notes) of CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries to declare a default on such other Indebtedness or
cause the payment thereof to be accelerated or payable prior to
its stated maturity; and
(3) as to which the lenders have been notified in writing
that they will not have any recourse to the stock or assets of
CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries.
Parent means CCH II, CCH I,
Charter Holdings, Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC,
CCI and/or any direct or indirect Subsidiary of the foregoing
100% of the Capital Stock of which is owned directly or
indirectly by one or more of the foregoing Persons, as
applicable, and that directly or indirectly beneficially owns
100% of the Capital Stock of CCO Holdings, and any successor
Person to any of the foregoing.
Permitted Investments means:
(1) any Investment by CCO Holdings in a Restricted
Subsidiary thereof, or any Investment by a Restricted Subsidiary
of CCO Holdings in CCO Holdings or in another Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings;
(2) any Investment in Cash Equivalents;
(3) any Investment by CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries in a Person, if as a result of such Investment:
|
|
|
(a) such Person becomes a Restricted Subsidiary of CCO
Holdings; or |
|
|
(b) such Person is merged, consolidated or amalgamated with
or into, or transfers or conveys substantially all of its assets
to, or is liquidated into, CCO Holdings or a Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings; |
(4) any Investment made as a result of the receipt of
non-cash consideration from an Asset Sale that was made pursuant
to and in compliance with the covenant described above under the
caption Repurchase at the Option of
Holders Asset Sales;
(5) any Investment made out of the net cash proceeds of the
issue and sale after November 10, 2003 (other than to a
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings) of Equity Interests (other than
Disqualified Stock) of CCO Holdings to the extent that such net
cash proceeds have not been applied to make a Restricted Payment
or to effect other transactions pursuant to the covenant
described under Certain Covenants
Restricted Payments;
(6) other Investments in any Person (other than any Parent)
having an aggregate fair market value when taken together with
all other Investments in any Person made by CCO Holdings and its
Restricted
204
Subsidiaries (without duplication) pursuant to this
clause (6) from and after the Issue Date, not to exceed
$750 million (initially measured on the date each such
Investment was made and without giving effect to subsequent
changes in value, but reducing the amount outstanding by the
aggregate amount of principal, interest, dividends,
distributions, repayments, proceeds or other value otherwise
returned or recovered in respect of any such Investment, but not
to exceed the initial amount of such Investment) at any one time
outstanding; and
(7) Investments in customers and suppliers in the ordinary
course of business which either
|
|
|
(A) generate accounts receivable, or |
|
|
(B) are accepted in settlement of bona fide disputes. |
Permitted Liens means:
(1) Liens on the assets of CCO Holdings securing
Indebtedness and other obligations under any of the Credit
Facilities;
(2) Liens in favor of CCO Holdings;
(3) Liens on property of a Person existing at the time such
Person is merged with or into or consolidated with CCO Holdings;
provided that such Liens were in existence prior to the
contemplation of such merger or consolidation and do not extend
to any assets other than those of the Person merged into or
consolidated with CCO Holdings;
(4) Liens on property existing at the time of acquisition
thereof by CCO Holdings; provided that such Liens were in
existence prior to the contemplation of such acquisition;
(5) Liens to secure the performance of statutory
obligations, surety or appeal bonds, performance bonds or other
obligations of a like nature incurred in the ordinary course of
business;
(6) purchase money mortgages or other purchase money Liens
(including, without limitation, any Capitalized Lease
Obligations) incurred by CCO Holdings upon any fixed or capital
assets acquired after the Issue Date or purchase money mortgages
(including, without limitation, Capital Lease Obligations) on
any such assets, whether or not assumed, existing at the time of
acquisition of such assets, whether or not assumed, so long as
|
|
|
(a) such mortgage or lien does not extend to or cover any
of the assets of CCO Holdings, except the asset so developed,
constructed, or acquired, and directly related assets such as
enhancements and modifications thereto, substitutions,
replacements, proceeds (including insurance proceeds), products,
rents and profits thereof, and |
|
|
(b) such mortgage or lien secures the obligation to pay all
or a portion of the purchase price of such asset, interest
thereon and other charges, costs and expenses (including,
without limitation, the cost of design, development,
construction, acquisition, transportation, installation,
improvement, and migration) and is incurred in connection
therewith (or the obligation under such Capitalized Lease
Obligation) only; |
(7) Liens existing on the Issue Date (other than in
connection with the Credit Facilities) and replacement Liens
therefor that do not encumber additional property;
(8) Liens for taxes, assessments or governmental charges or
claims that are not yet delinquent or that are being contested
in good faith by appropriate proceedings promptly instituted and
diligently concluded; provided that any reserve or other
appropriate provision as shall be required in conformity with
GAAP shall have been made therefor;
(9) statutory and common law Liens of landlords and
carriers, warehousemen, mechanics, suppliers, materialmen,
repairmen or other similar Liens arising in the ordinary course
of business and with respect to amounts not yet delinquent or
being contested in good faith by appropriate legal proceedings
promptly
205
instituted and diligently conducted and for which a reserve or
other appropriate provision, if any, as shall be required in
conformity with GAAP shall have been made;
(10) Liens incurred or deposits made in the ordinary course
of business in connection with workers compensation,
unemployment insurance and other types of social security;
(11) Liens incurred or deposits made to secure the
performance of tenders, bids, leases, statutory or regulatory
obligation, bankers acceptance, surety and appeal bonds,
government contracts, performance and return-of-money bonds and
other obligations of a similar nature incurred in the ordinary
course of business (exclusive of obligations for the payment of
borrowed money);
(12) easements, rights-of-way, municipal and zoning
ordinances and similar charges, encumbrances, title defects or
other irregularities that do not materially interfere with the
ordinary course of business of CCO Holdings or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries;
(13) Liens of franchisors or other regulatory bodies
arising in the ordinary course of business;
(14) Liens arising from filing Uniform Commercial Code
financing statements regarding leases or other Uniform
Commercial Code financing statements for precautionary purposes
relating to arrangements not constituting Indebtedness;
(15) Liens arising from the rendering of a final judgment
or order against CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries that does not give rise to an Event of Default;
(16) Liens securing reimbursement obligations with respect
to letters of credit that encumber documents and other property
relating to such letters of credit and the products and proceeds
thereof;
(17) Liens encumbering customary initial deposits and
margin deposits, and other Liens that are within the general
parameters customary in the industry and incurred in the
ordinary course of business, in each case, securing Indebtedness
under Hedging Obligations and forward contracts, options, future
contracts, future options or similar agreements or arrangements
designed solely to protect CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted
Subsidiaries from fluctuations in interest rates, currencies or
the price of commodities;
(18) Liens consisting of any interest or title of licensor
in the property subject to a license;
(19) Liens on the Capital Stock of Unrestricted
Subsidiaries;
(20) Liens arising from sales or other transfers of
accounts receivable which are past due or otherwise doubtful of
collection in the ordinary course of business;
(21) Liens incurred in the ordinary course of business of
CCO Holdings and its Restricted Subsidiaries with respect to
obligations which in the aggregate do not exceed
$50 million at any one time outstanding;
(22) Liens in favor of the trustee arising under the
Indentures and similar provisions in favor of trustees or other
agents or representatives under indentures or other agreements
governing debt instruments entered into after the date hereof;
(23) Liens in favor of the trustee for its benefit and the
benefit of holders of the Notes, as their respective interests
appear; and
(24) Liens securing Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness, to
the extent that the Indebtedness being refinanced was secured or
was permitted to be secured by such Liens.
Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness
means any Indebtedness of CCO Holdings or any of
its Restricted Subsidiaries issued in exchange for, or the net
proceeds of which are used within 60 days after the date of
issuance thereof to extend, refinance, renew, replace, defease
or refund, other Indebtedness of CCO Holdings or any of its
Restricted Subsidiaries (other than intercompany Indebtedness);
provided that unless permitted otherwise by the
Indenture, no Indebtedness of any Restricted Subsidiary may be
issued in exchange for, nor may the net proceeds of Indebtedness
be used to extend, refinance, renew, replace,
206
defease or refund, Indebtedness of the direct or indirect parent
of such Restricted Subsidiary; provided further that:
(1) the principal amount (or accreted value, if applicable)
of such Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness does not exceed the
principal amount of (or accreted value, if applicable) plus
accrued interest and premium, if any, on the Indebtedness so
extended, refinanced, renewed, replaced, defeased or refunded
(plus the amount of reasonable expenses incurred in connection
therewith), except to the extent that any such excess principal
amount would be then permitted to be incurred by other
provisions of the covenant described above under the caption
Certain Covenants Incurrence of
Indebtedness and Issuance of Preferred Stock.
(2) such Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness has a final
maturity date later than the final maturity date of, and has a
Weighted Average Life to Maturity equal to or greater than the
Weighted Average Life to Maturity of, the Indebtedness being
extended, refinanced, renewed, replaced, defeased or
refunded; and
(3) if the Indebtedness being extended, refinanced,
renewed, replaced, defeased or refunded is subordinated in right
of payment to the Notes, such Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness
has a final maturity date later than the final maturity date of,
and is subordinated in right of payment to, the Notes on terms
at least as favorable to the holders of Notes as those contained
in the documentation governing the Indebtedness being extended,
refinanced, renewed, replaced, defeased or refunded.
Person means any individual,
corporation, partnership, joint venture, association, limited
liability company, joint stock company, trust, unincorporated
organization, government or agency or political subdivision
thereof or any other entity.
Preferred Stock, as applied to the
Capital Stock of any Person, means Capital Stock of any class or
classes (however designated) which, by its terms, is preferred
as to the payment of dividends, or as to the distribution of
assets upon any voluntary or involuntary liquidation or
dissolution of such Person, over shares of Capital Stock of any
other class of such Person.
Productive Assets means assets
(including assets of a referent Person owned directly or
indirectly through ownership of Capital Stock) of a kind used or
useful in the Cable Related Business.
Qualified Capital Stock means any
Capital Stock that is not Disqualified Stock.
Rating Agencies means Moodys and
S&P.
Related Party means: (1) the
spouse or an immediate family member, estate or heir of Paul G.
Allen; or (2) any trust, corporation, partnership or other
entity, the beneficiaries, stockholders, partners, owners or
Persons beneficially holding an 80% or more controlling interest
of which consist of Paul G. Allen and/or such other Persons
referred to in the immediately preceding clause (1).
Restricted Investment means an
Investment other than a Permitted Investment.
Restricted Subsidiary of a Person
means any Subsidiary of the referent Person that is not an
Unrestricted Subsidiary.
S&P means Standard &
Poors Ratings Service, a division of the McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc. or any successor to the rating agency business
thereof.
Significant Subsidiary means
(a) with respect to any Person, any Restricted Subsidiary
of such Person which would be considered a Significant
Subsidiary as defined in Rule 1-02(w) of
Regulation S-X under the Securities Act and (b) in
addition, with respect to CCO Holdings, Capital Corp.
Stated Maturity means, with respect to
any installment of interest or principal on any series of
Indebtedness, the date on which such payment of interest or
principal was scheduled to be paid in the documentation
governing such Indebtedness on the Issue Date, or, if none, the
original documentation governing such Indebtedness, and shall
not include any contingent obligations to repay, redeem or
repurchase any such interest or principal prior to the date
originally scheduled for the payment thereof.
207
Subsidiary means, with respect to any
Person:
(1) any corporation, association or other business entity
of which at least 50% of the total voting power of shares of
Capital Stock entitled (without regard to the occurrence of any
contingency) to vote in the election of directors, managers or
trustees thereof is at the time owned or controlled, directly or
indirectly, by such Person or one or more of the other
Subsidiaries of that Person (or a combination thereof) and, in
the case of any such entity of which 50% of the total voting
power of shares of Capital Stock is so owned or controlled by
such Person or one or more of the other Subsidiaries of such
Person, such Person and its Subsidiaries also have the right to
control the management of such entity pursuant to contract or
otherwise; and
(2) any partnership
|
|
|
(a) the sole general partner or the managing general
partner of which is such Person or a Subsidiary of such
Person, or |
|
|
(b) the only general partners of which are such Person or
of one or more Subsidiaries of such Person (or any combination
thereof). |
Unrestricted Subsidiary means any
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings that is designated by the Board of
Directors of CCO Holdings or CCI as an Unrestricted Subsidiary
pursuant to a board resolution, but only to the extent that such
Subsidiary:
(1) has no Indebtedness other than Non-Recourse Debt;
(2) is not party to any agreement, contract, arrangement or
understanding with CCO Holdings or any Restricted Subsidiary of
CCO Holdings unless the terms of any such agreement, contract,
arrangement or understanding are no less favorable to CCO
Holdings or any Restricted Subsidiary of CCO Holdings than those
that might be obtained at the time from Persons who are not
Affiliates of CCO Holdings unless such terms constitute
Investments permitted by the covenant described above under the
caption Certain Covenants
Investments, Permitted Investments, Asset Sales permitted
under the covenant described above under the caption
Repurchase at the Option of the
Holders Asset Sales or sale-leaseback
transactions permitted by the covenant described above under the
caption Certain Covenants Sale and Leaseback
Transactions;
(3) is a Person with respect to which neither CCO Holdings
nor any of its Restricted Subsidiaries has any direct or
indirect obligation
|
|
|
(a) to subscribe for additional Equity Interests or |
|
|
(b) to maintain or preserve such Persons financial
condition or to cause such Person to achieve any specified
levels of operating results; |
(4) has not guaranteed or otherwise directly or indirectly
provided credit support for any Indebtedness of
CCO Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries;
(5) has at least one director on its board of directors
that is not a director or executive officer of CCO Holdings or
any of its Restricted Subsidiaries or has at least one executive
officer that is not a director or executive officer of CCO
Holdings or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries; and
(6) does not own any Capital Stock of any Restricted
Subsidiary of CCO Holdings.
Any designation of a Subsidiary of CCO Holdings as an
Unrestricted Subsidiary shall be evidenced to the trustee by
filing with the trustee a certified copy of the board resolution
giving effect to such designation and an officers
certificate certifying that such designation complied with the
preceding conditions and was permitted by the covenant described
above under the caption Certain
Covenants Investments. If, at any time, any
Unrestricted Subsidiary would fail to meet the preceding
requirements as an Unrestricted Subsidiary, it shall thereafter
cease to be an Unrestricted Subsidiary for purposes of the
Indenture and any Indebtedness of such Subsidiary shall be
deemed to be incurred by a Restricted Subsidiary of
CCO Holdings as of such date and, if such Indebtedness is
not permitted to be incurred as
208
of such date under the covenant described under the caption
Certain Covenants Incurrence of
Indebtedness and Issuance of Preferred Stock, CCO Holdings
shall be in default of such covenant. The Board of Directors of
CCO Holdings or CCI may at any time designate any Unrestricted
Subsidiary to be a Restricted Subsidiary; provided that
such designation shall be deemed to be an incurrence of
Indebtedness by a Restricted Subsidiary of any outstanding
Indebtedness of such Unrestricted Subsidiary and such
designation shall only be permitted if:
(1) such Indebtedness is permitted under the covenant
described under the caption Certain
Covenants Incurrence of Indebtedness and Issuance of
Preferred Stock, calculated on a pro forma basis as if
such designation had occurred at the beginning of the
four-quarter reference period; and
(2) no Default or Event of Default would be in existence
immediately following such designation.
Voting Stock of any Person as of any
date means the Capital Stock of such Person that is at the time
entitled to vote in the election of the board of directors or
comparable governing body of such Person.
Weighted Average Life to Maturity
means, when applied to any Indebtedness at any date, the
number of years obtained by dividing:
(1) the sum of the products obtained by multiplying
|
|
|
(a) the amount of each then remaining installment, sinking
fund, serial maturity or other required payments of principal,
including payment at final maturity, in respect thereof, by |
|
|
(b) the number of years (calculated to the nearest
one-twelfth) that will elapse between such date and the making
of such payment; by |
(2) the then outstanding principal amount of such
Indebtedness.
Wholly Owned Restricted Subsidiary of
any Person means a Restricted Subsidiary of such Person all of
the outstanding common equity interests or other ownership
interests of which (other than directors qualifying
shares) shall at the time be owned by such Person and/or by one
or more Wholly Owned Restricted Subsidiaries of such Person.
209
IMPORTANT UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS
General
The following is a general discussion of the material
U.S. federal income tax consequences of the purchase,
ownership and disposition of the new notes by a person who
acquires new notes pursuant to this exchange offer. Except where
noted, the summary deals only with the new notes held as capital
assets within the meaning of section 1221 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and
does not deal with special situations, such as those of
broker-dealers, tax exempt organizations, individual retirement
accounts and other tax deferred accounts, financial
institutions, insurance companies, holders whose functional
currency is not the U.S. dollar, or persons holding new
notes as part of a hedging or conversion transaction or a
straddle, or a constructive sale. Further, the discussion below
is based upon the provisions of the Code and Treasury
regulations, rulings and judicial decisions thereunder as of the
date hereof, and such authorities may be repealed, revoked, or
modified, possibly with retroactive effect, so as to result in
United States federal income tax consequences different from
those discussed below. In addition, except as otherwise
indicated, the following does not consider the effect of any
applicable foreign, state, local or other tax laws or estate or
gift tax considerations. Furthermore, this discussion does not
consider the tax treatment of holders of the new notes who are
partnerships or other pass-through entities for
U.S. federal income tax purposes, or who are former
citizens or long-term residents of the United States.
This summary addresses tax consequences relevant to a holder of
the new notes that is either a U.S. Holder or a
Non-U.S. Holder. As used herein, a
U.S. Holder is a beneficial owner of a new note
who is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, either an
individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States, a
corporation or other entity taxable as a corporation for
U.S. federal income tax purposes created in, or organized
in or under the laws of, the United States or any political
subdivision thereof, an estate the income of which is subject to
U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a
trust the administration of which is subject to the primary
supervision of a U.S. court and which has one or more
United States persons who have the authority to control all
substantial decisions of the trust or that was in existence on,
August 20, 1996, was treated as a United States person
under the Code on that date and has made a valid election to be
treated as a United States person under the Code. A
Non-U.S. Holder is a beneficial owner of a new
note that is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, not a
U.S. Holder or a partnership or other pass-through entity
for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
PROSPECTIVE INVESTORS ARE ADVISED TO CONSULT THEIR OWN TAX
ADVISORS WITH REGARD TO THE APPLICATION OF THE TAX
CONSIDERATIONS DISCUSSED BELOW TO THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATIONS,
AS WELL AS THE APPLICATION OF ANY STATE, LOCAL, FOREIGN, ESTATE,
GIFT OR OTHER TAX LAWS, OR SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS THEREOF.
United States Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders
Pursuant to the exchange offer holders are entitled to exchange
the original notes for new notes that will be substantially
identical in all material respects to the original notes, except
that the new notes will be registered and therefore will not be
subject to transfer restrictions. Accordingly,
|
|
|
(1) no gain or loss will be realized by a U.S. Holder
upon receipt of a new note, |
|
|
(2) the holding period of the new note will include the
holding period of the original note exchanged therefor, |
|
|
(3) the adjusted tax basis of the new notes will be the
same as the adjusted tax basis of the original notes exchanged
at the time of the exchange, and |
210
|
|
|
(4) the U.S. Holder will continue to take into account
income in respect of the new note in the same manner as before
the exchange. |
|
|
|
Payments of Interest on the New Notes |
Interest on the new notes will be taxable to a U.S. Holder
as ordinary income at the time such interest is accrued or
actually or constructively received in accordance with the
U.S. Holders regular method of accounting for
U.S. federal income tax purposes. With respect to the
payment of interest due on November 15, 2005 only, the
U.S. Holders of the original notes will have paid, on the
acquisition date, for the portion of such interest payment that
accrued prior to the acquisition date. Consequently, only the
amount in excess of such prepaid interest will be taxable to a
U.S. Holder of the new notes received in this exchange as
ordinary income. The remainder of the amount received on
November 15, 2005 will be treated as a non-taxable return
of tax basis.
|
|
|
Sale, Redemption, Retirement or Other Taxable Disposition
of the New Notes |
Unless a non-recognition event applies, upon the sale,
redemption, retirement or other taxable disposition of a new
note, the U.S. Holder will generally recognize gain or loss
in an amount equal to the difference between (1) the amount
of cash and the fair market value of other property received in
exchange therefor and (2) the holders adjusted tax
basis in such new note. Amounts attributable to accrued but
unpaid interest on the new notes will be treated as ordinary
interest income as described above. A U.S. Holders
adjusted tax basis in a new note will generally equal the
purchase price paid by such holder for the new note increased by
the amount of any market discount, if any, that the
U.S. Holder elected to include in income and decreased by
the amount of any amortizable bond premium applied to reduce
interest on the new notes.
Except as discussed below with respect to market discount, gain
or loss realized on the sale, redemption, retirement or other
taxable disposition of a new note will be capital gain or loss
and will be long term capital gain or loss at the time of sale,
redemption, retirement or other taxable disposition, if the new
note has been held for more than one year. The deductibility of
capital losses is subject to certain limitations.
The resale of new notes may be affected by the impact on a
purchaser of the market discount provisions of the Code. For
this purpose, the market discount on a new note generally will
be equal to the amount, if any, by which the stated redemption
price at maturity of the new note immediately after its
acquisition, other than at original issue, exceeds the
U.S. Holders adjusted tax basis in the new note.
Subject to a de minimis exception, these provisions generally
require a U.S. Holder who acquires a new note at a market
discount to treat as ordinary income any gain recognized on the
disposition of such new note to the extent of the accrued market
discount on such new note at the time of disposition, unless the
U.S. Holder elects to include accrued market discount in
income currently. In general, market discount will be treated as
accruing on a straight line basis over the remaining term of the
new note at the time of acquisition, or at the election of the
U.S. Holder, under a constant yield method. If an election
is made, the holders basis in the new notes will be
increased to reflect the amount of income recognized and the
rules described below regarding deferral of interest deductions
will not apply. The election to include market discount in
income currently, once made, applies to all market discount
obligations acquired on or after the first taxable year to which
the election applies and may not be revoked without the consent
of the Internal Revenue Service.
A U.S. Holder who acquires a new note at a market discount
and who does not elect to include accrued market discount in
income currently may be required to defer the deduction of a
portion of the interest on any indebtedness incurred or
maintained to purchase or carry such new note.
211
A U.S. Holder that purchased an original note for an amount
in excess of the amount payable on maturity (which is in this
case, the face amount of the original note) will be considered
to have purchased such original note and received the new note
with amortizable bond premium. A U.S. Holder
generally may elect to amortize the premium over the remaining
term of the new note on a constant yield method. However,
because the new notes could be redeemed for an amount in excess
of their principal amount, the amortization of a portion of
potential bond premium (equal to the excess of the amount
payable on the earlier call date over the amount payable at
maturity) could be deferred until later in the term of the new
note. The amount amortized in any year will be treated as a
reduction of the U.S. Holders interest income from
the new note. Amortizable bond premium on a new note held by a
U.S. Holder that does not elect annual amortization will
decrease the gain or increase the loss otherwise recognized upon
disposition of the new note. The election to amortize premium on
a constant yield method, once made, applies to all debt
obligations held or subsequently acquired by the electing
U.S. Holder on or after the first day of the first taxable
year to which the election applies and may not be revoked
without the consent of the Internal Revenue Service.
|
|
|
Information Reporting and Backup Withholding |
Backup withholding and information reporting requirements may
apply to certain payments of principal, premium, if any, and
interest on a new note and to certain payments of the proceeds
of the sale or redemption of a new note. We or our paying agent,
as the case may be, will be required to withhold from any
payment that is subject to backup withholding tax at a rate of
28 percent if a U.S. Holder fails to furnish his
U.S. taxpayer identification number (TIN),
certify that such number is correct, certify that such holder is
not subject to backup withholding or otherwise comply with the
applicable backup withholding rules. Unless extended by future
legislation, however, the reduction in the backup withholding
rate to 28 percent expires and the 31 percent backup
withholding rate will be reinstated for payments made after
December 31, 2010. Exempt holders (including, among others,
all corporations) are not subject to these backup withholding
and information reporting requirements.
Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules from a
payment to a U.S. Holder of the new notes will be allowed
as a refund or a credit against such holders
U.S. federal income tax liability, provided that the
required information is furnished to the Internal Revenue
Service.
United States Federal Income Taxation of
Non-U.S. Holders
The exchange of original notes for the new notes pursuant to
this exchange offer will not constitute a taxable event for a
Non-U.S. Holder.
Subject to the discussion of information reporting and backup
withholding below, and assuming that the DTCs book-entry
procedures set forth in the section entitled Description
of the Notes Book-Entry, Delivery and Form are
observed upon issuance and throughout the term of the Notes, the
payment to a Non-U.S. Holder of interest on a new note will
not be subject to United States federal withholding tax pursuant
to the portfolio interest exception, provided that:
|
|
|
(1) the interest is not effectively connected with the
conduct of a trade or business in the United States; |
|
|
(2) the Non-U.S. Holder (A) does not actually or
constructively own 10 percent or more of the combined
voting power of all classes of stock of CCO Holdings Capital
entitled to vote nor 10 percent or more of the capital or
profits interests of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC
and (B) is neither a controlled foreign corporation that is
related to us through stock ownership within the |
212
|
|
|
meaning of the Code, nor a bank that received the new notes on
an extension of credit in the ordinary course of its trade or
business; and |
|
|
(3) either (A) the beneficial owner of the new notes
certifies to us or our paying agent, under penalties of perjury,
that it is not a U.S. Holder and provides its name and
address on Internal Revenue Service Form W-8BEN (or a
suitable substitute form) or (B) a securities clearing
organization, bank or other financial institution that holds the
new notes on behalf of such Non-U.S. Holder in the ordinary
course of its trade or business (a financial
institution) certifies under penalties of perjury that
such an Internal Revenue Service Form W-8BEN or W-8IMY (or
suitable substitute form) has been received from the beneficial
owner by it or by a financial institution between it and the
beneficial owner and, in case of a non-qualified intermediary,
furnishes the payor with a copy thereof. |
If a Non-U.S. Holder cannot satisfy the requirements of the
portfolio interest exception described above, payments of
interest made to such Non-U.S. Holder will be subject to a
30 percent withholding tax, unless the beneficial owner of
the Note provides us or our paying agent, as the case may be,
with a properly executed (1) Internal Revenue Service
Form W-8BEN (or successor form) providing a correct TIN and
claiming an exemption from or reduction in the rate of
withholding under the benefit of a income tax treaty or
(2) Internal Revenue Service Form W-8ECI (or successor
form) providing a correct TIN and stating that interest paid on
the new note is not subject to withholding tax because it is
effectively connected with the beneficial owners conduct
of a trade or business in the United States.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a Non-U.S. Holder of a
new note is engaged in a trade or business in the United States
and interest on the new note is effectively connected with the
conduct of such trade or business, and, where an income tax
treaty applies, is attributable to a U.S. permanent
establishment or, in the case of an individual, a fixed base in
the United States, such Non-U.S. Holder generally will be
subject to U.S. federal income tax on such interest in the
same manner as if it were a U.S. Holder (that is, will be
taxable on a net basis at applicable graduated individual or
corporate rates). In addition, if such Non-U.S. Holder is a
foreign corporation, it may be subject to a branch profits tax
equal to 30 percent of its effectively connected earnings
and profits for that taxable year unless it qualifies for a
lower rate under an applicable income tax treaty.
With respect to the payment of interest due on November 15,
2005 only, the Non-U.S. Holders of the original notes will
have paid, on the acquisition date, for the portion of such
interest payment that accrued prior to the acquisition date.
