PROSPECTUS FILING
Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)3
Registration
No. 333-128853
333-128853-01
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 March 8, 2006, 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 February 8, 2006.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
i |
|
|
|
|
ii |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
|
F-1 |
|
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
We have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a
registration statement on
Form S-4
(Registration
No. 333-128853)
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 March 1, 2006.
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 Securities and Exchange
Commission, or 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 be able 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,
bridge loan 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 5.
Unless otherwise noted, all business data included in this
summary is as of September 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 otherwise stated, 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 6.17 million customers at
September 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 September 30, 2005, we served approximately
5.91 million analog video customers, of which approximately
2.75 million were also digital video customers. We also
served approximately 2.12 million high-speed Internet
customers (including approximately 244,000 who received only
high-speed Internet services). We also provided telephone
service to approximately 89,900 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
2006.
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 since 2004, as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the January 2006 sale by our parent companies, CCH II and CCH II
Capital Corp., of an additional $450 million principal
amount of their 10.250% senior notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the October 2005 entry by us into a $600 million senior
bridge loan agreement with various lenders (which was reduced to
$435 million as a result of the issuance of CCH II notes); |
|
|
|
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
Fourth quarter preliminary information
Because the fourth quarter has only recently ended, the
information that follows is, by necessity, preliminary in nature
and based only upon preliminary information available to Charter
as of the date of this prospectus. Investors should exercise
caution in relying on the information contained herein and
should not draw any inferences from this information regarding
financial or operating data that is not discussed herein.
In addition, certain customer and financial information is
presented on a pro forma basis, adjusted for (i) the divestiture
of geographically non-strategic systems in July 2005 as if these
dispositions had occurred on January 1, 2004, and (ii) the
removal of $6 million of credits issued to customers affected by
hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The divested systems served a total
of approximately 26,800 analog video customers, 12,000 digital
video customers and 600 high-speed Internet customers as of
their respective dates of disposition. The unaudited pro forma
information that follows has been presented for comparative
purposes and is not intended to provide any indication of what
actual consolidated results of operations or customers would
have been had these dispositions been completed as of the date
assumed.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, Charter increased its targeted
marketing efforts and related expenditures that began in the
third quarter of 2005. The long-term objective of these efforts
is to increase its revenues through deeper market penetration of
all of its services. We believe these efforts have been
effective as reflected in the following preliminary customer
results:
|
|
|
|
|
fourth quarter 2005 net losses of analog video customers are
approximately 21,800 compared to a pro forma net loss of
approximately 82,600 in the fourth quarter of 2004; |
|
|
|
fourth quarter 2005 net gains of digital video customers are
approximately 47,200 compared to a pro forma net loss of
approximately 14,400 in the fourth quarter of 2004; |
|
|
|
fourth quarter 2005 net gains of high-speed Internet customers
are approximately 76,400 compared to a pro forma net gain of
approximately 64,500 in the fourth quarter of 2004; and |
|
|
|
fourth quarter 2005 net gains of telephone customers are
approximately 31,600 compared to a net gain of approximately
5,200 in the fourth quarter of 2004. |
Charter currently expects actual revenue for the fourth quarter
of $1.335 billion to $1.345 billion, which is approximately a
4.6% to 5.4% increase compared to actual fourth quarter of 2004.
On a pro forma basis, fourth quarter revenue is expected of
$1.340 billion to $1.350 billion, which is approximately a 5.5%
to 6.2% increase compared to pro forma fourth quarter of 2004.
Capital expenditures for the fourth quarter of 2005 are
currently expected to be approximately $270 million to $280
million, which is lower than fourth quarter of 2004 capital
expenditures of $285 million and similar to the third quarter
2005 capital expenditures of $273 million. Capital expenditures
for the full year, 2005, are expected to have been approximately
$1.1 billion, which includes approximately $40 million to $45
million of rebuilding capital expenditures related to hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.
Appointment of New Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
Jeffrey T. Fisher, 43, has been appointed to the position of
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, effective
February 6, 2006. Mr. Fisher succeeds the Interim Chief
Financial Officer, Paul E. Martin, who will continue as
Charters Senior Vice President and Controller until at
least March 31, 2006. 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.
3
CCH II, LLC Note Offering
On January 30, 2006, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. issued $450
million principal amount in debt securities, the proceeds of
which will be provided, directly or indirectly, to Charter
Communications Operating, LLC, which will use such funds to
reduce borrowings, but not commitments, under the revolving
portion of its credit facilities. As a result of the offering of
these notes, availability under the bridge loan has been reduced
to $435 million.
CC VIII Settlement
As of October 31, 2005, acting through a Special Committee
of Charters Board of Directors, Charter settled its
dispute with Paul G. Allen, Charters controlling
stockholder and Chairman of the Board, related to the ownership
of a Charter subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC
(CC VIII).
Under the terms of the settlement, Charter Investment, Inc.
(CII), 100% owned by Mr. Allen, will retain 30%
of the Class A preferred equity interests it previously
held in CC VIII, subject to certain rights and restrictions
concerning transfer. Of the other 70% of the CC VIII
preferred interests, 7.4% has been transferred by CII to CCHC,
LLC, (CCHC) a newly formed direct, wholly owned
subsidiary of Charter Communications Holdings Company, LLC
(Charter Holdco) and the new direct parent of
Charter Holdings in exchange for a subordinated exchangeable
note issued to CII and the remaining 62.6% has been transferred
by CII to Charter Holdco, in accordance with the terms of the
settlement, for no additional monetary consideration. Charter
Holdco contributed the 62.6% interest to CCHC. The note has an
initial accreted value of $48.2 million accreting at 14%,
compounded quarterly, with a
15-year maturity.
Also as part of the settlement, CC VIII issued
approximately 49 million additional Class B units to
CC V Holdings, LLC, the direct parent of CC VIII, in
consideration for prior capital contributions to CC VIII by
CC V Holdings, LLC in connection with a transaction
that was unrelated to the dispute with CII. As a result of these
transfers and issuances, Mr. Allens pro rata share of
the profits and losses of CC VIII is approximately 5.6%.
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.
CCO Holdings Bridge Loan
In October 2005, we entered into a senior bridge loan agreement
with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Credit Suisse, Cayman Islands
Branch and Deutsche Bank AG Cayman Islands Branch (the
Lenders) whereby the Lenders have committed to make
loans to us in an aggregate amount of $600 million. We may,
subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, including the
satisfaction of certain of the conditions to borrowing under the
Charter Operating credit facilities, draw upon the facility
between January 2, 2006 and September 29, 2006 and the
loans will mature on the sixth anniversary of the first
borrowing under the bridge loan. In January 2006, upon the
issuance of $450 million principal amount of CCH II
notes discussed above, the commitment under the bridge loan
agreement was reduced to $435 million. The failure to
satisfy the conditions to borrowing under the bridge loan would
prevent any borrowing thereunder, which could materially
adversely affect our ability to operate our business and to make
payments under our debt instruments. See Description of
Other Indebtedness CCO Holdings, LLC Notes and
Bridge Loan.
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. Holders of Charter Holdings
notes due in 2009 and 2010 exchanged $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. Holders of Charter
Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 exchanged $845 million
principal amount of notes for $662 million principal amount
of 11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. In addition,
holders of Charter Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 tendered
$2.5 billion principal amount of notes for
$2.5 billion principal amount of various series of new CIH
notes. Each series of new CIH notes has the same stated interest
rate 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.
4
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. The equity ownership, voting
percentages and indebtedness amounts shown below are
approximations as of September 30, 2005 giving effect to
the issuance and sale of $450 million principal amount of
10.250% CCH II senior notes in January 2006 and the use of such
proceeds to pay down credit facilities, the issuance by Charter
of 67.7 million shares on November 28, 2005, the
creation of CCHC and the settlement of the CC VIII dispute
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.
5
|
|
(1) |
Charter acts as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its
direct and indirect limited liability company subsidiaries,
including CCO Holdings. |
|
(2) |
These membership units are held by CII and Vulcan Cable III
Inc., each of which is 100% owned by Paul G. Allen,
Charters 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) |
The percentages shown in this table reflect the issuance of the
94.9 million shares of Class A common stock issued on
July 29, 2005 and November 28, 2005 and the
corresponding issuance of an equal number of mirror membership
units by Charter Holdco to Charter. However, for accounting
purposes, Charters common equity interest in Charter
Holdco is 48%, and Paul G. Allens ownership of
Charter Holdco is 52%. These percentages exclude the
94.9 million mirror membership units issued to Charter due
to the required return of the issued mirror units upon return of
the shares offered pursuant to the share lending agreement. |
|
(4) |
Represents preferred membership interests in CC VIII, a
subsidiary of CC V Holdings, LLC, and a subordinated
accreting note issued by CCHC related to the settlement of the
CC VIII dispute. 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. |
6
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 March 8, 2006 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 notes will bear interest from November 15, 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. |
7
|
|
|
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. |
8
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
May 15, 2006. |
|
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 September 30, 2005, the indebtedness of CCO Holdings
and its subsidiaries reflected on our consolidated balance sheet
totaled approximately $8.8 billion, and the new notes are
structurally subordinated to approximately $7.5 billion of
that amount. |
|
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 |
9
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
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 nine months ended
September 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:
|
|
|
(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, to refinance amounts
outstanding under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries,
CC VI Operating Company, LLC, CC VIII Operating, LLC
and Falcon Cable Communications, LLC; |
|
|
(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, | |
|
Nine Months Ended September 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 |
|
|
$ |
2,513 |
|
|
$ |
2,551 |
|
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
4,566 |
|
|
|
4,819 |
|
|
|
4,977 |
|
|
|
4,948 |
(b) |
|
|
3,672 |
(b) |
|
|
3,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
2,068 |
|
|
|
1,540 |
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,489 |
|
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
7,107 |
|
|
|
5,939 |
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(2,159 |
) |
|
|
(2,267 |
) |
|
|
224 |
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
(616 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(513 |
) |
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
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 |
) |
|
|
(2,679 |
) |
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
Minority interest(c)
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
(2,683 |
) |
|
|
(2,654 |
) |
|
|
(235 |
) |
|
Income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(4,746 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(2,500 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,647 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,612 |
) |
|
$ |
(245 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$ |
2,095 |
|
|
$ |
804 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
891 |
|
|
$ |
616 |
|
|
$ |
815 |
|
|
Ratio of earnings to cover fixed charges(d)
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
Deficiency of earnings to cover fixed
charges(d)
|
|
$ |
4,946 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
$ |
2,555 |
|
|
$ |
2,703 |
|
|
$ |
2,679 |
|
|
$ |
226 |
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
Actual | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Operating Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(end of period)(e):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog video customers
|
|
|
6,431,300 |
|
|
|
6,200,500 |
|
|
|
5,991,500 |
|
|
|
6,074,600 |
|
|
|
5,906,300 |
|
|
Digital video customers
|
|
|
2,671,900 |
|
|
|
2,588,600 |
|
|
|
2,674,700 |
|
|
|
2,688,900 |
|
|
|
2,749,400 |
|
|
Residential high-speed Internet customers
|
|
|
1,565,600 |
|
|
|
1,527,800 |
|
|
|
1,884,400 |
|
|
|
1,819,900 |
|
|
|
2,120,000 |
|
|
Telephone customers
|
|
|
24,900 |
|
|
|
24,900 |
|
|
|
45,400 |
|
|
|
40,200 |
|
|
|
89,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual | |
|
|
As of September 30, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
(end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
16,169 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
8,805 |
|
Loans payable-related party
|
|
|
57 |
|
Minority interest(c)
|
|
|
665 |
|
Members equity
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Actual revenues exceeded pro forma revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 and 2005 by $29 million,
$29 million and $0, respectively. Pro forma loss before
cumulative effect of accounting change exceeded actual loss
before cumulative effect of accounting change by
$147 million, $145 million and $6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended
September 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 is not intended to provide any
indication of what our results of operations would have been had
the transactions described above been completed on the dates
indicated or to project our results of operations for any future
date. |
|
(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 |
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
(c) |
Minority interest represents the preferred membership interests
in CC VIII. Paul G. Allen indirectly held the
preferred membership units in CC VIII as a result of the
exercise of a put right originally granted in connection with
the Bresnan transaction in 2000. There was an issue regarding
the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII membership interests
following the consummation of the Bresnan put transaction on
June 6, 2003. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased
recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of
CC VIII for financial reporting purposes until such time as
the resolution of the issue was determinable or certain other
events occurred. This dispute was settled October 31, 2005.
We are currently determining the accounting impact of the
settlement. 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. |
|
(d) |
Earnings include net loss plus fixed charges. Fixed charges
consist of interest expense and an estimated interest component
of rent expense. |
|
(e) |
See Business Products and Services for
definitions of the terms contained in this section. |
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 September 30, 2005, our total debt reflected
on our consolidated balance sheet was approximately
$8.8 billion, our members equity is approximately
$5.2 billion and the deficiency of earnings to cover fixed
charges for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2005,
was approximately $220 million. The maturities of these
obligations are set forth in Description of Other
Indebtedness.
As of September 30, 2005, Charter had outstanding
approximately $888 million aggregate principal amount of
convertible senior notes, $25 million of which mature in
2006. As of September 30, 2005, Charter Holdings, CIH,
CCH I and CCH II had outstanding approximately
$9.4 billion aggregate principal amount of senior notes and
senior discount notes, maturing in 2007, 2009 and thereafter.
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 amount 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; |
|
|
|
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 |
15
|
|
|
|
|
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, bridge loan 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; |
|
|
|
pay dividends or make other distributions; |
16
|
|
|
|
|
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, bridge loan 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, the bridge loan 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, the bridge loan,
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 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 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. Although our
parent companies, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp., recently sold
$450 million principal amount of 10.250% senior notes due
2010, you should not assume that we will be able to access
additional sources of external liquidity on similar terms, if at
all. We believe that cash flows from operating activities and
17
amounts available under our credit facilities and bridge loan
will not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy our
and our parent companies interest payment and principal
repayment obligations in 2007 and beyond. 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. Our total potential borrowing availability under the
Charter Operating credit facilities was approximately
$786 million as of September 30, 2005, however, the
actual availability is limited by financial covenant
restrictions. At September 30, 2005, actual availability as
a result of these restrictions was only $648 million. These
financial covenant restrictions may from time to time limit the
availability of funds in the future. Although we have additional
borrowing availability of $600 million under the bridge
loan (which was reduced to $435 million as a result of the
issuance of the CCH II notes), availability of borrowings
under the bridge loan is subject to the satisfaction of certain
conditions, including the satisfaction of certain of the
conditions to borrowing under the credit facilities.
In addition, in connection with the issuance of audited
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005,
in the event that we are not able to demonstrate to our
independent accountants that we have adequate access to
liquidity, Charter and its subsidiaries ability to receive an
unqualified opinion from its independent accountants on their
respective financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2005 may be adversely affected. We believe we
will be able to demonstrate adequate access to sufficient
liquidity for the purpose of receiving an unqualified 2005
opinion, however, there can be no assurance that Charter and its
subsidiaries will receive an unqualified opinion. The failure to
receive an unqualified opinion would constitute an event of
default under the Charter Operating credit facilities and bridge
loan, and, as a result, we would not be able to access funds
thereunder.
An event of default under the credit facilities, bridge loan 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.
Likewise, the failure to satisfy the conditions to borrowing
under the bridge loan would prevent any borrowing thereunder,
which could materially adversely affect our ability to operate
our business and to make payments under our 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
18
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 was $8.8 billion as of September 30,
2005.
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 our subsidiaries other debt instruments
will have the right to be paid in full before us from any of our
subsidiaries assets; and |
|
|
|
Paul G. Allen, as an indirect holder of preferred
membership interests in our subsidiary, CC VIII, would have
a claim on a portion of its assets that would reduce the amounts
available for repayment to holders of the notes. 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. |
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.
19
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.
Paul G. 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.
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 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 and aggressive pricing 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 enable
them to begin providing video services, as well as telephone and
high bandwidth Internet access services, to residential and
business customers and they are now offering such service in
limited areas. 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 telephone companies and other providers
of dial-up
and digital subscriber line technology, also known as
(DSL). DSL service is competitive with high-speed
Internet service over cable systems. 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. Moreover, as we expand our telephone offerings,
we will face considerable competition from established telephone
companies and other carriers, including Voice Over Internet
Protocol (VOIP) providers.
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.
20
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.
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.
We and Charter are a party to, or otherwise involved in,
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 and Charter 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 we or Charter have entered into.
An unfavorable outcome in any of the lawsuits pending against us
or Charter, or in any other legal matter, or our or
Charters failure to comply with or properly implement the
terms of the settlements and resolutions of legal matters we or
Charter have 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 or
Charters 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. 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 $2.5 billion and
$239 million for the
21
nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2005,
respectively. We reported income before cumulative effect of
accounting change of $30 million for 2003. 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 December 31, 2005, approximately
15% of our current programming contracts were expired, and
approximately another 4% were scheduled to expire at or before
the end of 2006. 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 a 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 nine months ended September 30, 2005, we spent
approximately $815 million on capital expenditures. During
2005, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately
$1 billion to $1.1 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.
22
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 President of Finance and Strategy and Interim
co-Chief Financial
Officer and our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary. Jeffrey Fisher will begin serving as our
Chief Financial Officer on February 6, 2006, while the
individual currently serving in that capacity is doing so on an
interim basis. In addition, Neil Smit assumed the positions of
President and Chief Executive Officer effective August 22,
2005, and Grier Raclin became the Executive Vice President,
General Counsel and Corporate Secretary effective
October 10, 2005. 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 December 31, 2005 of approximately 90% 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,
23
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 and 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 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.
24
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. 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 10%
of our video customers, were expired as of September 30,
2005. Approximately 2% of additional franchises, covering
approximately an additional 4% 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 some regulatory
relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals are
generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants due to
a number of varying factors including efforts to withhold
streamlined cable franchising from incumbents until after the
expiration of their existing franchises. To the extent incumbent
cable operators are not able to avail themselves of this
streamlined franchising process, such operators may continue to
be subject to more onerous franchise requirements at the local
level than new entrants. The FCC recently initiated a proceeding
to determine whether local franchising authorities are impeding
the deployment of competitive cable services through
unreasonable franchising requirements and whether such
impediments should be preempted. At this time, we are not able
to determine what impact such proceeding may have on us.
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 September 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.
25
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 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 and regulatory interest
in requiring cable operators to offer historically bundled
programming services on an á la carte basis or to at least
offer a separately available child-friendly Family
Tier. It is 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.
26
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
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. 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.
The notes will be new securities for which there is currently no
public market. Further, 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 new notes,
on any securities exchange or for quotation of the notes on any
automated dealer quotation system. Accordingly, notwithstanding
any existing market for the
83/4%
Senior Notes issued in 2003, 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
27
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. 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, CCHC, Mr. Allen or their affiliates.
None of our direct or indirect equity holders, directors,
officers, employees or affiliates, including, without
limitation, Charter, Charter Holdco, CCHC, 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, CCHC, 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.
28
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.
29
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
September 30, 2005, on a consolidated basis:
The following information should be read in conjunction with
Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data,
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 | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in | |
|
|
millions, | |
|
|
unaudited) | |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
$ |
794 |
|
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
Charter Operating:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.000% senior second lien notes due 2012
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
83/8% senior
second lien notes due 2014
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
Renaissance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
Credit Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating(a)
|
|
|
5,513 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
|
8,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
Loan Payable Related Party
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
Minority Interest(b)
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
|
|
Members Equity
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$ |
14,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Total potential borrowing availability under our credit
facilities was $786 million as of September 30, 2005,
although the actual availability at that time was only
$648 million because of limits imposed by covenant
restrictions. |
|
(b) |
Minority interest consists of preferred membership interests in
CC VIII. Paul G. Allen held preferred membership units
in CC VIII as a result of the exercise of put rights
originally granted in connection with the Bresnan transaction in
2000. There was an issue regarding the ultimate ownership of the
CC VIII membership interests following the consummation of the
Bresnan put transaction on June 6, 2003. This dispute was
settled October 31, 2005. 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. |
30
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:
(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, to refinance amounts
outstanding under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries,
CC VI Operating Company, LLC, CC VIII Operating,
LLC and Falcon Cable Communications, LLC;
(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
83/4%
CCO Holdings senior 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 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 to project our results of operations for any future
date.
The unaudited pro forma balance sheet as of September 30,
2005 is not provided as pro forma adjustments are not
significant for that period.
31
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2004
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset | |
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Dispositions(a) | |
|
Transactions(b) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
2,534 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,513 |
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
3,701 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,672 |
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,540 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,855 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,939 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations
|
|
|
(2,154 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,267 |
) |
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
(412 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest, income taxes and cumulative
effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(2,533 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
(2,679 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting
change
|
|
|
(2,508 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
(2,654 |
) |
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(2,467 |
) |
|
$ |
(108 |
) |
|
$ |
(37 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,612 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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. |
32
|
|
|
(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
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Historical interest expense for Charter
Operatings revolving credit facility repaid with cash on
hand in February 2005
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Historical interest expense for the CC V Holdings, LLC
11.875% senior discount notes repaid with cash on hand in
March 2005
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Interest on $300 million of CCO Holdings
83/4% senior
notes issued in August 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
33
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Year Ended December 31, 2004
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset | |
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Dispositions(a) | |
|
Transactions(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 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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. |
34
|
|
|
(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.
35
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Transactions(a) | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
$ |
2,551 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,551 |
|
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
3,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,912 |
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
Loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
224 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(502 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(513 |
) |
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other, net
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(450 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest and income taxes
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(226 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(235 |
) |
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
(245 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Historical interest expense for Charter Operatings
revolving credit facility repaid with cash on hand in February
2005
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
Historical interest expense for the CC V Holdings, LLC
11.875% senior discount notes repaid with cash on hand in
March 2005
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net increase in interest expense for other financing transactions
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
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.
36
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
(i) the audited consolidated financial statements of CCO
Holdings and its subsidiaries for the five years ended
December 31, 2004 and (ii) the unaudited consolidated
financial statements of CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries for
the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2005. The
consolidated financial statements of CCO Holdings and its
subsidiaries for each of 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 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 |
|
|
$ |
3,701 |
|
|
$ |
3,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
1,486 |
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
1,952 |
|
|
|
2,080 |
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
826 |
|
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
|
1,436 |
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Option compensation expense (income), net
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Unfavorable contracts and other settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,229 |
|
|
|
5,018 |
|
|
|
8,888 |
|
|
|
4,303 |
|
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
|
5,855 |
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(1,088 |
) |
|
|
(1,211 |
) |
|
|
(4,322 |
) |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(2,154 |
) |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
(525 |
) |
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
(502 |
) |
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Other, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(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 |
) |
|
|
(2,533 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(dollars in millions) | |
|
(unaudited) | |
Minority interest(a)
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
accounting change
|
|
|
(1,740 |
) |
|
|
(1,854 |
) |
|
|
(4,962 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
(2,508 |
) |
|
|
(229 |
) |
Income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(1,716 |
) |
|
|
(1,827 |
) |
|
|
(4,746 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
(2,467 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(1,716 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,851 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,286 |
) |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,307 |
) |
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of earnings to cover fixed charges(b)
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
Deficiencies of earnings to cover fixed charges(b)
|
|
$ |
1,727 |
|
|
$ |
1,838 |
|
|
$ |
4,946 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
$ |
2,555 |
|
|
$ |
2,533 |
|
|
$ |
220 |
|
Balance Sheet Data (end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
310 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
$ |
91 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
24,235 |
|
|
|
26,091 |
|
|
|
21,984 |
|
|
|
20,994 |
|
|
|
16,964 |
|
|
|
16,628 |
|
|
|
16,169 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
7,531 |
|
|
|
6,961 |
|
|
|
8,066 |
|
|
|
7,956 |
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
7,622 |
|
|
|
8,805 |
|
Loans payable related party
|
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Minority interest(a)
|
|
|
666 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
693 |
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
Members equity
|
|
|
13,493 |
|
|
|
15,940 |
|
|
|
11,040 |
|
|
|
10,585 |
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
6,848 |
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Minority interest represents the preferred membership interests
in CC VIII. Paul G. Allen indirectly held the preferred
membership units in CC VIII as a result of the exercise of
a put right originally granted in connection with the Bresnan
transaction in 2000. There was an issue regarding the ultimate
ownership of the CC VIII membership interest following
consummation of the Bresnan put transaction on June 6,
2003. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased recognizing
minority interest in earnings and losses of CC VIII for
financial reporting purposes until such time as the resolution
of the issue was determinable or other events occurred. This
dispute was settled October 31, 2005. We are currently
determining the accounting impact of the settlement. 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. |
(b) |
|
Earnings include net loss plus fixed charges. Fixed charges
consist of interest expense and an estimated interest component
of rent expense. |
38
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
nine months ended September 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 CCHC, LLC,
which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Holdco. Charter
Holdco is a subsidiary of Charter. See Summary
Organizational Structure. Our parent companies
are CCH II, CCH I, CIH, Charter Holdings, CCHC,
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
We continue to pursue opportunities to improve our liquidity.
Our efforts in this regard resulted in the completion of a
number of transactions since 2004, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the January 2006 sale by our parent companies, CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp., of an additional $450 million
principal amount of their 10.250% senior notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the October 2005 entry by us into a $600 million senior
bridge loan agreement with various lenders (which was reduced to
$435 million as a result of the issuance of CCH II
notes); |
|
|
|
the August 2005 sale by us of $300 million of
83/4% senior
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.
39
The industrys and our most significant operational
challenges include 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 digital video customers. Competition from DSL
providers combined with limited opportunities to expand our
customer base now that approximately 32% 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 $30 million of
indebtedness under our credit facilities is scheduled to mature
during 2006. 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 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities | |
|
|
|
|
Acquisition | |
|
Cash | |
|
Assumed | |
|
Issued/Other | |
|
Total | |
|
Acquired | |
|
|
Date | |
|
Paid | |
|
Debt | |
|
Consideration | |
|
Price | |
|
Customers | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in Millions) | |
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 Holdco and
$629 million of equity 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 Class A common stock. |
40
|
|
|
(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 and
Charter Holdco 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 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 Charter 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 nine months ended
September 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. For
the nine months ended September 30, 2005, our income
41
from operations, which includes depreciation and amortization
expense and asset impairment charges but excludes interest
expense, was $224 million. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2004, our loss from operations was
$2.2 billion. We had a positive operating margin (defined
as income (loss) from operations divided by revenues) of 6% for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and a negative
operating margin of 58% for the nine months ended
September 30, 2004. The increase in income from operations
and operating margin for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 compared to 2004 was principally due to
impairment of franchises of $2.4 billion recorded in 2004
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
for financial reporting purposes until the dispute between
Charter and Mr. Allen regarding the preferred membership
interests in CC VIII was determinable or other events occurred.
This dispute was settled October 31, 2005. We are currently
determining the accounting impact of the settlement. See
Note 7 to the condensed consolidated financial statements
included elsewhere in this prospectus.
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
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and 2003, the
net carrying amount of our property, plant and equipment
42
(consisting primarily of cable network assets) was approximately
$5.9 billion (representing 36% of total assets),
$6.1 billion (representing 36% of total assets) and
$6.8 billion (representing 32% of total assets),
respectively. Total capital expenditures for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were approximately
$815 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
43
and overhead of $139 million, $164 million,
$174 million and $335 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Capitalized
internal direct labor and overhead costs have increased in 2005
as a result of the use of more internal labor for capitalizable
installations rather than third party contractors. 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 $1.1 billion, $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion
and $1.4 billion, representing approximately 31%, 21%, 34%
and 16% of costs and expenses, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and for 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 September 30, 2005, December 31, 2004
and 2003 was approximately $9.8 billion (representing 61%
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 September 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 $3 million and $4 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and for the year
ended
44
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 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. During
the nine months ended September 30, 2005, certain cable
systems to be sold met the criteria for assets held for sale. As
such, the assets were written down to fair value less estimated
costs to sell resulting in asset impairment charges during the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 of approximately
$39 million. 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 $540 million
(approximately $572 million before tax effects of
$32 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
45
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.
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 $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 our 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 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. The October 1, 2005 annual
impairment test will be finalized in the fourth quarter of 2005
and any impairment resulting from such test will be recorded in
the fourth quarter.
46
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. |
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 (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 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
47
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 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 (see Risk Factors Risks Related to
Mr. Allens Controlling Position). 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 September 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 September 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
48
a corresponding valuation allowance of $67 million,
$71 million and $51 million at September 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, 2002
and 2003. Our results (excluding our 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 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 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
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005 Compared to Nine
Months Ended September 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):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
$ |
3,912 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
3,701 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
|
44 |
% |
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
66 |
% |
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
94 |
% |
|
|
5,855 |
|
|
|
158 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
(2,154 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(502 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest, income taxes and cumulative
effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,533 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting
change
|
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,508 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,467 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3,307 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
Revenues increased by $211 million, or 6%, from
$3.7 billion for the nine months ended September 30,
2004 to $3.9 billion for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. This increase is principally the result
of an increase of 300,100 and 60,500 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 168,300 analog video customers
and $6 million of credits issued to hurricane Katrina
impacted customers related to service outages. Through September
and October, we have been restoring service to our impacted
customers and, as of October 31, 2005, substantially all of
our customers service has been restored. Included in the
reduction in analog video customers and reducing the increase in
digital video and high-speed Internet customers are 26,800
analog video customers, 12,000 digital video customers and 600
high-speed Internet customers sold in the cable system sales in
Texas and West Virginia, which closed in July 2005. The cable
system sales to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, which closed in
March and April 2004 and the cable system sales in Texas and
West Virginia, which closed in July 2005 (referred to in this
section as the System Sales) reduced the increase in
revenues by approximately $33 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.
Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased to
$72.97 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 from
$66.24 for the nine months ended September 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 nine months
ended during the respective period, divided by nine, divided by
the average number of analog video customers during the
respective period.
Revenues by service offering were as follows (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
2,551 |
|
|
|
65 |
% |
|
$ |
2,534 |
|
|
|
68 |
% |
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
25 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
Commercial
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,912 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
3,701 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
211 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and
digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers.
Video revenues increased by $17 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 compared to the nine months ended
September 30, 2004. Approximately $102 million of the
increase was the result of price increases and incremental video
revenues from existing customers and approximately
$11 million resulted from an increase in digital video
customers. The increases were offset by decreases of
approximately $66 million related to a decrease in analog
video customers, approximately $25 million resulting from
the System Sales and approximately $5 million of credits
issued to hurricanes Katrina and Rita impacted customers related
to service outages.
Revenues from high-speed Internet services provided to our
non-commercial customers increased $133 million, or 25%,
from $538 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 to $671 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005. Approximately $101 million
of the increase related to the increase in the average number of
customers receiving high-speed Internet services, whereas
approximately $36 million related to the increase in
average price of the service. The increase in high-speed Internet
50
revenues was reduced by approximately $3 million as a
result of the System Sales and $1 million of credits issued
to hurricanes Katrina and Rita impacted customers related to
service outages.
Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from
commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors.
Advertising sales increased $9 million, or 4%, from
$205 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2004 to $214 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, primarily as a result of an increase in
local advertising sales and an increase of $3 million in
advertising sales revenues from vendors offset by a decline in
national advertising sales. In addition, the increase was offset
by a decrease of $1 million as a result of the System
Sales. For the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
2004, we received $12 million and $9 million,
respectively, 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 $30 million, or
17%, from $175 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 to $205 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, primarily as a result of an
increase in commercial high-speed Internet revenues. The
increase was reduced by approximately $3 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
$22 million, or 9%, from $249 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 to $271 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increase was
primarily the result of an increase in telephone revenue of
$11 million, franchise fees of $11 million and
installation revenue of $7 million and was partially offset
by approximately $2 million as a result of the System Sales.
Operating expenses increased $162 million, or 10%, from
$1.6 billion for the nine months ended September 30,
2004 to $1.7 billion for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. The increase in operating expenses was
reduced by $13 million as a result of the System Sales.
Programming costs included in the accompanying condensed
consolidated statements of operations were $1.1 billion and
$991 million, representing 29% and 17% of total costs and
expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
2004, respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of
revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
1,066 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
$ |
991 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
$ |
75 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
Service
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
489 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
Advertising sales
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,714 |
|
|
|
44 |
% |
|
$ |
1,552 |
|
|
|
42 |
% |
|
$ |
162 |
|
|
|
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
$75 million, or 8%, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 over the nine months ended
September 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 $10 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 $27 million and
$43 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2005 and 2004, respectively. Programming costs for the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 also include a
$5 million reduction related to the settlement of a dispute
with TechTV, Inc. See Note 18 to the condensed consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.
51
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 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.
Service costs consist primarily of service personnel salaries
and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities, costs of
providing high-speed Internet service, maintenance and pole rent
expense. The increase in service costs of $83 million, or
17%, resulted primarily from increased labor and maintenance
costs to support improved service levels and our advanced
products, higher fuel prices and pole rent expense. The increase
in service costs was reduced by $3 million as a result of
the System Sales. Advertising sales expenses consist of costs
related to traditional advertising services provided to
advertising customers, including salaries, benefits and
commissions. Advertising sales expenses increased
$4 million, or 6%, primarily as a result of increased
salary, benefit and commission costs.
|
|
|
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses |
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$27 million, or 4%, from $735 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 to $762 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increase in
selling, general and administrative expenses was reduced by
$5 million as a result of the System Sales. Key components
of expense as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 over 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% | |
|
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Revenues | |
|
Change | |
|
Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
658 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
636 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Marketing
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
762 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
$ |
735 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
$22 million, or 3%, resulted primarily from increases in
professional fees associated with consulting services of
$28 million and a rise in salaries and benefits of
$21 million related to increased emphasis on improved
service levels and operational efficiencies, offset by decreases
in bad debt expense of $13 million, property and casualty
insurance of $7 million and the System Sales of
$5 million.
Marketing expenses increased $5 million, or 5%, as a result
of an increased investment in targeted marketing campaigns.
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
Depreciation and amortization expense increased by
$29 million, or 3%, as a result of an increase in capital
expenditures.
52
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 nine months ended September 30, 2004.