Consequently, only the amount in excess of such prepaid interest
will be treated as interest and will be subject to
the rules described above with respect to the interest payments
on the new notes received in the exchange. The remainder of the
amount received on November 15, 2005 will be treated as a
nontaxable return of tax basis.
|
|
|
Sale, Redemption, Retirement or Other Taxable Disposition
of New Notes |
Generally, any gain realized on the sale, redemption, retirement
or other taxable disposition of a new note by a
Non-U.S. Holder will not be subject to U.S. federal
income tax, unless:
|
|
|
(1) such gain is effectively connected with the conduct by
such holder of a trade or business in the United States, and,
where an income tax treaty applies, the gain is attributable to
a permanent establishment maintained in the United States or, in
the case of an individual, a fixed base in the United
States, or |
|
|
(2) in the case of gains derived by an individual, such
individual is present in the United States for 183 days or
more in the taxable year of the disposition and certain other
conditions are met. |
If a Non-U.S. Holder of a new note is engaged in the
conduct of a trade or business in the United States, gain on the
taxable disposition of a new note that is effectively connected
with the conduct of such trade or business and, where an income
tax treaty applies, is attributable to a U.S. permanent
establishment or, in the case of an individual, a fixed base in
the United States, generally will be taxed on a net basis at
applicable graduated individual or corporate rates. Effectively
connected gain of a foreign
213
corporation may, under certain circumstances, be subject as well
to a branch profits tax at a rate of 30 percent or a lower
applicable income tax treaty rate.
If an individual Non-U.S. Holder is present in the United
States for 183 days or more in the taxable year of the
disposition of the Note and is nevertheless a
Non-U.S. Holder, such Non-U.S. Holder
generally will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at a
rate of 30 percent (or a lower applicable income tax treaty
rate) on the amount by which capital gains allocable to
U.S. sources (including gain, if such gain is allowable to
U.S. sources, from the sale, exchange, retirement or other
disposition of the Note) exceed capital losses which are
allocable to U.S. sources and recognized during the same
taxable year.
|
|
|
Information Reporting and Backup Withholding |
We must report annually to the Internal Revenue Service and to
each Non-U.S. Holder any interest, regardless of whether
withholding was required, and any tax withheld with respect to
the interest. Copies of these information returns may also be
made available under the provisions of a specific treaty or
agreement of the tax authorities of the country in which the
Non-U.S. Holder resides.
Certain Non-U.S. Holders may, under applicable
U.S. Treasury regulations, be presumed to be
U.S. persons. Interest paid to such holders generally will
be subject to information reporting and backup withholding at a
28 percent rate unless such holders provide to us or our
paying agent, as the case maybe, an Internal Revenue Service
Form W-8BEN (or satisfy certain certification documentary
evidence requirements for establishing that such holders are
non-United States persons under U.S. Treasury regulations)
or otherwise establish an exemption. Unless extended by future
legislation, however, the reduction in the backup withholding
rate to 28 percent expires and the 31 percent backup
withholding rate will be reinstated for payments made after
December 31, 2010. Backup withholding will not apply to
interest that was subject to the 30 percent withholding tax
(or at applicable income tax treaty rate) applicable to certain
Non-U.S. Holders, as described above.
Information reporting and backup withholding will also generally
apply to a payment of the proceeds of a disposition of a new
note (including a redemption) if payment is effected by or
through a U.S. office of a broker, unless a
Non-U.S. Holder provides us or our paying agent, as the
case may be, with such Non-U.S. Holders name and
address and either certifies non-United States status or
otherwise establishes an exemption. In general, backup
withholding and information reporting will not apply to the
payment of the proceeds from the disposition of the Notes by or
through a foreign office of a broker. If, however, such broker
is (i) a United States person, (ii) a foreign person
50 percent or more of whose gross income is from a
U.S. trade or business for a specified three-year period,
(iii) a controlled foreign corporation as to
the United States, or (iv) a foreign partnership that, at
any time during its taxable year, is 50 percent or more (by
income or capital interest) owned by United States persons or is
engaged in the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, such
payment will be subject to information reporting, but not backup
withholding, unless such broker has documentary evidence in its
records that the holder is a Non-U.S. Holder and certain
other conditions are met, or the holder otherwise establishes an
exemption. Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding
rules from a payment to a holder of the new notes will be
allowed as a refund or a credit against such holders
U.S. federal income tax liability, provided that the
required information is furnished to the Internal Revenue
Service.
Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules from a
payment to a holder of the new notes will be allowed as a refund
or a credit against such holders U.S. federal income tax
liability, provided that the required information is furnished
to the Internal Revenue Service.
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION
A broker-dealer that is the holder of original notes that were
acquired for the account of such broker-dealer as a result of
market-making or other trading activities, other than original
notes acquired directly from us or any of our affiliates may
exchange such original notes for new notes pursuant to the
exchange offer. This is true so long as each broker-dealer that
receives new notes for its own account in exchange
214
for original notes, where such original notes were acquired by
such broker-dealer as a result of market-making or other trading
activities acknowledges that it will deliver a prospectus in
connection with any resale of such new notes. This prospectus,
as it may be amended or supplemented from time to time, may be
used by a broker-dealer in connection with resales of new notes
received in exchange for original notes where such original
notes were acquired as a result of market-making activities or
other trading activities. We have agreed that for a period of
180 days after consummation of the exchange offer or such
time as any broker-dealer no longer owns any registrable
securities, we will make this prospectus, as it may be amended
or supplemented from time to time, available to any
broker-dealer for use in connection with any such resale. All
dealers effecting transactions in the new notes will be required
to deliver a prospectus.
We will not receive any proceeds from any sale of new notes by
broker-dealers or any other holder of new notes. New notes
received by broker-dealers for their own account in the exchange
offer may be sold from time to time in one or more transactions
in the over-the-counter market, in negotiated transactions,
through the writing of options on the new notes or a combination
of such methods of resale, at market prices prevailing at the
time of resale, at prices related to such prevailing market
prices or negotiated prices. Any such resale may be made
directly to purchasers or to or through brokers or dealers who
may receive compensation in the form of commissions or
concessions from any such broker-dealer and/or the purchasers of
any such new notes. Any broker-dealer that resells new notes
that were received by it for its own account pursuant to the
exchange offer and any broker or dealer that participates in a
distribution of such new notes may be deemed to be an
underwriter within the meaning of the Securities Act
of 1933, and any profit on any such resale of new notes and any
commissions or concessions received by any such persons may be
deemed to be underwriting compensation under the Securities Act
of 1933. The letter of transmittal states that by acknowledging
that it will deliver and by delivering a prospectus, a
broker-dealer will not be deemed to admit that it is an
underwriter within the meaning of the Securities Act
of 1933.
For a period of 180 days after consummation of the exchange
offer (or, if earlier, until such time as any broker-dealer no
longer owns any registrable securities), we will promptly send
additional copies of this prospectus and any amendment or
supplement to this prospectus to any broker-dealer that requests
such documents in the letter of transmittal. We have agreed to
pay all expenses incident to the exchange offer and to our
performance of, or compliance with, the exchange and
registration rights agreement (other than commissions or
concessions of any brokers or dealers) and will indemnify the
holders of the notes (including any broker-dealers) against
certain liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities
Act of 1933.
LEGAL MATTERS
The validity of the new notes offered in this prospectus will be
passed upon for the Issuers by Irell & Manella LLP, Los
Angeles, California.
EXPERTS
The consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings, LLC and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 and for the
three year periods ended December 31, 2004, which are
included in this prospectus, have been audited by KPMG LLP, an
independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in
their report included in this prospectus, which includes
explanatory paragraphs regarding the adoption, effective
January 1, 2002, of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, effective September 30, 2004 of EITF Topic
D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets
Other than Goodwill, and, effective January 1, 2003,
of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, as amended
by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 148,
Accounting for Stock Based Compensation
Transition and Disclosure an amendment to FASB
Statement No. 123. The consolidated financial
statements referred to above have been included in this
prospectus in reliance upon the authority of KPMG LLP as experts
in giving said report.
215
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
The indenture governing the notes provides that, regardless of
whether they are at any time required to file reports with the
SEC, the Issuers will file with the SEC and furnish to the
holders of the notes all such reports and other information as
would be required to be filed with the SEC if the Issuers were
subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act.
While any notes remain outstanding, the Issuers will make
available upon request to any holder and any prospective
purchaser of notes the information required pursuant to
Rule 144A(d)(4) under the Securities Act during any period
in which the Issuers are not subject to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Exchange Act. This prospectus contains summaries,
believed to be accurate in all material respects, of certain
terms of certain agreements regarding this exchange offer and
the notes (including but not limited to the indenture governing
your notes), but reference is hereby made to the actual
agreements, copies of which will be made available to you upon
request to us or the initial purchasers, for complete
information with respect thereto, and all such summaries are
qualified in their entirety by this reference. Any such request
for the agreements summarized herein should be directed to
Investor Relations, CCO Holdings, LLC, Charter Plaza, 12405
Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63131, telephone
number (314) 965-0555.
216
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
F-2 |
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
F-7 |
|
Unaudited Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-47 |
|
|
|
|
F-48 |
|
|
|
|
F-49 |
|
|
|
|
F-50 |
|
F-1
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
CCO Holdings, LLC:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
CCO Holdings, LLC and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in members equity, and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2004. These consolidated financial statements
are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated
financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of CCO Holdings, LLC and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2004, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in note 3 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective January 1, 2002, the Company adopted
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142,
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.
As discussed in note 7 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective September 30, 2004, the Company
adopted EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value
Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill.
As discussed in note 16 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective January 1, 2003, the Company adopted
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, as amended by
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 148,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
Transition and Disclosure an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 123.
/s/ KPMG LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
March 1, 2005
F-2
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
ASSETS |
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $15
and $17, respectively
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
Receivables from related party
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTMENT IN CABLE PROPERTIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation
of $5,142 and $3,834, respectively
|
|
|
6,110 |
|
|
|
6,808 |
|
|
Franchises
|
|
|
9,878 |
|
|
|
13,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment in cable properties, net
|
|
|
15,988 |
|
|
|
20,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
$ |
20,994 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
$ |
996 |
|
|
Payables to related party
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
7,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOANS PAYABLE RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED MANAGEMENT FEES RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members equity
|
|
|
6,568 |
|
|
|
10,642 |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total members equity
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
10,585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and members equity
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
$ |
20,994 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-3
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
REVENUES
|
|
$ |
4,977 |
|
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of fixed assets
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER INCOME AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(509 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(624 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before minority interest, income taxes and
cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
(4,946 |
) |
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
INCOME TAX BENEFIT (EXPENSE)
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(4,746 |
) |
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF ACCOUNTING CHANGE, NET OF TAX
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-4
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN MEMBERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
Total | |
|
|
Members | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Members | |
|
|
Equity | |
|
Income (Loss) | |
|
Equity | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
BALANCE, December 31, 2001
|
|
$ |
15,980 |
|
|
$ |
(40 |
) |
|
$ |
15,940 |
|
|
Capital contribution
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
Distributions to parent company
|
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
Changes in fair value of interest rate agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(5,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, December 31, 2002
|
|
|
11,145 |
|
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
11,040 |
|
|
Capital contribution
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
Distributions to parent company
|
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
Changes in fair value of interest rate agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, December 31, 2003
|
|
|
10,642 |
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
10,585 |
|
|
Distributions to parent company
|
|
|
(738 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(738 |
) |
|
Changes in fair value of interest rate agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(3,340 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,340 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
6,568 |
|
|
$ |
(15 |
) |
|
$ |
6,553 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-5
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash flows
from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash interest expense
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of fixed assets
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(216 |
) |
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net
|
|
|
840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects from
acquisitions and dispositions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
Receivables from and payables to related party, including
deferred management fees
|
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
1,167 |
|
|
|
1,316 |
|
|
|
1,325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(893 |
) |
|
|
(804 |
) |
|
|
(2,095 |
) |
|
Change in accrued expenses related to capital expenditures
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
Proceeds from sale of systems
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for acquisitions, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
Purchases of investments
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
(191 |
) |
|
|
(757 |
) |
|
|
(2,285 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings of long-term debt
|
|
|
3,147 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
3,213 |
|
|
Repayments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(4,861 |
) |
|
|
(1,368 |
) |
|
|
(2,135 |
) |
|
Repayments to parent companies
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(96 |
) |
|
|
(233 |
) |
|
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
Capital contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
(738 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
(515 |
) |
|
|
(784 |
) |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH PAID FOR INTEREST
|
|
$ |
532 |
|
|
$ |
459 |
|
|
$ |
485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-6
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
1. |
Organization and Basis of Presentation |
CCO Holdings, LLC (CCO Holdings) is a holding
company whose primary assets at December 31, 2004 are
equity interests in its operating subsidiaries. CCO Holdings was
formed in June 2003 and is a wholly owned subsidiary of CCH II,
LLC (CCH II). CCH II is a wholly owned
subsidiary of CCH I, LLC (CCH I), which is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC
(Charter Holdings). Charter Holdings is a wholly
owned subsidiary of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC
(Charter Holdco), which is a subsidiary of Charter
Communications, Inc. (Charter).
CCO Holdings is the sole owner of Charter Communications
Operating, LLC (Charter Operating). Charter
Operating was formed in February 1999 to own and operate its
cable systems. In June and July of 2003, Charter Holdings
entered into a series of transactions and contributions which
had the effect of i) creating CCH I, CCH II and
CCO Holdings and ii) combining/contributing all of Charter
Holdings interest in cable operations not previously owned
by Charter Operating to Charter Operating (the Systems
Transfer). The Systems Transfer was accounted for as a
reorganization of entities under common control. Accordingly,
the accompanying financial statements combine the historical
financial condition and results of operations of Charter
Operating, and the operations of subsidiaries contributed by
Charter Holdings for the year ended December 31, 2002. CCO
Holdings and its subsidiaries are collectively referred to
herein as the Company. All significant intercompany
accounts and transactions among consolidated entities have been
eliminated.
The Company is a broadband communications company operating in
the United States. The Company offers its customers traditional
cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as
high-speed data services and, in some areas, advanced broadband
services such as high definition television, video on demand and
telephony. The Company sells its cable video programming,
high-speed data and advanced broadband services on a
subscription basis. The Company also sells local advertising on
satellite-delivered networks.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Areas involving
significant judgments and estimates include capitalization of
labor and overhead costs; depreciation and amortization costs;
impairments of property, plant and equipment, franchises and
goodwill; income taxes; and contingencies. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform
with the 2004 presentation.
|
|
2. |
Liquidity and Capital Resources |
The Company incurred net loss of $3.3 billion and
$5.3 billion in 2004 and 2002, respectively. The Company
achieved net income of $30 million in 2003. The
Companys net cash flows from operating activities were
$1.2 billion, $1.3 billion and $1.3 billion for
the years ending December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively.
The Companys long-term financing as of December 31,
2004 consists of $5.5 billion of credit facility debt and
$2.8 billion principal amount of high-yield notes. In each
of 2005 and 2006, $30 million of the
F-7
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Companys debt will mature. In 2007 and beyond, significant
additional amounts will become due under the Companys
remaining long-term debt obligations.
The Company has historically required significant cash to fund
capital expenditures and debt service costs. Historically, the
Company has funded these requirements through cash flows from
operating activities, borrowings under its credit facilities,
equity contributions from its parent companies, borrowings from
its parent companies, sales of assets, issuances of debt
securities and cash on hand. However, the mix of funding sources
changes from period to period. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, the Company generated $1.2 billion
of net cash flows from operating activities, after paying cash
interest of $532 million. In addition, the Company
generated approximately $744 million from the sale of
assets, substantially all of which was used to fund operations,
including capital expenditures. Finally, the Company had net
cash used in financing activities of $515 million, which
included, among other things, $738 million of distributions
primarily to fund parent company interest and in December 2004,
CCO Holdings issued $550 million of senior floating rate
notes. This debt issuance and the net cash flows from operating
activities were the primary reasons cash on hand increased by
$461 million to $546 million at December 31,
2004. The cash on hand was used to repay outstanding borrowings
under the Companys revolving credit facility, through a
series of transactions executed in February 2005.
The Company expects that cash on hand, cash flows from operating
activities and the amounts available under its credit facilities
will be adequate to meet its and its parent companies cash needs
in 2005. Cash flows from operating activities and amounts
available under the Companys credit facilities may not be
sufficient to fund the Companys operations and satisfy its
parent companies principal repayment obligations that come
due in 2006 and, the Company believes, will not be sufficient to
fund its operations and satisfy such repayment obligations
thereafter.
It is likely that the Company and its parent companies will
require additional funding to repay debt maturing after 2006.
The Company has been advised that its parent companies are
working with their financial advisors to address such funding
requirements. However, there can be no assurance that such
funding will be available. Although Mr. Allen and his
affiliates have purchased equity from the parent companies in
the past, Mr. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated to
purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to the Company
or its parent companies in the future.
|
|
|
Credit Facilities and Covenants |
The Companys ability to operate depends upon, among other
things, its continued access to capital, including credit under
the Charter Operating credit facilities. These credit
facilities, along with the Companys and its subsidiaries
indentures, are subject to certain restrictive covenants, some
of which require the Company to maintain specified financial
ratios and meet financial tests and to provide audited financial
statements with an unqualified opinion from the Companys
independent auditors. As of December 31, 2004, the Company
was in compliance with the covenants under its indentures and
credit facilities and the indentures of its subsidiaries and the
Company expects to remain in compliance with those covenants for
the next twelve months. As of December 31, 2004, the
Company had borrowing availability under the credit facilities
of $804 million, none of which was restricted due to
covenants. Continued access to the Companys credit
facilities is subject to the Company remaining in compliance
with the applicable covenants of these credit facilities,
including covenants tied to the Companys operating
performance. If the Companys operating performance results
in non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain
other events of non-compliance under these credit facilities or
indentures governing the Companys debt occurs, funding
under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on
some or potentially all of the Companys debt obligations
could occur. An event of default under the covenants governing
any of the Companys debt instruments could result in the
acceleration of its payment obligations under that debt and,
under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under its other
debt
F-8
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on the
Companys consolidated financial condition or results of
operations.
The Charter Operating credit facilities require the Company to
redeem the CC V Holdings notes within 45 days after the
first date that the Charter Holdings leverage ratio is less than
8.75 to 1.0. In satisfaction of this requirement, CC V Holdings,
LLC has called for redemption all of its outstanding notes, at
103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest
to the date of redemption, which is expected to be
March 14, 2005. The total cost of the redemption including
accrued and unpaid interest is expected to be approximately
$122 million. The Company intends to fund the redemption
with borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities.
|
|
|
Parent Company Debt Obligations |
Any financial or liquidity problems of CCO Holdings parent
companies could cause serious disruption to the Companys
business and have a material adverse effect on its business and
results of operations. A failure by Charter Holdings to satisfy
its debt payment obligations or a bankruptcy filing with respect
to Charter Holdings would give the lenders under the Charter
Operating credit facilities the right to accelerate the payment
obligations under these facilities. Any such acceleration would
be a default under the indenture governing the Companys
notes.
As of December 31, 2004, Charter had approximately
$1.0 billion principal amount of senior convertible notes
outstanding with approximately $156 million and
$863 million maturing in 2006 and 2009, respectively.
As of December 31, 2004, Charter Holdings had approximately
$8.9 billion principal amount of high-yield notes
outstanding with approximately $451 million,
$3.4 billion and $5.0 billion maturing in 2007, 2009
and thereafter, respectively. As of December 31, 2004,
CCH II had approximately $1.6 billion principal amount
of high-yield notes outstanding maturing in 2010. Charter,
Charter Holdings and CCH II will need to raise additional
capital or receive distributions or payments from the Company in
order to satisfy their debt obligations. However, because of
their significant indebtedness, the ability of the parent
companies to raise additional capital at reasonable rates is
uncertain. The indentures governing the CCH II notes, CCO
Holdings notes, and Charter Operating notes, however, restrict
these entities and their subsidiaries from making distributions
to their parent companies (including Charter, Charter Holdco and
Charter Holdings) for payment of principal on the parent company
debt obligations, in each case unless there is no default under
the applicable indenture and a specified leverage ratio test is
met at the time of such event. CCH II, CCO Holdings and
Charter Operating meet the applicable leverage ratio test under
each of their respective indentures, and as a result are not
prohibited from making any such distributions to their
respective direct parent at this time.
Charter is required to register by April 21, 2005 its
recently issued 5.875% convertible notes due 2009. If these
convertible notes are not registered by such date, Charter will
incur liquidated damages as defined in the related indenture. In
conjunction with issuing these convertible notes, Charter also
filed a registration statement to sell up to 150 million
shares of Charters Class A common stock pursuant to a
share lending agreement. These shares are required to be
registered by April 1, 2005. If such shares are not
registered by such date, Charter will incur liquidated damages
as defined in the related indenture.
|
|
|
Specific Limitations at Charter Holdings |
The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit
Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for
payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior
notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter
Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under Charter Holdings
indentures and other specified tests are met. For the
F-9
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
quarter ended December 31, 2004, there was no default under
Charter Holdings indentures and other specified tests were
met. In addition, Charter Holdings met the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0 based on December 31, 2004 financial results.
As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or
Charter Holdco are not currently restricted. Such distributions
will again be restricted, however, if Charter Holdings fails to
meet its leverage ratio test. In the past, Charter Holdings has
from time to time failed to meet this leverage ratio test and
there can be no assurance that Charter Holdings will satisfy
this test in the future.
During periods when such distributions are restricted, the
indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter
Holdings and its subsidiaries to make specified investments in
Charter Holdco or Charter, up to an amount determined by a
formula, as long as there is no default under the indentures. As
of December 31, 2004, Charter Holdco had $106 million
in cash on hand and was owed $29 million in intercompany
loans from its subsidiaries, which were available to pay
interest on Charters 4.75% convertible senior notes,
which is expected to be approximately $7 million in 2005.
In addition, Charter has $144 million of
U.S. government securities pledged as security for the six
interest payments on Charters 5.875% convertible
senior notes.
In March 2004, the Company closed the sale of certain cable
systems in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West
Virginia to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC. The Company closed
the sale of an additional cable system in New York to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC in April 2004. These transactions
resulted in a $104 million pretax gain recorded as a gain
on sale of assets in the Companys consolidated statements
of operations. Subject to post-closing contractual adjustments,
the total net proceeds from the sale of all of these systems
were approximately $733 million. The proceeds were used to
repay a portion of amounts outstanding under the Companys
credit facilities.
|
|
3. |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with
original maturities of three months or less to be cash
equivalents. These investments are carried at cost, which
approximates market value.
|
|
|
Property, Plant and Equipment |
Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost, including
all material, labor and certain indirect costs associated with
the construction of cable transmission and distribution
facilities. Costs associated with initial customer installations
and the additions of network equipment necessary to enable
advanced services are capitalized. Costs capitalized as part of
initial customer installations include materials, labor, and
certain indirect costs. Indirect costs are associated with the
activities of the Companys personnel who assist in
connecting and activating the new service and consist of
compensation and indirect costs associated with these support
functions. Indirect costs primarily include employee benefits
and payroll taxes, direct variable costs associated with
capitalizable activities, consisting primarily of installation
and construction vehicle costs, the cost of dispatch personnel
and indirect costs directly attributable to capitalizable
activities. The costs of disconnecting service at a
customers dwelling or reconnecting service to a previously
installed dwelling are charged to operating expense in the
period incurred. Costs for repairs and maintenance are charged
to operating expense as incurred, while plant and equipment
replacement and betterments, including replacement of cable
drops from the pole to the dwelling, are capitalized.
F-10
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Depreciation is recorded using the straight-line composite
method over managements estimate of the useful lives of
the related assets as follows:
|
|
|
Cable distribution systems
|
|
7-20 years |
Customer equipment and installations
|
|
3-5 years |
Vehicles and equipment
|
|
1-5 years |
Buildings and leasehold improvements
|
|
5-15 years |
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
5 years |
Franchise rights represent the value attributed to agreements
with local authorities that allow access to homes in cable
service areas acquired through the purchase of cable systems.
Management estimates the fair value of franchise rights at the
date of acquisition and determines if the franchise has a finite
life or an indefinite-life as defined by Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142,
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. Effective
January 1, 2002, all franchises that qualify for
indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are no
longer amortized against earnings but instead are tested for
impairment annually as of October 1, or more frequently as
warranted by events or changes in circumstances (see
Note 7). The Company concluded that 99% of its franchises
qualify for indefinite-life treatment; however, certain
franchises did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment due to
technological or operational factors that limit their lives.
These franchise costs are amortized on a straight-line basis
over 10 years. Costs incurred in renewing cable franchises
are deferred and amortized over 10 years.
Other noncurrent assets primarily include goodwill, deferred
financing costs and investments in equity securities. Costs
related to borrowings are deferred and amortized to interest
expense over the terms of the related borrowings.
Investments in equity securities are accounted for at cost,
under the equity method of accounting or in accordance with
SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in
Debt and Equity Securities. Charter recognizes losses for
any decline in value considered to be other than temporary.
Certain marketable equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized
gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive
income or loss.
The following summarizes investment information as of and for
the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying | |
|
Gain (loss) For the | |
|
|
Value at | |
|
Years Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity investments, under the cost method
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Equity investments, under the equity method
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Marketable securities, at market value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
21 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation of Property, Plant and Equipment |
The Company evaluates the recoverability of property, plant and
equipment for impairment when events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable.
F-11
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Such events or changes in circumstances could include such
factors as impairment of the Companys indefinite life
franchise under SFAS No. 142, changes in technological
advances, fluctuations in the fair value of such assets, adverse
changes in relationships with local franchise authorities,
adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results.
If a review indicates that the carrying value of such asset is
not recoverable from estimated undiscounted cash flows, the
carrying value of such asset is reduced to its estimated fair
value. While the Company believes that its estimates of future
cash flows are reasonable, different assumptions regarding such
cash flows could materially affect its evaluations of asset
recoverability. No impairment of property, plant and equipment
occurred in 2004, 2003 and 2002.
|
|
|
Derivative Financial Instruments |
The Company accounts for derivative financial instruments in
accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended.
For those instruments which qualify as hedging activities,
related gains or losses are recorded in accumulated other
comprehensive income. For all other derivative instruments, the
related gains or losses are recorded in the income statement.
The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative
instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements, interest
rate cap agreements and interest rate collar agreements
(collectively referred to herein as interest rate agreements) as
required under the terms of the credit facilities of the
Companys subsidiaries. The Companys policy is to
manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate
debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, the Company agrees to
exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed
and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an
agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate cap
agreements are used to lock in a maximum interest rate should
variable rates rise, but enable the Company to otherwise pay
lower market rates. Interest rate collar agreements are used to
limit exposure to and benefits from interest rate fluctuations
on variable rate debt to within a certain range of rates. The
Company does not hold or issue any derivative financial
instruments for trading purposes.
Revenues from residential and commercial video and high-speed
data services are recognized when the related services are
provided. Advertising sales are recognized at estimated
realizable values in the period that the advertisements are
broadcast. Local governmental authorities impose franchise fees
on the Company ranging up to a federally mandated maximum of 5%
of gross revenues as defined in the franchise agreement. Such
fees are collected on a monthly basis from the Companys
customers and are periodically remitted to local franchise
authorities. Franchise fees are reported as revenues on a gross
basis with a corresponding operating expense.
The Company has various contracts to obtain analog, digital and
premium video programming from program suppliers whose
compensation is typically based on a flat fee per customer. The
cost of the right to exhibit network programming under such
arrangements is recorded in operating expenses in the month the
programming is available for exhibition. Programming costs are
paid each month based on calculations performed by the Company
and are subject to adjustment based on periodic audits performed
by the programmers. Certain programming contracts contain launch
incentives to be paid by the programmers. The Company receives
these payments related to the activation of the
programmers cable television channel and recognizes the
launch incentives on a straight-line basis over the life of the
programming agreement as a reduction of programming expense.
This offset to programming expense was $59 million,
$62 million and $57 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Programming
costs included in the accompanying statement of operations were
$1.3 billion, $1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. As of December 31,
F-12
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
2004 and 2003, the deferred amount of launch incentives,
included in other long-term liabilities, totaled
$106 million and $170 million, respectively.