Asset impairment charges for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 represent the write-down of assets
related to pending cable asset sales to fair value less costs to
sell. See Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
(Gain) Loss on Sale of Assets, Net |
Loss on sale of assets of $5 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 primarily represents the loss
recognized on the disposition of plant and equipment. Gain on
sale of assets of $104 million for the nine months ended
September 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 $11 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 primarily represents
options expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123.
Option compensation expense of $34 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 primarily represents the
expense of approximately $9 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 nine months
ended September 30, 2004, we recognized approximately
$8 million related to the performance shares granted under
the Charter Long-Term Incentive Program and approximately
$17 million related to options granted following the
adoption of SFAS No. 123.
|
|
|
Hurricane Asset Retirement Loss |
Hurricane asset retirement loss represents the loss associated
with the write-off of the net book value of assets destroyed by
hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the third quarter of 2005.
Special charges of $4 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 represents $5 million of severance
and related costs of our management realignment and
$1 million related to legal settlements 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
$100 million for the nine months ended September 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 were approved
by the respective courts and approximately $9 million of
severance and related costs of our workforce reduction. For the
nine months ended September 30, 2004, the severance costs
were offset by $3 million received from a third party in
settlement of a dispute.
53
Net interest expense increased by $96 million, or 24%, from
$406 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2004 to $502 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. The increase in net interest expense
was a result of an increase of $759 million in average debt
outstanding from $7.6 billion for the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 compared to $8.4 billion for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and an increase in our
average borrowing rate from 6.64% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 to 7.50% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005.
|
|
|
Gain on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,
Net |
Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities
decreased $5 million from $48 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 to $43 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005. The decrease is
primarily a result of a decrease in gains on interest rate
agreements that do not qualify for hedge accounting under
SFAS No. 133, which decreased from $45 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 to
$41 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2005.
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
Loss on extinguishment of debt of $6 million for the nine
months ended September 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 included elsewhere in this
prospectus. Loss on extinguishment of debt of $21 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 represents the
write-off of deferred financing fees and third party costs
related to the Charter Operating refinancing in April 2004.
Gain on investments of $21 million for the nine months
ended September 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,
and in 2004, the pro rata share of the profits and losses of
CC VIII. 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 was resolved. This dispute
was settled October 31, 2005. See Note 7 to the
condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere
in this prospectus.
|
|
|
Income Tax Benefit (Expense) |
Income tax expense of $10 million and income tax benefit of
$41 million was recognized for the nine months ended
September 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.
The income tax benefit recognized in the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 was directly related to the impairment
of franchises as discussed above. 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.
54
Net loss decreased by $3.1 billion, from $3.3 billion
for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 to
$239 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2005 as a result of the factors described above.
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
55
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 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.
56
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
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
57
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
58
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.
59
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. 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 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
60
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, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
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.
61
The decrease in accounts receivable of 25% 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 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62
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.
63
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 increase net
income by
64
$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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005, we generated $823 million of net
cash flows from operating activities after paying cash interest
of $481 million. In addition, we used approximately
$815 million for purchases of property, plant and
equipment. Finally, we had net cash flows used in financing
activities of $635 million. 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.
In October 2005, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., as
guarantor thereunder, entered into a senior bridge loan
agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Credit Suisse, Cayman
Islands Branch and Deutsche Bank AG Cayman Islands Branch
whereby the lenders have committed to make loans to us in an
aggregate amount of $600 million. We may, subject to
certain conditions, including the satisfaction of certain of the
conditions to borrowing under the credit facilities, draw upon
the facility between January 2, 2006 and September 29,
2006 and the loans will mature on the sixth anniversary of the
first borrowing under the bridge loan. In January 2006, upon the
issuance of $450 million principal amount of CCH II notes,
the commitment under the bridge loan agreement was reduced to
$435 million.
We expect that cash on hand, cash flows from operating
activities and the amounts available under our credit facilities
and bridge loan will be adequate to meet our and our parent
companies cash needs for 2006. Although our parent
companies, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp., recently
sold $450 million principal amount of 10.250% senior notes due
2010, you should not assume that we will be able to access
additional sources of external liquidity on similar terms, if at
all. We believe that cash flows from operating activities and
amounts available under our credit facilities and bridge loan
will not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy our
and our parent companies interest and principal repayment
obligations in 2007 and beyond. We have been advised that
Charter is working with its financial advisors to address this
funding requirement. However, there can be no assurance that
such funding will be available to us. In addition, Paul
G. Allen, Charters Chairman and controlling
shareholder, and his affiliates are not obligated to purchase
equity from, contribute to or loan funds to us or our parent
companies.
|
|
|
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 and bridge loan, 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 September 30, 2005, we are in
compliance with the covenants under our
65
indentures and credit facilities and we expect to remain in
compliance with those covenants and the bridge loan covenants
for the next twelve months. As of September 30, 2005, our
total potential borrowing availability under our credit
facilities totaled $786 million, although the actual
availability at that time was only $648 million because of
limits imposed by covenant restrictions. In addition, effective
January 2, 2006, we have additional borrowing availability
of $600 million as a result of the bridge loan. In January
2006, upon the issuance of $450 million principal amount of
CCH II notes, the commitment under the bridge loan
agreement was reduced to $435 million. Continued access to
our credit facilities and bridge loan is subject to our
remaining in compliance with the covenants of these credit
facilities and bridge loan, including covenants tied to our
operating performance. If our operating performance results in
non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain other
events of non-compliance under these credit facilities, bridge
loan or indentures governing our debt occurs, funding under the
credit facilities and bridge loan 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. See
Risk Factors Risks Related to Significant
Indebtedness of Us and Our Subsidiaries 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.
|
|
|
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, CIH, CCH I or
CCH II to satisfy their debt payment obligations or a
bankruptcy filing with respect to 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
our notes.
As of September 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 nine months ended September 30, 2005, we
distributed $832 million to CCH II of which
$60 million was subsequently distributed to Charter Holdco.
As of September 30, 2005, Charter Holdco was owed
$57 million in intercompany loans from its subsidiaries,
which were available to pay interest and principal on
Charters convertible senior notes. In addition, Charter
has $123 million of governmental securities pledged as
security for the next five semi-annual interest payments on
Charters 5.875% convertible senior notes.
As of September 30, 2005, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I and
CCH II had approximately $9.4 billion principal amount
of high-yield notes outstanding with approximately
$105 million, $684 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 CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries to a
parent company (including Charter, Charter Holdco, CCHC, Charter
Holdings, CIH, CCH I and CCH II) for payment of principal
on the parent company notes are restricted by the indentures
governing the 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. For the quarter ended September 30, 2005, there was
no default under any of the aforementioned indentures. However,
CCO Holdings did not meet its leverage ratio test of 4.5 to
1.0 based on September 30, 2005 financial results. As a
result, distributions from CCO Holdings to CCH II,
CCH I, CIH, Charter Holdings, CCHC, Charter Holdco or
Charter for payment of principal of the respective parent
companys debt are currently restricted and will continue
to be restricted until that test is met. Distributions by
Charter Operating and CCO Holdings for payment of principal
on parent company
66
notes are further restricted by the covenants in the credit
facilities and bridge loan, respectively. However distributions
for payment of the respective parent companys interest are
permitted.
In September 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 and 2010 exchanged $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. Holders of Charter
Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 exchanged $845 million
principal amount of notes for $662 million principal amount
of 11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. In addition,
holders of Charter Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 exchanged
$2.5 billion principal amount of notes for
$2.5 billion principal amount of various series of new CIH
notes. Each series of new CIH notes has the same stated interest
rate 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.
|
|
|
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 September 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 September 30, 2005 financial
results. As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to
Charter, Charter Holdco or CCHC for payment of interest or
principal 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.
No assurances can be given that we will not experience liquidity
problems if we do not obtain sufficient additional financing on
a timely basis as our debt becomes due or because of adverse
market conditions, increased competition or other unfavorable
events. If, at any time, additional capital or borrowing
capacity is required beyond amounts internally generated or
available under our credit facilities, bridge loan or through
additional debt financings, we would consider:
|
|
|
|
|
issuing debt or equity at the parent companies level, the
proceeds of which could be loaned or contributed to us; |
|
|
|
issuing debt securities that may have structural or other
priority over our existing 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 and bridge loan, the availability and terms of which
would be subject to market conditions. |
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.
|
|
|
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
67
which Charter Operating issued, in private placement
transactions, 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.
In July 2005, we closed the sale of certain cable systems in
Texas and West Virginia and closed the sale of an additional
cable system in Nebraska in October 2005 for a total sales price
of approximately $37 million, representing a total of
33,000 customers.
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 our revolving
credit facilities.
|
|
|
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 20 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. |
|
(4) |
We pay programming fees under multi-year contracts ranging
generally 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. |
68
|
|
(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 $9 million in cash and cash equivalents as of
September 30, 2005 compared to $546 million as of
December 31, 2004. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, we generated $823 million of net
cash flows from operating activities after paying cash interest
of $415 million. In addition, we used approximately
$815 million for purchases of property, plant and
equipment. Finally, we had net cash flows used in financing
activities of $635 million.
Operating Activities. Net cash provided by
operating activities increased $14 million, or 2%, from
$809 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2004 to $823 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, net cash provided by operating
activities increased primarily as a result of changes in
operating assets and liabilities that used $65 million less
cash during the nine months ended September 30, 2005 than
the corresponding period in 2004 combined with an increase in
revenue over cash costs partially offset by an increase in cash
interest expense of $90 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.
Investing Activities. Net cash used by investing
activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was
$725 million and net cash provided by investing activities
for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 was
$94 million. Investing activities used $819 million
more cash during the nine months ended September 30, 2005
than the corresponding period in 2004 primarily as a result of
increased cash used for capital expenditures in 2005 coupled
with proceeds from the sale of certain cable systems to Atlantic
Broadband Finance, LLC in 2004.
69
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 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
2004 was $635 million and $897 million, respectively.
Financing activities used $262 million less cash during the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 than the corresponding
period in 2004 primarily as a result of a decrease in net
repayments of long-term debt and in payments for debt issuance
costs 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 were $815 million, $616 million
$893 million, $804 million and $2.1 billion for
the nine months ended September 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 increased as compared to the nine months
ended September 30, 2004 as a result of increased spending
on support capital related to our investment in service
improvements and scalable infrastructure related to telephone
services, VOD and digital simulcast. 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 services 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, our liabilities related
to capital expenditures increased $39 million and decreased
$11 million, $33 million, $41 million and
$49 million, respectively.
During 2005, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately
$1.0 billion to $1.1 billion. The increase in capital
expenditures for 2005 compared to 2004 is the result of expected
increases in telephone services, deployment of advanced digital
set-top terminals and capital expenditures to replace plant and
equipment destroyed by hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We expect
that the nature of these expenditures will continue to be
composed primarily of purchases of customer premise equipment,
support capital and for
70
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 generally accepted accounting principles
(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
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
For the Years Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Customer premise equipment(a)
|
|
$ |
322 |
|
|
$ |
344 |
|
|
$ |
451 |
|
|
$ |
380 |
|
|
$ |
740 |
|
Scalable infrastructure(b)
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
Line extensions(c)
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Upgrade/ Rebuild(d)
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
Support capital(e)
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital expenditures(f)
|
|
$ |
815 |
|
|
$ |
616 |
|
|
$ |
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 nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. |
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
71
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 September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
long-term debt totaled approximately $8.8 billion and
$8.3 billion, respectively. This debt was comprised of
approximately $5.5 billion and $5.5 billion of credit
facility debt and $3.3 billion and $2.8 billion
accreted value of high-yield notes, respectively. As of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the weighted
average interest rate on the credit facility debt, was
approximately 7.5% and 6.8%, respectively, and the weighted
average interest rate on the high-yield notes was approximately
8.3% and 8.2%, respectively, resulting in a blended weighted
average interest rate of 7.8% 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
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
respectively. The fair value of our high-yield notes was
$3.3 billion and $2.9 billion at September 30,
2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of
our credit facilities was $5.5 billion and
$5.5 billion at September 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 nine
months ended September 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
$2 million, $3 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, a gain of
$14 million, $31 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.
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 nine months ended September 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 $41 million, $45 million,
$65 million and $57 million and losses of
$101 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative
instruments not designated as hedges.
72
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 September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, we had
outstanding $2.1 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 FASB 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.
In March 2005, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 47,
Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations.
This interpretation clarifies that the term conditional
asset retirement obligation as used in FASB Statement
No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,
refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement
activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement are
conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the
control of the entity. This pronouncement is effective for
fiscal years ending after December 15, 2005. The adoption
of this interpretation is not expected 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.
73
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 6.17 million customers at
September 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 September 30, 2005, we served approximately
5.91 million analog video customers, of which approximately
2.75 million were also digital video customers. We also
served approximately 2.12 million high-speed Internet
customers (including approximately 244,000 who received only
high-speed Internet services). We also provided telephone
service to approximately 89,900 customers as of that date.
At September 30, 2005, our investment in cable properties,
long-term debt and total members equity was
$15.7 billion, $8.8 billion and $5.2 billion,
respectively. Our working capital deficit was $823 million
at September 30, 2005. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, our revenues were approximately
$3.9 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 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 48% 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 49% 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 54% and a beneficial voting
control interest of approximately 91% as of September 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.
74
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
2006.
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 since 2004, as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the January 2006 sale by our parent companies, CCH II and
CCH II Capital Corp., of an additional $450 million
principal amount of their 10.250% senior notes due 2010; |
|
|
|
the October 2005 entry by us into a $600 million senior
bridge loan agreement with various lenders (which was reduced to
$435 million as a result of the issuance of CCH II
notes); |
|
|
|
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
83/4%
senior 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 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); |
75
|
|
|
|
|
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
$735 million, the proceeds of which were used to reduce
indebtedness. |
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
á 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.
76
The following table summarizes our customer statistics for
analog and digital video, residential high-speed Internet, and
residential telephone as of September 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate as of | |
|
|
| |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
2005(a) | |
|
2004(a) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cable Video Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog Video:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential (non-bulk) analog video customers(b)
|
|
|
5,636,100 |
|
|
|
5,825,000 |
|
|
|
Multi-dwelling (bulk) and commercial unit customers(c)
|
|
|
270,200 |
|
|
|
249,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog video customers(b)(c)
|
|
|
5,906,300 |
|
|
|
6,074,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital Video:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital video customers(d)
|
|
|
2,749,400 |
|
|
|
2,688,900 |
|
Non-Video Cable Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential high-speed Internet customers(e)
|
|
|
2,120,000 |
|
|
|
1,819,900 |
|
|
|
Residential telephone customers(f)
|
|
|
89,900 |
|
|
|
40,200 |
|
The September 30, 2005 statistics presented above reflect
the minimal loss of customers related to hurricanes Katrina and
Rita. In the fourth quarter of 2005, we had approximately 8,200
net losses of analog video customers related to systems impacted
by hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We are currently estimating
additional net analog customer losses of approximately 10,000 to
15,000 related to hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
After giving effect to the sale of certain non-strategic cable
systems in July 2005, September 30, 2004 analog video
customers, digital video customers and high-speed Internet
customers would have been 6,046,900, 2,677,600 and 1,819,300,
respectively.
|
|
|
(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 September 30, 2005 and 2004,
customers include approximately 44,400 and
46,000 persons whose accounts were over 60 days past
due in payment, approximately 9,800 and 5,500 persons whose
accounts were over 90 days past due in payment, and
approximately 6,000 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 September 30, 2005
and 2004 are approximately 8,900 and 10,700 customers,
respectively, that receive digital video service directly
through satellite transmission. |
|
(e) |
|
Residential high-speed Internet customers represent
those customers who subscribe to our high-speed Internet
service. At September 30, 2005 and 2004, approximately
1,876,000 and 1,614,400 of these high-speed Internet customers,
respectively, also receive video services from us and are
included within our video statistics above. |
|
(f) |
|
Residential telephone customers include all
households receiving telephone service. |
77
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. |
|
|
|
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 third quarter of 2005 with 19% penetration of
high-speed Internet homes passed, an increase from 17%
penetration of high-speed Internet homes passed at
September 30, 2004. This gave us a percentage increase in
high-speed Internet customers of 16% and an increase in
high-speed Internet revenues of 25% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 compared to the nine months ended
September 30, 2004.
78
We continue to deploy voice communications services using VoIP
to transmit digital voice signals over our systems. At
September 30, 2005, our telephone service was available to
approximately 2.4 million homes and we were marketing to
approximately 78% of those homes. We will continue to prepare
additional markets for telephone launches in 2006.
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 nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and the years ending
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, we had advertising
revenues from vendors of approximately $12 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 |
|
September 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 - $113.00 |
|
High-speed Internet service
|
|
$ |
21.95 - $ 59.99 |
|
Video on demand (per selection)
|
|
$ |
0.99 - $ 29.99 |
|
High definition television
|
|
$ |
3.99 - $ 9.99 |
|
Digital video recorder
|
|
$ |
6.99 - $ 14.99 |
|
In addition, from time to time we offer free service or
reduced-price service during promotional periods in order to
attract new customers.
79
Our Network Technology
The following table sets forth the technological capacity of our
systems as of September 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 |
% |
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 732 at
September 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 86% of our customers were served by headends
serving at least 10,000 customers as of September 30, 2005.
As of September 30, 2005, our cable systems consisted of
approximately 221,000 strand miles, including approximately
57,700 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.
80
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.
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. Marketing expenditures increased 5%
to $104 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, as compared to the nine months ended
September 30, 2004. We expect marketing expenditures to
continue to increase for the remainder of 2005.
81
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.
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
82
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.
As measured by programming costs, and excluding premium services
(substantially all of which were renegotiated and renewed in
2003), as of December 31, 2005 approximately 15% of our
current programming contracts were expired, and approximately
another 4% are scheduled to expire at or before the end of 2006.
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 September 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 10% of our analog video
customers were expired as of September 30, 2005.
Approximately 2% of additional franchises, covering
approximately 4% 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.
83
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 some regulatory
relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals are
generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants due to
a number of varying factors including efforts to withhold
streamlined cable franchising from incumbents until after the
expiration of their existing franchises. The FCC recently
initiated a proceeding to determine whether local franchising
authorities are impeding the development of competitive cable
services through unreasonable franchising requirements and
whether any such impediments should be preempted. At this time,
we are not able to determine what impact such proceeding may
have on us.
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 September 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,
84
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% 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.
85
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
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 September 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 September 30, 2005, we have upgraded many
of these systems to at least 750 megahertz two-way HFC
architecture.
86
|
|
|
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-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.
87
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, however, require unobstructed
line of sight transmission paths and MMDS ventures
have been quite limited to date.
The FCC completed its auction of the remaining Multichannel
Video Distribution & Data Service (MVDDS)
licenses in December 2005. 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 September 30, 2005, we had approximately
16,500 full-time equivalent employees, and our parent
companies employed approximately
500 full-time
employees to manage our operations. At September 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.
88
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 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 the 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
89
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. |
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. At the end of September 2005,
Stipulations of Dismissal were filed with the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals resulting in the dismissal of both appeals with
prejudice. Procedurally, therefore the settlements are final.
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. The claims administrator is
responsible for disbursing the settlement consideration.
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
90
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, 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. All four officers have filed counterclaims.
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.
91
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. For example, there has been considerable
legislative and regulatory interest in requiring cable to offer
historically bundled programming services on an á la
carte basis or to at least offer a separately available
child-friendly Family Tier. 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,
92
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
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. Legislation is now pending
establishing February 2009 as the deadline to complete that
transition at which time cable operators may need to take
additional operational steps to ensure that customers not
otherwise equipped to receive digital programming, retain access
to broadcast 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 has 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
93
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
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 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 is now
scheduled to go into effect as of July 1, 2007. Charter is
among the cable operators challenging that prohibition in court.
94
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. Congress is presently
considering bills to reinstate the broadcast flag rules, and to
require the use of certain technology for analog connectors so
as to prevent unauthorized copying and redistribution of
programming.
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; (13) emergency alert
systems; and (14) obligations to accommodate law
enforcement wire taps.
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.
95
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 some regulatory
relief for incumbent cable operators, these proposals are
generally viewed as being more favorable to new entrants due to
a number of varying factors including efforts to withhold
streamlined cable franchising from incumbents until after the
expiration of their existing franchises. The FCC recently
initiated a proceeding to determine whether local franchising
authorities are impeding the deployment of competitive cable
services through unreasonable franchising requirements and
whether such impediments should be preempted. At this time, we
are not able to determine what impact such proceeding may have
on us.
96
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.
Neil Smit is the sole director of CCO Holdings Capital.
The persons listed below are directors of Charter, Charter
Holdco or CCO Holdings Capital as indicated.
|
|
|
Directors |
|
Position(s) |
|
|
|
Paul G. Allen
|
|
Chairman of the board of directors of Charter |
W. Lance Conn
|
|
Director of Charter |
Nathaniel A. Davis
|
|
Director of Charter |
Jonathan L. Dolgen
|
|
Director of Charter |
Robert P. May
|
|
Director of Charter |
David C. Merritt
|
|
Director of Charter |
Marc B. Nathanson
|
|
Director of Charter |
Jo Allen Patton
|
|
Director of Charter |
Neil Smit
|
|
Director of Charter and CCO Holdings Capital, President and
Chief Executive Officer of Charter, Charter Holdco, 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.
97
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. (Old Viacom), a worldwide
entertainment and media company, where he provided advisory
services to the Chief Executive Officer of Old Viacom, or
others designated by him, on an as requested basis. Effective
December 31, 2005, Old Viacom was separated into two
publicly traded companies, Viacom Inc.
(New Viacom) and CBS Corporation. Since
the separation of Old Viacom, Mr. Dolgen provides advisory
services to the Chief Executive Officer of New 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 Old Viacom, where
he oversaw various operations of Old 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. As a result
of the separation of Old Viacom, Old Viacoms motion
picture production and distribution and theatrical exhibition
businesses became part of New Viacoms businesses, and the
remainder of Old Viacoms businesses overseen by
Mr. Dolgen remained with CBS Corporation. 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 was named Chief Executive Officer and
a director of Calpine Corporation, a power company, in December
2005. Calpine filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the
Bankruptcy Code on December 20, 2005. He served on the
board of directors of HealthSouth Corporation, a national
provider of healthcare services, from October 2002 until October
2005, and was its Chairman from July 2004 until October 2005.
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. 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. 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.
98
Mr. May was educated at Curry College and Boston College
and attended Harvard Business Schools Program for
Management Development. He is a member of Deutsche Bank of
Americas Advisory Board.
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 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. On
February 8, 2006, Mr. Merritt became a director of
Calpine Corporation, which had filed a petition under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in December 2005.
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, 48, 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, 47, was elected a director and
President and Chief Executive Officer of Charter on
August 22, 2005. He has served as sole director of CCO
Holdings Capital since January 2006. 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
99
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 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, consists of Nathaniel Davis,
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 and prior to that time,
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.
Directors who were employees did not receive additional
compensation in 2004 or 2005. Mr. Vogel and Mr. Smit,
who were Charters President and Chief Executive Officer in
2005, were the only directors
100
who were also employees during 2005. Mr. May, who was our
Interim President and Chief Executive Officer from January 2005
until August 2005, was not an employee. However, he received
fees and a bonus pursuant to an agreement. See Employment
Arrangements.
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 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 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, CIH, CCH I, CCH II, CCO
Holdings, CCO Holdings Capital and Charter Operating:
|
|
|
Executive Officers |
|
Position |
|
|
|
Paul G. Allen
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors of Charter |
Neil Smit
|
|
Director of Charter and CCO Holdings Capital, President and
Chief Executive Officer of Charter, Charter Holdco, CCO Holdings
and CCO Holdings Capital |
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer |
Jeffrey T. Fisher
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Sue Ann R. Hamilton
|
|
Executive Vice President, Programming |
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
Paul E. Martin
|
|
Senior Vice President, Principal Accounting Officer and
Corporate Controller |
Robert A. Quigley
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer |
Grier C. Raclin
|
|
Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
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.
Jeffrey T. Fisher, 43, Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Fisher was appointed to
the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer, effective February 6, 2006. Prior to joining
Charter, Mr. Fisher was employed by Delta Airlines, Inc.
from 1998 to 2006 in a number of positions including Senior Vice
President Restructuring from September 2005 until January
2006, President and General Manager of Delta Connection, Inc.
from January to September 2005, Chief Financial Officer of Delta
Connection from 2001 until January 2005, Vice President of
Finance, Marketing and Sales Controller of Delta Airlines in
2001 and Vice President of Financial Planning and Analysis of
Delta Airlines from 2000 to 2001. Delta Airlines filed a
petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on
September 14, 2005. Mr. Fisher received a BBM degree
from Embry Riddle University and a MBA in International Finance
from University of Texas in Arlington, Texas.
101
Sue Ann R. Hamilton, 45, 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.
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,
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 and ceased being Interim Chief Financial
Officer on February 6, 2006, upon appointment of Jeffrey
Fisher as the new 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.
Robert A. Quigley, 62, Executive Vice
President and Chief Marketing Officer. Mr. Quigley joined
Charter in his current position in December 2005. Prior to
joining Charter, Mr. Quigley was President and CEO at
Quigley Consulting Group, LLC, a private consulting group, from
April 2005 to December 2005. From March 2004 to March 2005,
he was Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing at
Cardean Education Group (formerly UNext com LLC), a private
online education company. From February 2000 to March 2004,
Mr. Quigley was Executive Vice President of America OnLine
and Chief Operating Officer of its Consumer Marketing division.
Prior to America OnLine, he was owner, President and CEO of
Wordsquare Publishing Co. from July 1994 to February 2000.
Mr. Quigley is a graduate of Wesleyan University with a
B.A. in History and is a member of the Direct Marketing
Association Board of Directors.
Grier C. Raclin, 53, Executive Vice President,
General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. Mr. Raclin joined
Charter in his current position in October 2005. Prior to
joining Charter, Mr. Raclin had served as the Chief Legal
Officer and Corporate Secretary of Savvis Communications
Corporation since January 2003. Prior to joining Savvis,
Mr. Raclin served as Executive Vice President, Chief
Administrative Officer, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
from 2000 to 2002 and as Senior Vice President of Corporate
Affairs, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary from 1997 to
2000 of Global TeleSystems Inc. (GTS). In 2001, GTS
filed, in pre-arranged proceedings, a petition for
surseance(moratorium), offering a composition, in
The Netherlands and a petition under Chapter 11 of the
United States Bankruptcy Code, both in connection with the sale
of the company to KPNQwest. Mr. Raclin earned a
102
law degree from Northwestern University Law School, attended
business school at the University of Chicago Executive Program
and earned a B.S. degree from Northwestern University.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
At the beginning of 2005, Mr. Lillis and Mr. Merritt
served as the Option Plan Committee which administered the 1999
Charter Communications Option Plan and the Charter
Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and the
Compensation Committee consisted of Messrs. Allen, Lillis
and Nathanson. The Option Plan Committee and the Compensation
Committee merged in February 2005 and the committee then
consisted of Messrs. Allen, Merritt and Nathanson. Mr. May
joined the committee in August 2005. The Compensation Committee
is currently comprised of Messrs. Allen, May, Merritt and
Nathanson.
No member of Charters Compensation Committee or its Option
Plan Committee was an officer or employee of Charter or any of
its subsidiaries during 2005, except for Mr. Allen who
served as a non-employee chairman of the Compensation Committee
and Mr. May who served in a non-employee capacity as
Interim President and Chief Executive Officer from January 2005
until August 2005. Mr. May joined the Compensation
Committee in August 2005 after his service as Interim President
and Chief Executive Officer. 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 2005. Mr. Allen is the 100% owner
and a director of Vulcan Inc. and certain of its affiliates,
which 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 2005, (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) 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, 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. Mr. Lovett was appointed a director of Digeo, Inc.
in December 2005.
103
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, 2003, 2004 and
2005. These officers consist of three individuals who served as
Chief Executive Officer, and each of the other four most highly
compensated executive officers as of December 31, 2005.
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, CIH, CCH I, 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 | |
|
($) | |
|
($)(1) | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
(#) | |
|
($)(2) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Neil Smit(3)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
415,385 |
|
|
|
1,200,000 |
(10) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,278,500 |
(22) |
|
|
3,333,333 |
|
|
|
23,236 |
(29) |
|
President and Chief |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert P. May(4)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
750,000 |
(11) |
|
|
1,360,239 |
(17) |
|
|
180,000 |
(23) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former Interim President |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000 |
(17) |
|
|
50,000 |
(23) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl E. Vogel(5)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
115,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,428 |
(18) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,697,451 |
(30) |
|
Former President and |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
1,038,462 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
(12) |
|
|
38,977 |
(18) |
|
|
4,729,400 |
(24) |
|
|
580,000 |
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
(13) |
|
|
40,345 |
(18) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
750,000 |
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
Michael J. Lovett(6)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
516,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,898 |
(19) |
|
|
265,980 |
(25) |
|
|
216,000 |
|
|
|
59,013 |
(31) |
|
Executive Vice President |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
291,346 |
|
|
|
241,888 |
|
|
|
7,797 |
(19) |
|
|
355,710 |
(25) |
|
|
172,000 |
|
|
|
6,994 |
|
|
and Chief Operating Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
81,731 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
2,400 |
(19) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
1,592 |
|
Paul E. Martin(7)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
350,950 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,650 |
(26) |
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
7,047 |
|
|
Senior Vice President, |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
193,173 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
269,100 |
(26) |
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
6,530 |
|
|
Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
167,308 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,048 |
|
Wayne H. Davis(8)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
409,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108,810 |
(27) |
|
|
145,800 |
|
|
|
3,527 |
|
|
Executive Vice President |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
269,231 |
|
|
|
61,370 |
(15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
435,635 |
(27) |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
2,278 |
|
|
and Chief Technical Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
212,885 |
|
|
|
47,500 |
|
|
|
581 |
(20) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
225,000 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
Sue Ann R. Hamilton(9)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
362,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
107,838 |
(28) |
|
|
145,000 |
|
|
|
6,351 |
|
|
Executive Vice |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
346,000 |
|
|
|
13,045 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
245,575 |
(28) |
|
|
90,000 |
|
|
|
3,996 |
|
|
President Programming |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
225,000 |
|
|
|
231,250 |
(16) |
|
|
4,444 |
(21) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
1,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Generally, bonus amounts for 2005 have not yet been determined
by the Compensation Committee or Charters Board of
Directors. |
|
|
(2) |
Except as noted in notes 29 through 31 below, respectively,
these amounts consist of matching contributions under our 401(k)
plan, premiums for supplemental life insurance available to
executives, and long-term disability available to executives. |
|
|
(3) |
Mr. Smit joined Charter on August 22, 2005 in his
current position. |
|
|
(4) |
Mr. May served as Interim President and Chief Executive
Officer from January 2005 through August 2005. |
|
|
(5) |
Mr. Vogel resigned from all of his positions with Charter
and its subsidiaries on January 17, 2005. |
|
|
(6) |
Mr. Lovett joined Charter in August 2003 and was promoted
to his current position in April 2005. |
|
|
(7) |
Mr. Martin joined Charter in March 2000. He has served as
Charters Interim Chief Financial Officer since August 2004
and continued to serve until February 6, 2006, upon
appointment of Jeffrey Fisher as the new Chief Financial Officer. |
104
|
|
(8) |
Mr. Davis joined Charter in December 2001 and was promoted
to his current position in June 2004. |
|
(9) |
Ms. Hamilton joined Charter in March 2003 and was promoted
to her current position in April 2005. |
|
|
(10) |
Pursuant to his employment agreement, Mr. Smit will receive
a minimum bonus of $1,200,000 for 2005. |
|
(11) |
This bonus was paid in January 2006 pursuant to
Mr. Mays Executive Services Agreement. See
Employment Arrangements. |
|
(12) |
Mr. Vogels 2004 bonus was a mid-year discretionary
bonus. |
|
(13) |
Mr. Vogels 2003 bonus was determined in accordance
with the terms of his employment agreement. |
|
(14) |
Includes (i) for 2005, a bonus of $50,000 for his services
as Interim Co-Chief Financial Officer and a discretionary bonus
of $50,000 and (ii) for 2004, a SOX implementation bonus of
$25,000. |
|
(15) |
Mr. Davis 2004 bonus included a $50,000 discretionary
bonus. |
|
(16) |
Ms. Hamiltons 2003 bonus included a $150,000 signing
bonus. |
|
(17) |
Includes (i) for 2005, $1,177,885 as compensation for
services as Interim President and Chief Executive Officer
pursuant to his Executive Services Agreement (see
Employment Arrangements), $67,000 as compensation
for services as a director on Charters Board of Directors,
$15,717 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane and
$99,637 for reimbursement for transportation and living expenses
pursuant to his Executive Services Agreement, and (ii) for
2004, compensation for services as a director on Charters
Board of Directors. |
|
(18) |
Includes (i) for 2005, $1,428 attributed to personal use of
the corporate airplane, (ii) for 2004, $28,977 attributed
to personal use of the corporate airplane and $10,000 for tax
advisory services, and (iii) for 2003, $30,345 attributed
to personal use of the corporate airplane and $10,000 for tax
advisory services. |
|
(19) |
Includes (i) for 2005, $7,698 attributed to personal use of
the corporate airplane and $7,200 for automobile allowance,
(ii) for 2004, $597 attributed to personal use of the
corporate airplane and $7,200 for automobile allowance and
(iii) for 2003, $2,400 for automobile allowance. |
|
(20) |
Amount attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane. |
|
(21) |
Amount attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane. |
|
(22) |
Pursuant to his employment agreement, Mr. Smit received
1,250,000 restricted shares in August 2005, which will vest on
the third anniversary of the grant date and 1,562,500
restricted shares in August 2005, which will vest on the first
anniversary of the grant date. See Employment
Arrangements. At December 31, 2005, the value of all
of the named officers unvested restricted stock holdings
was $3,431,250, based on a per share market value (closing sale
price) of $1.22 for Charters Class A common stock on
December 31, 2005. |
|
(23) |
Includes (i) for 2005, 100,000 restricted shares granted in
April 2005 under our 2001 Stock Incentive Plan for
Mr. Mays services as Interim President and Chief
Executive Officer that vested upon his termination in that
position in August 2005 and 40,650 restricted shares granted in
October 2005 under our 2001 Stock Incentive Plan for
Mr. Mays annual director grant which vests on the
first anniversary of the grant date. At December 31, 2005,
the value of all of the named officers unvested restricted
stock holdings was $49,593, based on a per share market value
(closing sale price) of $1.22 for Charters Class A
common stock on December 31, 2005, and (ii) for 2004,
19,685 restricted shares granted in October 2004 under our 2001
Stock Incentive Plan for Mr. Mays annual director
grant, which vested on its first anniversary of the grant date
in October 2005. |
|
(24) |
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. Under the terms of the separation
agreement described below in Employment
Arrangements, his options and remaining restricted stock
vested until |
105
|
|
|
December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable
until sixty (60) days thereafter. All performance shares
were forfeited upon termination of employment. All remaining
unvested restricted stock and stock options were cancelled on
December 31, 2005. Therefore, at December 31, 2005,
the value of all of the named officers unvested restricted
stock holdings was $0, based on a per share market value
(closing sale price) of $1.22 for Charters Class A
common stock on December 31, 2005. |
|
(25) |
Includes (i) for 2005, 129,600 performance shares granted
in April 2005 under our Long-Term Incentive Program which will
vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter
meets certain performance criteria and 75,000 restricted shares
granted in April 2005 under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that
will vest on the third anniversary of the grant date, and
(ii) for 2004, 88,000 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, 2005, the value of
all of the named officers unvested restricted stock
holdings (including performance shares) was $356,972, based on a
per share market value (closing sale price) of $1.22 for
Charters Class A common stock on December 31,
2005. |
|
(26) |
Includes (i) for 2005, 40,500 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, and (ii) for 2004, 37,500
performance shares granted in January 2004 under our Long-Term
Incentive Program which will vest on the third anniversary of
the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance
criteria and 17,214 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 will vest on the third
anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain
performance criteria, and the other half of which will vest over
three years in equal one-third installments. At
December 31, 2005, the value of all of the named
officers unvested restricted stock holdings (including
performance shares) was $112,661, based on a per share market
value (closing sale price) of $1.22 for Charters
Class A common stock on December 31, 2005. |
|
(27) |
Includes (i) for 2005, 83,700 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, and (ii) for 2004, 77,500
performance shares granted in January 2004 under our Long-Term
Incentive Program which will vest on the third anniversary of
the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance
criteria and 8,000 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 will vest on the third
anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain
performance criteria, and the other half of which will vest over
three years in equal one-third installments. At
December 31, 2005, the value of all of the named
officers unvested restricted stock holdings (including
performance shares) was $204,797, based on a per share market
value (closing sale price) of $1.22 for Charters
Class A common stock on December 31, 2005. |
|
(28) |
These restricted shares consist of 83,700 and 47,500 performance
shares granted in 2005 and 2004, respectively, 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, 2005, the value of
all of the named officers unvested restricted stock
holdings (including performance shares) was $160,064 based on a
per share market value (closing sale price) of $1.22 for
Charters Class A common stock on December 31,
2005. |
|
(29) |
In addition to items in Note 2 above, includes $19,697
attributed to reimbursement for taxes (on a grossed
up basis) paid in respect of prior reimbursements for
relocation expenses. |
|
(30) |
In addition to items in Note 2 above, includes accrued
vacation at time of termination and severance payments pursuant
to Mr. Vogels separation agreement (see
Employment Arrangements). |
|
(31) |
In addition to items in Note 2 above, includes $51,223
attributed to reimbursement for taxes (on a grossed
up basis) paid in respect of prior reimbursements for
relocation expenses. |
106
2005 Option Grants
The following table shows individual grants of options made to
individuals named in the Summary Compensation Table during 2005.