Advertising costs associated with marketing the Companys
products and services are generally expensed as costs are
incurred. Such advertising expense was $72 million,
$62 million and $60 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
The Company has historically accounted for stock-based
compensation in accordance with Accounting Principles Board
(APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees, and related interpretations, as
permitted by SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation. On January 1, 2003, the
Company adopted the fair value measurement provisions of
SFAS No. 123 using the prospective method under which
the Company will recognize compensation expense of a stock-based
award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair
value of the award on the grant date consistent with the method
described in Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation
(FIN) No. 28, Accounting for Stock
Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award
Plans. Adoption of these provisions resulted in utilizing a
preferable accounting method as the consolidated financial
statements will present the estimated fair value of stock-based
compensation in expense consistently with other forms of
compensation and other expense associated with goods and
services received for equity instruments. In accordance with
SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation Transition and Disclosure, the fair
value method was applied only to awards granted or modified
after January 1, 2003, whereas awards granted prior to such
date were accounted for under APB No. 25, unless they were
modified or settled in cash.
SFAS No. 123 requires pro forma disclosure of the
impact on earnings as if the compensation expense for these
plans had been determined using the fair value method. The
following table presents the Companys net income (loss) as
reported and the pro forma amounts that would have been reported
using the fair value method under SFAS No. 123 for the
years presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
Add back stock-based compensation expense related to stock
options included in reported net loss
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Less employee stock-based compensation expense determined under
fair value based method for all employee stock option awards
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(105 |
) |
Effects of unvested options in stock option exchange (see
Note 16)
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
(3,294 |
) |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
(5,386 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of each option granted is estimated on the date
of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The
following weighted average assumptions were used for grants
during the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively: risk-free interest rates of 3.3%, 3.0%, and 3.6%;
expected volatility of 92.4%, 93.6% and 64.2%; and expected
lives of 4.6 years, 4.5 years and 4.3 years,
respectively. The valuations assume no dividends are paid.
F-13
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
Unfavorable Contracts and Other Settlements |
The Company recognized $5 million of benefit for the year
ended December 31, 2004 related to changes in estimated
legal reserves established as part of previous business
combinations, which, based on an evaluation of current facts and
circumstances, are no longer required.
The Company recognized $72 million of benefit for the year
ended December 31, 2003 as a result of the settlement of
estimated liabilities recorded in connection with prior business
combinations. The majority of this benefit (approximately
$52 million) is due to the renegotiation of a major
programming contract, for which a liability had been recorded
for the above market portion of the agreement in conjunction
with the Falcon acquisition in 1999 and the Bresnan acquisition
in 2000. The remaining benefit relates to the reversal of
previously recorded liabilities, which are no longer required.
CCO Holdings is a single member limited liability company not
subject to income tax. CCO Holdings holds all operations through
indirect subsidiaries. The majority of these indirect
subsidiaries are limited liability companies that are also not
subject to income tax. However, certain of CCO Holdings
indirect subsidiaries are corporations that are subject to
income tax. The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and
liabilities for temporary differences between the financial
reporting basis and the tax basis of these indirect corporate
subsidiaries assets and liabilities and expected benefits
of utilizing net operating loss carryforwards. The impact on
deferred taxes of changes in tax rates and tax law, if any,
applied to the years during which temporary differences are
expected to be settled, are reflected in the consolidated
financial statements in the period of enactment (see
Note 18).
Minority interest on the Companys consolidated balance
sheets represents $656 million and $694 million of
preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC
(CC VIII), an indirect subsidiary of
CCH II, as of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. The preferred membership interests in CC VIII
accrete at 2% per annum and since June 6, 2003, share
pro rata in the profits of CC VIII. As more fully described
in Note 19, this preferred interest arises from the
approximately $630 million of preferred membership units
issued by CC VIII in connection with the Bresnan
acquisition in February, 2000. As of December 31, 2003,
minority interest also includes $25 million of preferred
interest in Charter Helicon, LLC, another indirect subsidiary of
CCH II, issued in connection with the Helicon acquisition.
The preferred interest in Charter Helicon, LLC accrues interest
at 10% per annum. As of December 31, 2004, the
preferred interest was reclassified to other long-term
liabilities.
SFAS No. 131, Disclosure about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information, established standards
for reporting information about operating segments in annual
financial statements and in interim financial reports issued to
shareholders. Operating segments are defined as components of an
enterprise about which separate financial information is
available that is evaluated on a regular basis by the chief
operating decision maker, or decision making group, in deciding
how to allocate resources to an individual segment and in
assessing performance of the segment.
The Companys operations are managed on the basis of
geographic divisional operating segments. The Company has
evaluated the criteria for aggregation of the geographic
operating segments under paragraph 17 of
SFAS No. 131 and believes it meets each of the
respective criteria set forth. The Company delivers similar
products and services within each of its geographic divisional
operations. Each geographic and divisional service area utilizes
similar means for delivering the programming of the
F-14
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Companys services; have similarity in the type or class of
customer receiving the products and services; distributes the
Companys services over a unified network; and operates
within a consistent regulatory environment. In addition, each of
the geographic divisional operating segments has similar
economic characteristics. In light of the Companys similar
services, means for delivery, similarity in type of customers,
the use of a unified network and other considerations across its
geographic divisional operating structure, management has
determined that the Company has one reportable segment,
broadband services.
On February 28, 2002, CC Systems, LLC, a subsidiary of
the Company, and High Speed Access Corp. (HSA)
closed the Companys acquisition from HSA of the contracts
and associated assets, and assumed related liabilities, that
served certain of the Companys high-speed data customers.
At closing, the Company paid approximately $78 million in
cash and delivered 37,000 shares of HSAs
Series D convertible preferred stock and all the warrants
to buy HSA common stock owned by the Company. The purchase price
has been allocated to assets acquired and liabilities assumed
based on fair values, including approximately $8 million
assigned to intangible assets and amortized over an average
useful life of three years and approximately $52 million
assigned to goodwill. During the period from 1997 to 2000,
certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into Internet-access
related service agreements with HSA, and both Vulcan Ventures
and certain of the Companys subsidiaries made equity
investments in HSA. (see Note 19 for additional
information).
In April 2002, Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, Rifkin
Acquisition Partners, LLC and Charter Communications
Entertainment I, LLC, each an indirect, wholly-owned
subsidiary of Charter Holdings, completed the purchase of
certain assets of Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar
Income Program IV-3, L.P., Enstar Income/ Growth
Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar Cable of Macoupin County and
Enstar IV/ PBD Systems Venture, serving approximately
21,600 (unaudited) customers, for a total cash purchase price of
$48 million. In September 2002, Charter Communications
Entertainment I, LLC purchased all of Enstar Income
Program II-1, L.P.s Illinois cable systems, serving
approximately 6,400 (unaudited)customers, for a cash purchase
price of $15 million. Enstar Communications Corporation, a
direct subsidiary of Charter Holdco, is a general partner of the
Enstar limited partnerships but does not exercise control over
them. The purchase prices were allocated to assets acquired
based on fair values, including $41 million assigned to
franchises and $4 million assigned to other intangible
assets amortized over a useful life of three years.
The 2002 acquisitions were funded primarily from borrowings
under the credit facilities of the Companys subsidiaries.
|
|
5. |
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts |
Activity in the allowance for doubtful accounts is summarized as
follows for the years presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance, beginning of year
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
Charged to expense
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Uncollected balances written off, net of recoveries
|
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-15
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
6. |
Property, Plant and Equipment |
Property, plant and equipment consists of the following as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cable distribution systems
|
|
$ |
6,555 |
|
|
$ |
6,304 |
|
Customer equipment and installations
|
|
|
3,497 |
|
|
|
3,157 |
|
Vehicles and equipment
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
Buildings and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,252 |
|
|
|
10,642 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(5,142 |
) |
|
|
(3,834 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6,110 |
|
|
$ |
6,808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company periodically evaluates the estimated useful lives
used to depreciate its assets and the estimated amount of assets
that will be abandoned or have minimal use in the future. A
significant change in assumptions about the extent or timing of
future asset retirements, or in the Companys use of new
technology and upgrade programs, could materially affect future
depreciation expense.
Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002 was $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion and
$1.4 billion respectively.
|
|
7. |
Franchises and Goodwill |
On January 1, 2002, the Company adopted
SFAS No. 142, which eliminates the amortization of
indefinite-lived intangible assets. Accordingly, beginning
January 1, 2002, all franchises that qualify for
indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are no
longer amortized against earnings but instead are tested for
impairment annually based on valuations, or more frequently as
warranted by events or changes in circumstances. Based on the
guidance prescribed in Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) Issue No. 02-7, Unit of Accounting
for Testing of Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible
Assets, franchises are aggregated into essentially
inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset
groups generally represent geographic clustering of the
Companys cable systems into groups by which such systems
are managed. Management believes such grouping represents the
highest and best use of those assets.
The Companys valuations, which are based on the present
value of projected after tax cash flows, result in a value of
property, plant and equipment, franchises, customer
relationships and its total entity value. The value of goodwill
is the difference between the total entity value and amounts
assigned to the other assets.
Franchises, for valuation purposes, are defined as the future
economic benefits of the right to solicit and service potential
customers (customer marketing rights), and the right to deploy
and market new services such as interactivity and telephony to
the potential customers (service marketing rights). Fair value
is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows
using assumptions consistent with internal forecasts. The
franchise after-tax cash flow is calculated as the after-tax
cash flow generated by the potential customers obtained and the
new services added to those customers in future periods. The sum
of the present value of the franchises after-tax cash flow
in years 1 through 10 and the continuing value of the after-tax
cash flow beyond year 10 yields the fair value of the franchise.
Prior to the adoption of EITF Topic D-108, Use of the
Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill,
F-16
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
discussed below, the Company followed a residual method of
valuing its franchise assets, which had the effect of including
goodwill with the franchise assets.
The Company follows the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17,
Recognition of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets
Acquired in a Business Combination, in valuing customer
relationships. Customer relationships, for valuation purposes,
represent the value of the business relationship with existing
customers and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash
flows from these customers including the right to deploy and
market additional services such as interactivity and telephony
to these customers. The present value of these after-tax cash
flows yield the fair value of the customer relationships.
Substantially all acquisitions occurred prior to January 1,
2002. The Company did not record any value associated with the
customer relationship intangibles related to those acquisitions.
For acquisitions subsequent to January 1, 2002 the Company
did assign a value to the customer relationship intangible,
which is amortized over its estimated useful life.
In September 2004, EITF Topic D-108 was issued which requires
the direct method of separately valuing all intangible assets
and does not permit goodwill to be included in franchise assets.
The Company performed an impairment assessment as of
September 30, 2004, and adopted EITF Topic D-108 in that
assessment resulting in a total franchise impairment of
approximately $3.3 billion. The Company recorded a
cumulative effect of accounting change of $840 million
(approximately $875 million before tax effects of
$16 million and minority interest effects of
$19 million) for the year ended December 31, 2004
representing the portion of the Companys total franchise
impairment attributable to no longer including goodwill with
franchise assets. The effect of the adoption was to increase net
loss by $840 million for the year ended December 31,
2004. The remaining $2.4 billion of the total franchise
impairment was attributable to the use of lower projected growth
rates and the resulting revised estimates of future cash flows
in the Companys valuation, and was recorded as impairment
of franchises in the Companys accompanying consolidated
statements of operations for the year ended December 31,
2004. Sustained analog video customer losses by the Company in
the third quarter of 2004 primarily as a result of increased
competition from direct broadcast satellite providers and
decreased growth rates in the Companys high-speed data
customers in the third quarter of 2004, in part, as a result of
increased competition from digital subscriber line service
providers led to the lower projected growth rates and the
revised estimates of future cash flows from those used at
October 1, 2003.
The valuation completed at October 1, 2003 showed franchise
values in excess of book value and thus resulted in no
impairment. The Companys annual impairment assessment as
of October 1, 2002, based on revised estimates from
January 1, 2002 of future cash flows and projected
long-term growth rates in the Companys valuation, led to
the recognition of a $4.6 billion impairment charge in the
fourth quarter of 2002.
F-17
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, indefinite-lived and
finite-lived intangible assets are presented in the following
table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
Net | |
|
|
Carrying | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Carrying | |
|
Carrying | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Carrying | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
Amount | |
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
Amount | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Indefinite-lived intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with indefinite lives
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
$ |
13,606 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,606 |
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
$ |
13,658 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finite-lived intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with finite lives
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2004, the net carrying
amount of indefinite-lived intangible assets was reduced by
$490 million as a result of the sale of cable systems,
primarily the sale to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, discussed
in Note 2. Additionally, in the first and fourth quarters
of 2004, approximately $29 million and $8 million,
respectively, of franchises that were previously classified as
finite-lived were reclassified to indefinite-lived, based on the
Companys renewal of these franchise assets in 2003 and
2004. Franchise amortization expense for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $4 million,
$9 million and $9 million, respectively, which
represents the amortization relating to franchises that did not
qualify for indefinite-life treatment under
SFAS No. 142, including costs associated with
franchise renewals. The Company expects that amortization
expense on franchise assets will be approximately
$3 million annually for each of the next five years. Actual
amortization expense in future periods could differ from these
estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or
divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors.
|
|
8. |
Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following
as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Accounts payable trade
|
|
$ |
138 |
|
|
$ |
144 |
|
Accrued capital expenditures
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Accrued expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
Programming costs
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
Franchise related fees
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
State sales tax
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
$ |
996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-18
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Long-term debt consists of the following as of December 31,
2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Face | |
|
Accreted | |
|
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Long-Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8% senior second-lien notes due 2012
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/8% senior
second-lien notes due 2014
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Renaissance Media Group LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
CC V Holdings, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.875% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
Credit Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
4,459 |
|
|
|
4,459 |
|
CC VI Operating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
868 |
|
|
|
868 |
|
Falcon Cable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
856 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
CC VIII Operating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
8,294 |
|
|
$ |
7,954 |
|
|
$ |
7,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accreted values presented above represents the face value of
the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale
plus the accretion to the balance sheet date.
In April 2004, the Companys indirect subsidiaries, Charter
Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp.,
sold $1.5 billion of senior second-lien notes in a private
transaction. Additionally, Charter Operating amended and
restated its $5.1 billion credit facilities, among other
things, to defer maturities and increase availability under
those facilities to approximately $6.5 billion, consisting
of a $1.5 billion six-year revolving credit facility, a
$2.0 billion six-year term loan facility and a
$3.0 billion seven-year term loan facility. Charter
Operating used the additional borrowings under the amended and
restated credit facilities, together with proceeds from the sale
of the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes to refinance
the credit facilities of its subsidiaries, CC VI Operating
Company, LLC (CC VI Operating), Falcon Cable
Communications, LLC (Falcon Cable), and CC VIII
Operating, LLC (CC VIII Operating), all in
concurrent transactions. In addition, Charter Operating was
substituted as the lender in place of the banks under those
subsidiaries credit facilities. These transactions
resulted in losses on extinguishment of debt of $21 million.
CCO Holdings Notes.
|
|
|
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013 |
In November 2003, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
jointly issued $500 million total principal amount of
83/4% senior
notes due 2013. The CCO Holdings notes are general unsecured
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They
rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated
obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The
CCO Holdings
F-19
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of CCO
Holdings subsidiaries, including the Renaissance notes,
the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit
facilities and the Charter Operating notes.
Interest on the CCO Holdings senior notes accrues at
83/4% per
year and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each May 15
and November 15.
At any time prior to November 15, 2006, the issuers of the
CCO Holdings senior notes may redeem up to 35% of the total
principal amount of the CCO Holdings senior notes to the extent
of public equity proceeds they have received on a pro rata basis
at a redemption price equal to 108.75% of the principal amount
of CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus any accrued and
unpaid interest.
On or after November 15, 2008, the issuers of the CCO
Holdings senior notes may redeem all or a part of the notes at a
redemption price that declines ratably from the initial
redemption price of 104.375% to a redemption price on or after
November 15, 2011 of 100.0% of the principal amount of the
CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus, in each case, any
accrued and unpaid interest.
In the event of specified change of control events, CCO Holdings
must offer to purchase the outstanding CCO Holdings senior notes
from the holders at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total
principal amount of the notes, plus any accrued and unpaid
interest.
|
|
|
Senior Floating Rate Notes Due 2010 |
In December 2004, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
jointly issued $550 million total principal amount of
senior floating rate notes due 2010.
Interest on the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes accrues
at the LIBOR rate plus 4.125% annually, from December 15,
2004 or, if interest already has been paid, from the date it was
most recently paid. Interest is reset and payable quarterly in
arrears on each March 15, June 15, September 15 and
December 15, commencing on March 15, 2005.
At any time prior to December 15, 2006, the issuers of the
senior floating rate notes may redeem up to 35% of the notes in
an amount not to exceed the amount of proceeds of one or more
public equity offerings at a redemption price equal to 100% of
the principal amount, plus a premium equal to the interest rate
per annum applicable to the notes on the date notice of
redemption is given, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any,
to the redemption date, provided that at least 65% of the
original aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains
outstanding after the redemption.
The issuers of the senior floating rate notes may redeem the
notes in whole or in part at the issuers option from
December 15, 2006 until December 14, 2007 for 102% of
the principal amount, from December 15, 2007 until
December 14, 2008 for 101% of the principal amount and from
and after December 15, 2008, at par, in each case, plus
accrued and unpaid interest.
The indentures governing the CCO Holdings senior notes contain
restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or
activities by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries.
Substantially all of CCO Holdings direct and indirect
subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.
Charter Operating Notes. On April 27, 2004,
Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital
Corp. jointly issued $1.1 billion of 8% senior
second-lien notes due 2012 and $400 million of
83/8% senior
second-lien notes due 2014, for total gross proceeds of
$1.5 billion. Interest on the Charter Operating notes is
payable semi-annually in arrears on each April 30 and
October 30, commencing on October 30, 2004.
The Charter Operating notes were sold in a private transaction
that was not subject to the registration requirements of the
Securities Act of 1933. The Charter Operating notes are not
expected to have the
F-20
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
benefit of any exchange or other registration rights, except in
specified limited circumstances. On the issue date of the
Charter Operating notes, because of restrictions contained in
the Charter Holdings indentures, there were no Charter Operating
note guarantees, even though Charter Operatings immediate
parent, CCO Holdings, and certain of the Companys
subsidiaries were obligors and/or guarantors under the Charter
Operating credit facilities.
Upon the occurrence of the guarantee and pledge date (generally,
the fifth business day after the Charter Holdings leverage ratio
is certified to be below 8.75 to 1.0), CCO Holdings and those
subsidiaries of Charter Operating that are then guarantors of,
or otherwise obligors with respect to, indebtedness under the
Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations will
be required to guarantee the Charter Operating notes. The note
guarantee of each such guarantor will be:
|
|
|
|
|
a senior obligation of such guarantor; |
|
|
|
structurally senior to the outstanding senior notes of CCO
Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. (except in the case of
CCO Holdings note guarantee, which ranks equally with such
senior notes), the outstanding senior notes of CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp., the outstanding senior notes and
senior discount notes of Charter Holdings, the outstanding
convertible senior notes of Charter and any future indebtedness
of parent companies of CCO Holdings (but subject to provisions
in the Charter Operating indenture that permit interest and,
subject to meeting the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test,
principal payments to be made thereon); and |
|
|
|
senior in right of payment to any future subordinated
indebtedness of such guarantor. |
As a result of the above leverage ratio test being met, CCO
Holdings and certain of its subsidiaries provided the additional
guarantees described above during the first quarter of 2005.
All the subsidiaries of Charter Operating (except CCO NR Sub,
LLC, and certain other subsidiaries that are not deemed material
and are designated as nonrecourse subsidiaries under the Charter
Operating credit facilities) are restricted subsidiaries of
Charter Operating under the Charter Operating notes.
Unrestricted subsidiaries generally will not be subject to the
restrictive covenants in the Charter Operating indenture.
In the event of specified change of control events, Charter
Operating must offer to purchase the Charter Operating notes at
a purchase price equal to 101% of the total principal amount of
the Charter Operating notes repurchased plus any accrued and
unpaid interest thereon.
The indenture governing the Charter Operating senior notes
contains restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions
or activities by Charter Operating and its restricted
subsidiaries. Substantially all of Charter Operatings
direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted
subsidiaries.
Renaissance Notes. In connection with the
acquisition of Renaissance in April 1999, the Company assumed
$163 million principal amount at maturity of
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008 of which
$49 million was repurchased in May 1999. The Renaissance
notes did not require the payment of interest until
April 15, 2003. From and after April 15, 2003, the
Renaissance notes bear interest, payable semi-annually, on April
15 and October 15, commencing on October 15, 2003. The
Renaissance notes are due on April 15, 2008.
CC V Holdings Notes. Charter Holdco acquired
CC V Holdings in November 1999 and assumed CC V
Holdings outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes
due 2008 with an accreted value of $113 million as of
December 31, 2003. Commencing December 1, 2003, cash
interest on the CC V Holdings 11.875% notes will be
payable semi-annually on June 1 and December 1 of each
year. In February 2005, these notes were called with an
anticipated redemption date of March 14, 2005.
F-21
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
High-Yield Restrictive Covenants; Limitation on
Indebtedness. The indentures governing the notes of the
Companys subsidiaries contain certain covenants that
restrict the ability of CCO Holdings, CCO Holdings Capital
Corp., Charter Operating, Charter Communications Operating
Capital Corp., the CC V Holdings notes issuers, Renaissance
Media Group, and all of their restricted subsidiaries to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional debt; |
|
|
|
pay dividends on equity or repurchase equity; |
|
|
|
make investments; |
|
|
|
sell all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or
into other companies; |
|
|
|
sell assets; |
|
|
|
enter into sale-leasebacks; |
|
|
|
in the case of restricted subsidiaries, create or permit to
exist dividend or payment restrictions with respect to the bond
issuers, guarantee their parent companies debt, or issue
specified equity interests; |
|
|
|
engage in certain transactions with affiliates; and |
|
|
|
grant liens. |
Charter Operating Credit Facilities. In April
2004, Charter Operating amended and restated its
$5.1 billion credit facilities, among other things, to
defer maturities and increase availability under those
facilities to approximately $6.5 billion, consisting of a
$1.5 billion revolving credit facility with a maturity date
in 2010; a $2.0 billion Term A loan facility of which 12.5%
matures in 2007, 30% matures in 2008, 37.5% matures in 2009 and
20% matures in 2010; and a $3.0 billion Term B loan
facility which is repayable in 27 equal quarterly installments
aggregating in each loan year to 1% of the original amount of
the Term B facility, with the remaining balance due at final
maturity in 2011. Charter Operating used the additional
borrowings under the amended and restated credit facilities,
together with proceeds from the sale of the Charter Operating
senior second-lien notes to refinance the credit facilities of
its subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, Falcon Cable, and
CC VIII Operating,, all in concurrent transactions. In
addition, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in
place of the banks under those subsidiaries credit
facilities.
Amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit
facilities bear interest, at Charter Operatings election,
at a base rate or the Eurodollar rate (2.07% to 2.28% as of
December 31, 2004), as defined, plus a margin for
Eurodollar loans of up to 3.00% for the Term A facility and
revolving credit facility, and up to 3.25% for the Term B
facility, and for base rate loans of up to 2.00% for the Term A
facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 2.25% for the
Term B facility. A quarterly commitment fee of up to .75% is
payable on the average daily unborrowed balance of the revolving
credit facilities.
The obligations under the Charter Operating credit facilities
(the Obligations) are guaranteed by Charter
Operatings immediate parent company, CCO Holdings, and the
subsidiaries of Charter Operating, except for immaterial
subsidiaries and subsidiaries precluded from guaranteeing by
reason of the provisions of other indebtedness to which they are
subject (the non-guarantor subsidiaries, primarily
Renaissance and CC V Holdings and their subsidiaries). The
Obligations are also secured by (i) a lien on all of the
assets of Charter Operating and its subsidiaries (other than
assets of the non-guarantor subsidiaries), to the extent such
lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the
filing of a financing statement, and (ii) by a pledge by
CCO Holdings of the equity interests owned by it in Charter
Operating or any of Charter Operatings subsidiaries, as
well as intercompany obligations owing to it by any of such
entities. Upon the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio (as defined
in the indenture governing the Charter
F-22
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Holdings senior notes and senior discount notes) being under
8.75 to 1.0, the Charter Operating credit facilities require
that the 11.875% notes due 2008 issued by CC V
Holdings, LLC be redeemed. Because such Leverage Ratio was
determined to be under 8.75 to 1.0, in February 2005, CC V
Holdings has called for redemption of such notes with an
anticipated redemption date of March 14, 2005. Following
such redemption and provided the Leverage Ratio of Charter
Holdings remains under 8.75 to 1.0, CC V Holdings and its
subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor subsidiaries) will
guarantee the Obligations and grant a lien on all of their
assets as to which a lien can be perfected under the Uniform
Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement.
The Charter Operating credit facilities were amended and
restated previously as of June 19, 2003 to allow for the
insertion of intermediate holding companies between Charter
Holdings and Charter Operating. In exchange for the
lenders consent to the organizational restructuring,
Charter Operatings pricing increased by 50 basis
points across all levels in the pricing grid then in effect
under the Charter Operating credit facilities.
Amounts under the Charter Operating credit facilities, as
amended in 2003, bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the
base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 3.0% for
Eurodollar loans (3.15% to 3.92% as of December 31, 2003)
and 2.0% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of
between 0.25% and 0.375% per annum was payable on the
unborrowed balance of the revolving credit facilities.
As of December 31, 2004, outstanding borrowings under the
Charter Operating credit facilities were approximately
$5.5 billion and the unused total potential availability
was $804 million.
CC VI Operating Credit Facilities. As
discussed above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was
substituted as the lender in place of the banks for the
CC VI Operating Credit Facilities.
Prior to April 2004, amounts under the CC VI Operating
credit facilities bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the
base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.5% for
Eurodollar loans (2.40% to 3.66% as of December 31, 2003)
and 1.5% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of
0.25% per year was payable on the unborrowed balance of the
Term A facility and the revolving facility.
Falcon Cable Credit Facilities. As discussed
above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was substituted as the
lender in place of the banks for the Falcon Cable Credit
Facilities.
Prior to April 2004, amounts under the Falcon Cable credit
facilities bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the base
rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.25% for
Eurodollar loans (2.40% to 3.42% as of December 31, 2003)
and up to 1.25% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee
of between 0.25% and 0.375% per year was payable on the
unborrowed balance of the revolving facilities.
CC VIII Operating Credit Facilities. As
discussed above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was
substituted as the lender in place of the banks for the
CC VIII Operating Credit Facilities.
Prior to April 2004, amounts under the CC VIII Operating
credit facilities bear interest at the Eurodollar rate or the
base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.50% for
Eurodollar loans (2.15% to 3.66% as of December 31, 2003)
and up to 1.50% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee
of 0.25% was payable on the unborrowed balance of the revolving
credit facilities.
Charter Operating Credit Facilities Restrictive
Covenants. The Charter Operating credit facilities
contain representations and warranties, affirmative and negative
covenants similar to those described above with respect to the
indentures governing the Companys notes, information
requirements, events of default and financial covenants. The
financial covenants, as defined, measure performance against
standards set for leverage, debt service coverage, and operating
cash flow coverage of cash interest expense on a quarterly basis
or as applicable. Additionally, the credit facilities contain
provisions requiring mandatory loan prepayments under specific
circumstances, including when significant amounts of assets are
sold and the
F-23
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
proceeds are not promptly reinvested in assets useful in the
business of the borrower within a specified period. The Charter
Operating credit facilities also provide that in the event that
any indebtedness of CCO Holdings remains outstanding on the
date, which is six months prior to the scheduled final maturity,
the term loans under the Charter Operating credit facilities
will mature and the revolving credit facilities will terminate
on such date. The events of default under the Charter Operating
credit facilities include, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
the failure to make payments when due or within the applicable
grace period, |
|
|
|
the failure to comply with specified covenants, including but
not limited to a covenant to deliver audited financial
statements with an unqualified opinion from the Companys
independent auditors, |
|
|
|
the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that cause or
permit the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by CCO
Holdings, Charter Operating or Charter Operatings
subsidiaries in amounts in excess of $50 million in
aggregate principal amount, |
|
|
|
the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that result in
the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by certain of CCO
Holdings direct and indirect parent companies in amounts
in excess of $200 million in aggregate principal amount, |
|
|
|
Paul Allen and/or certain of his family members and/or their
exclusively owned entities (collectively, the Paul Allen
Group) ceasing to have the power, directly or indirectly,
to vote at least 35% of the ordinary voting power of Charter
Operating, |
|
|
|
the consummation of any transaction resulting in any person or
group (other than the Paul Allen Group) having power, directly
or indirectly, to vote more than 35% of the ordinary voting
power of Charter Operating, unless the Paul Allen Group holds a
greater share of ordinary voting power of Charter Operating, |
|
|
|
certain of Charter Operatings indirect or direct parent
companies having indebtedness in excess of $500 million
aggregate principal amount which remains undefeased three months
prior to the final maturity of such indebtedness, and |
|
|
|
Charter Operating ceasing to be a wholly-owned direct subsidiary
of CCO Holdings, except in certain very limited circumstances. |
In the event of a default under the Companys
subsidiaries credit facilities or notes, the
subsidiaries creditors could elect to declare all amounts
borrowed, together with accrued and unpaid interest and other
fees, to be due and payable. In such event, the
subsidiaries credit facilities and indentures would not
permit the Companys subsidiaries to distribute funds to
the Company to pay interest or principal on the Companys
notes or its parent companies notes. In addition, the
lenders under the Companys credit facilities could
foreclose on their collateral, which includes equity interests
in the Companys subsidiaries, and exercise other rights of
secured creditors. In any such case, the Company might not be
able to repay or make any payments on its notes or its parent
companies notes. Additionally, an acceleration or payment
default under Charter Operatings credit facilities would
cause a cross-default in the indentures governing the Charter
Holdings notes, CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, Charter
Operating notes and Charters convertible senior notes and
would trigger the cross-default provision of the Charter
Operating Credit Agreement. Any default under any of the
subsidiaries credit facilities or notes might adversely
affect the holders of the Companys notes and the
Companys growth, financial condition and results of
operations and could force the Company to examine all options,
including seeking the protection of the bankruptcy laws.
Based upon outstanding indebtedness as of December 31,
2004, the amortization of term loans, scheduled reductions in
available borrowings of the revolving credit facilities, and the
maturity dates for all
F-24
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
senior and subordinated notes and debentures, total future
principal payments on the total borrowings under all debt
agreements as of December 31, 2004, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Amount | |
|
|
| |
2005
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
2006
|
|
|
30 |
|
2007
|
|
|
280 |
|
2008
|
|
|
857 |
|
2009
|
|
|
780 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
6,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
For the amounts of debt scheduled to mature during 2005, it is
managements intent to fund the repayments from borrowings
on the Companys revolving credit facility. The
accompanying consolidated balance sheet reflects this intent by
presenting all debt balances as long-term while the table above
reflects actual debt maturities as of the stated date.
|
|
10. |
Comprehensive Income (Loss) |
Certain marketable equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized
gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive
loss on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Additionally, the Company reports changes in the fair value of
interest rate agreements designated as hedging the variability
of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations,
that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, in accumulated other comprehensive loss.
Comprehensive loss for the years ended December 31, 2004
and 2002 was $3.3 billion and $5.4 billion,
respectively. Comprehensive income for the year ended
December 31, 2003 was $78 million.
|
|
11. |
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities |
The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative
instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest
rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as
interest rate agreements) to manage its interest costs. The
Companys policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of
fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap
agreements, the Company has agreed to exchange, at specified
intervals through 2007, the difference between fixed and
variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an
agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar
agreements are used to limit the Companys exposure to and
benefits from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt
to within a certain range of rates.
The Company does not hold or issue derivative instruments for
trading purposes. The Company does, however, have certain
interest rate derivative instruments that have been designated
as cash flow hedging instruments. Such instruments effectively
convert variable interest payments on certain debt instruments
into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges,
SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to
offset related results on hedged items in the consolidated
statement of operations. The Company has formally documented,
designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that
receive hedge accounting. For the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments
and hedging activities includes gains of $4 million and
$8 million and losses of $14 million, respectively,
which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate
hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical
terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations.
Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated
as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows
associated
F-25
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness
criteria SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated
other comprehensive loss. For the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002, a gain of $42 million and
$48 million and losses of $65 million, respectively,
related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow
hedges, was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss.
The amounts are subsequently reclassified into interest expense
as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related
interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affects earnings
(losses).
Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated
as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria
specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management
believes such instruments are closely correlated with the
respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate
derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to
fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on
derivative instruments and hedging activities in the
Companys consolidated statement of operations. For the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain
(loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes
gains of $65 million, $57 million and losses of
$101 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative
instruments not designated as hedges.
As of December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company had
outstanding $2.7 billion, $3.0 billion and
$3.4 billion and $20 million, $520 million and
$520 million, respectively, in notional amounts of interest
rate swaps and collars, respectively. The notional amounts of
interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by
the parties and, thus, are not a measure of exposure to credit
loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the
notional amount and the other terms of the contracts.
|
|
12. |
Fair Value of Financial Instruments |
The Company has estimated the fair value of its financial
instruments as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 using
available market information or other appropriate valuation
methodologies. Considerable judgment, however, is required in
interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.
Accordingly, the estimates presented in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements are not necessarily indicative
of the amounts the Company would realize in a current market
exchange.
The carrying amounts of cash, receivables, payables and other
current assets and liabilities approximate fair value because of
the short maturity of those instruments. The Company is exposed
to market price risk volatility with respect to investments in
publicly traded and privately held entities.
The fair value of interest rate agreements represents the
estimated amount the Company would receive or pay upon
termination of the agreements. Management believes that the
sellers of the interest rate agreements will be able to meet
their obligations under the agreements. In addition, some of the
interest rate agreements are with certain of the participating
banks under the Companys credit facilities, thereby
reducing the exposure to credit loss. The Company has policies
regarding the financial stability and credit standing of major
counterparties. Nonperformance by the counterparties is not
anticipated nor would it have a material adverse effect on the
Companys consolidated financial condition or results of
operations.
The estimated fair value of the Companys notes and
interest rate agreements at December 31, 2004 and 2003 are
based on quoted market prices, and the fair value of the credit
facilities is based on dealer quotations.
F-26
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of the carrying value and fair value of the
Companys debt and related interest rate agreements at
December 31, 2004 and 2003 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Carrying | |
|
Fair | |
|
Carrying | |
|
Fair | |
|
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings debt
|
|
$ |
1,050 |
|
|
$ |
1,064 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
510 |
|
Charter Operating debt
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
1,563 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit facilities
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,502 |
|
|
|
7,227 |
|
|
|
6,949 |
|
Other
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
Interest Rate Agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
Swaps
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
Collars
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
The weighted average interest pay rate for the Companys
interest rate swap agreements was 8.07% and 7.25% at
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Revenues consist of the following for the years presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
3,373 |
|
|
$ |
3,461 |
|
|
$ |
3,420 |
|
High-speed data
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
302 |
|
Commercial
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
Other
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,977 |
|
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses consist of the following for the years
presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
1,319 |
|
|
$ |
1,249 |
|
|
$ |
1,166 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Service
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,080 |
|
|
$ |
1,952 |
|
|
$ |
1,807 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-27
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
15. Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the
following for the years presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
849 |
|
|
$ |
833 |
|
|
$ |
810 |
|
Marketing
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
971 |
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
$ |
963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Components of selling expense are included in general and
administrative and marketing expense.
|
|
16. |
Stock Compensation Plans |
Charter grants stock options, restricted stock and other
incentive compensation pursuant to the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
of Charter (the 2001 Plan). Prior to 2001, options
were granted under the 1999 Option Plan of Charter Holdco (the
1999 Plan).
The 1999 Plan provided for the grant of options to purchase
membership units in Charter Holdco to current and prospective
employees and consultants of Charter Holdco and its affiliates
and current and prospective non-employee directors of Charter.
Options granted generally vest over five years from the grant
date, with 25% vesting 15 months after the anniversary of
the grant date and ratably thereafter. Options not exercised
accumulate and are exercisable, in whole or in part, in any
subsequent period, but not later than 10 years from the
date of grant. Membership units received upon exercise of the
options are automatically exchanged into Class A common
stock of Charter on a one-for-one basis.
The 2001 Plan provides for the grant of non-qualified stock
options, stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalent rights,
performance units and performance shares, share awards, phantom
stock and/or shares of restricted stock (not to exceed
3,000,000), as each term is defined in the 2001 Plan. Employees,
officers, consultants and directors of the Company and its
subsidiaries and affiliates are eligible to receive grants under
the 2001 Plan. Options granted generally vest over four years
from the grant date, with 25% vesting on the anniversary of the
grant date and ratably thereafter. Generally, options expire
10 years from the grant date.
The 2001 Plan allows for the issuance of up to a total of
90,000,000 shares of Charter Class A common stock (or
units convertible into Charter Class A common stock). The
total shares available reflect a July 2003 amendment to the 2001
Plan approved by the board of directors and the shareholders of
Charter to increase available shares by 30,000,000 shares.
In 2001, any shares covered by options that terminated under the
1999 Plan were transferred to the 2001 Plan, and no new options
can be granted under the 1999 Plan.
In the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, certain
directors were awarded a total of 182,932 and
80,603 shares, respectively, of restricted Charter
Class A common stock of which 25,705 shares had been
cancelled as of December 31, 2004. The shares vest one year
from the date of grant. In December 2003 and January 2004, in
connection with new employment agreements, certain officers were
awarded 50,000 and 50,000 shares, respectively, of
restricted Charter Class A common stock of which
50,000 shares had been cancelled as of December 31,
2004. The shares vest annually over a four-year period beginning
from the date of grant. As of December 31, 2004, deferred
compensation remaining to be recognized in future period totaled
$0.4 million.
F-28
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of the activity for the Companys stock options,
excluding granted shares of restricted Charter Class A
common stock, for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, is as follows (amounts in thousands, except per share
data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Price | |
|
Shares | |
|
Price | |
|
Shares | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Options outstanding, beginning of period
|
|
|
47,882 |
|
|
$ |
12.48 |
|
|
|
53,632 |
|
|
$ |
14.22 |
|
|
|
46,558 |
|
|
$ |
17.10 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
9,405 |
|
|
|
4.88 |
|
|
|
7,983 |
|
|
|
3.53 |
|
|
|
13,122 |
|
|
|
4.88 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(839 |
) |
|
|
2.02 |
|
|
|
(165 |
) |
|
|
3.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(31,613 |
) |
|
|
15.16 |
|
|
|
(13,568 |
) |
|
|
14.10 |
|
|
|
(6,048 |
) |
|
|
16.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding, end of period
|
|
|
24,835 |
|
|
$ |
6.57 |
|
|
|
47,882 |
|
|
$ |
12.48 |
|
|
|
53,632 |
|
|
$ |
14.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average remaining contractual life
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable, end of period
|
|
|
7,731 |
|
|
$ |
10.77 |
|
|
|
22,861 |
|
|
$ |
16.36 |
|
|
|
17,844 |
|
|
$ |
17.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average fair value of options granted
|
|
$ |
3.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes information about stock options
outstanding and exercisable as of December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Exercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
Remaining | |
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Remaining | |
|
Average | |
Range of |
|
Number | |
|
Contractual | |
|
Exercise | |
|
Number | |
|
Contractual | |
|
Exercise | |
Exercise Prices |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Life | |
|
Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Life | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands) | |
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) | |
|
|
|
|
$ 1.11-$ 1.60
|
|
|
3,144 |
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
$ |
1.52 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
$ |
1.45 |
|
$ 2.85-$ 4.56
|
|
|
7,408 |
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
8 years |
|
|
|
3.28 |
|
$ 5.06-$ 5.17
|
|
|
8,857 |
|
|
|
9 years |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
9 years |
|
|
|
5.06 |
|
$ 9.13-$13.68
|
|
|
2,264 |
|
|
|
7 years |
|
|
|
11.08 |
|
|
|
1,481 |
|
|
|
7 years |
|
|
|
11.28 |
|
$13.96-$23.09
|
|
|
3,162 |
|
|
|
5 years |
|
|
|
19.63 |
|
|
|
2,855 |
|
|
|
5 years |
|
|
|
19.59 |
|
On January 1, 2003, the Company adopted the fair value
measurement provisions of SFAS No. 123, under which
the Company recognizes compensation expense of a stock-based
award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair
value of the award on the grant date. Adoption of these
provisions resulted in utilizing a preferable accounting method
as the consolidated financial statements present the estimated
fair value of stock-based compensation in expense consistently
with other forms of compensation and other expense associated
with goods and services received for equity instruments. In
accordance with SFAS No. 123, the fair value method
will be applied only to awards granted or modified after
January 1, 2003, whereas awards granted prior to such date
will continue to be accounted for under APB No. 25, unless
they are modified or settled in cash. The ongoing effect on
consolidated results of operations or financial condition will
be dependent upon future stock based compensation awards
granted. The Company recorded $31 million of option
compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123, the Company
used the intrinsic value method prescribed by APB No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, to account for
the option plans. Option
F-29
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
compensation expense of $5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2002, was recorded in the consolidated
statements of operations since the exercise prices of certain
options were less than the estimated fair values of the
underlying membership interests on the date of grant.
In January 2004, Charter began an option exchange Program in
which the Company offered its employees the right to exchange
all stock options (vested and unvested) under the 1999 Charter
Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that
had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of
restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some
instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio, which varied
depending on the exercise price of an employees outstanding
options, if an employee would have received more than
400 shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered
options, Charter issued that employee shares of restricted stock
in the exchange. If, based on the exchange ratios, an employee
would have received 400 or fewer shares of restricted stock in
exchange for tendered options, Charter instead paid the employee
cash in an amount equal to the number of shares the employee
would have received multiplied by $5.00. The offer applied to
options (vested and unvested) to purchase a total of
22,929,573 shares of Charter Class A common stock, or
approximately 48% of Charters 47,882,365 total options
issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2003.
Participation by employees was voluntary. Those members of
Charters board of directors who were not also employees of
the Company or any of its subsidiaries were not eligible to
participate in the exchange offer.
In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004,
Charter accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase
approximately 18,137,664 shares of its Class A common
stock. In exchange, Charter granted 1,966,686 shares of
restricted stock, including 460,777 performance shares to
eligible employees of the rank of senior vice president and
above, and paid a total cash amount of approximately
$4 million (which amount includes applicable withholding
taxes) to those employees who received cash rather than shares
of restricted stock. The restricted stock was granted on
February 25, 2004. Employees tendered approximately 79% of
the options eligible to be exchanged under the program.
The cost to the Company of the stock option exchange Program was
approximately $10 million, with a 2004 cash compensation
expense of approximately $4 million and a non-cash
compensation expense of approximately $6 million to be
expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period of the
restricted stock in the exchange.
In January 2004, the Compensation Committee of the board of
directors of Charter approved Charters Long-Term Incentive
Program (LTIP), which is a Program administered
under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the LTIP, employees
of Charter and its subsidiaries whose pay classifications exceed
a certain level are eligible to receive stock options, and more
senior level employees are eligible to receive stock options and
performance shares. The stock options vest 25% on each of the
first four anniversaries of the date of grant. The performance
shares vest on the third anniversary of the grant date and
shares of Charter Class A common stock are issued,
conditional upon Charters performance against financial
performance measures established by Charters management
and approved by its board of directors as of the time of the
award. Charter granted 6.9 million shares in January 2004
under this Program and recognized expense of $8 million in
the first three quarters of 2004. However, in the fourth quarter
of 2004, the Company reversed the entire $8 million of
expense based on the Companys assessment of the
probability of achieving the financial performance measures
established by Charter and required to be met for the
performance shares to vest.
In the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company began a workforce
reduction Program and consolidation of its operations from three
divisions and ten regions into five operating divisions,
eliminating redundant practices and streamlining its management
structure. The Company has recorded special charges as a
F-30
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
result of reducing its workforce and consolidating
administrative offices in 2003 and 2004. The activity associated
with this initiative is summarized in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
Severance/ | |
|
|
|
|
|
Special | |
|
|
Leases | |
|
Litigation | |
|
Other | |
|
Charge | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Special Charges
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2002
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special Charges
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
21 |
|
Payments
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special Charges
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
Payments
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2002 special charges
include $4 million related to legal and other costs
associated with Charters ongoing grand jury investigation,
shareholder lawsuits and Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) investigation and $1 million associated
with severance costs related to a 2001 restructuring plan. For
the year ended December 31, 2003, the severance and lease
costs were offset by a $5 million settlement from the
Internet service provider Excite@Home related to the conversion
of high-speed data customers to Charter Pipeline service in
2001. For the year ended December 31, 2004, special charges
include approximately $85 million, representing the
aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and
warrants to purchase Charter Class A common stock
contemplated to be issued as part of a settlement of
consolidated federal and state class actions and federal
derivative action lawsuits and approximately $10 million of
litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of a
national class action suit, all of which are subject to final
documentation and court approval (see Note 20). For the
year ended December 31, 2004, special charges were offset
by $3 million received from a third party in settlement of
a dispute.
CCO Holdings is a single member limited liability company not
subject to income tax. CCO Holdings holds all operations through
indirect subsidiaries. The majority of these indirect
subsidiaries are limited liability companies that are also not
subject to income tax. However, certain of CCO Holdings
indirect subsidiaries are corporations that are subject to
income tax.
For the year ended December 31, 2003, the Company recorded
income tax expense realized through increases in deferred tax
liabilities and federal and state income taxes related to our
indirect corporate subsidiaries. For the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2002, the Company recorded income tax
benefit for its indirect corporate subsidiaries related to
differences in accounting for franchises.
F-31
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Current and deferred income tax expense (benefit) is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Current expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal income taxes
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
State income taxes
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income tax expense
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred benefit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal income taxes
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(219 |
) |
|
State income taxes
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax (benefit) expense:
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(250 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income (benefit) expense
|
|
$ |
(51 |
) |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
(248 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company recorded the portion of the income tax benefit
associated with the adoption of EITF Topic D-108 and
SFAS No. 142 as a $16 million and a
$32 million reduction of the cumulative effect of
accounting change on the accompanying statement of operations
for the years ended December 31, 2004 and December 31,
2002, respectively.
The Companys effective tax rate differs from that derived
by applying the applicable federal income tax rate of 35%, and
average state income tax rate of 5% for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Statutory federal income taxes
|
|
$ |
(887 |
) |
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
(1,737 |
) |
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(127 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(248 |
) |
Losses allocated to limited liability companies not subject to
income taxes
|
|
|
943 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
1,740 |
|
Valuation allowance provided
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(248 |
) |
Less: cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
$ |
(35 |
) |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
(216 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-32
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The tax effects of these temporary differences that give rise to
significant portions of the deferred tax assets and deferred tax
liabilities at December 31, 2004 and 2003 for the indirect
corporate subsidiaries of the Company which are included in
long-term liabilities are presented below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carryforward
|
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
80 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross deferred tax assets
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
Less: valuation allowance
|
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant & equipment
|
|
$ |
(39 |
) |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
Franchises
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
(260 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
(302 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$ |
(208 |
) |
|
$ |
(267 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company has deferred
tax assets of $103 million and $86 million,
respectively, which primarily relate to net operating loss
carryforwards of certain of its indirect corporate subsidiaries.
These net operating loss carryforwards (generally expiring in
years 2005 through 2024) of $95 million, are subject to
certain return limitations. Valuation allowances of
$71 million and $51 million exist with respect to
these carryforwards as of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets,
management considers whether it is more likely than not that
some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will be realized.
Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax
liabilities, projected future taxable income and tax planning
strategies in making this assessment. Management believes that
the deferred tax assets will be realized prior to the expiration
of the tax net operating loss carryforwards in 2005 through
2024, except for those tax net operating loss carryforwards that
may be subject to certain limitations. Because of the
uncertainty associated in realizing the deferred tax assets
associated with the potentially limited tax net operating loss
carryforwards, valuation allowances have been established except
for deferred tax assets available to offset deferred tax
liabilities.
Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal
Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 1999,
2000, 2002 and 2003. The results of the Company (excluding the
indirect corporate subsidiaries) for these years are subject to
this examination. Management does not expect the results of this
examination to have a material adverse effect on the
Companys financial condition or results of operations.
|
|
19. |
Related Party Transactions |
The following sets forth certain transactions in which the
Company and the directors, executive officers and affiliates of
the Company are involved. Unless otherwise disclosed, management
believes that each of the transactions described below was on
terms no less favorable to the Company than could have been
obtained from independent third parties.
Charter is a party to management arrangements with Charter
Holdco and certain of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements,
Charter provides management services for the cable systems owned
or operated
F-33
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
by its subsidiaries. The management services include such
services as centralized customer billing services, data
processing and related support, benefits administration and
coordination of insurance coverage and self-insurance programs
for medical, dental and workers compensation claims. Costs
associated with providing these services are billed and charged
directly to the Companys operating subsidiaries and are
included within operating costs in the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations. Such costs totaled $202 million,
$210 million and $176 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. All other
costs incurred on the behalf of the Companys operating
subsidiaries are considered a part of the management fee and are
recorded as a component of selling, general and administrative
expense, in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the
management fee charged to the Companys operating
subsidiaries approximated the expenses incurred by Charter
Holdco and Charter on behalf of the Companys operating
subsidiaries. The credit facilities of the Companys
operating subsidiaries prohibit payments of management fees in
excess of 3.5% of revenues until repayment of the outstanding
indebtedness. In the event any portion of the management fee due
and payable is not paid, it is deferred by Charter and accrued
as a liability of such subsidiaries. Any deferred amount of the
management fee will bear interest at the rate of 10% per
year, compounded annually, from the date it was due and payable
until the date it is paid.
Mr. Allen, the controlling shareholder of Charter, and a
number of his affiliates have interests in various entities that
provide services or programming to Charters subsidiaries.
Given the diverse nature of Mr. Allens investment
activities and interests, and to avoid the possibility of future
disputes as to potential business, Charter and Charter Holdco,
under the terms of their respective organizational documents,
may not, and may not allow their subsidiaries to engage in any
business transaction outside the cable transmission business
except for certain existing approved investments. Should Charter
or Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries wish to pursue,
or allow their subsidiaries to pursue, a business transaction
outside of this scope, it must first offer Mr. Allen the
opportunity to pursue the particular business transaction. If he
decides not to pursue the business transaction and consents to
Charter or its subsidiaries engaging in the business
transaction, they will be able to do so. The cable transmission
business means the business of transmitting video, audio,
including telephony, and data over cable systems owned, operated
or managed by Charter, Charter Holdco or any of their
subsidiaries from time to time.
Mr. Allen or his affiliates own or have owned equity
interests or warrants to purchase equity interests in various
entities with which the Company does business or which provides
it with products, services or programming. Among these entities
are TechTV L.L.C. (TechTV), Oxygen Media Corporation
(Oxygen Media), Digeo, Inc., Click2learn, Inc.,
Trail Blazer Inc., Action Sports Cable Network (Action
Sports) and Microsoft Corporation. In addition,
Mr. Allen and William Savoy, a former Charter director,
were directors of USA Networks, Inc. (USA Networks),
who operates the USA Network, The Sci-Fi Channel, Trio, World
News International and Home Shopping Network, owning
approximately 5% and less than 1%, respectively, of the common
stock of USA Networks. In 2002, Mr. Allen and
Mr. Savoy sold their common stock and are no longer
directors of the USA Network. In May 2004, TechTV was sold to an
unrelated third party. Mr. Allen owns 100% of the equity of
Vulcan Ventures Incorporated (Vulcan Ventures) and
Vulcan Inc. and is the president of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo
Allen Patton is a director and the President and Chief Executive
Officer of Vulcan Inc. and is a director and Vice President of
Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President
of Vulcan Inc. and Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Savoy was a vice
president and a director of Vulcan Ventures until his
resignation in September 2003 and he resigned as a director of
Charter in April 2004. The various cable, media, Internet and
telephony companies in which Mr. Allen has invested may
mutually benefit one another. The Company can give no assurance,
nor should you expect, that any of these business relationships
will be successful, that the Company will realize any benefits
from these relationships or that the Company will enter into any
business relationships in the future with Mr. Allens
affiliated companies.
F-34
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Mr. Allen and his affiliates have made, and in the future
likely will make, numerous investments outside of the Company
and its business. The Company cannot assure that, in the event
that the Company or any of its subsidiaries enter into
transactions in the future with any affiliate of Mr. Allen,
such transactions will be on terms as favorable to the Company
as terms it might have obtained from an unrelated third party.
Also, conflicts could arise with respect to the allocation of
corporate opportunities between the Company and Mr. Allen
and his affiliates. The Company has not instituted any formal
plan or arrangement to address potential conflicts of interest.
High Speed Access Corp. (High Speed
Access) was a provider of high-speed Internet access
services over cable modems. During the period from 1997 to 2000,
certain Charter entities entered into Internet-access related
service agreements, and both Vulcan Ventures, an entity owned by
Mr. Allen, and Charter Holdco made equity investments in
High Speed Access.
On February 28, 2002, Charters subsidiary,
CC Systems, purchased from High Speed Access the contracts
and associated assets, and assumed related liabilities, that
served the Companys customers, including a customer
contact center, network operations center and provisioning
software. Immediately prior to the asset purchase, Vulcan
Ventures beneficially owned approximately 37%, and the Company
beneficially owned approximately 13%, of the common stock of
High Speed Access (including the shares of common stock which
could be acquired upon conversion of the Series D preferred
stock, and upon exercise of the warrants owned by Charter
Holdco). Following the consummation of the asset purchase,
neither the Company nor Vulcan Ventures beneficially owned any
securities of, or were otherwise affiliated with, High Speed
Access.
The Company receives or will receive programming for broadcast
via its cable systems from TechTV (now G4), USA Networks, Oxygen
Media, Trail Blazers Inc. and Action Sports. The Company pays a
fee for the programming service generally based on the number of
customers receiving the service. Such fees for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were each less than 1% of
total operating expenses with the exception of USA Networks
which was 2%, 2% and 2% of total operating expenses for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
In addition, the Company receives commissions from USA Networks
for home shopping sales generated by its customers. Such
revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002 were less than 1% of total revenues. On November 5,
2002, Action Sports announced that it was discontinuing its
business. The Company believes that the failure of Action Sports
will not materially affect the Companys business or
results of operations.
Tech TV. The Company receives from TechTV
programming for distribution via its cable system pursuant to an
affiliation agreement. The affiliation agreement provides, among
other things, that TechTV must offer Charter certain terms and
conditions that are no less favorable in the affiliation
agreement than are given to any other distributor that serves
the same number of or fewer TechTV viewing customers.
Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation agreement, the Company
was entitled to incentive payments for channel launches through
December 31, 2003.
In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with
Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for
(i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation
agreement which, among other things, revises the description of
the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive
certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of
the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make
payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco
under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to
pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month
period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising
time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in
consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and
waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the
aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of
content relating to technology and video gaming for
Charters interactive television platforms through
December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For the
year ended December 31, 2004, the Company recognized
F-35
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
approximately $5 million of the Vulcan Programming payment
as an offset to programming expense and paid approximately
$2 million to Tech TV under the affiliation agreement.
Oxygen. Concurrently with the execution of a
carriage agreement, Charter Holdco entered into an equity
issuance agreement pursuant to which Oxygen Media LLCs
(Oxygen) parent company, Oxygen Media Corporation
(Oxygen Media), granted a subsidiary of Charter
Holdco a warrant to purchase 2.4 million shares of common
stock of Oxygen Media for an exercise price of $22.00 per
share. In February 2005, the warrant expired unexercised.
Charter Holdco was also to receive unregistered shares of Oxygen
Media common stock with a guaranteed fair market value on the
date of issuance of $34 million, on or prior to
February 2, 2005 with the exact date to be determined by
Oxygen Media, but this commitment was later revised as discussed
below.