All such grants were made under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan
and the exercise price was based upon the fair market value of
Charters Class A common stock on the respective grant
dates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential Realizable Value at | |
|
|
Securities | |
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed Annual Rate of | |
|
|
Underlying | |
|
Options | |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Price Appreciation for | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Granted to | |
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Option Term(2) | |
|
|
Granted | |
|
Employees | |
|
Price | |
|
Expiration | |
|
| |
Name |
|
(#)(1) | |
|
in 2005 | |
|
($/Sh) | |
|
Date | |
|
5%($) | |
|
10%($) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Neil Smit
|
|
|
3,333,333 |
|
|
|
30.83 |
% |
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
|
|
8/22/2015 |
|
|
$ |
2,465,267 |
|
|
$ |
6,247,470 |
|
Robert P. May
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl E. Vogel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
216,000 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
|
|
|
4/26/2015 |
|
|
|
175,914 |
|
|
|
445,802 |
|
Paul E. Martin
|
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
0.77 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
|
|
|
4/26/2015 |
|
|
|
68,430 |
|
|
|
173,415 |
|
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
|
145,800 |
|
|
|
1.35 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
|
|
|
4/26/2015 |
|
|
|
118,742 |
|
|
|
300,916 |
|
Sue Ann R. Hamilton
|
|
|
97,200 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
% |
|
|
1.53 |
|
|
|
3/25/2015 |
|
|
|
93,221 |
|
|
|
236,240 |
|
|
|
|
47,800 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
% |
|
|
1.27 |
|
|
|
10/18/2015 |
|
|
|
38,208 |
|
|
|
96,826 |
|
|
|
(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. |
|
|
|
2005 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 2005, (ii) the number of shares of
Charters Class A common stock underlying unexercised
options at year-end 2005, and (iii) the value of
unexercised
in-the-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, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Underlying | |
|
Value of Unexercised | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Unexercised Options at | |
|
In-the-Money Options at | |
|
|
Acquired on | |
|
Value | |
|
December 31, 2005(#)(1) | |
|
December 31, 2005($)(2) | |
|
|
Exercise | |
|
Realized | |
|
| |
|
| |
Name |
|
(#) | |
|
($) | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
Exercisable |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Neil Smit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,333,333 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
133,333 |
|
Robert P. May
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl E. Vogel(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,120,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,000 |
|
|
|
395,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Martin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143,125 |
|
|
|
193,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176,250 |
|
|
|
379,550 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sue Ann R. Hamilton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,500 |
|
|
|
312,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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. |
107
|
|
|
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 $1.22 as of
December 31, 2005 for Charters Class A common
stock. |
|
(3) |
Mr. Vogels employment terminated on January 17,
2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options
continued to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested
options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter. |
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 | |
|
(#) | |
|
(#) | |
|
(#) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Neil Smit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert P. May
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl E. Vogel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
129,600 |
|
|
|
1 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
90,720 |
|
|
|
129,600 |
|
|
|
259,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Martin
|
|
|
40,500 |
|
|
|
1 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
28,350 |
|
|
|
40,500 |
|
|
|
81,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
1 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
58,590 |
|
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
167,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 year vesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sue Ann R. Hamilton
|
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
1 year performance cycle |
|
|
|
58,590 |
|
|
|
83,700 |
|
|
|
167,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 December 31, 2005, 1,317,520 shares had been
issued under the plans upon exercise of options, 825,725 had
been issued upon vesting of restricted stock granted under the
plans, and 4,252,570 shares were subject to future vesting
under restricted stock agreements. Of the remaining
83,604,185 shares covered by the plans, as of
December 31, 2005, 29,126,744 were subject to outstanding
options (34% of which were vested), and there were 11,719,032
performance shares granted under
108
Charters Long-Term Incentive Program or the
February 20, 2004 exchange offer discussed later, 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 December 31, 2005,
42,758,409 shares remained available for future grants
under the plans. As of December 31, 2005, there were 5,341
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 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
109
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.
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.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Martin
|
|
|
2/25/04 |
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
23.09 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
7 years 0 months |
|
|
Senior Vice President, Interim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
11.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 years 7 months |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
15.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 years 2 months |
|
|
Principal Accounting Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Corporate Controller |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
|
2/25/04 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
23.09 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
7 years 0 months |
|
|
Executive Vice President and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
12.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 years 11 months |
|
|
Chief Technical 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 along with 340,000
restricted stock units with one-third of the shares vesting on
each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date. On the
grant date, the price of the Companys common stock was
$4.37. |
|
|
(2) |
On February 25, 2004, in exchange for 105,000 options
tendered, 8,607 performance shares were granted with a three
year performance cycle and three year vesting along with 8,607
restricted stock units with one-third of the shares vesting on
each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date. On the
grant date, the price of the Companys common stock was
$4.37. |
|
|
(3) |
On February 25, 2004, in exchange for 80,000 options
tendered, 4,000 performance shares were granted with a
three year performance cycle and three year vesting along with
4,000 restricted stock units with one-third of the shares
vesting on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant
date. On the grant date, the price of the Companys common
stock was $4.37. |
2005 Executive Cash Award Plan
In June 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
110
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 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 a lump sum payment equal to 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.
111
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, 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. The May Executive Services
Agreement was terminated effective December 31, 2005 and
upon termination of the Agreement, Mr. May was eligible for
a bonus payment. On January 5, 2006, Charter paid him a
bonus of $750,000, with the possibility that such bonus would be
increased by an additional percentage. The additional
percentage, if any, would be equal to any percent increase in
bonus paid to Charter executives under the 2005 Executive Bonus
Plan as a result of an adjustment by the Board of Directors to a
certain bonus parameter for all executives.
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.
As of January 20, 2006, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Mr. Fisher, Executive Vice President and
Chief Executive Officer (the Employment Agreement).
The Employment Agreement provides that Mr. Fisher will
serve in an executive capacity as its Executive Vice President
at a salary of $500,000, to perform such executive, managerial
and administrative duties as are assigned or delegated by
President and/or Chief Executive Officer, including but not
limited to serving as Chief Financial Officer. The term of the
Employment Agreement is two years from the effective date. Under
the Employment Agreement, Mr. Fisher will receive a signing
bonus of $100,000 and he shall be eligible to receive a
performance-based target bonus of up to 70% of salary and to
participate in the Long Term Incentive Plan and to receive such
other employee benefits as are available to other senior
executives. Mr. Fisher will participate in the 2005
Executive Cash Award Plan commencing in 2006 and, in addition,
Charter will provide the same additional benefit to
Mr. Fisher that he would have been entitled to receive
under the Cash Award Plan if he had participated in the Plan at
the time of the inception of the Plan in 2005. He will also
receive a grant of 50,000 restricted shares of Charters
Class A common stock, vesting
112
in equal installments over a three-year period from employment
date; an award of options to purchase 1,000,000 shares of
Charters Class A common stock under terms of the
stock incentive plan on the effective date of the Employment
Agreement; and in the first quarter of 2006, an award of
additional options to purchase 145,800 shares of Charters
Class A common stock under the stock incentive plan. Those
options shall vest in equal installments over a four-year time
period from the grant date. In addition, in the first quarter of
2006, he will receive 83,700 performance shares under the stock
incentive plan and will be eligible to earn these shares over a
three-year performance cycle from January 2006 to December 2008.
Mr. Fisher will receive relocation assistance pursuant to
Charters executive homeowner relocation plan and the costs
for temporary housing. In the event that Mr. Fisher is
terminated by Charter without cause or for
good reason, as those terms are defined in the
Employment Agreement, Mr. Fisher 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; a lump sum payment equal to payments
due under COBRA for the greater of twelve months or the number
of full months remaining in the term of the agreement; and the
vesting of options and restricted stock for as long as severance
payments are made. The Employment Agreement contains a one-year
non-compete provision (or until the end of the term of the
agreement, if longer) and a two-year non-solicitation clause.
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, 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; a lump
sum payment equal to payments due under COBRA for the greater of
twelve months or the number of full months remaining in the term
of the agreement; 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.
Effective January 9, 2006, Charter entered into a retention
agreement with Mr. Martin, in which Mr. Martin agreed
to remain as Interim Chief Financial Officer until at least
March 31, 2006 or such time as Charter reassigns or
terminates his employment, whichever occurs first
(Termination Date). On the Termination Date, Charter
will pay Mr. Martin a special retention bonus in a lump sum
of $116,200. This special retention bonus is in addition to any
amounts due to Mr. Martin under the 2005 Executive Bonus
Plan and to any other severance amounts, set forth below.
Mr. Martin will not participate in any executive incentive
or bonus plan for 2006 unless otherwise agreed to by the
parties. In addition, pursuant to this agreement, Charter will
treat (a) any termination of Mr. Martins
employment by Charter without Cause, and other than due to Death
or Disability, as such terms are defined in his
previously-executed Employment Agreement, after January 1,
2006, and (b) any termination by Mr. Martin of his
employment for any reason after April 1, 2006 (including
voluntary resignation), as if his employment terminated without
Cause and Charter will pay as severance to Mr. Martin an
amount calculated pursuant to his Employment Agreement on the
basis of his base salary as Controller and without regard to any
additional compensation he had been receiving as Interim Chief
Financial Officer. He will also receive three months of
outplacement assistance at a level and from a provider selected
by Charter in its sole discretion.
On September 2, 2005, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Mr. Martin, Senior Vice President, 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
113
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, 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; a lump sum payment equal to payments
due under COBRA for the greater of twelve months or the number
of full months remaining in the term of the agreement; 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.
Effective April 15, 2005, Charter also entered into an
agreement governing the terms of the service of Mr. 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.
On October 31, 2005, Charter entered into an employment
agreement with Ms. Hamilton, Executive Vice President,
Programming. The agreement provides that Ms. Hamilton 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 $371,800. The
term of this agreement is two years from the date of the
agreement. She shall be eligible to participate in
Charters incentive bonus plan that applies to senior
executives, Stock Option Plan and to receive such employee
benefits as are available to other senior executives. In the
event that Ms. Hamilton is terminated by Charter without
cause or for good reason, as those terms
are defined in the employment agreement, Hamilton will receive
her 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; a lump sum payment equal
to payments due under COBRA for the greater of twelve months or
the number of full months remaining in the term of the
agreement; and the vesting of options and restricted stock for
as long as severance payments are made. The employment agreement
contains a one-year
non-compete provision (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 November 14, 2005, Charter executed an employment
agreement with Mr. Raclin, effective as of October 10,
2005. The agreement provides that Mr. Raclin shall be
employed in an executive capacity as Executive Vice President
and General Counsel with management responsibility for
Charters legal affairs, governmental affairs, compliance
and regulatory functions and to perform such other legal,
executive, managerial and administrative duties as are assigned
or delegated by the Chief Executive Officer or the equivalent
position, at a salary of $425,000, to be reviewed on an annual
basis. The agreement also provides for a one time signing bonus
of $200,000, the grant of 50,000 restricted shares of Charter
Class A common stock, an option to purchase 100,000 shares
of Charter common stock under the Incentive Stock Plan, an
option to purchase 145,800 shares of Charter common stock
under the Long Term Incentive portion of the Incentive Stock
Plan, and 62,775 performance shares under the Incentive Stock
Plan. He shall be eligible to participate in the incentive bonus
plan, the 2005 Executive Cash Award Plan and to receive such
other employee benefits as are available to other senior
executives. The term of this agreement is two years from
the effective date of the agreement. In the event that
Mr. Raclin is terminated by Charter without
cause or by Mr. Raclin for good
reason, as those terms are defined in the employment
agreement, Mr. Raclin will receive (a) if such termination
occurs before the first
114
scheduled payout of the executive cash award plan (unless that
failure is due to his failure to execute the required related
agreement) or at any time within one year after a change of
control as defined in the agreement, two (2) times his
salary or (b) if such termination occurs at any other time,
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; a lump sum payment equal to
payments due under COBRA for the greater of twelve months
or the number of full months remaining in the term of the
agreement; and the vesting of options and restricted stock for
as long as severance payments are made. The employment agreement
contains a one-year
non-compete provision (or until the end of the term of the
agreement, if longer) in a Competitive Business, as such term is
defined in the agreement, and a two-year non-solicitation
clause. Mr. Raclin is entitled to relocation assistance
pursuant to Charters executive homeowner relocation plan
and the costs for temporary housing until he consummates the
purchase of a home in the St. Louis area or August 16,
2006, whichever occurs first.
On December 9, 2005, Charter executed an employment
agreement with Mr. Quigley. The agreement provides that
Mr. Quigley shall be employed in an executive capacity to
perform such executive, managerial and administrative duties as
are assigned or delegated by the President and Chief Executive
Officer or the designee thereof, at a salary of $450,000. He
shall be eligible to participate in the incentive bonus plan,
stock option plan and to receive such other employee benefits as
are available to other senior executives. The term of this
agreement is two years from the effective date of the agreement.
In the event that Mr. Quigleys employment is
terminated by Charter without cause or by
Mr. Quigley for good reason, as those terms are
defined in the employment agreement, Mr. Quigley 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; a lump sum payment
equal to payments due under COBRA for the greater of twelve
months or the number of full months remaining in the term of the
agreement; and the vesting of options and restricted stock for
as long as severance payments are made. The employment agreement
contains a one-year non-compete provision (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. In addition, at the time of his
employment, Charter agreed to pay him a signing bonus of
$200,000 deferred until January 2006; grant options to purchase
145,800 shares of Class A common stock under our 2001
Stock Incentive Plan; 83,700 performance shares under our 2001
Stock Incentive Plan; and 50,000 shares of restricted stock
which will vest over a three year period.