The Company recognizes the guaranteed value of the investment
over the life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of
programming expense. For the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, the Company recorded approximately
$13 million, $9 million, and $6 million,
respectively, as a reduction of programming expense. The
carrying value of the Companys investment in Oxygen was
approximately $32 million and $19 million as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into
agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The
amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number
of the Companys customers to which Oxygen programming must
be carried and for which the Company must pay, (b) releases
Charter Holdco from any claims related to the failure to achieve
distribution benchmarks under the carriage agreement,
(c) requires Oxygen to make payment on outstanding
receivables for marketing support fees due to the Company under
the affiliation agreement; and (d) requires that Oxygen
provide its programming content to the Company on economic terms
no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable or
satellite operator having fewer subscribers than the Company.
The renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the
period that the Company will carry Oxygen programming to its
customers through January 31, 2008, and (b) requires
license fees to be paid based on customers receiving Oxygen
programming, rather than for specific customer benchmarks.
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the
equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of
1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a
liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued
dividends to Charter Holdco on February 1, 2005 in place of
the $34 million of unregistered shares of Oxygen Media
common stock. Oxygen Media will deliver these shares in March
2005. The preferred stock is convertible into common stock after
December 31, 2007 at a conversion ratio, the numerator of
which is the liquidation preference and the denominator which is
the fair market value per share of Oxygen Media common stock on
the conversion date.
Digeo, Inc. In March 2001, Charter Ventures and
Vulcan Ventures Incorporated formed DBroadband Holdings, LLC for
the sole purpose of purchasing equity interests in Digeo. In
connection with the execution of the broadband carriage
agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC purchased an equity interest
in Digeo funded by contributions from Vulcan Ventures
Incorporated. The equity interest is subject to a priority
return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to the amount
contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures behalf.
After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount contributed and any
cumulative loss allocations, Charter Ventures has a 100% profit
interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC. Charter Ventures is not
required to make any capital contributions, including capital
calls, and may require Vulcan Ventures, through January 24,
2004, to make certain additional contributions through
DBroadband Holdings, LLC to acquire additional equity in Digeo
as necessary to maintain Charter Ventures pro rata
interest in Digeo in the event of certain future Digeo equity
financings by the founders of Digeo. These additional equity
interests are also subject to a priority return of capital to
Vulcan Ventures up to amounts contributed by Vulcan Ventures on
Charter Ventures behalf. DBroadband Holdings, LLC is
therefore not included in the Companys consolidated
financial statements. Pursuant to an amended version of this
F-36
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures contributed a total of
$29 million to Digeo, $7 million of which was
contributed on Charter Ventures behalf, subject to Vulcan
Ventures aforementioned priority return. Since the
formation of DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has
contributed approximately $56 million on Charter
Ventures behalf.
On June 30, 2003, Charter Holdco entered into an agreement
with Motorola, Inc. for the purchase of 100,000 digital video
recorder (DVR) units. The software for these DVR
units is being supplied by Digeo Interactive, LLC under a
license agreement entered into in April 2004. Under the license
agreement Digeo Interactive granted to Charter Holdco the right
to use Digeos proprietary software for the number of DVR
units that Charter deploys from a maximum of 10 headends through
year-end 2004. This maximum number of headends was increased
from 10 to 15 pursuant to a letter agreement executed on
June 11, 2004 and the date for entering into license
agreements for units deployed was extended to June 30,
2005. The number of headends was increased again from 15 to 20
pursuant to a letter agreement dated August 4, 2004, from
20 to 30 pursuant to a letter agreement dated September 28,
2004 and from 30 to 50 headends by a letter agreement in
February 2005. The license granted for each unit deployed under
the agreement is valid for five years. In addition, Charter will
pay certain other fees including a per-headend license fee and
maintenance fees. Maximum license and maintenance fees during
the term of the agreement are expected to be approximately
$7 million. The agreement provides that Charter is entitled
to receive contract terms, considered on the whole, and license
fees, considered apart from other contract terms, no less
favorable than those accorded to any other Digeo customer.
Charter paid $474,400 in license and maintenance fees in 2004.
In April 2004, the Company launched DVR service (using units
containing the Digeo software) in its Rochester, Minnesota
market using a broadband media center that is an integrated
set-top terminal with a cable converter, DVR hard drive and
connectivity to other consumer electronics devices (such as
stereos, MP3 players, and digital cameras).
In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet
with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase
of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that
the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to
year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development,
testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would
enter into a license agreement for Digeos proprietary
software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the
license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter
Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and
in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement,
each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet.
Product development and testing is continuing. Total purchase
price and license and maintenance fees during the term of the
definitive agreements are expected to be approximately
$41 million. The definitive agreements are terminable at no
penalty to Charter in certain circumstances.
A wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo, Digeo Interactive, provides
interactive channel (i-channel) service to Charter on a
month-to-month basis. In the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, Charter paid Digeo Interactive $3 million,
$4 million and $3 million, respectively, for
customized development of i-channels and an interactive
toolkit to enable Charter to develop interactive
local content.
On January 10, 2003, the Company signed an agreement to
carry two around-the-clock, high-definition networks, HDNet and
HDNet Movies. HDNet Movies delivers a commercial-free schedule
of full-length feature films converted from 35mm to
high-definition, including titles from an extensive library of
Warner Bros. films. HDNet Movies will feature a mix of
theatrical releases, made-for-TV movies, independent films and
shorts. The HDNet channel features a variety of HDTV
programming, including live sports, sitcoms, dramas, action
series, documentaries, travel programs, music concerts and
shows, special events, and news features including HDNet World
Report. HDNet also offers a selection of classic
F-37
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
and recent television series. The Company paid HDNet and HDNet
Movies approximately $0.6 million in 2004. The Company
believes that entities controlled by Mr. Cuban owned
approximately 81% of HDNet as of December 31, 2004. As of
December 31, 2004, the Company believes that Mark Cuban,
co-founder and president of HDNet, owned approximately 6.2% of
the total common equity in Charter based on a Schedule 13G
filed with the SEC on May 21, 2003.
As part of the acquisition of the cable systems owned by Bresnan
Communications Company Limited Partnership in February 2000, CC
VIII, LLC, CCH IIs indirect limited liability company
subsidiary, issued, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A
preferred membership units (collectively, the CC VIII
interest) with a value and an initial capital account of
approximately $630 million to certain sellers affiliated
with AT&T Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast
Corporation (the Comcast sellers). While held by the
Comcast sellers, the CC VIII interest was entitled to a 2%
priority return on its initial capital account and such priority
return was entitled to preferential distributions from available
cash and upon liquidation of CC VIII. While held by the Comcast
sellers, the CC VIII interest generally did not share in the
profits and losses of CC VIII. Mr. Allen granted the
Comcast sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII interest
for approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest annually
from February 2000 (the Comcast put right). In April
2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right in
full, and this transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003.
Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the holder of the
CC VIII interest, indirectly through an affiliate.
Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in the next
paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter will be allocated
his pro rata share (based on number of membership interests
outstanding) of profits or losses of CC VIII. In the event of a
liquidation of CC VIII, Mr. Allen would be entitled to
a priority distribution with respect to the 2% priority return
(which will continue to accrete). Any remaining distributions in
liquidation would be distributed to CC V Holdings, LLC and
Mr. Allen in proportion to CC V Holdings, LLCs
capital account and Mr. Allens capital account (which
will equal the initial capital account of the Comcast sellers of
approximately $630 million, increased or decreased by
Mr. Allens pro rata share of CC VIIIs profits
or losses (as computed for capital account purposes) after
June 6, 2003). The limited liability company agreement of
CC VIII does not provide for a mandatory redemption of the CC
VIII interest.
An issue has arisen as to whether the documentation for the
Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the
ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following
consummation of the Comcast put right. Specifically, under the
terms of the Bresnan transaction documents that were entered
into in June 1999, the Comcast sellers originally would have
received, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Charter Holdco
membership units, but due to an FCC regulatory issue raised by
the Comcast sellers shortly before closing, the Bresnan
transaction was modified to provide that the Comcast sellers
instead would receive the preferred equity interests in CC VIII
represented by the CC VIII interest. As part of the last-minute
changes to the Bresnan transaction documents, a draft amended
version of the Charter Holdco limited liability company
agreement was prepared, and contract provisions were drafted for
that agreement that would have required an automatic exchange of
the CC VIII interest for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership
units if the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right and
sold the CC VIII interest to Mr. Allen or his
affiliates. However, the provisions that would have required
this automatic exchange did not appear in the final version of
the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement that was
delivered and executed at the closing of the Bresnan
transaction. The law firm that prepared the documents for the
Bresnan transaction brought this matter to the attention of
Charter and representatives of Mr. Allen in 2002.
Thereafter, the board of directors of Charter formed a Special
Committee (currently comprised of Messrs. Merritt, Tory and
Wangberg) to investigate the matter and take any other
appropriate action on behalf of Charter with respect to this
matter. After conducting an investigation of the relevant facts
and circumstances, the Special Committee determined that a
scriveners error had occurred in February 2000
in connection with the preparation of the last-minute revisions
to the Bresnan transaction documents
F-38
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
and that, as a result, Charter should seek the reformation of
the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement, or
alternative relief, in order to restore and ensure the
obligation that the CC VIII interest be automatically exchanged
for Charter Holdco units. The Special Committee further
determined that, as part of such contract reformation or
alternative relief, Mr. Allen should be required to
contribute the CC VIII interest to Charter Holdco in
exchange for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units. The
Special Committee also recommended to the board of directors of
Charter that, to the extent the contract reformation is
achieved, the board of directors should consider whether the CC
VIII interest should ultimately be held by Charter Holdco or
Charter Holdings or another entity owned directly or indirectly
by them.
Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committees
determinations described above and has so notified the Special
Committee. Mr. Allen contends that the transaction is
accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and
contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures.
The parties engaged in a process of non-binding mediation to
seek to resolve this matter, without success. The Special
Committee is evaluating what further actions or processes it may
undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further
deliberation, each party has agreed to refrain from initiating
legal proceedings over this matter until it has given at least
ten days prior notice to the other. In addition, the
Special Committee and Mr. Allen have determined to utilize
the Delaware Court of Chancerys program for mediation of
complex business disputes in an effort to resolve the CC VIII
interest dispute. If the Special Committee and Mr. Allen
are unable to reach a resolution through that mediation process
or to agree on an alternative dispute resolution process, the
Special Committee intends to seek resolution of this dispute
through judicial proceedings in an action that would be
commenced, after appropriate notice, in the Delaware Court of
Chancery against Mr. Allen and his affiliates seeking
contract reformation, declaratory relief as to the respective
rights of the parties regarding this dispute and alternative
forms of legal and equitable relief. The ultimate resolution and
financial impact of the dispute are not determinable at this
time.
|
|
20. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
The following table summarizes the Companys payment
obligations as of December 31, 2004 for its contractual
obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2008 | |
|
2009 | |
|
Thereafter | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Contractual Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating and Capital Lease Obligations(1)
|
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
18 |
|
Programming Minimum Commitments(2)
|
|
|
1,579 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,939 |
|
|
$ |
403 |
|
|
$ |
411 |
|
|
$ |
435 |
|
|
$ |
343 |
|
|
$ |
262 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The Company leases certain facilities and equipment under
noncancellable operating leases. Leases and rental costs charged
to expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, were $23 million, $30 million and
$31 million, respectively. |
|
(2) |
The Company pays programming fees under multi-year contracts
ranging from three to six years typically based on a flat fee
per customer, which may be fixed for the term or may in some
cases, escalate over the term. Programming costs included in the
accompanying statement of operations were $1.3 billion,
$1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Certain of
the Companys programming agreements are based on a flat
fee per month or |
F-39
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
have guaranteed minimum payments. The table sets forth the
aggregate guaranteed minimum commitments under the
Companys programming contracts. |
|
(3) |
Other represents other guaranteed minimum
commitments, which consist primarily of commitments to the
Companys billing services vendors. |
The following items are not included in the contractual
obligation table due to various factors discussed below.
However, the Company incurs these costs as part of its
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
The Company also rents utility poles used in its operations.
Generally, pole rentals are cancelable on short notice, but the
Company anticipates that such rentals will recur. Rent expense
incurred for pole rental attachments for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, was $43 million,
$40 million and $41 million, respectively. |
|
|
|
The Company pays franchise fees under multi-year franchise
agreements based on a percentage of revenues earned from video
service per year. The Company also pays other franchise related
costs, such as public education grants under multi-year
agreements. Franchise fees and other franchise-related costs
included in the accompanying statement of operations were
$164 million, $162 million and $160 million for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. |
|
|
|
The Company also has $166 million in letters of credit,
primarily to its various workers compensation, property
casualty and general liability carriers as collateral for
reimbursement of claims. These letters of credit reduce the
amount the Company may borrow under its credit facilities. |
Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the
Federal Class Actions) were filed against
Charter and certain of its former and present officers and
directors in various jurisdictions allegedly on behalf of all
purchasers of Charters securities during the period from
either November 8 or November 9, 1999 through July 17 or
July 18, 2002. Unspecified damages were sought by the
plaintiffs. In general, the lawsuits alleged that Charter
utilized misleading accounting practices and failed to disclose
these accounting practices and/or issued false and misleading
financial statements and press releases concerning
Charters operations and prospects. The Federal
Class Actions were specifically and individually identified
in public filings made by Charter prior to the date of this
annual report.
In October 2002, Charter filed a motion with the Judicial Panel
on Multidistrict Litigation (the Panel) to transfer
the Federal Class Actions to the Eastern District of
Missouri. On March 12, 2003, the Panel transferred the six
Federal Class Actions not filed in the Eastern District of
Missouri to that district for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings with the eight Federal Class Actions
already pending there. The Panels transfer order assigned
the Federal Class Actions to Judge Charles A. Shaw. By
virtue of a prior court order, StoneRidge Investment Partners
LLC became lead plaintiff upon entry of the Panels
transfer order. StoneRidge subsequently filed a Consolidated
Amended Complaint. The Court subsequently consolidated the
Federal Class Actions into a single action (the
Consolidated Federal Class Action) for pretrial
purposes. On June 19, 2003, following a status and
scheduling conference with the parties, the Court issued a Case
Management Order setting forth a schedule for the pretrial phase
of the Consolidated Class Action. Motions to dismiss the
Consolidated Amended Complaint were filed. On February 10,
2004, in response to a joint motion made by StoneRidge and
defendants, Charter, Vogel and Allen, the court entered an order
providing, among other things, that: (1) the parties who
filed such motion engage in a mediation within ninety
(90) days; and (2) all proceedings in the Consolidated
Federal Class Actions were stayed until May 10, 2004.
On May 11, 2004, the Court extended the stay in the
Consolidated Federal Class Action for an additional sixty
(60) days. On July 12, 2004, the parties submitted a
joint motion to again extend the stay, this time until
September 10, 2004. The Court granted
F-40
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
that extension on July 20, 2004. On August 5, 2004,
Stoneridge, Charter and the individual defendants who were the
subject of the suit entered into a Memorandum of Understanding
setting forth agreements in principle to settle the Consolidated
Federal Class Action. These parties subsequently entered
into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24,
2005 (described more fully below) which incorporate the terms of
the August 5, 2004 Memorandum of Understanding.
On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the
State Derivative Action) was filed in the Circuit
Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the
Missouri State Court) against Charter and its then
current directors, as well as its former auditors. A
substantively identical derivative action was later filed and
consolidated into the State Derivative Action. The plaintiffs
allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary
duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal
controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on
Charters behalf, were sought by the plaintiffs.
On March 12, 2004, an action substantively identical to the
State Derivative Action was filed in the Missouri State Court,
against Charter and certain of its current and former directors,
as well as its former auditors. The plaintiffs in that case
alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary
duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal
controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on
Charters behalf, were sought by plaintiffs. On
July 14, 2004, the Court consolidated this case with the
State Derivative Action.
Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative
suit (the Federal Derivative Action) was filed
against Charter and its then current directors in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The
plaintiff in that suit alleged that the individual defendants
breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter
by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls
and procedures.
As noted above, Charter entered into Memoranda of Understanding
on August 5, 2004 setting forth agreements in principle
regarding settlement of the Consolidated Federal
Class Action, the State Derivative Action(s) and the
Federal Derivative Action (the Actions). Charter and
various other defendants in those actions subsequently entered
into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24,
2005, setting forth a settlement of the Actions in a manner
consistent with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding.
The Stipulations of Settlement, along with the various
supporting documentation, were filed with the Court on
February 2, 2005. The Settlements provide that, in exchange
for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against Charter and
its former and present officers and directors named in the
Actions, Charter will pay to the plaintiffs a combination of
cash and equity collectively valued at $144 million, which
will include the fees and expenses of plaintiffs counsel.
Of this amount, $64 million will be paid in cash (by
Charters insurance carriers) and the balance will be paid
in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to
purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate warrant value of $40 million. The warrants would
have an exercise price equal to 150% of the fair market value
(as defined) of Charter Class A common stock as of the date
of the entry of the order of final judgment approving the
settlement. In addition, Charter expects to issue additional
shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier
having an aggregate value of $5 million. As a result, in
the second quarter of 2004, the Company recorded a
$149 million litigation liability within other long-term
liabilities and a $64 million insurance receivable as part
of other non-current assets on its consolidated balance sheet
and an $85 million special charge on its consolidated
statement of operations. Additionally, as part of the
settlements, Charter will also commit to a variety of corporate
governance changes, internal practices and public disclosures,
some of which have already been undertaken and none of which are
inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in connection with
the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation described below.
Documents related to the settlement of the Actions have now been
executed and filed. On February 15, 2005, the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri gave
preliminary approval to the settlement of the Actions. The
settlement of
F-41
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
each of the lawsuits remains conditioned upon, among other
things, final judicial approval of the settlements following
notice to the class, and dismissal, with prejudice, of the
consolidated derivative actions now pending in Missouri State
Court, which are related to the Federal Derivative Action.
In addition to the Federal Class Actions, the State
Derivative Action (s), the new Missouri State Court derivative
action and the Federal Derivative Action, six putative class
action lawsuits have been filed against Charter and certain of
its then current directors and officers in the Court of Chancery
of the State of Delaware (the Delaware
Class Actions). The lawsuits were filed after the
filing of a Schedule 13D amendment by Mr. Allen
indicating that he was exploring a number of possible
alternatives with respect to restructuring or expanding his
ownership interest in Charter. Charter believes the plaintiffs
speculated that Mr. Allen might have been contemplating an
unfair bid for shares of Charter or some other sort of going
private transaction on unfair terms and generally alleged that
the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by participating
in or acquiescing to such a transaction. The lawsuits, which are
substantively identical, were brought on behalf of
Charters securities holders as of July 29, 2002, and
sought unspecified damages and possible injunctive relief.
However, no such transaction by Mr. Allen has been
presented. On April 30, 2004, orders of dismissal without
prejudice were entered in each of the Delaware
Class Actions.
In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury
investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorneys
Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its
accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter
reported customer numbers and its reporting of amounts received
from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The
U.S. Attorneys Office has publicly stated that
Charter is not a target of the investigation. Charter was also
advised by the U.S. Attorneys Office that no current
officer or member of its board of directors is a target of the
investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury
charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail
and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting
practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal
suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Each of the
indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts
related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and are
awaiting sentencing. Charter has advised the Company that it is
fully cooperating with the investigation.
On November 4, 2002, Charter received an informal,
non-public inquiry from the staff of the SEC. The SEC issued a
formal order of investigation dated January 23, 2003, and
subsequently served document and testimony subpoenas on Charter
and a number of its former employees. The investigation and
subpoenas generally concerned Charters prior reports with
respect to its determination of the number of customers, and
various of its accounting policies and practices including its
capitalization of certain expenses and dealings with certain
vendors, including programmers and digital set-top terminal
suppliers. On July 27, 2004, the SEC and Charter reached a
final agreement to settle the investigation. In the Settlement
Agreement and Cease and Desist Order, Charter agreed to entry of
an administrative order prohibiting any future violation of
United States securities laws and requiring certain other
remedial internal practices and public disclosures. Charter
neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing, and the SEC assessed
no fine against Charter.
Charter is generally required to indemnify each of the named
individual defendants in connection with the matters described
above pursuant to the terms of its bylaws and (where applicable)
such individual defendants employment agreements. In
accordance with these documents, in connection with the pending
grand jury investigation, the now settled SEC investigation and
the above described lawsuits, some of Charters current and
former directors and current and former officers have been
advanced certain costs and expenses incurred in connection with
their defense. On February 22, 2005, Charter filed suit
against four of its former officers who were indicted in the
course of the grand jury investigation. These suits seek to
recover the legal fees and other related expenses advanced to
these individuals by Charter for the grand jury investigation,
SEC investigation and class action and related lawsuits.
F-42
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In October 2001, two customers, Nikki Nicholls and
Geraldine M. Barber, filed a class action suit against
Charter Holdco in South Carolina Court of Common Pleas (the
South Carolina Class Action), purportedly on
behalf of a class of Charter Holdcos customers, alleging
that Charter Holdco improperly charged them a wire maintenance
fee without request or permission. They also claimed that
Charter Holdco improperly required them to rent analog and/or
digital set-top terminals even though their television sets were
cable ready. A substantively identical case was
filed in the Superior Court of Athens Clarke County,
Georgia by Emma S. Tobar on March 26, 2002 (the
Georgia Class Action), alleging a nationwide
class for these claims. Charter Holdco removed the South
Carolina Class Action to the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina in November 2001, and moved
to dismiss the suit in December 2001. The federal judge remanded
the case to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas in August
2002 without ruling on the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs
subsequently moved for a default judgment, arguing that upon
return to state court, Charter Holdco should have, but did not
file a new motion to dismiss. The state court judge granted the
plaintiffs motion over Charter Holdcos objection in
September 2002. Charter Holdco immediately appealed that
decision to the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the South
Carolina Supreme Court, but those courts ruled that until a
final judgment was entered against Charter Holdco, they lacked
jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
In January 2003, the Court of Common Pleas granted the
plaintiffs motion for class certification. In October and
November 2003, Charter Holdco filed motions (a) asking that
court to set aside the default judgment, and (b) seeking
dismissal of plaintiffs suit for failure to state a claim.
In January 2004, the Court of Common Pleas granted in part and
denied in part Charter Holdcos motion to dismiss for
failure to state a claim. It also took under advisement Charter
Holdcos motion to set aside the default judgment. In April
2004, the parties to both the Georgia and South Carolina
Class Actions participated in a mediation. The mediator
made a proposal to the parties to settle the lawsuits. In May
2004, the parties accepted the mediators proposal and
reached a tentative settlement, subject to final documentation
and court approval. As a result of the tentative settlement, the
Company recorded a special charge of $9 million in its
consolidated statement of operations in the first quarter of
2004. On July 8, 2004, the Superior Court of
Athens Clarke County, Georgia granted a motion to
amend the Tobar complaint to add Nicholls, Barber and April
Jones as plaintiffs in the Georgia Class Action and to add
any potential class members in South Carolina. The court also
granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on that
date. On August 2, 2004, the parties submitted a joint
request to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to stay the
South Carolina Class Action pending final approval of the
settlement and on August 17, 2004, that court granted the
parties request. On November 10, 2004, the court
granted final approval of the settlement, rejecting positions
advanced by two objectors to the settlement. On
December 13, 2004 the court entered a written order
formally approving that settlement. On January 11, 2005,
certain class members appealed the order entered by the Georgia
court. Those objectors voluntarily dismissed their appeal with
prejudice on February 8, 2005. On February 9, 2005,
the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas entered a court order
of dismissal for the South Carolina Class Action.
Additionally, one of the objectors to this settlement recently
filed a similar, but not identical, lawsuit.
Furthermore, Charter is also party to other lawsuits and claims
that arose in the ordinary course of conducting its business. In
the opinion of management, after taking into account recorded
liabilities, the outcome of these other lawsuits and claims are
not expected to have a material adverse effect on the
Companys consolidated financial condition, results of
operations or its liquidity.
|
|
|
Regulation in the Cable Industry |
The operation of a cable system is extensively regulated by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), some state
governments and most local governments. The FCC has the
authority to enforce its regulations through the imposition of
substantial fines, the issuance of cease and desist orders
and/or the imposition of other administrative sanctions, such as
the revocation of FCC licenses needed to operate
F-43
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
certain transmission facilities used in connection with cable
operations. The 1996 Telecom Act altered the regulatory
structure governing the nations communications providers.
It removed barriers to competition in both the cable television
market and the local telephone market. Among other things, it
reduced the scope of cable rate regulation and encouraged
additional competition in the video programming industry by
allowing local telephone companies to provide video programming
in their own telephone service areas.
The 1996 Telecom Act required the FCC to undertake a number of
implementing rulemakings. Moreover, Congress and the FCC have
frequently revisited the subject of cable regulation. Future
legislative and regulatory changes could adversely affect the
Companys operations.
|
|
21. |
Employee Benefit Plan |
The Companys employees may participate in the Charter
Communications, Inc. 401(k) Plan. Employees that qualify for
participation can contribute up to 50% of their salary, on a
pre-tax basis, subject to a maximum contribution limit as
determined by the Internal Revenue Service. The Company matches
50% of the first 5% of participant contributions. The Company
made contributions to the 401(k) plan totaling $7 million,
$7 million and $8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
|
|
22. |
Recently Issued Accounting Standards |
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
issued the revised SFAS No. 123, Share
Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for
share-based payment transactions in which a company receives
employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of
that company or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair
value of the companys equity instruments or that may be
settled by the issuance of such equity instruments. This
statement will be effective for the Company beginning
July 1, 2005. Because the Company adopted the fair value
recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 on
January 1, 2003, the Company does not expect this revised
standard to have a material impact on its financial statements.
The Company does not believe that any other recently issued, but
not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would
have a material effect on the Companys accompanying
financial statements.
|
|
23. |
Parent Company Only Financial Statements |
As the result of limitations on, and prohibitions of,
distributions, substantially all of the net assets of the
consolidated subsidiaries are restricted from distribution to
CCO Holdings, the parent company (see Note 9). The
following condensed parent-only financial statements of CCO
Holdings account for the investment in its subsidiaries under
the equity method of accounting. The financial statements should
be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements of the Company and notes thereto.
F-44
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC (Parent Company Only)
Condensed Balance Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
ASSETS |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
541 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Receivables from related party
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Loans receivables from related party
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries
|
|
|
6,673 |
|
|
|
10,722 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
7,613 |
|
|
$ |
11,097 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
Current liabilities
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Members equity
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
10,585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and members equity
|
|
$ |
7,613 |
|
|
$ |
11,097 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Statement of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Interest expense, net
|
|
$ |
(31 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
Equity in income (losses) of subsidiaries
|
|
|
(3,309 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(5,286 |
) |
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-45
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Condensed Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
Equity in income (losses) of subsidiaries
|
|
|
3,309 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
5,286 |
|
|
Noncash interest expense
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in subsidiaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
(859 |
) |
|
Distributions from subsidiaries
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
(446 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of debt
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
Distributions to parent companies
|
|
|
(738 |
) |
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
Loans to related party
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
(202 |
) |
|
|
(405 |
) |
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of year
|
|
$ |
541 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-46
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(unaudited) | |
|
|
ASSETS |
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $14
and $15, respectively
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTMENT IN CABLE PROPERTIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation
of $6,026 and $5,142, respectively
|
|
|
6,033 |
|
|
|
6,110 |
|
|
Franchises, net
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
9,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment in cable properties, net
|
|
|
15,872 |
|
|
|
15,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
16,343 |
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$ |
900 |
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
Payables to related party
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT
|
|
|
8,444 |
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOANS PAYABLE RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED MANAGEMENT FEES RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members equity
|
|
|
5,639 |
|
|
|
6,568 |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total members equity
|
|
|
5,634 |
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and members equity
|
|
$ |
16,343 |
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-47
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(dollars in millions)
UNAUDITED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
Six Months Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES
|
|
$ |
1,323 |
|
|
$ |
1,239 |
|
|
$ |
2,594 |
|
|
$ |
2,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
569 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,213 |
|
|
|
1,224 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER INCOME AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
(324 |
) |
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
(283 |
) |
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest and income taxes
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
INCOME TAX EXPENSE
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(45 |
) |
|
$ |
(88 |
) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-48
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(dollars in millions)
UNAUDITED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash flows from
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
Noncash interest expense
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects from
dispositions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
Receivables from and payables to related party, including
deferred management fees
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(542 |
) |
|
|
(380 |
) |
|
Change in accrued expenses related to capital expenditures
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
Proceeds from sale of assets
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
Purchases of investments
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from investments
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
(472 |
) |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings of long-term debt
|
|
|
635 |
|
|
|
2,812 |
|
|
Borrowings from related parties
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(819 |
) |
|
|
(3,159 |
) |
|
Repayments to related parties
|
|
|
(107 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
Distributions
|
|
|
(450 |
) |
|
|
(341 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
(604 |
) |
|
|
(782 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH PAID FOR INTEREST
|
|
$ |
308 |
|
|
$ |
294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NONCASH TRANSACTIONS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of debt by Charter Communications Operating, LLC
|
|
$ |
333 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC notes and
accrued interest
|
|
$ |
(343 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer of property, plant and equipment from parent company
|
|
$ |
139 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-49
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions)
|
|
1. |
Organization and Basis of Presentation |
CCO Holdings, LLC (CCO Holdings) is a holding
company whose primary assets at June 30, 2005 are equity
interests in its operating subsidiaries. CCO Holdings is a
subsidiary of CCH II, LLC (CCH II).