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 2003, 2004 and 2005. Mr. Vogel was
entitled to reimbursement of fees and dues for his membership in
a country club of his choice, which he declined in 2003, 2004
and 2005, and
115
reimbursement for up to $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 received a lump sum cash payment of approximately
$358,000 in January 2006, which represented the agreed-upon
payment of $500,000 reduced to the extent of compensation
attributable to certain competitive activities.
Mr. Vogel continued to receive certain health benefits
during 2005 and will receive 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), continued 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 has 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.
In addition to the indemnification provisions which apply to all
employees under Charters bylaws, Mr. Vogels
agreement provides that Charter will indemnify and hold him
harmless 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 him of his
duties. The above agreement also contains confidentiality and
non-solicitation provisions.
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.
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
116
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.
117
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 December 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
December 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 |
|
|
|
363,794,364 |
|
|
|
50.38 |
% |
|
|
90.45 |
% |
Charter Investment, Inc.(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
247,481,191 |
|
|
|
37.29 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Vulcan Cable III Inc.(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,313,173 |
|
|
|
21.84 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Neil Smit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,812,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Robert P. May
|
|
|
119,685 |
|
|
|
40,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
W. Lance Conn
|
|
|
19,231 |
|
|
|
32,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Nathaniel A. Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,215 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jonathan L. Dolgen
|
|
|
19,685 |
|
|
|
40,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
David C. Merritt
|
|
|
25,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jo Allen Patton
|
|
|
10,977 |
|
|
|
40,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Marc B. Nathanson
|
|
|
425,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
John H. Tory
|
|
|
30,005 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Larry W. Wangberg
|
|
|
28,705 |
|
|
|
39,063 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Michael J. Lovett
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
112,375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Wayne H. Davis
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
|
|
1,332 |
|
|
|
210,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Sue Ann Hamilton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Paul E. Martin
|
|
|
11,738 |
|
|
|
2,869 |
|
|
|
162,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
All current directors and executive officers as a group
(18 persons)
|
|
|
29,828,066 |
|
|
|
3,383,926 |
|
|
|
794,175 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
363,794,364 |
|
|
|
50.95 |
% |
|
|
90.56 |
% |
Carl E. Vogel(10)
|
|
|
113,334 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,265,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Scott A. Bommer(11)
|
|
|
18,237,744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.38 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Glenview Capital Management, LLC(12)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.78 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Glenview Capital GP, LLC(12)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.78 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Lawrence M. Robbins(12)
|
|
|
19,903,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.78 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Steelhead Partners (13)
|
|
|
30,284,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.28 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.(13)
|
|
|
18,447,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.43 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
James Michael Johnston(13)
|
|
|
24,835,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.97 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Brian Katz Klein(13)
|
|
|
24,835,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.97 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
FMR Corp.(14)
|
|
|
38,515,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.25 |
% |
|
|
1.01 |
% |
Fidelity Management & Research Company(14)
|
|
|
14,961,471 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,487,601 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.12 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Edward C. Johnson 3d(14)
|
|
|
38,515,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.25 |
% |
|
|
1.01 |
% |
Standard Pacific Capital LLC(15)
|
|
|
21,804,756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.24 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Kingdon Capital Management, LLC(16)
|
|
|
24,236,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.82 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
|
* 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 March 1, 2006 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 December 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. As a
result of the settlement of the CC VIII dispute, Mr. Allen
received an accreting note exchangeable as of December 31,
2005 for 24,662,333 Charter Holdco units. 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: |
|
|
|
|
|
416,204,671 shares of Class A common stock are issued
and outstanding as of December 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
March 1, 2006; and |
119
|
|
|
|
|
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.
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: |
|
|
|
|
|
247,481,191 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 includes 24,662,333 shares of
Class A common stock issuable as of December 31, 2005
upon exchange of units of Charter Holdco, which are issuable to
Charter Investment, Inc. (which is owned by Mr. Allen) as a
consequence of the settlement of the CC VIII dispute. 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 247,481,191 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 continued to vest until December 31,
2005, and his options will be exercisable for another
60 days thereafter. |
|
(11) |
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 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). |
|
(12) |
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 |
120
|
|
|
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. |
|
(13) |
The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the
holders Form 13F filed with the SEC January 25,
2006. 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. |
|
(14) |
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. |
|
(15) |
The equity ownership in this table is based upon the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on
November 9, 2005. The address of the reporting person is:
101 California Street, 36th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111. |
|
(16) |
The equity ownership in this table is based upon the
holders Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on
January 25, 2006. The address of the reporting person
is: 152 West 57th Street, 50th Floor, New
York, NY 10019. |
Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation
Plans
The following information is provided as of December 31,
2005 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
|
|
|
29,126,744 |
(1) |
|
$ |
4.47 |
|
|
|
42,758,409 |
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
289,268 |
(2) |
|
$ |
3.91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
|
29,416,012 |
|
|
$ |
4.46 |
|
|
|
42,758,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
This total does not include 4,252,570 shares issued
pursuant to restricted stock grants made under our 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan, which were subject to vesting based on continued
employment or 11,258,256 performance shares issued under our
LTIP plan, which are subject to vesting based on continued
employment and Charters achievement of certain performance
criteria. |
|
(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. |
121
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
$84 million, $90 million and $95 million for
management services rendered in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Mutual Services Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
Charter paid Charter Holdco approximately $73 million,
$74 million and $64 million for services rendered in
2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30,
2005, respectively. |
|
Previous Management |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
No fees were paid in 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, 2003 and 2004 and September 30, 2005. |
122
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
TechTV Carriage Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton
Larry W. Wangberg |
|
We recorded approximately $1 million, $5 million and
$1 million from TechTV under the affiliation agreement in
2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30,
2005, respectively, related to launch incentives as a reduction
of programming expense. We paid TechTV approximately $80,600,
$2 million and $2 million in 2003 and 2004 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Oxygen Media Corporation |
|
|
|
|
Carriage Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
W. Lance Conn
Jo Allen Patton |
|
We paid Oxygen Media approximately $9 million,
$13 million and $7 million under a carriage agreement
in exchange for programming in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, respectively. We recorded
approximately $1 million, $1 million and
$0.1 million in 2003 and 2004 and the nine months ended
September 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 $9 million, $13 million
and $2 million as a reduction of programming expense in
2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30,
2005, respectively, in recognition of the guaranteed value of
the investment. |
123
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portland Trail Blazers Carriage |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen |
|
We paid approximately $135,200, $96,100 and $116,500 for rights
to carry the cable broadcast of certain Trail Blazers basketball
games in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Digeo, Inc. Broadband Carriage |
|
|
|
|
Agreement |
|
Paul G. Allen
Carl E. Vogel
Jo Allen Patton
W. Lance Conn
Michael J. Lovett |
|
We paid Digeo approximately $4 million, $3 million and
$2 million for customized development of the i- channels
and the local content tool kit in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 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 $1 million in license
and maintenance fees in 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 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
$9 million in capital purchases in 2004 and the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
Viacom Networks |
|
Jonathan L. Dolgen |
|
We are party to certain affiliation agreements with networks of
New Viacom and CBS Corporation, pursuant to which they
provide Charter with programming for distribution via our cable
systems. For the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 and
for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, Charter paid
Old Viacom approximately $188 million,
$194 million and $150 million, respectively, for
programming, and Charter recorded as receivables approximately
$5 million, $8 million and $15 million from
Old Viacom for launch incentives and marketing support for
the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, respectively. |
|
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 $67,300, $49,300 and $55,500 in 2003 and
2004 and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005,
respectively, to Mapleton Communications, an affiliate of
Mapleton Investments, LLC. |
124
|
|
|
|
|
Transaction |
|
Interested Related Party |
|
Description of Transaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 $469,300, $0 and $0 in
2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 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 $8 million,
$3 million and $15,700 for costs incurred in connection
with litigation matters in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine months
ended September 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 51% owned by us and
49% 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 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, 2003 and 2004 and
for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, the
subsidiaries of Charter Holdco paid approximately
$84 million, $90 million and $95 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
125
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, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, Charter paid approximately
$73 million, $74 million and $64 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, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, Charters
subsidiaries did not pay any fees to Charter Investment, Inc. to
reduce management fees payable. As of December 31, 2003 and
2004 and September 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.
|
|
|
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, 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
126
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, indirectly through a company
controlled by him, Charter Investment, Inc. (CII),
became the holder of the CC VIII interest. Consequently,
subject to the matters referenced in the next paragraph,
Mr. Allen generally thereafter has been 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, an
indirect subsidiary of Charter (CC V), and
Mr. Allen in proportion to CC Vs 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 arose 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 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 disagreed with the Special Committees
determinations described above and so notified the Special
Committee. Mr. Allen contended that the transaction was
accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and
contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures.
127
The parties engaged in a process of non-binding mediation to
seek to resolve this matter, without success. The Special
Committee evaluated what further actions or processes to
undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further
deliberation, each party agreed to refrain from initiating legal
proceedings over this matter until it had given at least ten
days prior notice to the other. In addition, the Special
Committee and Mr. Allen 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.
As of October 31, 2005, Mr. Allen, the Special
Committee, Charter, Charter Holdco and certain of their
affiliates, having investigated the facts and circumstances
relating to the dispute involving the CC VIII interest,
after consultation with counsel and other advisors, and as a
result of the Delaware Chancery Courts non-binding
mediation program, agreed to settle the dispute, and execute
certain permanent and irrevocable releases pursuant to the
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release agreement dated
October 31, 2005 (the Settlement).
Pursuant to the Settlement, CII has retained 30% of its
CC VIII interest (the Remaining Interests). The
Remaining Interests are subject to certain drag along, tag along
and transfer restrictions as detailed in the revised
CC VIII Limited Liability Company Agreement. CII
transferred the other 70% of the CC VIII interest directly
and indirectly, through Charter Holdco, to a newly formed
entity, CCHC (a direct subsidiary of Charter Holdco and the
direct parent of Charter Holdings). Of that other 70% of the
CC VIII preferred interests, 7.4% has been transferred by
CII to CCHC for a subordinated exchangeable note with an initial
accreted value of $48.2 million, accreting at 14%,
compounded quarterly, with a 15-year maturity (the
Note). The remaining 62.6% has been transferred by
CII to Charter Holdco, in accordance with the terms of the
settlement for no additional monetary consideration. Charter
Holdco contributed the 62.6% interest to CCHC.
As part of the Settlement, CC VIII issued approximately
49 million additional Class B units to CC V in
consideration for prior capital contributions to CC VIII by
CC V, with respect to transactions that were unrelated to
the dispute in connection with CIIs membership units in
CC VIII. As a result, Mr. Allens pro rata share
of the profits and losses of CC VIII attributable to the
Remaining Interests is approximately 5.6%.
The Note is exchangeable, at CIIs option, at any time, for
Charter Holdco Class A Common units at a rate equal to the
then accreted value, divided by $2.00 (the Exchange
Rate). Customary anti-dilution protections have been
provided that could cause future changes to the Exchange Rate.
Additionally, the Charter Holdco Class A Common units
received will be exchangeable by the holder into Charter common
stock in accordance with existing agreements between CII,
Charter and certain other parties signatory thereto. Beginning
three years and four months after the closing of the Settlement,
if the closing price of Charter common stock is at or above the
Exchange Rate for a certain period of time as specified in the
Exchange Agreement, Charter Holdco may require the exchange of
the Note for Charter Holdco Class A Common units at the
Exchange Rate.
CCHC has the right to redeem the Note under certain
circumstances, for cash in an amount equal to the then accreted
value. CCHC must redeem the Note at its maturity for cash in an
amount equal to the initial stated value plus the accreted
return through maturity.
The Board of Directors has determined that the transferred
CC VIII interests remain at CCHC.
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.
128
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
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. 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
remained subject to the put to Mr. Allen. Such preferred
interest was recorded in other long-term liabilities as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004. On
October 6, 2005, Charter Helicon, LLC redeemed all of
the preferred membership interest for the redemption price of
$25 million plus accrued interest.
|
|
|
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
129
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 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.
130
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.
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, 2003
and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005
we recognized approximately $1 million, $5 million and
$1 million, respectively, of the Vulcan Programming payment
as an offset to programming expense and paid approximately
$80,600, $2 million and $2 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.
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, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, we paid Oxygen approximately
$9 million, $13 million and $7 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 $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, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 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, 2003 and 2004 and
for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, we recorded
approximately $9 million, $13 million and
$2 million,
131
respectively, as a reduction of programming expense. The
carrying value of our investment in Oxygen was approximately
$19 million, $32 million and $33 million as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 and September 30, 2005,
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 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 September 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.
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, 2003 and 2004
and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, we paid
approximately $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.
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.
132
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 split certain revenues
earned from the service. In 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, we paid Digeo Interactive
approximately $4 million, $3 million and
$2 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. Charter paid approximately $0.5 million and
$1 million in license and maintenance fees for the year
ended December 31, 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 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).
133
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 $9 million in capital
purchases under this agreement for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 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.
In October 2005, Charter Holdco and Digeo Interactive entered
into a binding term sheet for the test market deployment of the
Moxi Entertainment Applications Pack (MEAP). The
MEAP is an addition to the Moxi Client Software and will contain
ten games (such as Video Poker and Blackjack), a photo
application and jukebox application. The term sheet is limited
to a test market application of approximately
14,000 subscribers and the aggregate value is not expected
to exceed $0.1 million. In the event the test market proves
successful, the companies will replace the term sheet with a
long form agreement including a planned roll-out across
additional markets. The term sheet expires on May 1, 2006.
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. Mr. Lovett is a director of Digeo since December
2005 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.
Other Miscellaneous Relationships
Pursuant to certain affiliation agreements with networks of
New Viacom, including MTV, MTV2, Nickelodeon, VH1, TVLand,
CMT, Spike TV, Comedy Central and Viacom Digital Suite, and
stations and networks of CBS Corporation including
CBS-owned and operated broadcast stations, Showtime, The Movie
Channel, and Flix, New Viacom and CBS Corporation
provide Charter with programming for distribution via our cable
systems. The affiliation agreements provide for, among other
things, rates and terms of carriage, advertising on these
networks, which Charter can sell to local advertisers and
marketing support. For the years ended December 31, 2003
and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005,
Charter paid Old Viacom approximately $188 million,
$194 million and $150 million, respectively, for
programming. Charter recorded approximately $5 million,
$8 million and $15 million as receivables from
Old Viacom networks related to launch incentives for
certain channels and marketing support, respectively, for the
years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005. From April 1994 to July
2004, Mr. Dolgen served as Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of the Viacom Entertainment Group.
134
|
|
|
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 $67,300, $49,300 and $55,500 in 2003 and
2004 and for the nine months ended September 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,
2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30,
2005, Charter Holdco earned approximately $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 directors and
executive officers a total of approximately $8 million,
$3 million and $15,700 in respect of
135
invoices received in 2003 and 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 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. All four
officers have filed counterclaims.
136
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 September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our
actual total debt was approximately $8.8 billion and
$8.3 billion, respectively, as summarized below (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
|
Start Date for | |
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
|
Cash Interest | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
Interest |
|
Payment on | |
|
|
|
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Payment |
|
Discount | |
|
Maturity | |
Long-Term Debt(b) |
|
Amount | |
|
Value(a) | |
|
Amount | |
|
Value(a) | |
|
Dates |
|
Notes | |
|
Date(b) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Renaissance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.000% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
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(d)
|
|
|
5,513 |
|
|
|
5,513 |
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
794 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/15/13 |
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/15, 6/15, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
9/15 & 12/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/15/10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,810 |
|
|
$ |
8,805 |
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The accreted value presented above represents the principal
amount 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. |
|
(d) |
|
In January 2006, our parent company, CCH II and CCH II
Capital Corp., issued $450 million principal amount of
10.250% senior notes due 2010, the proceeds of which were used
to pay down credit facilities. |
As of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
long-term debt totaled approximately $8.8 billion and
$8.3 billion, respectively. This debt was comprised of
approximately $5.5 billion and $5.5 billion of credit
facility debt and $3.3 billion and $2.8 billion
accreted value of high-yield notes at September 30, 2005
and December 31, 2004, respectively.
As of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the
weighted average interest rate on the credit facility debt was
approximately 7.5% and 6.8%, respectively and the weighted
average interest rate on the high-yield notes was approximately
8.3% and 8.2%, resulting in a blended weighted average interest
rate of 7.8% 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
137
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
respectively. The fair value of our high-yield notes was
$3.3 billion and $2.9 billion at September 30,
2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of
our credit facility debt was approximately $5.5 billion and
$5.5 billion at September 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 and
the bridge loan (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.
|
|
|
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) 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
138
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. |
139
Outstanding Notes and Bridge Loan
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.
|
|
|
Previously Issued
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
83/4%
Senior Notes due 2013 that were issued in November 2003 have
terms identical to those of the new notes, and, upon issuance,
the new notes will trade fungibly with the notes issued in 2003
and will bear the same CUSIP number as those notes.
|
|
|
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 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 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.
CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. may redeem the
senior floating rate notes 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.
|
|
|
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.
140
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. |
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 |
141
|
|
|
|
|
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 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
142
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.