CCH II is a subsidiary of CCH I, LLC (CCH
I), which is a subsidiary of Charter Communications
Holdings, LLC (Charter Holdings). Charter Holdings
is a subsidiary of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC
(Charter Holdco), which is a subsidiary of Charter
Communications, Inc. (Charter). CCO Holdings is the
sole owner of Charter Communications Operating, LLC
(Charter Operating). The condensed consolidated
financial statements include the accounts of CCO Holdings and
all of its direct and indirect subsidiaries where the underlying
operations reside, collectively referred to herein as the
Company. All significant intercompany accounts and
transactions among consolidated entities have been eliminated.
The Company is a broadband communications company operating in
the United States. The Company offers its customers traditional
cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as
high-speed Internet services and, in some areas, advanced
broadband services such as high definition television, video on
demand and telephone. The Company sells its cable video
programming, high-speed Internet and advanced broadband services
on a subscription basis. The Company also sells local
advertising on satellite-delivered networks.
The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements of
the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States for interim
financial information and the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Accordingly, certain information and footnote disclosures
typically included in CCO Holdings Annual Report on
Form 10-K have been condensed or omitted for this quarterly
report. The accompanying condensed consolidated financial
statements are unaudited and are subject to review by regulatory
authorities. However, in the opinion of management, such
financial statements include all adjustments, which consist of
only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair
presentation of the results for the periods presented. Interim
results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full
year.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Areas involving
significant judgments and estimates include capitalization of
labor and overhead costs; depreciation and amortization costs;
impairments of property, plant and equipment, franchises and
goodwill; income taxes; and contingencies. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Certain 2004 amounts have been reclassified to conform with the
2005 presentation.
|
|
2. |
Liquidity and Capital Resources |
The Company incurred net loss of $45 million and
$88 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, respectively, and $136 million and
$46 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and
2004, respectively. The Companys net cash flows from
operating activities were $552 million and
$478 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, respectively.
The Companys long-term financing as of June 30, 2005
consists of $5.4 billion of credit facility debt and
$3.0 billion accreted value of high-yield notes. For the
remainder of 2005, $15 million of the Companys debt
matures, and in 2006, an additional $30 million of the
Companys debt matures. In 2007
F-50
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
and beyond, significant additional amounts will become due under
the Companys remaining long-term debt obligations.
The Company has historically required significant cash to fund
debt service costs, capital expenditures and ongoing operations.
Historically, the Company has funded these requirements through
cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under its
credit facilities, equity contributions from its parent
companies, borrowings from its parent companies, sales of
assets, issuances of debt securities and from cash on hand.
However, the mix of funding sources changes from period to
period. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Company
generated $552 million of net cash flows from operating
activities, after paying cash interest of $308 million. In
addition, the Company used approximately $542 million for
purchases of property, plant and equipment. Finally, the Company
had net cash flows used in financing activities of
$604 million, which included, among other things,
approximately $705 million in repayment of borrowings under
the Companys revolving credit facility. This repayment was
the primary reason cash on hand decreased by $524 million
to $22 million at June 30, 2005.
The Company expects that cash on hand, cash flows from operating
activities and the amounts available under its credit facilities
will be adequate to meet its and its parent companies cash
needs for the remainder of 2005. Cash flows from operating
activities and amounts available under the Companys credit
facilities may not be sufficient to fund the Companys
operations and satisfy its and its parent companies
principal repayment obligations that come due in 2006 and, the
Company believes, will not be sufficient to fund its operations
and satisfy such repayment obligations thereafter.
It is likely that the Company and its parent companies will
require additional funding to repay debt maturing after 2006.
The Company has been advised that Charter is working with its
financial advisors to address such funding requirements.
However, there can be no assurance that such funding will be
available to the Company. Although Mr. Allen and his
affiliates have purchased equity from Charter and Charter Holdco
in the past, Mr. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated
to purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to Charter,
Charter Holdco or the Company in the future.
|
|
|
Credit Facilities and Covenants |
The Companys ability to operate depends upon, among other
things, its continued access to capital, including credit under
the Charter Operating credit facilities. These credit
facilities, along with the Companys indentures, contain
certain restrictive covenants, some of which require the Company
to maintain specified financial ratios and meet financial tests
and to provide audited financial statements with an unqualified
opinion from the Companys independent auditors. As of
June 30, 2005, the Company was in compliance with the
covenants under its indentures and credit facilities and the
Company expects to remain in compliance with those covenants for
the next twelve months. As of June 30, 2005, the Company
had borrowing availability under the credit facilities of
$870 million, none of which was restricted due to
covenants. Continued access to the Companys credit
facilities is subject to the Company remaining in compliance
with the covenants of these credit facilities, including
covenants tied to the Companys operating performance. If
the Companys operating performance results in
non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain other
events of non-compliance under these credit facilities or
indentures governing the Companys debt occurs, funding
under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on
some or potentially all of the Companys debt obligations
could occur. An event of default under the covenants governing
any of the Companys debt instruments could result in the
acceleration of its payment obligations under that debt and,
under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under its other
debt obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on
the Companys consolidated financial condition or results
of operations.
F-51
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
The Charter Operating credit facilities required the Company to
redeem the CC V Holdings, LLC notes as a result of the Charter
Holdings leverage ratio becoming less than 8.75 to 1.0. In
satisfaction of this requirement, in March 2005, CC V Holdings,
LLC redeemed all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of
principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date
of redemption. The total cost of the redemption including
accrued and unpaid interest was approximately $122 million.
The Company funded the redemption with borrowings under the
Charter Operating credit facilities.
|
|
|
Parent Companies Debt Obligations |
Any financial or liquidity problems of the Companys parent
companies could cause serious disruption to the Companys
business and have a material adverse effect on the
Companys business and results of operations. A failure by
Charter Holdings to satisfy its debt payment obligations or a
bankruptcy filing with respect to Charter Holdings would give
the lenders under the Charter Operating credit facilities the
right to accelerate the payment obligations under these
facilities. Any such acceleration would be a default under the
indenture governing the Companys notes. As of
June 30, 2005, Charter had approximately $888 million
principal amount of senior convertible notes outstanding with
approximately $25 million and $863 million maturing in
2006 and 2009, respectively. During the six months ended
June 30, 2005, the Company distributed $450 million to
CCH II of which $60 million was subsequently
distributed to Charter Holdco. As of June 30, 2005, Charter
Holdco was owed $62 million in intercompany loans from its
subsidiaries, which amount was available to pay interest and
principal on Charters convertible senior notes. In
addition, Charter has $122 million of governmental
securities pledged as security for the next five semi-annual
interest payments on Charters 5.875% convertible
senior notes.
As of June 30, 2005, Charter Holdings had approximately
$8.5 billion principal amount of high-yield notes
outstanding with approximately $105 million,
$3.4 billion and $5.0 billion maturing in 2007, 2009
and thereafter, respectively. As of June 30, 2005,
CCH II had approximately $1.6 billion principal amount
of high-yield notes outstanding maturing in 2010. Charter,
Charter Holdings and CCH II will need to raise additional
capital or receive distributions or payments from the Company in
order to satisfy their debt obligations. However, because of
their significant indebtedness, the ability of the parent
companies to raise additional capital at reasonable rates is
uncertain. Distributions by Charters subsidiaries to a
parent company (including Charter, Charter Holdco, Charter
Holdings and CCH II) for payment of principal on the parent
companies debt obligations, however, are restricted by the
indentures governing the CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes,
and Charter Operating notes, unless under their respective
indentures there is no default and a specified leverage ratio
test is met at the time of such event.
In accordance with the registration rights agreement entered
into with their initial sale, Charter was required to register
for resale by April 21, 2005 its 5.875% convertible
senior notes due 2009, issued in November 2004. Since these
convertible notes were not registered by that date, Charter paid
or will pay liquidated damages totaling $0.5 million
through July 14, 2005, the day prior to the effective date
of the registration statement. In addition, in accordance with
the share lending agreement entered into in connection with the
initial sale of its 5.875% convertible senior notes due
2009, Charter was required to register by April 1, 2005
150 million shares of its Class A common stock that
Charter was obligated to lend to Citigroup Global Markets
Limited (CGML) at CGMLs request. Because this
registration statement was not declared effective by such date,
Charter paid or will pay liquidated damages totaling
$11 million from April 2, 2005 through July 17,
2005, the day before the effective date of the registration
statement. The liquidated damages were recorded as interest
expense in Charters condensed consolidated statements of
operations.
F-52
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
Specific Limitations at Charter Holdings |
The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit
Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for
payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior
notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter
Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under Charter Holdings
indentures and other specified tests are met. For the quarter
ended June 30, 2005, there was no default under Charter
Holdings indentures and other specified tests were met.
However, Charter Holdings did not meet the leverage ratio of
8.75 to 1.0 based on June 30, 2005 financial results. As a
result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or
Charter Holdco are currently restricted and will continue to be
restricted until that test is met. During this restriction
period, the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes
permit Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to make specified
investments in Charter Holdco or Charter, up to an amount
determined by a formula, as long as there is no default under
the indentures.
As of June 30, 2005, the Company has concluded it is
probable that three pending cable asset sales, representing
approximately 33,000 customers, will close within the next
twelve months thus meeting the criteria for assets held for sale
under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. As such the
assets were written down to fair value less estimated costs to
sell resulting in asset impairment charges during the three and
six months ended June 30, 2005 of approximately $8 million
and $39 million, respectively. At June 30, 2005 assets
held for sale, included in investment in cable properties, are
approximately $40 million.
In March 2004, the Company closed the sale of certain cable
systems in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West
Virginia to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC. The Company closed
the sale of an additional cable system in New York to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC in April 2004. These transactions
resulted in a $106 million pretax gain recorded as a gain
on sale of assets in the Companys consolidated statements
of operations. The total net proceeds from the sale of all of
these systems were approximately $735 million. The proceeds
were used to repay a portion of amounts outstanding under the
Companys revolving credit facility.
Gain on investments for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2005 primarily represents a gain realized on an
exchange of the Companys interest in an equity investee
for an investment in a larger enterprise.
|
|
4. |
Franchises and Goodwill |
Franchise rights represent the value attributed to agreements
with local authorities that allow access to homes in cable
service areas acquired through the purchase of cable systems.
Management estimates the fair value of franchise rights at the
date of acquisition and determines if the franchise has a finite
life or an indefinite-life as defined by SFAS No. 142,
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. Franchises that
qualify for indefinite-life treatment under
SFAS No. 142 are tested for impairment annually based
on valuations, or more frequently as warranted by events or
changes in circumstances. Such test resulted in a total
franchise impairment of approximately $3.3 billion during
the third quarter of 2004. Franchises are aggregated into
essentially inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations.
The asset groups generally represent geographic clustering of
the Companys cable systems into groups by which such
systems are managed. Management believes such grouping
represents the highest and best use of those assets.
The Companys valuations, which are based on the present
value of projected after tax cash flows, result in a value of
property, plant and equipment, franchises, customer
relationships and its total entity
F-53
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
value. The value of goodwill is the difference between the total
entity value and amounts assigned to the other assets.
Franchises, for valuation purposes, are defined as the future
economic benefits of the right to solicit and service potential
customers (customer marketing rights), and the right to deploy
and market new services such as interactivity and telephone to
the potential customers (service marketing rights). Fair value
is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows
using assumptions consistent with internal forecasts. The
franchise after-tax cash flow is calculated as the after-tax
cash flow generated by the potential customers obtained and the
new services added to those customers in future periods. The sum
of the present value of the franchises after-tax cash flow
in years 1 through 10 and the continuing value of the after-tax
cash flow beyond year 10 yields the fair value of the franchise.
The Company follows the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17,
Recognition of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets
Acquired in a Business Combination, in valuing customer
relationships. Customer relationships, for valuation purposes,
represent the value of the business relationship with existing
customers and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash
flows from these customers including the right to deploy and
market additional services such as interactivity and telephone
to these customers. The present value of these after-tax cash
flows yields the fair value of the customer relationships.
Substantially all acquisitions occurred prior to January 1,
2002. The Company did not record any value associated with the
customer relationship intangibles related to those acquisitions.
For acquisitions subsequent to January 1, 2002 the Company
did assign a value to the customer relationship intangible,
which is amortized over its estimated useful life.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
indefinite-lived and finite-lived intangible assets are
presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
Net | |
|
|
Carrying | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Carrying | |
|
Carrying | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Carrying | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
Amount | |
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
Amount | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Indefinite-lived intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with indefinite lives
|
|
$ |
9,806 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,806 |
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,858 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,858 |
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finite-lived intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with finite lives
|
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with indefinite lives decreased $39 million as a
result of the asset impairment charges recorded related to three
pending cable asset sales (see Note 3). Franchise
amortization expense for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 was $1 million and
$2 million, respectively, which represents the amortization
relating to franchises that did not qualify for indefinite-life
treatment under SFAS No. 142, including costs
associated with franchise renewals. The Company expects that
amortization expense on franchise assets will be approximately
$3 million annually for each of the next five years. Actual
amortization expense in future periods could differ from these
estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or
divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors.
F-54
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
5. |
Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following
as of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Accounts payable trade
|
|
$ |
82 |
|
|
$ |
138 |
|
Accrued capital expenditures
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Accrued expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
Programming costs
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
Franchise-related fees
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
900 |
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt consists of the following as of June 30,
2005 and December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Face Value | |
|
Accreted Value | |
|
Face Value | |
|
Accreted Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Long-Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
Charter Operating:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8% senior second lien notes due 2012
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
83/8% senior
second lien notes due 2014
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Renaissance Media Group LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
CC V Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.875% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
Credit Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
5,445 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,442 |
|
|
$ |
8,444 |
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accreted values presented above represent the face value of
the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale
plus the accretion to the balance sheet date.
In March and June 2005, Charter Operating consummated exchange
transactions with a small number of institutional holders of
Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007 pursuant to
which Charter Operating issued, in private placements,
approximately $333 million principal amount of new notes
with terms identical to Charter Operatings
8.375% senior second lien notes due 2014 in exchange for
F-55
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
approximately $346 million of the Charter Holdings
8.25% senior notes due 2007. The Charter Holdings notes
received in the exchange were thereafter distributed to Charter
Holdings and cancelled.
In March 2005, Charters subsidiary, CC V Holdings,
LLC, redeemed all of its 11.875% notes due 2008, at
103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest
to the date of redemption. The total cost of redemption was
approximately $122 million and was funded through
borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities. The
redemption resulted in a loss on extinguishment of debt for the
six months ended June 30, 2005 of approximately
$5 million. Following such redemption, CC V Holdings,
LLC and its subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor subsidiaries)
guaranteed the Charter Operating credit facilities and granted a
lien on all of their assets as to which a lien can be perfected
under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing
statement.
Minority interest on the Companys consolidated balance
sheets represents preferred membership interests in
CC VIII, LLC (CC VIII), an indirect
subsidiary of CCO Holdings. As more fully described in
Note 17, this preferred interest arises from the
approximately $630 million of preferred membership units
issued by CC VIII in connection with an acquisition in
February 2000 and continues to be the subject of a dispute
between Charter and Mr. Paul G. Allen, Charters
Chairman and controlling shareholder. Generally, operating
earnings or losses are allocated to the minority owner based on
its ownership percentage, thereby increasing or decreasing the
Companys net loss, respectively. To the extent they relate
to CC VIII, the allocations of earnings or losses are
subject to adjustment based on the ultimate resolution of this
disputed ownership. Due to the uncertainties related to the
ultimate resolution, effective January 1, 2005, the Company
ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of
CC VIII for financial reporting purposes until such time as
the resolution of the matter is determinable or other events
occur. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005,
the Companys results include income of $8 million and
$17 million, respectively, attributable to CC VIII.
Certain marketable equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized
gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive
loss on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Additionally, the Company reports changes in the fair value of
interest rate agreements designated as hedging the variability
of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations,
that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, in accumulated other comprehensive loss.
Comprehensive loss for the three months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004 was $44 million and $61 million,
respectively, and $126 million and $17 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
|
|
9. |
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities |
The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative
instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest
rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as
interest rate agreements) to manage its interest costs. The
Companys policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of
fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap
agreements, the Company has agreed to exchange, at specified
intervals through 2007, the difference between fixed and
variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an
agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar
agreements are used to limit the Companys exposure to and
benefits from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt
to within a certain range of rates.
F-56
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
The Company does not hold or issue derivative instruments for
trading purposes. The Company does, however, have certain
interest rate derivative instruments that have been designated
as cash flow hedging instruments. Such instruments effectively
convert variable interest payments on certain debt instruments
into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges,
SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to
offset related results on hedged items in the consolidated
statement of operations. The Company has formally documented,
designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that
receive hedge accounting. For the three months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative
instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $0 and
$3 million, respectively, and for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative
instruments and hedging activities includes gains of
$1 million and $2 million, respectively, which
represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate hedge
agreements arising from differences between the critical terms
of the agreements and the related hedged obligations. Changes in
the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging
instruments of the variability of cash flows associated with
floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness
criteria of SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated
other comprehensive loss. For the three months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, a gain of $0 and $27 million,
respectively, and for the six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, a gain of $9 million and $29 million,
respectively, related to derivative instruments designated as
cash flow hedges, was recorded in accumulated other
comprehensive loss. The amounts are subsequently reclassified
into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period
in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt
obligations affects earnings (losses).
Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated
as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria
specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management
believes such instruments are closely correlated with the
respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate
derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to
fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on
derivative instruments and hedging activities in the
Companys condensed consolidated statements of operations.
For the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, net gain
(loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes
losses of $1 million and gains of $60 million,
respectively, and for the six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging
activities includes gains of $25 million and
$54 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative
instruments not designated as hedges.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the Company
had outstanding $2.2 billion and $2.7 billion and
$20 million and $20 million, respectively, in notional
amounts of interest rate swaps and collars, respectively. The
notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent
amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of
exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by
reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the
contracts.
F-57
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
Revenues consist of the following for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
861 |
|
|
$ |
846 |
|
|
$ |
1,703 |
|
|
$ |
1,695 |
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
349 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
Commercial
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
Other
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,323 |
|
|
$ |
1,239 |
|
|
$ |
2,594 |
|
|
$ |
2,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses consist of the following for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
351 |
|
|
$ |
329 |
|
|
$ |
709 |
|
|
$ |
663 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Service
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
569 |
|
|
$ |
515 |
|
|
$ |
1,128 |
|
|
$ |
1,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12. Selling, General and
Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the
following for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
225 |
|
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
427 |
|
|
$ |
416 |
|
Marketing
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
256 |
|
|
$ |
244 |
|
|
$ |
493 |
|
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Components of selling expense are included in general and
administrative and marketing expense.
F-58
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
The Company has recorded special charges as a result of reducing
its workforce, consolidating administrative offices and
management realignment in 2004 and 2005. The activity associated
with this initiative is summarized in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Beginning Balance
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
Special Charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Payments
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30,
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, special
charges were offset by approximately $2 million related to
an agreed upon discount in respect of the portion of the
settlement consideration payable under the Stipulations of
Settlement of the consolidated Federal Class Action and the
Federal Derivative Action allocable to plaintiffs attorney
fees and Charters insurance carrier as a result of the
election to pay such fees in cash (see Note 15).
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, special
charges also includes approximately $85 million, which
represents the aggregate value of the Charter Class A
common stock and warrants to purchase Charter Class A
common stock contemplated to be issued as part of the terms set
forth in memoranda of understanding regarding settlement of the
consolidated Federal Class Action and Federal Derivative
Action. For the six months ended June 30, 2004, special
charges includes approximately $9 million of litigation
costs related to the tentative settlement of the South Carolina
national class action suit, subject to final documentation and
court approval (see Note 15).
The Company is a single member limited liability company not
subject to income tax. The Company holds all operations through
indirect subsidiaries. The majority of these indirect
subsidiaries are limited liability companies that are not
subject to income tax. However, certain of the Companys
indirect subsidiaries are corporations that are subject to
income tax.
As of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the Company
had net deferred income tax liabilities of approximately
$214 million and $208 million, respectively. The net
deferred income tax liabilities relate to certain of the
Companys indirect subsidiaries, which file separate income
tax returns.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, the
Company recorded $2 million and $8 million of income
tax expense, respectively, and during the three and six months
ended June 30, 2004 the Company recorded $3 million
and $4 million of income tax expense, respectively. The
income tax expense is recognized through current federal and
state income tax expense as well as increases to the deferred
tax liabilities of certain of the Companys indirect
corporate subsidiaries.
Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal
Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 2000,
2002 and 2003. The results of the Company (excluding the
indirect corporate subsidiaries) for these years are subject to
this examination. Management does not expect the results of this
examination to have a material adverse effect on the
Companys financial condition or results of operations.
F-59
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
Securities Class Actions and Derivative Suits |
Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the
Federal Class Actions) were filed against
Charter and certain of its former and present officers and
directors in various jurisdictions allegedly on behalf of all
purchasers of Charters securities during the period from
either November 8 or November 9, 1999 through
July 17 or July 18, 2002. Unspecified damages were
sought by the plaintiffs. In general, the lawsuits alleged that
Charter utilized misleading accounting practices and failed to
disclose these accounting practices and/or issued false and
misleading financial statements and press releases concerning
Charters operations and prospects. The Federal
Class Actions were specifically and individually identified
in public filings made by Charter prior to the date of this
quarterly report. On March 12, 2003, the Panel transferred
the six Federal Class Actions not filed in the Eastern
District of Missouri to that district for coordinated or
consolidated pretrial proceedings with the eight Federal
Class Actions already pending there. The Court subsequently
consolidated the Federal Class Actions into a single action
(the Consolidated Federal Class Action) for
pretrial purposes. On August 5, 2004, the plaintiffs
representatives, Charter and the individual defendants who were
the subject of the suit entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding setting forth agreements in principle to settle
the Consolidated Federal Class Action. These parties
subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of
January 24, 2005 (described more fully below) which
incorporate the terms of the August 5, 2004 Memorandum of
Understanding.
On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the
State Derivative Action) was filed in the Circuit
Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the
Missouri State Court), against Charter and its then
current directors, as well as its former auditors. The
plaintiffs alleged that the individual defendants breached their
fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate
internal controls and procedures. On March 12, 2004, an
action substantively identical to the State Derivative Action
was filed in Missouri State Court against Charter and certain of
its current and former directors, as well as its former
auditors. On July 14, 2004, the Court consolidated this
case with the State Derivative Action.
Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative
suit (the Federal Derivative Action), was filed
against Charter and its then current directors in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The
plaintiff in that suit alleged that the individual defendants
breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter
by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls
and procedures.
As noted above, Charter and the individual defendants entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding on August 5, 2004
setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of
the Consolidated Federal Class Action, the State Derivative
Action(s) and the Federal Derivative Action (the
Actions). Charter and various other defendants in
those actions subsequently entered into Stipulations of
Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005, setting forth a
settlement of the Actions in a manner consistent with the terms
of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Stipulations of
Settlement, along with various supporting documentation, were
filed with the Court on February 2, 2005. On May 23,
2005 the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri conducted the final fairness hearing for the
Actions, and on June 30, 2005, the Court issued its final
approval of the settlements. Members of the class had
30 days from the issuance of the June 30 order
approving the settlement to file an appeal challenging the
approval. Two notices of appeal were filed relating to the
settlement, but Charter does not yet know the specific issues
presented by such appeals, nor have briefing schedules been set.
F-60
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
As amended, the Stipulations of Settlement provide that, in
exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against
Charter and its former and present officers and directors named
in the Actions, Charter would pay to the plaintiffs a
combination of cash and equity collectively valued at
$144 million, which will include the fees and expenses of
plaintiffs counsel. Of this amount, $64 million would
be paid in cash (by Charters insurance carriers) and the
$80 million balance was to be paid (subject to
Charters right to substitute cash therefor described
below) in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to
purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an
aggregate warrant value of $40 million, with such values in
each case being determined pursuant to formulas set forth in the
Stipulations of Settlement. However, Charter had the right, in
its sole discretion, to substitute cash for some or all of the
aforementioned securities on a dollar for dollar basis. Pursuant
to that right, Charter elected to fund the $80 million
obligation with 13.4 million shares of Charter Class A
common stock (having an aggregate value of approximately
$15 million pursuant to the formula set forth in the
Stipulations of Settlement) with the remaining balance (less an
agreed upon $2 million discount in respect of that portion
allocable to plaintiffs attorneys fees) to be paid
in cash. In addition, Charter had agreed to issue additional
shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier
having an aggregate value of $5 million; however, by
agreement with its carrier Charter has paid $4.5 million in
cash in lieu of issuing such shares. Charter delivered the
settlement consideration to the claims administrator on
July 8, 2005, and it will be held in escrow pending any
appeals of the approval. On July 14, 2005, the Circuit
Court for the City of St. Louis dismissed with prejudice
the State Derivative Actions.
As part of the settlements, Charter has committed to a variety
of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public
disclosures, some of which have already been undertaken and none
of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in
connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation.
|
|
|
Government Investigations |
In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury
investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorneys
Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its
accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter
reported customer numbers, and its reporting of amounts received
from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The
U.S. Attorneys Office publicly stated that Charter
was not a target of the investigation. Charter was also advised
by the U.S. Attorneys Office that no current officer
or member of its board of directors was a target of the
investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury
charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail
and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting
practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal
suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Each of the
indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts
related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and were
sentenced April 22, 2005. Charter has advised the Company
that it has fully cooperated with the investigation, and
following the sentencings, the U.S. Attorneys Office
for the Eastern District of Missouri announced that its
investigation was concluded and that no further indictments
would issue.
Charter was generally required to indemnify, under certain
conditions, each of the named individual defendants in
connection with the matters described above pursuant to the
terms of its bylaws and (where applicable) such individual
defendants employment agreements. In accordance with these
documents, in connection with the grand jury investigation, a
now-settled SEC investigation and the above-described lawsuits,
some of Charters current and former directors and current
and former officers have been advanced certain costs and
expenses incurred in connection with their defense. On
February 22, 2005, Charter filed suit against four of its
former officers who were indicted in the course of the grand jury
F-61
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
investigation. These suits seek to recover the legal fees and
other related expenses advanced to these individuals. One of
these former officers has counterclaimed against Charter
alleging, among other things, that Charter owes him additional
indemnification for legal fees that Charter did not pay and
another of these former officers has counterclaimed against
Charter for accrued sick leave.