In October 2005, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., as
guarantor thereunder, entered into the bridge loan with the
Lenders whereby the Lenders have committed to make loans to CCO
Holdings in an aggregate amount of $600 million. In January
2006, upon the issuance of $450 million principal amount
CCH II notes, the commitment under the bridge loan
agreement was reduced to $435 million. CCO Holdings may,
subject to certain conditions, including the satisfaction of
certain of the conditions to borrowing under the credit
facilities, draw upon the facility between January 2, 2006 and
September 29, 2006 and the loans will mature on the sixth
anniversary of the first borrowing under the bridge loan. Each
loan will accrue interest at a rate equal to an adjusted LIBOR
rate plus a spread. The spread will initially be 450 basis
points and will increase (a) by an additional 25 basis points at
the end of the six-month period following the date of the first
borrowing, (b) by an additional 25 basis points at the end
of each of the next two subsequent three month periods and (c)
by 62.5 basis points at the end of each of the next two
subsequent three-month periods.
Beginning on the first anniversary of the first date that CCO
Holdings borrows under the bridge loan and at any time
thereafter, any Lender will have the option to receive
exchange notes (the terms of which are described
below, the Exchange Notes) in exchange for any loan
that has not been repaid by that date. Upon the earlier of (x)
the date that at least a majority of all loans that have been
outstanding have been exchanged for Exchange Notes and (y) the
date that is 18 months after the first date that CCO Holdings
borrows under the bridge loan, the remainder of loans will be
automatically exchanged for Exchange Notes.
As conditions to each draw, (i) there shall be no default under
the bridge loan, (ii) all the representations and warranties
under the bridge loan shall be true and correct in all material
respects and (iii) all conditions to borrowing under the Charter
Operating credit facilities (with certain exceptions) shall be
satisfied.
The aggregate unused commitment will be reduced by 100% of the
net proceeds from certain asset sales, to the extent such net
proceeds have not been used to prepay loans or Exchange Notes.
However, asset sales that generate net proceeds of less than $75
million will not be subject to such commitment reduction
obligation, unless the aggregate net proceeds from such asset
sales exceed $200 million, in which case the aggregate unused
commitment will be reduced by the amount of such excess.
CCO Holdings will be required to prepay loans (and redeem or
offer to repurchase Exchange Notes, if issued) from the net
proceeds from (i) the issuance of equity or incurrence of debt
by Charter and its subsidiaries, with certain exceptions, and
(ii) certain asset sales (to the extent not used for purposes
permitted under the bridge loan).
The covenants and events of default applicable to CCO Holdings
under the bridge loan are similar to the covenants and events of
default in the indenture for the senior secured notes of CCH I.
The Exchange Notes will mature on the sixth anniversary of the
first borrowing under the bridge loan. The Exchange Notes will
bear interest at a rate equal to the rate that would have been
borne by the loans. The same mandatory redemption provisions
will apply to the Exchange Notes as applied to the loans, except
that CCO Holdings will be required to make an offer to redeem
upon the occurrence of a change of control at 101% of principal
amount plus accrued and unpaid interest.
143
The Exchange Notes will, if held by a person other than an
initial lender or an affiliate thereof, be (a) non-callable for
the first three years after the first borrowing date and (b)
thereafter, callable at par plus accrued interest plus a premium
equal to 50% of the coupon in effect on the first anniversary of
the first borrowing date, which premium shall decline to 25% of
such coupon in the fourth year and to zero thereafter.
Otherwise, the Exchange Notes will be callable at any time at
100% of the amount thereof plus accrued and unpaid interest.
|
|
|
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.
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 |
144
|
|
|
|
|
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; |
|
|
|
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, |
145
|
|
|
|
|
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.
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.
146
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 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
147
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. |
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.
148
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 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.
149
Parent Company Debt
As of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our
direct and indirect parent companies actual total debt was
approximately $10.3 billion and $11.2 billion,
respectively, as summarized below (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual | |
|
Actual | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
|
Start date for | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
cash interest | |
|
|
|
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Interest payment | |
|
payment on | |
|
Maturity | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
value(a) | |
|
Amount | |
|
value(a) | |
|
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 |
|
|
|
841 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
5/16 & 11/16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/16/09 |
|
Charter Holdings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.250% senior notes due 2007
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/07 |
|
|
8.625% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
1,244 |
|
|
|
1,243 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/09 |
|
|
9.920% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
1,108 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
10/1/04 |
|
|
|
4/1/11 |
|
|
10.000% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/09 |
|
|
10.250% senior notes due 2010
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15/10 |
|
|
11.750% senior discount notes due 2010
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/05 |
|
|
|
1/15/10 |
|
|
10.750% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10/1/09 |
|
|
11.125% senior notes due 2011
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15/11 |
|
|
13.500% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
589 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/06 |
|
|
|
1/15/11 |
|
|
9.625% senior notes due 2009
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11/15/09 |
|
|
10.000% senior notes due 2011
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/15/11 |
|
|
11.750% senior discount notes due 2011
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
939 |
|
|
|
803 |
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
11/15/06 |
|
|
|
5/15/11 |
|
|
12.125% senior discount notes due 2012
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/07 |
|
|
|
1/15/12 |
|
CIH(a):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.125% senior notes due 2014
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15/14 |
|
|
9.920% senior discount notes due 2014
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1/14 |
|
|
10.000% senior notes due 2014
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/15/14 |
|
|
11.750% senior discount notes due 2014
|
|
|
815 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/15 & 11/15 |
|
|
|
11/15/06 |
|
|
|
5/15/14 |
|
|
13.500% senior discount notes due 2014
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/06 |
|
|
|
1/15/14 |
|
|
12.125% senior discount notes due 2015
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/15 & 7/15 |
|
|
|
7/15/07 |
|
|
|
1/15/15 |
|
CCH I(a):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.00% senior notes due 2015
|
|
|
3,525 |
|
|
|
3,686 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/1 & 10/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10/1/15 |
|
CCH II:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.250% senior notes due 2010(d)
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
3/15 & 9/15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/15/10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,313 |
|
|
$ |
10,315 |
|
|
$ |
11,499 |
|
|
$ |
11,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The accreted value presented above represents the principal
amount of the notes less the original issue discount at the time
of sale plus the accretion to the balance sheet date. The
accreted value of CIH notes and CCH I notes issued in exchange
for Charter Holdings notes are recorded in accordance with GAAP.
GAAP requires that the CIH notes issued in exchange for Charter
Holdings notes and the CCH I notes issued in exchange for the
8.625% Charter Holdings notes due 2009 be recorded at the
historical book values of the Charter Holdings notes as opposed
to the current accreted value for |
150
|
|
|
|
|
legal purposes and notes indenture purposes (which, for both
purposes, is the amount that would become payable if the debt
becomes immediately due). As of September 30, 2005, the accreted
value of our parent companies debt for legal purposes and
notes and indentures purposes is $9.8 billion. |
|
(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) |
|
In January 2006, our parent company, CCH II and CCH II Capital
Corp., issued $450 million principal amount of 10.250%
senior notes due 2010, the proceeds of which were used to pay
down credit facilities. |
|
|
|
Charter Communications, Inc. Notes |
|
|
|
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 September 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.
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 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
151
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.
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
$123 million at September 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 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
152
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.
In October 2004, Charter, acting through a Special Committee of
Charters Board of Directors, and Mr. Allen, settled a
dispute that had arisen between the parties with regard to the
ownership of CC VIII. As part of that settlement, CCHC issued a
subordinated exchangeable note (the CCHC Note) to
CII. The CCHC Note has a
15-year maturity. The
CCHC note has an initial accreted value of $48.2 million
accreting at 14% compounded quarterly, except that from and
after February 28, 2009. CCHC may pay any increase in the
accreted value of the CCHC in cash and the accreted value of the
Note will not increase to the extent such amount is paid in
cash. The CCHC Note is exchangeable at CIIs option, at any
time, for Charter Holdco Class A Common units at a rate
equal to the then accreted value, divided by $2.00.
|
|
|
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 Notes.
153
|
|
|
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.
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.
154
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 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
155
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.
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 |
156
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
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.
157
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 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 I Holdings, LLC Notes |
In September 2005, CIH and CCH I Holdings Capital Corp.
jointly issued $2.5 billion total principal amount of 9.92%
to 13.50% senior accreting notes due 2014 and 2015 in exchange
for an aggregate amount of $2.4 billion of Charter Holdings
notes due 2011 and 2012, spread over six series of notes and
with varying interest rates as set forth in the table under
Description of Certain Indebtedness. The notes are
guaranteed by Charter Holdings.
The CIH notes are senior debt obligations of CIH and
CCH I Holdings Capital Corp. They rank equally with all
other current and future unsecured, unsubordinated obligations
of CIH and CCH I Holdings Capital Corp. The CIH notes
are structurally subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries
of CIH, including the CCH I notes,
the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes,
the Renaissance notes and the Charter Operating notes.
The CIH notes may not be redeemed at the option of the
issuers until September 30, 2007. On or after such date,
the CIH notes may be redeemed in accordance with the following
table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note Series |
|
Redemption Dates | |
|
Percentage of Principal | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
11.125%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - January 14, 2008 |
|
|
|
103.708 |
% |
|
|
|
January 15, 2008 - January 14, 2009 |
|
|
|
101.854 |
% |
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
9.92%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
10.0%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - May 14, 2008 |
|
|
|
103.333 |
% |
|
|
|
May 15, 2008 - May 14, 2009 |
|
|
|
101.667 |
% |
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
11.75%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - May 14, 2008 |
|
|
|
103.917 |
% |
|
|
|
May 15, 2008 - May 14, 2009 |
|
|
|
101.958 |
% |
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
13.5%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - January 14, 2008 |
|
|
|
104.5% |
|
|
|
|
January 15, 2008 - January 14, 2009 |
|
|
|
102.25% |
|
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
12.125%
|
|
|
September 30, 2007 - January 14, 2008 |
|
|
|
106.063 |
% |
|
|
|
January 15, 2008 - January 14, 2009 |
|
|
|
104.042 |
% |
|
|
|
January 15, 2009 - January 14, 2010 |
|
|
|
102.021 |
% |
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
In the event that a specified change of control event happens,
CIH and CCH I Holdings Capital Corp. must offer to
repurchase any outstanding notes at a price equal to the sum of
the accreted value of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest
plus a premium that varies over time.
158
The indenture governing the CIH notes contains restrictive
covenants similar to those contained in the indenture governing
the Charter Holdings notes with the following exceptions:
|
|
|
|
|
The debt incurrence covenant permits up to 9.75 billion
(rather than 3.5 billion) of debt under credit facilities
(less the amount of net proceeds of asset sales applied to repay
such debt as required by the asset sale covenant). |
|
|
|
CIH 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 CIH Leverage Ratio
would be below 8.75 to 1.0 and if no default exists or would
exist as a consequence of such transaction. If those conditions
are met, restricted payments in a total amount of up to the sum
of (1) the greater of (a) $500 million or
(b) 100% of CIHs consolidated EBITDA, as defined,
minus 1.2 times its consolidated interest expense each for the
period from September 28, 2005 to the end of CIHs
most recently ended full fiscal quarter for which internal
financial statements are available, plus (2) 100% of new
cash and non-cash equity proceeds received by CIH 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. |
|
|
|
Instead of the $150 million and $50 million permitted
investment baskets described above, there is a $750 million
permitted investment basket. |
In September 2005, CCH I and CCH I Capital Corp.
jointly issued $3.5 billion total principal amount of 11%
senior secured notes due October 2015 in exchange for an
aggregate amount of $4.2 billion of certain Charter
Holdings notes. The notes are guaranteed by Charter Holdings and
are secured by a pledge of 100% of the equity interest of
CCH Is wholly owned direct subsidiary, CCH II.
Such pledge is subject to significant limitations as described
in the related pledge agreement. Interest on the
CCH I notes accrues at 11% per annum and is
payable semi-annually in arrears on each April 1 and
October 1, commencing on April 1, 2006.
The CCH I notes are senior debt obligations of CCH I
and CCH I Capital Corp. To the extent of the value of the
collateral, they rank senior to all of CCH Is future
unsecured senior indebtedness. The CCH I notes are
structurally subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries of
CCH I, including the CCH II notes, CCO
Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes and the Charter Operating
notes.
CCH I and CCH I Capital Corp. may, prior to
October 1, 2008 in the event of a qualified equity offering
providing sufficient proceeds, redeem up to 35% of the aggregate
principal amount of the CCH I notes at a redemption price
of 111% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid
interest. Aside from this provision, CCH I and CCH I
Capital Corp. may not redeem at their option any of the notes
prior to October 1, 2010. On or after October 1, 2010,
CCH I and CCH I Capital Corp. may redeem, in whole or
in part, CCH I notes at the applicable prices
(expressed as percentages of principal amount) listed below,
plus accrued and unpaid interest if redeemed during the twelve
month period beginning on October 1 of the years listed
below.
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
2010
|
|
|
105.5% |
|
2011
|
|
|
102.75% |
|
2012
|
|
|
101.375% |
|
2013 and thereafter
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
If a change of control occurs, each holder of
the CCH I notes will have the right to require
the repurchase of all or any part of that holders
CCH I notes at 101% of the principal amount plus accrued
and unpaid interest.
159
The indenture governing the CCH I notes contains
restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or
activities by CCH I and its restricted subsidiaries,
including the covenants summarized below. Substantially all of
CCH Is direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently
restricted subsidiaries.
The covenant in the indenture governing the CCH I notes
that restricts incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred
stock permits CCH I 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, CCH I 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 7.5 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 I and its restricted
subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:
|
|
|
|
|
up to $9.75 billion of debt under credit facilities (less
the amount of net proceeds of asset sales applied to repay such
debt as required by the asset sale covenant); |
|
|
|
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 CCH I 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 offering or private placement.
The CCH I indenture generally permits CCH I 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 those in the CCH I
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 CCH I indenture
covenants.
Generally, under the CCH I indenture:
|
|
|
|
|
CCH I and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay
dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make
other specified restricted payments only if CCH I can incur
$1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test, which requires
that CCH I meet a 7.5 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 CCH Is consolidated EBITDA, as defined,
for the period from September 28, 2005 to the end of
CCH Is most recently ended full fiscal quarter for
which financial statements are available minus 1.3 times its
consolidated interest expense for such period, plus 100% of new
cash and appraised non-cash equity proceeds received by
CCH I and not allocated to certain investments, from and
after September 28, 2005, plus $100 million. |
In addition, CCH I and its restricted subsidiaries 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
CCH I or its restricted subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
to enable certain of its parents to pay interest on certain of
their indebtedness; |
|
|
|
to enable certain of its parents to purchase, redeem or
refinance certain indebtedness, so long as CCH I could
incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the 7.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio
test referred to above; or |
160
|
|
|
|
|
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 CCH I notes restricts
CCH I 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 I could not incur $1.00 of new debt
under the 7.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after
giving effect to the transaction.
Permitted investments include:
|
|
|
|
|
investments by CCH I and its restricted subsidiaries in
CCH I 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 I since September 28, 2005 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. |
CCH I is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other
than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens
securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing
obligations up to $50 million and other specified liens.
The lien covenant does not restrict liens on assets of
subsidiaries of CCH I.
CCH I and CCH I 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 CCH I and its subsidiaries could incur $1.00 of
new debt under the 7.50 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
CCH I notes.
CCH I 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. CCH I 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 certain debt, or to offer to repurchase the CCH I
notes with any remaining proceeds.
CCH I and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not
engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the time of
the transaction, CCH I 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.
With certain exceptions, CCH Is restricted
subsidiaries may generally not enter into restrictions on their
ability to make dividends or distributions or transfer assets to
CCH I.
The restricted subsidiaries of CCH I are generally not
permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure other debt of
CCH I, except in respect of credit facilities unless the
guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee of the CCH I
notes 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 CCH I 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
161
affiliates involving over $50 million without receiving an
independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction to the
holders of the CCH I 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 and on
January 30, 2006 they issued an additional $450 million
principal amount of these notes. 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. |
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
162
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. |
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.
163
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 bridge loan, the Charter Holdings notes, CIH notes,
CCH I 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
parents or our subsidiaries indentures.
164
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
165
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
166
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
167
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,
168
(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.
169
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.
170
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 |
171
|
|
|
|
|
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.
172
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 September 30, 2005, the outstanding Indebtedness of CCO
Holdings and its subsidiaries totaled approximately
$8.8 billion, approximately $7.5 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 Unrestricted
Subsidiaries. Unrestricted Subsidiaries will generally not
be subject to the restrictive covenants in the Indenture.
173
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 November 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
May 15, 2006. 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 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.
174
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.
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;
175
(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.
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
176
(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 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);
177
(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;
(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
178
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 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.
179
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 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);
180
(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 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.
181
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;
(2) the Indenture and the Notes;
(3) applicable law;
182
(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; |
(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;
183
(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;
(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;
184
(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.
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.
185
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;
(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
186
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 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
187
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 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
188
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.
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;
189
(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 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.
190
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 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
191
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.
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
192
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 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.
193
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;
(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.
194
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).
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;
195
(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.
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;
196
(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.
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),
197
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 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
198
(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.
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
199
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 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
200
(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.
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;
201
(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 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); |
202
|
|
|
(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 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. |
203
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 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;
204
(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, 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
205
(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.