In addition to the matters set forth above, Charter is also
party to other lawsuits and claims that arose in the ordinary
course of conducting its business. In the opinion of management,
after taking into account recorded liabilities, the outcome of
these other lawsuits and claims are not expected to have a
material adverse effect on the Companys consolidated
financial condition, results of operations or its liquidity.
|
|
16. |
Stock Compensation Plans |
Prior to January 1, 2003, the Company accounted for
stock-based compensation in accordance with Accounting
Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related
interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. On
January 1, 2003, the Company adopted the fair value
measurement provisions of SFAS No. 123 using the
prospective method, under which the Company recognizes
compensation expense of a stock-based award to an employee over
the vesting period based on the fair value of the award on the
grant date consistent with the method described in Financial
Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 28,
Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable
Stock Option or Award Plans. Adoption of these provisions
resulted in utilizing a preferable accounting method as the
condensed consolidated financial statements will present the
estimated fair value of stock-based compensation in expense
consistently with other forms of compensation and other expense
associated with goods and services received for equity
instruments. In accordance with SFAS No. 148,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
Transition and Disclosure, the fair value method is being
applied only to awards granted or modified after January 1,
2003, whereas awards granted prior to such date will continue to
be accounted for under APB No. 25, unless they are modified
or settled in cash. The ongoing effect on consolidated results
of operations or financial condition will depend on future
stock-based compensation awards granted by Charter.
SFAS No. 123 requires pro forma disclosure of the
impact on earnings as if the compensation expense for these
plans had been determined using the fair value method. The
following table presents the Companys net loss as reported
and the pro forma amounts that would have been reported using
the fair value method under SFAS No. 123 for the
periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(45 |
) |
|
$ |
(88 |
) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
Add back stock-based compensation expense related to stock
options included in reported net loss
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Less employee stock-based compensation expense determined under
fair value based method for all employee stock option awards
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
Effects of unvested options in stock option exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
(45 |
) |
|
$ |
(86 |
) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-62
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
In January 2004, Charter began an option exchange program in
which the Company offered its employees the right to exchange
all stock options (vested and unvested) under the 1999 Charter
Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that
had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of
restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some
instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio, which varied
depending on the exercise price of an employees
outstanding options, if an employee would have received more
than 400 shares of restricted stock in exchange for
tendered options, Charter issued to that employee shares of
restricted stock in the exchange. If, based on the exchange
ratios, an employee would have received 400 or fewer shares of
restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, Charter
instead paid the employee cash in an amount equal to the number
of shares the employee would have received multiplied by $5.00.
The offer applied to options (vested and unvested) to purchase a
total of 22,929,573 shares of Charter Class A common
stock, or approximately 48% of Charters 47,882,365 total
options (vested and unvested) issued and outstanding as of
December 31, 2003. Participation by employees was
voluntary. Those members of Charters board of directors
who were not also employees of the Company were not eligible to
participate in the exchange offer.
In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004,
Charter accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase
approximately 18,137,664 shares of Charter Class A
common stock. In exchange, Charter granted 1,966,686 shares
of restricted stock, including 460,777 performance shares to
eligible employees of the rank of senior vice president and
above, and paid a total cash amount of approximately
$4 million (which amount includes applicable withholding
taxes) to those employees who received cash rather than shares
of restricted stock. The restricted stock was granted on
February 25, 2004. Employees tendered approximately 79% of
the options exchangeable under the program.
The cost to the Company of the stock option exchange program was
approximately $10 million, with a 2004 cash compensation
expense of approximately $4 million and a non-cash
compensation expense of approximately $6 million to be
expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period of the
restricted stock issued in the exchange.
In January 2004, the Compensation Committee of the board of
directors of Charter approved Charters Long-Term Incentive
Program (LTIP), which is a program administered
under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the LTIP, employees
of Charter and its subsidiaries whose pay classifications exceed
a certain level are eligible to receive stock options, and more
senior level employees are eligible to receive stock options and
performance shares. The stock options vest 25% on each of the
first four anniversaries of the date of grant. The performance
units vest on the third anniversary of the grant date and shares
of Charter Class A common stock are issued, conditional
upon Charters performance against financial performance
targets established by Charters management and approved by
its board of directors. Charter granted 6.9 million
performance shares in January 2004 under this program and the
Company recognized expense of $3 million and
$6 million during the three and six months ended
June 30, 2004, respectively. However, in the fourth quarter
of 2004, the Company reversed the $8 million of expense
recorded in the first three quarters of 2004 based on the
Companys assessment of the probability of achieving the
financial performance measures established by Charter and
required to be met for the performance shares to vest. In March
and April 2005, Charter granted 2.8 million performance
shares under the LTIP. The impact of such grants were de minimis
to the Companys results of operations for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2005.
|
|
17. |
Related Party Transactions |
The following sets forth certain transactions in which the
Company and the directors, executive officers and affiliates of
the Company are involved. Unless otherwise disclosed, management
believes that
F-63
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
each of the transactions described below was on terms no less
favorable to the Company than could have been obtained from
independent third parties.
CC VIII. As part of the acquisition of the cable
systems owned by Bresnan Communications Company Limited
Partnership in February 2000, CC VIII, CCO Holdings
indirect limited liability company subsidiary, issued, after
adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership units
(collectively, the CC VIII interest) with a
value and an initial capital account of approximately
$630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T
Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (the
Comcast sellers). While held by the Comcast sellers,
the CC VIII interest was entitled to a 2% priority return
on its initial capital account and such priority return was
entitled to preferential distributions from available cash and
upon liquidation of CC VIII. While held by the Comcast
sellers, the CC VIII interest generally did not share in
the profits and losses of CC VIII. Mr. Allen granted
the Comcast sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII
interest for approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest
annually from February 2000 (the Comcast put right).
In April 2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put
right in full, and this transaction was consummated on
June 6, 2003. Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the
holder of the CC VIII interest, indirectly through an
affiliate. Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in
the next paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter will be
allocated his pro rata share (based on number of membership
interests outstanding) of profits or losses of CC VIII. In
the event of a liquidation of CC VIII, Mr. Allen would
be entitled to a priority distribution with respect to the 2%
priority return (which will continue to accrete). Any remaining
distributions in liquidation would be distributed to CC V
Holdings, LLC and Mr. Allen in proportion to CC V Holdings,
LLCs capital account and Mr. Allens capital
account (which will equal the initial capital account of the
Comcast sellers of approximately $630 million, increased or
decreased by Mr. Allens pro rata share of
CC VIIIs profits or losses (as computed for capital
account purposes) after June 6, 2003). The limited
liability company agreement of CC VIII does not provide for
a mandatory redemption of the CC VIII interest.
An issue has arisen as to whether the documentation for the
Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the
ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following
consummation of the Comcast put right. Specifically, under the
terms of the Bresnan transaction documents that were entered
into in June 1999, the Comcast sellers originally would have
received, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Charter Holdco
membership units, but due to an FCC regulatory issue raised by
the Comcast sellers shortly before closing, the Bresnan
transaction was modified to provide that the Comcast sellers
instead would receive the preferred equity interests in
CC VIII represented by the CC VIII interest. As part
of the last-minute changes to the Bresnan transaction documents,
a draft amended version of the Charter Holdco limited liability
company agreement was prepared, and contract provisions were
drafted for that agreement that would have required an automatic
exchange of the CC VIII interest for 24,273,943 Charter
Holdco membership units if the Comcast sellers exercised the
Comcast put right and sold the CC VIII interest to
Mr. Allen or his affiliates. However, the provisions that
would have required this automatic exchange did not appear in
the final version of the Charter Holdco limited liability
company agreement that was delivered and executed at the closing
of the Bresnan transaction. The law firm that prepared the
documents for the Bresnan transaction brought this matter to the
attention of Charter and representatives of Mr. Allen in
2002.
Thereafter, the board of directors of Charter formed a Special
Committee (currently comprised of Messrs. Merritt, Tory and
Wangberg) to investigate the matter and take any other
appropriate action on behalf of Charter with respect to this
matter. After conducting an investigation of the relevant facts
and circumstances, the Special Committee determined that a
scriveners error had occurred in February 2000
in connection with the preparation of the last-minute revisions
to the Bresnan transaction documents and that, as a result,
Charter should seek the reformation of the Charter Holdco
limited liability company agreement, or alternative relief, in
order to restore and ensure the obligation that the CC VIII
interest be
F-64
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
automatically exchanged for Charter Holdco units. The Special
Committee further determined that, as part of such contract
reformation or alternative relief, Mr. Allen should be
required to contribute the CC VIII interest to Charter
Holdco in exchange for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership
units. The Special Committee also recommended to the board of
directors of Charter that, to the extent the contract
reformation is achieved, the board of directors should consider
whether the CC VIII interest should ultimately be held by
Charter Holdco or Charter Holdings or another entity owned
directly or indirectly by them.
Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committees
determinations described above and has so notified the Special
Committee. Mr. Allen contends that the transaction is
accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and
contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures.
The parties engaged in a process of non-binding mediation to
seek to resolve this matter, without success. The Special
Committee is evaluating what further actions or processes it may
undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further
deliberation, each party has agreed to refrain from initiating
legal proceedings over this matter until it has given at least
ten days prior notice to the other. In addition, the
Special Committee and Mr. Allen have determined to utilize
the Delaware Court of Chancerys program for mediation of
complex business disputes in an effort to resolve the
CC VIII interest dispute. If the Special Committee and
Mr. Allen are unable to reach a resolution through that
mediation process or to agree on an alternative dispute
resolution process, the Special Committee intends to seek
resolution of this dispute through judicial proceedings in an
action that would be commenced, after appropriate notice, in the
Delaware Court of Chancery against Mr. Allen and his
affiliates seeking contract reformation, declaratory relief as
to the respective rights of the parties regarding this dispute
and alternative forms of legal and equitable relief. The
ultimate resolution and financial impact of the dispute are not
determinable at this time.
TechTV, Inc. TechTV, Inc. (TechTV)
operated a cable television network that offered programming
mostly related to technology. Pursuant to an affiliation
agreement that originated in 1998 and that terminates in 2008,
TechTV has provided the Company with programming for
distribution via Charters cable systems. The affiliation
agreement provides, among other things, that TechTV must offer
Charter certain terms and conditions that are no less favorable
in the affiliation agreement than are given to any other
distributor that serves the same number of or fewer TechTV
viewing customers. Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation
agreement, the Company was entitled to incentive payments for
channel launches through December 31, 2003.
In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with
Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for
(i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation
agreement which, among other things, revises the description of
the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive
certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of
the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make
payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco
under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to
pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month
period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising
time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in
consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and
waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the
aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of
content relating to technology and video gaming for
Charters interactive television platforms through
December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For each
of the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,
the Company recognized approximately $0.3 million and
$0.6 million, respectively, of the Vulcan Programming
payment as an offset to programming expense. For the three and
six months ended June 30, 2005, the Company paid
approximately $0.5 million and $1 million,
respectively, and for the three and six months
F-65
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
ended June 30, 2004, the Company paid approximately
$0.4 million and $0.6 million, respectively, under the
affiliation agreement.
The Company believes that Vulcan Programming, which is 100%
owned by Mr. Allen, owned an approximate 98% equity
interest in TechTV at the time Vulcan Programming sold TechTV to
an unrelated third party in May 2004. Until September 2003,
Mr. Savoy, a former Charter director, was the president and
director of Vulcan Programming and was a director of TechTV.
Mr. Wangberg, one of Charters directors, was the
chairman, chief executive officer and a director of TechTV.
Mr. Wangberg resigned as the chief executive officer of
TechTV in July 2002. He remained a director of TechTV along with
Mr. Allen until Vulcan Programming sold TechTV.
Digeo, Inc. In March 2001, a subsidiary of CCO
Holdings, Charter Communications Ventures, LLC (Charter
Ventures), and Vulcan Ventures Incorporated formed
DBroadband Holdings, LLC for the sole purpose of purchasing
equity interests in Digeo, Inc. (Digeo), an entity
controlled by Paul Allen. In connection with the execution of
the broadband carriage agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC
purchased an equity interest in Digeo funded by contributions
from Vulcan Ventures Incorporated. The equity interest is
subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to
the amount contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter
Ventures behalf. After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount
contributed and any cumulative loss allocations, Charter
Ventures has a 100% profit interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC.
Charter Ventures is not required to make any capital
contributions, including capital calls, to Digeo. DBroadband
Holdings, LLC is therefore not included in the Companys
consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to an amended
version of this arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures
contributed a total of $29 million to Digeo,
$7 million of which was contributed on Charter
Ventures behalf, subject to Vulcan Ventures
aforementioned priority return. Since the formation of
DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has contributed
approximately $56 million on Charter Ventures behalf.
On March 2, 2001, Charter Ventures entered into a broadband
carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive, LLC (Digeo
Interactive), a wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo. The
carriage agreement provided that Digeo Interactive would provide
to Charter a portal product, which would function as
the television-based Internet portal (the initial point of entry
to the Internet) for Charters customers who received
Internet access from Charter. The agreement term was for
25 years and Charter agreed to use the Digeo portal
exclusively for six years. Before the portal product was
delivered to Charter, Digeo terminated development of the portal
product.
On September 27, 2001, Charter and Digeo Interactive
amended the broadband carriage agreement. According to the
amendment, Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter the
content for enhanced Wink interactive television
services, known as Charter Interactive Channels
(i-channels). In order to provide the i-channels,
Digeo Interactive sublicensed certain Wink technologies to
Charter. Charter is entitled to share in the revenues generated
by the i-channels. Currently, the Companys digital video
customers who receive i-channels receive the service at no
additional charge.
On September 28, 2002, Charter entered into a second
amendment to its broadband carriage agreement with Digeo
Interactive. This amendment superseded the amendment of
September 27, 2001. It provided for the development by
Digeo Interactive of future features to be included in the Basic
i-TV service to be provided by Digeo and for Digeos
development of an interactive toolkit to enable
Charter to develop interactive local content. Furthermore,
Charter could request that Digeo Interactive manage local
content for a fee. The amendment provided for Charter to pay for
development of the Basic i-TV service as well as license fees
for customers who would receive the service, and for Charter and
Digeo to split certain revenues earned from the service. The
Company paid Digeo Interactive approximately $1 million and
$1 million for the three and six months ended June 30,
2005, respectively, and $1 million and $1 million for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, respectively,
for customized
F-66
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
development of the i-channels and the local content tool kit.
This amendment expired pursuant to its terms on
December 31, 2003. Digeo Interactive is continuing to
provide the Basic i-TV service on a month-to-month basis.
On June 30, 2003, Charter Holdco entered into an agreement
with Motorola, Inc. for the purchase of 100,000 digital video
recorder (DVR) units. The software for these DVR
units is being supplied by Digeo Interactive, LLC under a
license agreement entered into in April 2004. Under the license
agreement Digeo Interactive granted to Charter Holdco the right
to use Digeos proprietary software for the number of DVR
units that Charter deployed from a maximum of 10 headends
through year-end 2004. This maximum number of headends was
increased from 10 to 15 pursuant to a letter agreement executed
on June 11, 2004 and the date for entering into license
agreements for units deployed was extended to June 30,
2005. The number of headends was increased from 15 to 20
pursuant to a letter agreement dated August 4, 2004, from
20 to 30 pursuant to a letter agreement dated September 28,
2004 and from 30 to 50 headends by a letter agreement in
February 2005. The license granted for each unit deployed under
the agreement is valid for five years. In addition, Charter will
pay certain other fees including a per-headend license fee and
maintenance fees. Maximum license and maintenance fees during
the term of the agreement are expected to be approximately
$7 million. The agreement provides that Charter is entitled
to receive contract terms, considered on the whole, and license
fees, considered apart from other contract terms, no less
favorable than those accorded to any other Digeo customer.
Charter paid approximately $0.1 million and
$0.2 million in license and maintenance fees for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively.
In April 2004, the Company launched DVR service using units
containing the Digeo software in Charters Rochester,
Minnesota market using a broadband media center that is an
integrated set-top terminal with a cable converter, DVR hard
drive and connectivity to other consumer electronics devices
(such as stereos, MP3 players, and digital cameras).
In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet
with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase
of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that
the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to
year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development,
testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would
enter into a license agreement for Digeos proprietary
software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the
license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter
Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and
in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement,
each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet.
Product development and testing has been completed. Total
purchase price and license and maintenance fees during the term
of the definitive agreements are expected to be approximately
$41 million. The definitive agreements are terminable at no
penalty to Charter in certain circumstances. Charter paid
approximately $1 million and $2 million in capital
purchases under this agreement for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2005, respectively.
In late 2003, Microsoft filed suit against Digeo for
$9 million in a breach of contract action, involving an
agreement that Digeo and Microsoft had entered into in 2001.
Digeo informed us that it believed it had an indemnification
claim against us for half that amount. Digeo settled with
Microsoft agreeing to make a cash payment and to purchase
certain amounts of Microsoft software products and consulting
services through 2008. In consideration of Digeo agreeing to
release us from its potential claim against us, after
consultation with outside counsel we agreed, in June 2005, to
purchase a total of $2.3 million in Microsoft consulting
services through 2008, a portion of which amounts Digeo has
informed us will count against Digeos purchase obligations
with Microsoft.
The Company believes that Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled
by Mr. Allen, owns an approximate 60% equity interest in
Digeo, Inc., on a fully-converted non-diluted basis.
Mr. Allen, Lance Conn and Jo
F-67
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
Allen Patton, directors of Charter, are directors of Digeo, and
Mr. Vogel was a director of Digeo in 2004. During 2004 and
2005, Mr. Vogel held options to
purchase 10,000 shares of Digeo common stock.
Oxygen Media LLC. Oxygen Media LLC
(Oxygen) provides programming content aimed at the
female audience for distribution over cable systems and
satellite. On July 22, 2002, Charter Holdco entered into a
carriage agreement with Oxygen, whereby the Company agreed to
carry programming content from Oxygen. Under the carriage
agreement, the Company currently makes Oxygen programming
available to approximately 5 million of its video
customers. The term of the carriage agreement was retroactive to
February 1, 2000, the date of launch of Oxygen programming
by the Company, and runs for a period of five years from that
date. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, the
Company paid Oxygen approximately $2 million and
$5 million, respectively, and for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2004, the Company paid Oxygen approximately
$3 million and $7 million, respectively, for
programming content. In addition, Oxygen pays the Company
marketing support fees for customers launched after the first
year of the term of the carriage agreement up to a total of
$4 million. The Company recorded approximately
$0.1 million related to these launch incentives as a
reduction of programming expense for the six months ended
June 30, 2005, and $0.4 million and $0.7 million
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004,
respectively.
Concurrently with the execution of the carriage agreement,
Charter Holdco entered into an equity issuance agreement
pursuant to which Oxygens parent company, Oxygen Media
Corporation (Oxygen Media), granted a subsidiary of
Charter Holdco a warrant to purchase 2.4 million
shares of Oxygen Media common stock for an exercise price of
$22.00 per share. In February 2005, this warrant expired
unexercised. Charter Holdco was also to receive unregistered
shares of Oxygen Media common stock with a guaranteed fair
market value on the date of issuance of $34 million, on or
prior to February 2, 2005, with the exact date to be
determined by Oxygen Media, but this commitment was later
revised as discussed below.
The Company recognized the guaranteed value of the investment
over the life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of
programming expense. For the six months ended June 30,
2005, the Company recorded approximately $2 million, as a
reduction of programming expense and for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2004, the Company recorded
approximately $3 million and $7 million, respectively.
The carrying value of the Companys investment in Oxygen
was approximately $33 million and $32 million as of
June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively.
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into
agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The
amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number
of the Companys customers to which Oxygen programming must
be carried and for which the Company must pay, (b) releases
Charter Holdco from any claims related to the failure to achieve
distribution benchmarks under the carriage agreement,
(c) requires Oxygen to make payment on outstanding
receivables for marketing support fees due to the Company under
the carriage agreement; and (d) requires that Oxygen
provide its programming content to the Company on economic terms
no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable or
satellite operator having fewer subscribers than the Company.
The renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the
period that the Company will carry Oxygen programming to the
Companys customers through January 31, 2008, and
(b) requires license fees to be paid based on customers
receiving Oxygen programming, rather than for specific customer
benchmarks.
In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the
equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of
1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a
liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued
dividends to Charter Holdco on February 1, 2005 in place of
the $34 million of unregistered shares of Oxygen Media
common stock. Oxygen Media delivered these shares in March 2005.
The preferred stock is convertible into common stock after
December 31, 2007 at a conversion ratio per
F-68
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(UNAUDITED)
share of preferred stock, the numerator of which is the
liquidation preference and the denominator of which is the fair
market value per share of Oxygen Media common stock on the
conversion date.
As of June 30, 2005, through Vulcan Programming,
Mr. Allen owned an approximate 31% interest in Oxygen
assuming no exercises of outstanding warrants or conversion or
exchange of convertible or exchangeable securities. Ms. Jo
Allen Patton is a director and the President of Vulcan
Programming. Mr. Lance Conn is a Vice President of Vulcan
Programming. Marc Nathanson has an indirect beneficial interest
of less than 1% in Oxygen.
|
|
18. |
Recently Issued Accounting Standards |
In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued SFAS No. 153, Exchanges
of Non-monetary Assets An Amendment of APB
No. 29. This statement eliminates the exception to fair
value for exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it
with a general exception for exchange transactions that do not
have commercial substance that is, transactions that
are not expected to result in significant changes in the cash
flows of the reporting entity. The Company adopted this
pronouncement effective April 1, 2005. The exchange
transaction discussed in Note 3 was accounted for under
this standard.
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
issued the revised SFAS No. 123, Share-Based
Payment, which addresses the accounting for share-based
payment transactions in which a company receives employee
services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of that
company or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value
of the companys equity instruments or that may be settled
by the issuance of such equity instruments. This statement will
be effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2006.
Because the Company adopted the fair value recognition
provisions of SFAS No. 123 on January 1, 2003,
the Company does not expect this revised standard to have a
material impact on its financial statements.
The Company does not believe that any other recently issued, but
not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would
have a material effect on the Companys accompanying
financial statements.
F-69
Dealer Prospectus Delivery Obligation
Until ,
2005, all dealers that effect transactions in these securities,
whether or not participating in this offering, may be required
to deliver a prospectus. This is in addition to the
dealers obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as
underwriters and with respect to their unsold allotments or
subscriptions.
PART II
INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED IN THE PROSPECTUS
|
|
Item 20. |
Indemnification of Directors and Officers |
Indemnification Under the Limited Liability Company
Agreement of CCO Holdings
The limited liability company agreement of CCO Holdings provides
that the members, the manager, the directors, their affiliates
or any person who at any time serves or has served as a
director, officer, employee or other agent of any member or any
such affiliate, and who, in such capacity, engages or has
engaged in activities on behalf of CCO Holdings, shall be
indemnified and held harmless by CCO Holdings to the fullest
extent permitted by law from and against any losses, damages,
expenses, including attorneys fees, judgments and amounts
paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by or in
connection with any claim, action, suit or proceeding arising
out of or incidental to such indemnifiable persons acts or
omissions on behalf of CCO Holdings. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, no indemnification is available under the limited
liability company agreement in respect of any such claim
adjudged to be primarily the result of bad faith, willful
misconduct or fraud of an indemnifiable person. Payment of these
indemnification obligations shall be made from the assets of CCO
Holdings and the members shall not be personally liable to an
indemnifiable person for payment of indemnification.
Indemnification Under the Delaware Limited Liability
Company Act
Section 18-108 of the Delaware Limited Liability Company
Act authorizes a limited liability company to indemnify and hold
harmless any member or manager or other person from and against
any and all claims and demands whatsoever, subject to such
standards and restrictions, if any, as are set forth in its
limited liability company agreement.
Indemnification Under the By-Laws of CCO Holdings
Capital
The bylaws of CCO Holdings Capital require CCO Holdings Capital,
to the fullest extent authorized by the Delaware General
Corporation Law, to indemnify any person who was or is made a
party or is threatened to be made a party or is otherwise
involved in any action, suit or proceeding by reason of the fact
that he is or was a director or officer of CCO Holdings Capital
or is or was serving at the request of CCO Holdings Capital as a
director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation,
partnership, joint venture, trust, employee benefit plan or
other entity or enterprise, in each case, against all expense,
liability and loss (including attorneys fees, judgments,
amounts paid in settlement, fines, ERISA excise taxes or
penalties) reasonably incurred or suffered by such person in
connection therewith.
Indemnification Under the Delaware General Corporation
Law
Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law,
authorizes a corporation to indemnify any person who was or is a
party, or is threatened to be made a party, to any threatened,
pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil,
criminal, administrative or investigative, by reason of the fact
that the person is or was a director, officer, employee or agent
of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the
corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another
corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other
enterprise, against expenses, including attorneys fees,
judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and
reasonably incurred by the person in connection with such
action, suit or proceeding, if the person acted in good faith
and in a manner the person reasonably believed to be in, or not
opposed to, the best interests of the corporation and, with
respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable
cause to believe the persons conduct was unlawful. In
addition, the Delaware General Corporation Law does not permit
indemnification in any threatened, pending or completed action
or suit by or in the right of the corporation in respect of any
claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have been
adjudged to be liable to the corporation, unless and only to the
extent that the court in which such action or suit was brought
shall determine upon application that, despite the adjudication
of liability, but in view of all the circumstances of the case,
such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity
II-1
for such expenses, which such court shall deem proper. To the
extent that a present or former director or officer of a
corporation has been successful on the merits or otherwise in
defense of any action, suit or proceeding referred to above, or
in defense of any claim, issue or matter, such person shall be
indemnified against expenses, including attorneys fees,
actually and reasonably incurred by such person. Indemnity is
mandatory to the extent a claim, issue or matter has been
successfully defended. The Delaware General Corporation Law also
allows a corporation to provide for the elimination or limit of
the personal liability of a director to the corporation or its
stockholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty
as a director, provided that such provision shall not eliminate
or limit the liability of a director
|
|
|
(i) for any breach of the directors duty of loyalty
to the corporation or its stockholders, |
|
|
(ii) for acts or omissions not in good faith or which
involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law, |
|
|
(iii) for unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock
purchases or redemptions, or |
|
|
(iv) for any transaction from which the director derived an
improper personal benefit. These provisions will not limit the
liability of directors or officers under the federal securities
laws of the United States. |
|
|
Item 21. |
Exhibits and Financial Schedules. |
Exhibits
Exhibits are listed by numbers corresponding to the
Exhibit Table of Item 601 in Regulation S-K.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
2 |
.1(a) |
|
Purchase and Contribution Agreement, entered into as of June
1999, by and among BCI (USA), LLC, William Bresnan,
Blackstone BC Capital Partners L.P., Blackstone BC Offshore
Capital Partners L.P., Blackstone Family Investment
Partnership III L.P., TCID of Michigan, Inc. and TCI
Bresnan LLC and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.11 to Amendment
No. 2 to the registration statement on Form S-1 of
Charter Communications, Inc. filed on September 28, 1999
(File No. 333-83887)). |
|
|
2 |
.1(b) |
|
First Amendment to Purchase and Contribution Agreement dated as
of February 14, 2000, by and among BCI (USA), LLC, William
J. Bresnan, Blackstone BC Capital Partners L.P., Blackstone BC
Offshore Capital Partners, L.P., Blackstone Family
Media III L.P. (as assignee of Blackstone Family
Investment III, L.P.), TCID of Michigan, Inc., TCI Bresnan,
LLC and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC,
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.11(a) to the
current report on Form 8-K filed by Charter Communications,
Inc. on February 29, 2000 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
2 |
.2 |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of September 28, 2001,
between High Speed Access Corp. and Charter Communications
Holding Company, LLC (including as Exhibit A, the Form of
Voting Agreement, as Exhibit B, the form of Management
Agreement, as Exhibit C, the form of License Agreement, and
as Exhibit D, the Form of Billing Letter Agreement)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Amendment
No. 6 to Schedule 13D filed by Charter Communications,
Inc. and others with respect to High Speed Access Corp., filed
on October 1, 2001 (File No. 005-56431)). |
|
|
2 |
.3(a) |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated August 29, 2001, by and
between Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC,
Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, and Rifkin Acquisitions
Partners, LLC and Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P., Enstar
Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-3,
L.P., Enstar Income/ Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar IV/ PBD
Systems Venture, and Enstar Cable of Macoupin County
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the current
report of Form 8-K filed by Enstar IV-2, L.P. on
September 13, 2001 (File No. 000-15706)). |
II-2
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
2 |
.3(b) |
|
Letter of Amendment, dated September 10, 2001, by and
between Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC,
Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, and Rifkin Acquisition
Partners, LLC and Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P., Enstar
Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-3,
L.P., Enstar Income/Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar IV/PBD
Systems Venture, and Enstar Cable of Macoupin County
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the current
report of Form 8-K filed by Enstar IV-2, L.P. on
September 13, 2001 (File No. 000-15706)). |
|
|
2 |
.3(c) |
|
Letter of Amendment, dated April 10, 2002, by and between
Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC, Interlink
Communications Partners, LLC, and Rifkin Acquisition Partners,
LLC and Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P., Enstar Income
Program II-2, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-3, L.P.,
Enstar Income/Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar IV/PBD Systems
Venture, and Enstar Cable of Macoupin County (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the current report on
Form 8-K filed by Enstar Income Program IV-1, L.P. on
April 22, 2002 (File No. 000-15705)). |
|
|
2 |
.4 |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated April 10, 2002, by and
between Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC, and
Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P. (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 2.2 to the current report on Form 8-K filed
by Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P. on April 26, 2002
(File No. 000-14508)). |
|
|
2 |
.5 |
|
Purchase Agreement, dated May 29, 2003, by and between
Falcon Video Communications, L.P. and WaveDivision Holdings, LLC
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Charter
Communications, Inc.s current report on Form 8-K
filed on May 30, 2003 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
2 |
.6 |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated September 3, 2003, by and
between Charter Communications VI, LLC, The Helicon Group, L.P.,
Hornell Television Service, Inc., Interlink Communications
Partners, LLC, Charter Communications Holdings, LLC and Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 2.1 to Charter Communications, Inc.s current
report on Form 8-K/A filed on September 3, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Certificate of Formation of CCO Holdings, LLC. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-4 filed by the registrants on February 6, 2004
(File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Certificate of Correction of Certificate of Formation of CCO
Holdings, LLC. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to
the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed by the
registrants on February 6, 2004 (File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
3 |
.3 |
|
Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of CCO
Holdings, LLC, dated as of June 19, 2003. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.3 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-4 filed by the registrants on February 6, 2004
(File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
3 |
.4 |
|
Certificate of Incorporation of CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
(originally named CC Holdco I Capital Corp.) (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to the Registration Statement
on Form S-4 filed by the registrants on February 6,
2004 (File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
3 |
.5 |
|
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation of CCO
Holdings Capital Corp. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.5 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4
filed by the registrants on February 6, 2004 (File
No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
3 |
.6 |
|
By-Laws of CCO Holdings Capital Corp. (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 3.6 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-4 filed by the registrants on February 6, 2004
(File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
4 |
.1 |
|
Indenture relating to the
83/4% Senior
Notes due 2013, dated as of November 10, 2003, by and among
CCO Holdings, LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.5 to Charter Communications, Inc.s current
report on Form 8-K filed on November 12, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
4 |
.2 |
|
Indenture dated as of December 15, 2004 among CCO Holdings,
LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as
trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to CCO
Holdings, LLCs current report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2004 (File No. 333-112593)). |
II-3
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
4 |
.3 |
|
Purchase Agreement, dated August 11, 2005 by and among CCO
Holdings, LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp. and J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc., Credit Suisse First Boston LLC, and Banc of
America Securities LLC as representatives of the purchasers
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the current
report on Form 8-K of CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings
Capital Corp. filed on August 17, 2005 (File
No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
4 |
.4 |
|
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of August 17, 2005 by
and among CCO Holdings, LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp. and
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the current report on Form 8-K of CCO
Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. filed on
August 23, 2005 (File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
4 |
.5 |
|
Exchange and Registration Rights Agreement dated August 17,
2005 by and among CCO Holdings, LLC, CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Credit Suisse First Boston LLC,
and Banc of America Securities LLC as representatives of the
purchasers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
the current report on Form 8-K of CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO
Holdings Capital Corp. filed on August 23, 2005 (File
No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
5 |
.1** |
|
Opinion of Irell & Manella LLP regarding legality. |
|
|
10 |
.1 |
|
Indenture, dated as of April 9, 1998, by and among
Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee)
LLC, Renaissance Media Capital Corporation, Renaissance Media
Group LLC and United States Trust Company of New York, as
trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
registration statement on Forms S-4 of Renaissance Media
Group LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC, Renaissance Media
(Louisiana) LLC and Renaissance Media Capital Corporation filed
on June 12, 1998 (File No. 333-56679)). |
|
|
10 |
.2 |
|
Exchange Agreement, dated as of February 14, 2000, by and
among Charter Communications, Inc., BCI (USA), LLC, William J.
Bresnan, Blackstone BC Capital Partners, L.P., Blackstone BC
Offshore Capital Partners L.P., Blackstone Family
Media, III L.P., (as assignee of Blackstone Family
Investment III L.P.), TCID of Michigan, Inc., and TCI
Bresnan LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.40 to
the current report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications,
Inc. filed on February 29, 2000 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.3 |
|
Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of CC
VIII, LLC, dated as of March 31, 2003 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.27 to the annual report on
Form 10-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed on
April 15, 2003 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.4 |
|
Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of
Charter Communications Operating, LLC, dated as of June 19,
2003 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Charter
Communications, Inc. quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed on
August 5, 2003 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.5(a) |
|
Commitment Letter, dated April 14, 2003, from Vulcan Inc.
to Charter Communications VII, LLC (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3a to Charter Communications, Inc. quarterly
report on Form 10-Q filed on August 5, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.5(b) |
|
Letter from Vulcan Inc. dated June 30, 2003 amending the
Commitment Letter, dated April 14, 2003 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3b to Charter Communications, Inc.
quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed on August 5, 2003
(File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.5(c) |
|
Notice of Termination of Commitment, dated November 14,
2003. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8(a) to the
registration statement of CCO Holdings, LLC filed on
Feb. 6, 2004 (File No. 333-112593)). |
|
|
10 |
.6(a) |
|
First Amended and Restated Mutual Services Agreement, dated as
of December 21, 2000, by and between Charter
Communications, Inc., Charter Investment, Inc. and Charter
Communications Holding Company, LLC (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2(b) to the registration statement on
Form S-4 of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC and
Charter Communications Holdings Capital Corporation filed on
February 2, 2001 (File No. 333-54902)). |
|
|
10 |
.6(b) |
|
Letter Agreement dated June 19, 2003, by and among Charter
Communications, Inc., Charter Communications Holding Company,
LLC and Charter Investment, Inc. regarding Mutual services
Agreement (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit No. 10.5(b) to the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q filed by Charter Communications, Inc. on
August 5, 2003 (file No. 000-27927)). |
II-4
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.6(c) |
|
Second Amended and Restated Mutual Services Agreement, dated as
of June 19, 2003 between Charter Communications, Inc. and
Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit No. 10.5(a) to the quarterly
report on Form 10-Q field by Charter Communications, Inc.
on August 5, 2003 (file No. 000-27927)). |
|
10 |
.7 |
|
Amended and Restated Management Agreement, dated as of
June 19, 2003, between Charter Communications Operating,
LLC and Charter Communications, Inc. (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit No. 10.4 to the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q field by Charter Communications, Inc. on
August 5, 2003 (File No. 333-83887)). |
|
|
10 |
.8 |
|
Purchase Agreement, dated April 20, 2004 by and between
Charter Communications Operating, LLC and Charter Communications
Operating Capital Corp. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.33 to Amendment No. 2 to the registration
statement on Form S-4 filed on May 5, 2004 by
CCH II, LLC and CCH II Capital Corp. filed on
May 5, 2004 (File No. 333-111423)). |
|
|
10 |
.9 |
|
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement among Charter
Communications Operating, LLC, CCO Holdings, LLC and
certain lenders and agent named therein dated April 27,
2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to
Amendment No. 2 to the registration statement on
Form S-4 filed on May 5, 2004 by CCH II, LLC and
CCH Capital Corp. ((File No. 333-111423)). |
|
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Indenture relating to the 8% senior second lien notes due 2012
and
83/8%
senior second lien notes due 2014, dated as of April 27,
2004, by and among Charter Communications Operating, LLC,
Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp. and Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.32 to Amendment No. 2 to the registration
statement on Form S-4 of CCH II, LLC filed on
May 5, 2004 (File No. 333-111423)). |
|
|
10 |
.11(a) |
|
Stipulation of Settlement, dated as of January 24, 2005,
regarding settlement of Consolidated Federal Class Action
entitled in Re Charter Communications, Inc. Securities
Litigation. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.48 to
the Annual Report on Form 10-K filed by Charter
Communications, Inc. on March 3, 2005 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.11(b) |
|
Amendment to Stipulation of Settlement, dated as of May 23,
2005, regarding settlement of Consolidated Federal
Class Action entitled In Re Charter Communications, Inc.
Securities Litigation (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.35(b) to Amendment No. 4 to the
registration statement on Form S-1 filed by Charter
Communications, Inc. on June 7, 2005 (File
No. 333-121136)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(a) |
|
Charter Communications Holdings, LLC 1999 Option Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Amendment
No. 4 to the registration statement on Form S-4 of
Charter Communications Holdings, LLC and Charter Communications
Holdings Capital Corporation filed on July 22, 1999 (File
No. 333-77499)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(b) |
|
Assumption Agreement regarding Option Plan, dated as of
May 25, 1999, by and between Charter Communications
Holdings, LLC and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to Amendment
No. 6 to the registration statement on Form S-4 of
Charter Communications Holdings, LLC and Charter Communications
Holdings Capital Corporation filed on August 27, 1999 (File
No. 333-77499)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(c) |
|
Form of Amendment No. 1 to the Charter Communications
Holdings, LLC 1999 Option Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.10(c) to Amendment No. 4 to the
registration statement on Form S-1 of Charter
Communications, Inc. filed on November 1, 1999 (File
No. 333-83887)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(d) |
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Charter Communications Holdings, LLC
1999 Option Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4(c) to the annual report on Form 10-K
filed by Charter Communications, Inc. on March 30, 2000
(File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(e) |
|
Amendment No. 3 to the Charter Communications 1999 Option
Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14(e) to the
annual report of Form 10-K of Charter Communications, Inc.
filed on March 29, 2002 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.12(f) |
|
Amendment No. 4 to the Charter Communications 1999 Option
Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10(f) to the
annual report on Form 10-K of Charter Communications, Inc.
filed on April 15, 2003 (File No. 000-27927)). |
II-5
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.13(a) |
|
Charter Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed by Charter
Communications, Inc. on May 15, 2001 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(b) |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11(b) to the annual report on Form 10-K of
Charter Communications, Inc. filed on April 15, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(c) |
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.10 to the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
filed by Charter Communications, Inc. on November 14, 2001
(File No. 000-27927)). |
|
10 |
.13(d) |
|
Amendment No. 3 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan effective January 2, 2002
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15(c) to the
annual report of Form 10-K of Charter Communications, Inc.
filed on March 29, 2002 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(e) |
|
Amendment No. 4 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11(e) to the annual report on Form 10-K of
Charter Communications, Inc. filed on April 15, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(f) |
|
Amendment No. 5 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11(f) to the annual report on Form 10-K of
Charter Communications, Inc. filed on April 15, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(g) |
|
Amendment No. 6 to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan effective December 23, 2004
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.43(g) to the
registration statement on Form S-1 of Charter
Communications, Inc. filed on October 5, 2005 (File
No. 333-128838)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(h) |
|
Amendment No. 7 to the Charter Communications Inc. 2001
Stock Incentive Plan effective August 23, 2005
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.43(h) to the
registration statement on Form S-1 of Charter
Communications, Inc. filed on October 5, 2005 (File
No. 333-128838)). |
|
|
10 |
.13(i) |
|
Description of Long-Term Incentive Program under the Charter
Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC, filed on
May 10, 2004 (File No. 333-77499-01)). |
|
|
10 |
.14(a) |
|
Letter Agreement, dated May 25, 1999, between Charter
Communications, Inc. and Marc Nathanson (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.36 to the registration statement on
Form S-4 of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC and
Charter Communications Holdings Capital Corporation filed on
January 25, 2000 (File No. 333-95351)). |
|
|
10 |
.14(b) |
|
Letter Agreement, dated March 27, 2000, between CC VII
Holdings, LLC and Marc Nathanson amending the Letter Agreement
dated May 25, 1999 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.13(b) to the annual report on Form 10-K of
Charter Communications, Inc. filed on April 15, 2003 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.15 |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of October 8, 2001, by and
between Carl E. Vogel and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the quarterly
report on Form 10-Q filed by Charter Communications, Inc.
on November 14, 2001 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.16 |
|
Employment Agreement between Charter Communications, Inc. and
Margaret A. Maggie Bellville, entered into as of
April 27, 2003 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
filed by Charter Communications, Inc. on November 3, 2003
(File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.17(a) |
|
Employment Offer Letter, dated December 2, 2003 by and
between Charter Communications, Inc. and Derek Chang
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the annual
report on Form 10-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed
on March 15, 2004 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.17(b) |
|
Amendment to Employment Offer Letter, dated January 27,
2005, by and between Charter Communications, Inc. and Derek
Chang (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the
current report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc.
filed January 28, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
II-6
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Separation Agreement and Release for Margaret A. Bellville dated
as of September 16, 2004 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Charter Communications, Inc.s
quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed on November 4,
2004 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.19 |
|
Executive Services Agreement, dated as of January 17, 2005,
between Charter Communications, Inc. and Robert P. May
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed on
January 21, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Separation Agreement and Release for Steven A. Schumm dated as
of February 8, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.1 to Charter Communications, Inc.s current
report on Form 8-K filed on February 11, 2005 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.21 |
|
Separation Agreement and Release for Carl E. Vogel, dated as of
February 17, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.1 to the current report on Form 8-K filed
by Charter Communications, Inc. on February 22, 2005 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Separation Agreement and Release for Thomas A. Cullen, dated as
of March 15, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.1 to the current report on Form 8-K filed
by Charter Communications, Inc. on March 17, 2005 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.23 |
|
Description of Charter Communications, Inc. 2005 Executive Bonus
Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.51 to the
annual report on Form 10-K filed by Charter Communications,
Inc. on March 3, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.24 |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of April 1, 2005, by and
between Michael J. Lovett and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed by Charter
Communications, Inc. on May 3, 2005 (File
No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.25 |
|
Letter Agreement, dated April 15, 2005, by and between
Charter Communications, Inc. and Paul E. Martin (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current report on
Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed
April 19, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.26 |
|
2005 Executive Cash Award Plan dated as of June 9, 2005
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed
June 15, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.27 |
|
Restricted Stock Agreement, dated as of July 13, 2005, by
and between Robert P. May and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed
July 13, 2005 (file No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.28 |
|
Restricted Stock Agreement, dated as of July 13, 2005, by
and between Michael J. Lovett and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed
July 13, 2005 (file No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.29 |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of August 9, 2005, by and
between Neil Smit and Charter Communications, Inc. (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current report on
Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed on
August 15, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.30 |
|
Employment Agreement dated as of September 2, 2005, by and
between Paul E. Martin and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed on
September 9, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
10 |
.31 |
|
Employment Agreement dated as of September 2, 2005, by and
between Wayne H. Davis and Charter Communications, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to the current
report on Form 8-K of Charter Communications, Inc. filed on
September 9, 2005 (File No. 000-27927)). |
|
|
12 |
.1* |
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges. |
|
|
21 |
.1* |
|
Subsidiaries of CCO Holdings, LLC. |
|
|
23 |
.1** |
|
Consent of Irell & Manella LLP (included with
Exhibit 5.1). |
|
|
23 |
.2* |
|
Consent of KPMG LLP. |
|
|
24 |
.1* |
|
Power of attorney (included on the signature page hereto) |
|
|
25 |
.1** |
|
Statement of eligibility of trustee. |
|
|
99 |
.1** |
|
Form of Cover Letter to Registered Holders and the Depository
Trust Company Participants. |
|
|
99 |
.2** |
|
Form of Broker Letter. |
II-7
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
99 |
.3** |
|
Form of Letter of Transmittal. |
|
|
99 |
.4** |
|
Form of Notice of Guaranteed Delivery. |
|
|
** |
To be filed by amendment. |
|
|
|
|
|
Management compensatory plan or arrangement |
|
|
|
Financial Statement Schedules |
Schedules not listed above are omitted because of the absence of
the conditions under which they are required or because the
information required by such omitted schedules is set forth in
the financial statements or the notes thereto.
The undersigned registrants hereby undertake that:
|
|
|
(1) Prior to any public reoffering of the securities
registered hereunder through use of a prospectus which is a part
of this registration statement, by any person or party who is
deemed to be an underwriter within the meaning of
Rule 145(c), the issuer undertakes that such reoffering
prospectus will contain the information called for by the
applicable registration form with respect to the reofferings by
persons who may be deemed underwriters, in addition to the
information called for by the other items of the applicable form. |
|
|
(2) Every prospectus: (i) that is filed pursuant to
the immediately preceding paragraph or (ii) that purports
to meet the requirements of Section 10(a)(3) of the
Securities Act of 1933 and is used in connection with an
offering of securities subject to Rule 415, will be filed
as a part of an amendment to the registration statement and will
not be used until such amendment is effective, and that, for
purposes of determining any liability under the Securities Act
of 1933, each such post-effective amendment shall be deemed to
be a new registration statement relating to the securities
offered therein, and the offering of such securities at that
time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering
thereof. |
The undersigned registrants hereby undertake to respond to
requests for information that is incorporated by reference into
the prospectus pursuant to Item 4, 10(b), 11 or 13 of this
form, within one business day of receipt of such request, and to
send the incorporated documents by first class mail or other
equally prompt means. This includes information contained in
documents filed subsequent to the effective date of the
registration statement through the date of responding to the
request.
The undersigned registrants hereby undertake to supply by means
of a post-effective amendment all information concerning a
transaction, and the company being acquired involved therein,
that was not the subject of and included in the registration
statement when it became effective.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act of 1933 may be permitted to directors, officers,
and controlling persons of the registrants pursuant to the
foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the registrants have been
advised that in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as
expressed in the Securities Act of 1933 and is, therefore,
unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification
against such liabilities, other than the payment by the
registrants of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer,
or controlling person of the registrants in the successful
defense of any action, suit or proceeding, is asserted by such
director, officer, or controlling person in connection with the
securities being registered, the registrants will, unless in the
opinion of their counsel the matter has been settled by
controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate
jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by them
is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act of
1933 and will be governed by the final adjudication of such
issue.
II-8
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the
registrant has duly caused this registration statement on
Form S-4 to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized, in the city of Saint Louis, State of
Missouri, on October 6, 2005.
|
|
|
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC, |
|
Registrant |
|
|
By: CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., |
|
Sole Manager |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Martin |
|
Senior Vice President, |
|
Interim Chief Financial Officer, |
|
Principal Accounting Officer and |
|
Corporate Controller |
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Neil Smit, Paul E. Martin
and Thomas J. Hearity, with full power to act as his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place
and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all
amendments (including post-effective amendments) to the
registration statement, and to file the same, with all exhibits
thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and any other regulatory
authority, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent, full
power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection
therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or
could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that
said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this
registration statement has been signed below by the following
persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul G. Allen
Paul
G. Allen |
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors of Charter Communications,
Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Neil Smit
Neil
Smit |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer, Director (Principal
Executive Officer) Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
II-9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul E. Martin
Paul
E. Martin |
|
Senior Vice President,
Interim Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer
and Corporate Controller (Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer) Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ W. Lance Conn
W. Lance
Conn |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Nathaniel A. Davis
Nathaniel
A. Davis |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
September 20, 2005 |
|
/s/ Jonathan L. Dolgen
Jonathan
L. Dolgen |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
September 23, 2005 |
|
/s/ Robert P. May
Robert
P. May |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ David C. Merritt
David
C. Merritt |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Marc B. Nathanson
Marc
B. Nathanson |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Jo Allen Patton
Jo
Allen Patton |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ John H. Tory
John
H. Tory |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Larry W. Wangberg
Larry
W. Wangberg |
|
Director of Charter Communications, Inc. |
|
September 21, 2005 |
II-10
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, CCO
Holdings Capital Corp. has duly caused this registration
statement on Form S-4 to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Saint
Louis, State of Missouri on October 6, 2005.
|
|
|
CCO HOLDINGS CAPITAL CORP. |
|
Registrant |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Martin |
|
Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial |
|
Officer, Principal Accounting Officer |
|
and Corporate Controller |
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Neil Smit, Paul E. Martin
and Thomas J. Hearity, with full power to act as his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place
and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all
amendments (including post-effective amendments) to the
registration statement, and to file the same, with all exhibits
thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and any other regulatory
authority, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent, full
power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection
therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or
could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that
said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this
registration statement has been signed below by the following
persons and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Neil Smit
Neil
Smit |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer, (Principal Executive
Officer), CCO Holdings Capital Corp. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Paul E. Martin
Paul
E. Martin |
|
Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller (Principal
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) CCO Holdings
Capital Corp. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
II-11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Robert P. May
Robert
P. May |
|
Director of CCO Holdings Capital Corp. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
|
/s/ Jo Allen Patton
Jo
Allen Patton |
|
Director of CCO Holdings Capital Corp. |
|
October 6, 2005 |
II-12
EX-12.1
Exhibit 12.1
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED
CHARGES
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
CALCULATION
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
Ended
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before Minority Interest, Income
Taxes and Cumulative Effects of Accounting Change
|
|
$ |
(1,727 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,838 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,946 |
) |
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
(2,555 |
) |
|
$ |
(33 |
) |
|
$ |
(122 |
) |
Fixed Charges
|
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Earnings
|
|
$ |
(1,078 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,307 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,427 |
) |
|
$ |
579 |
|
|
$ |
(1,988 |
) |
|
$ |
228 |
|
|
$ |
205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
$ |
638 |
|
|
$ |
517 |
|
|
$ |
502 |
|
|
$ |
488 |
|
|
$ |
539 |
|
|
$ |
249 |
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
Amortization of Debt Costs
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Interest Element of Rentals
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fixed Charges
|
|
$ |
649 |
|
|
$ |
531 |
|
|
$ |
519 |
|
|
$ |
507 |
|
|
$ |
567 |
|
|
$ |
261 |
|
|
$ |
327 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Earnings for the years ended December 31,
2000, 2001, 2002 and 2004 and for the six months ended
June 30, 2004 and 2005 were insufficient to cover fixed charges by
$1,727, $1,838, $4,946, $2,555, $33 and $122 respectively. As a
result of such deficiencies, the ratios are not presented above.
|
EX-21.1
Exhibit 21.1
CCO Holdings Subsidiaries
Entity Jurisdictions & Type
September 2005
|
|
|
Entity Name |
|
Jurisdiction and Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
212 Seventh Street, Inc.
|
|
a Missouri corporation |
Adlink Cable Advertising, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
American Cable Entertainment Company, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
ARH, Ltd.
|
|
a Colorado corporation |
Athens Cablevision, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Ausable Cable TV, Inc.
|
|
a New York corporation |
Bend Cable Communications, LLC
|
|
an Oregon limited liability company |
Cable Equities Colorado, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Cable Equities of Colorado Management Corp.
|
|
a Colorado corporation |
Cable Systems, Inc.
|
|
a Kansas corporation |
CC 10, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC Holdco I, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC Michigan, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC New England, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC Systems, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC V Holdings Finance, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
CC V Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VI Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VI Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VI Operating, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VI Purchasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VII Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VII Lease, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
CC VII Leasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VII Purchasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VIII Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VIII Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VIII Operating, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VIII Purchasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CC VIII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO Holdings Capital Corp.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
CCO Lease, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
CCO Leasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO NR Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO Property, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCO Purchasing, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCOH Sub, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCONR Sub, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
CCV.com, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Cencom Cable Entertainment, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Central Oregon Cable Advertising, LLC
|
|
an Oregon limited liability company |
CF Finance LaGrange, Inc.
|
|
a Georgia corporation |
Charlotte Cable Advertising Interconnect, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Advertising of Saint Louis, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Cable Operating Company, L.L.C.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Cable Partners, L.L.C.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Page 1
CCO Holdings Subsidiaries
Entity Jurisdictions & Type
September 2005
|
|
|
Entity Name |
|
Jurisdiction and Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Communications Entertainment I, DST
|
|
a Delaware statutory business trust |
Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Entertainment II, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Entertainment, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications JV, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Operating, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Charter Communications Properties LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Services, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications V, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications Ventures, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications VI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications VII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Communications, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Distribution, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink AL-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Alabama, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink AR-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink AR-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink AZ-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink CA-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink CA-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink CO-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink CO-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink CT-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink GA-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Georgia, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink ID-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Illinois, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink IN-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Kentucky, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink KS-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink KS-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink LA-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink LA-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink MA-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Michigan, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Missouri, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink MS-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink MS-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NC-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NC-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NC-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Nebraska, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NH-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NM-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NV-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NY-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink NY-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink OH-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink OK-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink OR-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink PA-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Page 2
CCO Holdings Subsidiaries
Entity Jurisdictions & Type
September 2005
|
|
|
Entity Name |
|
Jurisdiction and Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Fiberlink PA-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink SC-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink SC-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Tennessee, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink TX-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink UT-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink VA-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink VA-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink VA-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink VT-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink WA-CCVII, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink Wisconsin, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink WV-CCO, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink WV-CCVI, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Fiberlink, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Helicon, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Online, L.P.
|
|
a Delaware limited partnership |
Charter RMG, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Stores FCN, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Telephone of Minnesota, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Charter Video Electronics, Inc.
|
|
a Minnesota corporation |
Chat TV, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Dalton Cablevision, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
DBroadband Holdings, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Falcon Cable Communications, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Falcon Cable Media, a California Limited Partnership
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Falcon Cable Systems Company II, L.P.
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Falcon Cablevision, a California Limited Partnership
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Falcon Community Cable, L.P.
|
|
a Delaware limited partnership |
Falcon Community Ventures I, LP
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Falcon First Cable of New York, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Falcon First Cable of the Southeast, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Falcon First, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Falcon Telecable, a California Limited Partnership
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Falcon Video Communications, L.P.
|
|
a California limited partnership |
Helicon Group, L.P., The
|
|
a Delaware limited partnership |
Helicon Partners I, L.P.
|
|
a Delaware limited partnership |
Hometown TV, Inc.
|
|
a New York corporation |
Hornell Television Services, Inc.
|
|
a New York corporation |
HPI Acquisition Co., L.L.C.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Interlink Communications Partners, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Long Beach, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Marcus Cable Associates, L.L.C.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Marcus Cable of Alabama, L.L.C.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Marcus Cable, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Midwest Cable Communications, Inc.
|
|
a Minnesota corporation |
Peachtree Cable TV, L.P.
|
|
a Georgia limited partnership |
Peachtree Cable T.V., LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Plattsburgh Cablevision, Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Renaissance Media Capital Corporation
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Page 3
CCO Holdings Subsidiaries
Entity Jurisdictions & Type
September 2005
|
|
|
Entity Name |
|
Jurisdiction and Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Renaissance Media Group LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Renaissance Media LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Rifkin Acquisition Capital Corporation
|
|
a Colorado corporation |
Rifkin Acquisition Partners, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Robin Media Group, Inc.
|
|
a Nevada corporation |
Scottsboro TV Cable, Inc.
|
|
an Alabama corporation |
Tennessee, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Tioga Cable Company, Inc.
|
|
a Pennsylvania corporation |
TWC W. Ohio Charter Cable Advertising, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Vista Broadband Communications, LLC
|
|
a Delaware limited liability company |
Wilcat Transmission Co., Inc.
|
|
a Delaware corporation |
Page 4
EX-23.2
Exhibit 23.2
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors
CCO
Holdings, LLC:
We consent to the use of our report included herein and to the reference to our firm under the
heading Experts in the prospectus.
/s/ KPMG LLP
St. Louis, MO
October 4, 2005