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
206
(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 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
207
(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.
208
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 |
209
|
|
|
(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.
|
|
|
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.
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
210
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 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 |
211
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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 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
212
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.
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 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
213
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.
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.
214
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
F-2 |
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
F-7 |
|
Unaudited Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-48 |
|
|
|
|
F-49 |
|
|
|
|
F-50 |
|
|
|
|
F-51 |
|
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
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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
F-8
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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.
F-9
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
|
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 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
F-10
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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.
F-11
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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. 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
F-12
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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, 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
F-13
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
|
|
|
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
F-14
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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
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
F-15
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
F-16
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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, 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
F-17
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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.
F-18
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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,
F-19
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-20
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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.
F-21
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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
F-22
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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.
F-23
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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, |
F-24
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
|
|
|
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 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.
F-25
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
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 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.
F-26
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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.
F-27
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
F-28
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-29
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-30
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-31
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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.
F-32
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
F-33
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-34
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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
F-35
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-36
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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
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.
F-37
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-38
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-39
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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, |
F-40
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
|
|
|
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 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.
F-41
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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
F-42
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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.
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
F-43
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 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.
F-44
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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-45
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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-46
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2004, 2003 AND 2002
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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-47
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(unaudited) | |
|
|
ASSETS |
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
546 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $15
and $15, respectively
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTMENT IN CABLE PROPERTIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation
of $6,357 and $5,142, respectively
|
|
|
5,895 |
|
|
|
6,110 |
|
|
Franchises, net
|
|
|
9,830 |
|
|
|
9,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment in cable properties, net
|
|
|
15,725 |
|
|
|
15,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT ASSETS
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
16,169 |
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$ |
933 |
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
Payables to related party
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
1,040 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT
|
|
|
8,805 |
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOANS PAYABLE RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED MANAGEMENT FEES RELATED PARTY
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members equity
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
6,568 |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total members equity
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
6,553 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and members equity
|
|
$ |
16,169 |
|
|
$ |
16,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-48
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(dollars in millions)
UNAUDITED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
REVENUES
|
|
$ |
1,318 |
|
|
$ |
1,248 |
|
|
$ |
3,912 |
|
|
$ |
3,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)
|
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,255 |
|
|
|
3,592 |
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
5,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
(2,344 |
) |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
(2,154 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER INCOME AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(502 |
) |
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest, income taxes and cumulative
effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
(2,533 |
) |
MINORITY INTEREST
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting
change
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(2,466 |
) |
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
(2,508 |
) |
INCOME TAX BENEFIT (EXPENSE)
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(2,421 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
(2,467 |
) |
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF ACCOUNTING CHANGE, NET OF TAX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(103 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,261 |
) |
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,307 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-49
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(dollars in millions)
UNAUDITED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,307 |
) |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash flows from
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of franchises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433 |
|
|
|
Option compensation expense, net
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
Hurricane asset retirement loss
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special charges, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
Noncash interest expense
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
Gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
Gain on investments
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
840 |
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects from
dispositions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
Receivables from and payables to related party, including
deferred management fees
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(815 |
) |
|
|
(616 |
) |
|
Change in accrued expenses related to capital expenditures
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
Proceeds from sale of assets
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
Purchases of investments
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
Proceeds from investments
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
(725 |
) |
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings of long-term debt
|
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
2,873 |
|
|
Borrowings from related parties
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(1,014 |
) |
|
|
(4,707 |
) |
|
Repayments to related parties
|
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of debt
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
Payments for debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
Distributions
|
|
|
(832 |
) |
|
|
(466 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
(897 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
(537 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH PAID FOR INTEREST
|
|
$ |
415 |
|
|
$ |
339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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-50
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
1. |
Organization and Basis of Presentation |
CCO Holdings, LLC (CCO Holdings) is a holding
company whose principal assets at September 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). CCH I is a subsidiary of
CCH I Holdings, LLC (CIH) which is a subsidiary
of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC (Charter
Holdings). Charter Holdings is a subsidiary of CCHC, LLC
(CCHC) which is a subsidiary of Charter
Communications Holding Company, LLC (Charter
Holdco). Charter Holdco 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 (the 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 $103 million and
$239 million for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2005, respectively, and $3.3 billion for
each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004.
The Companys net cash flows from operating activities were
$823 million and $809 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
The Companys long-term financing as of September 30,
2005 consists of $5.5 billion of credit facility debt and
$3.3 billion accreted value of high-yield notes. For the
remainder of 2005, $7 million of the
F-51
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
Companys debt matures, and in 2006, an additional
$30 million of the Companys debt matures. 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
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, 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005, the Company generated $823 million
of net cash flows from operating activities, after paying cash
interest of $415 million. In addition, the Company used
approximately $815 million for purchases of property, plant
and equipment. Finally, the Company had net cash flows used in
financing activities of $635 million.
In October 2005, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., as
guarantor thereunder, entered into a senior bridge loan
agreement (the Bridge Loan) with JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A., Credit Suisse, Cayman Islands Branch and Deutsche
Bank AG Cayman Islands Branch (the Lenders) whereby
the Lenders have committed to make loans to CCO Holdings in an
aggregate amount of $600 million. CCO Holdings may draw
upon the facility between January 2, 2006 and
September 29, 2006 and the loans will mature on the sixth
anniversary of the first borrowing under the Bridge Loan.
The Company expects that cash on hand, cash flows from operating
activities and the amounts available under its credit facilities
and Bridge Loan will be adequate to meet its and its parent
companies cash needs for the remainder of 2005 and 2006.
Cash flows from operating activities and amounts available under
the Companys credit facilities and Bridge Loan may not be
sufficient to fund the Companys operations and satisfy its
and its parent companies interest payment obligations in
2007. It is likely that the Company and its parent
companies will require additional funding to satisfy their
debt repayment obligations in 2007. The Company believes that
cash flows from operating activities and amounts available under
its credit facilities and Bridge Loan will not be sufficient to
fund its operations and satisfy its and its parent
companies interest and principal repayment obligations
thereafter.
The Company has been advised that Charter is working with its
financial advisors to address its and the Companys funding
requirements. However, there can be no assurance that such
funding will be available to the Company. Although Paul G.
Allen, Charters Chairman and controlling shareholder, 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 and Bridge
Loan, 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 September 30, 2005, the Company is in
compliance with the covenants under its indentures and credit
facilities and the Company expects to remain in compliance with
those covenants and the Bridge Loan covenants for the next
twelve months. The Companys total potential borrowing
availability under the current credit facilities totaled
$786 million as of September 30, 2005, although the
actual availability at that time was only $648 million
because of limits imposed by covenant restrictions. In addition,
effective January 2, 2006, the Company will have additional
borrowing availability of $600 million as a result of the
Bridge Loan.
F-52
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
Continued access to the Companys credit facilities and
Bridge Loan is subject to the Company remaining in compliance
with the covenants of these credit facilities and Bridge Loan,
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,
Bridge Loan or indentures governing the Companys debt
occur, funding under the credit facilities and Bridge Loan 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.
|
|
|
Parent Company 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, CIH, CCH I or CCH II to satisfy
their debt payment obligations or a bankruptcy filing with
respect to 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 Companys notes.
As of September 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 nine months ended September 30, 2005, the
Company distributed $832 million to CCH II of which
$60 million was subsequently distributed to Charter Holdco.
As of September 30, 2005, Charter Holdco was owed
$57 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 $123 million of governmental securities pledged as
security for the next five semi-annual interest payments on
Charters 5.875% convertible senior notes.
As of September 30, 2005, Charter Holdings, CIH, CCH I
and CCH II had approximately $9.4 billion principal
amount of high-yield notes outstanding with approximately
$105 million, $684 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 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 CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries to a parent
company (including Charter, Charter Holdco, CCHC, Charter
Holdings, CIH, CCH I and CCH II) for payment of
principal on parent company notes are restricted by the Bridge
Loan and the indentures governing the 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. For the quarter ended
September 30, 2005, there was no default under any of the
aforementioned indentures. However, CCO Holdings did not meet
its leverage ratio test of 4.5 to 1.0 based on
September 30, 2005 financial results. As a result,
distributions from CCO Holdings to CCH II, CCH I, CIH,
Charter Holdings, CCHC, Charter Holdco or Charter for payment of
principal of the respective parent companys debt are
currently restricted and will continue to be restricted until
that test is met. However distributions for payment of the
respective parent companys interest are permitted.
F-53
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
In September 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 and 2010 exchanged $3.4 billion principal
amount of notes for $2.9 billion principal amount of new
11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. Holders of Charter
Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 exchanged $845 million
principal amount of notes for $662 million principal amount
of 11% CCH I senior secured notes due 2015. In addition, holders
of Charter Holdings notes due 2011 and 2012 exchanged
$2.5 billion principal amount of notes for
$2.5 billion principal amount of various series of new CIH
notes. Each series of new CIH notes has the same stated interest
rate 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.
|
|
|
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 September 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 September 30, 2005 financial
results. As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to
Charter, Charter Holdco or CCHC for payment of interest or
principal 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 July 2005, the Company closed the sale of certain cable
systems in Texas and West Virginia and closed the sale of an
additional cable system in Nebraska in October 2005,
representing a total of approximately 33,000 customers. During
the nine months ended September 30, 2005, those cable
systems met 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 of approximately $39 million. At
September 30, 2005 assets held for sale, included in
investment in cable properties, are approximately
$7 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 nine months ended September 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.
F-54
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
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 each
October 1 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. The
October 1, 2005 annual impairment test will be finalized in
the fourth quarter of 2005 and any impairment resulting from
such test will be recorded in the fourth quarter. 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 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 Emerging Issues Task Force
(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.
In September 2004, the SEC staff issued EITF
Topic D-108 which
requires the direct method of separately valuing all intangible
assets and does not permit goodwill to be included in franchise
assets. The Company adopted Topic D-108 in its impairment
assessment as of September 30, 2004 that resulted 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 nine months ended September 30,
2004 representing the portion of the Companys total
franchise impairment attributable to no longer including
goodwill with franchise assets. 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
F-55
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
statements of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 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 Internet 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.
As of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
indefinite-lived and finite-lived intangible assets are
presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 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
|
|
$ |
9,797 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,797 |
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,845 |
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,849 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,849 |
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finite-lived intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with finite lives
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franchises with indefinite lives decreased $39 million as a
result of the asset impairment charges recorded related to three
cable asset sales and $9 million as a result of the closing
of two of the cable asset sales in July 2005 (see Note 3).
Franchise amortization expense for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004 was $1 million and
$3 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-56
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
5. |
Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following
as of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Accounts payable trade
|
|
$ |
62 |
|
|
$ |
138 |
|
Accrued capital expenditures
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Accrued expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
Programming costs
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
Franchise-related fees
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
933 |
|
|
$ |
901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt consists of the following as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
Principal | |
|
Accreted | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Value | |
|
Amount | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Long-Term Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCO Holdings, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83/4% senior
notes due 2013
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
794 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
|
Senior floating rate notes due 2010
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
Charter Communications Operating, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
CC V Holdings, LLC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.875% senior discount notes due 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
Credit Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charter Operating
|
|
|
5,513 |
|
|
|
5,513 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,810 |
|
|
$ |
8,805 |
|
|
$ |
8,292 |
|
|
$ |
8,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accreted values presented above represent the principal
amount of the notes less the original issue discount at the time
of sale plus the accretion to the balance sheet date.
In October 2005, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., as
guarantor thereunder, entered into the Bridge Loan with the
Lenders whereby the Lenders have committed to make loans to CCO
Holdings in an aggregate amount of $600 million. CCO
Holdings may draw upon the facility between January 2, 2006
and September 29, 2006 and the loans will mature on the
sixth anniversary of the first
F-57
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
borrowing under the Bridge Loan. Each loan will accrue interest
at a rate equal to an adjusted LIBOR rate plus a spread. The
spread will initially be 450 basis points and will increase
(a) by an additional 25 basis points at the end of the
six-month period following the date of the first borrowing,
(b) by an additional 25 basis points at the end of
each of the next two subsequent three month periods and
(c) by 62.5 basis points at the end of each of the
next two subsequent three-month periods. CCO Holdings will be
required to prepay loans from the net proceeds from (i) the
issuance of equity or incurrence of debt by Charter and its
subsidiaries, with certain exceptions, and (ii) certain
asset sales (to the extent not used for other purposes permitted
under the Bridge Loan).
In August 2005, CCO Holdings issued $300 million in debt
securities, the proceeds of which were used for general
corporate purposes, including the payment of distributions to
its parent companies, including Charter Holdings, to pay
interest expense.
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
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.
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
In March 2005, CCO Holdings 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
nine months ended September 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 as of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004
primarily represents preferred membership interests in
CC VIII, LLC (CC VIII), an indirect subsidiary
of CCO Holdings, of $665 million and $656 million,
respectively. As more fully described in Note 18, 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 was
the subject of a dispute between Charter and Mr. Allen,
Charters Chairman and controlling shareholder that was
settled October 31, 2005. The Company is currently
determining the impact of the settlement to be recorded in the
fourth quarter of 2005. Due to the uncertainties that existed
prior to October 31, 2005 related to the ultimate
resolution of the dispute, 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 was determinable or
other events occurred. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2005, the Companys results include
income of $8 million and $25 million, respectively,
attributable to CC VIII.
F-58
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 September 30,
2005 and 2004 was $98 million and $3.3 billion,
respectively, and was $224 million and $3.3 billion
for the nine months ended September 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.
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
September 30, 2005 and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative
instruments and hedging activities includes gains of
$1 million and $1 million, respectively, and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, net gain
(loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes
gains of $2 million and $3 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
September 30, 2005 and 2004, a gain of $5 million and
$2 million, respectively, and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004, a gain of $14 million and
$31 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 September 30, 2005 and 2004, net
gain (loss) on derivative
F-59
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
instruments and hedging activities includes gains of
$16 million and losses of $9 million, respectively,
and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004,
net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities
includes gains of $41 million and $45 million,
respectively, for interest rate derivative instruments not
designated as hedges.
As of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the
Company had outstanding $2.1 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.
Revenues consist of the following for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Video
|
|
$ |
848 |
|
|
$ |
839 |
|
|
$ |
2,551 |
|
|
$ |
2,534 |
|
High-speed Internet
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Commercial
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
Other
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,318 |
|
|
$ |
1,248 |
|
|
$ |
3,912 |
|
|
$ |
3,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses consist of the following for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Programming
|
|
$ |
357 |
|
|
$ |
328 |
|
|
$ |
1,066 |
|
|
$ |
991 |
|
Service
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
489 |
|
Advertising sales
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
586 |
|
|
$ |
525 |
|
|
$ |
1,714 |
|
|
$ |
1,552 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-60
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
12. Selling, General and
Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the
following for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months | |
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
General and administrative
|
|
$ |
231 |
|
|
$ |
220 |
|
|
$ |
658 |
|
|
$ |
636 |
|
Marketing
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
269 |
|
|
$ |
252 |
|
|
$ |
762 |
|
|
$ |
735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Components of selling expense are included in general and
administrative and marketing expense.
|
|
13. |
Hurricane Asset Retirement Loss |
Certain of the Companys cable systems in Louisiana
suffered significant plant damage as a result of hurricanes
Katrina and Rita. Based on preliminary evaluations, the Company
wrote off $19 million of its plants net book value.
Insignificant amounts of other expenses were recorded related to
hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
The Company has insurance coverage for both property and
business interruption. The Company has not recorded any
potential insurance recoveries as it is still assessing the
damage of its plant and the extent of insurance coverage.
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 | |
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Beginning Balance
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
Special Charges
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Payments
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30,
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2005,
special charges also included $1 million related to legal
settlements. For the nine months ended September 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 16).
For the nine months ended September 30, 2004, special
charges also includes 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
F-61
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
costs related to the tentative settlement of the South Carolina
national class action suit, which were approved by the
respective courts. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2004, the severance costs were offset by
$3 million received from a third party in settlement of a
dispute.
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 September 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 nine months ended September 30, 2005,
the Company recorded $2 million and $10 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. During
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004, the
Company recorded $61 million and $57 million of income
tax benefit, respectively. The Company recorded the portion of
the income tax benefit associated with the adoption of
Topic D-108 as a
$16 million reduction of the cumulative effect of
accounting change on the accompanying statement of operations
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004. The
income tax benefits were realized as a result of decreases in
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, 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.
|
|
|
Securities Class Actions and Derivative Suits |
Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the
Federal Class Actions) were filed in 2002
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
F-62
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
Class Action. These parties subsequently entered into
Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005
(described more fully below) that 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. 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. At the end of September 2005,
Stipulations of Dismissal were filed with the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals resulting in the dismissal of both appeals with
prejudice. Procedurally therefore, the settlements are final.
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 as 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
F-63
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
having an aggregate value of $5 million; however, by
agreement with its carrier, Charter 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 was held in escrow pending resolution
of the appeals. Those appeals are now resolved. On July 14,
2005, the Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis dismissed
with prejudice the State Derivative Actions. The claims
administrator is responsible for disbursing the settlement
consideration.
As part of the settlements, Charter committed to a variety of
corporate governance changes, internal practices and public
disclosures, all 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 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 were 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. 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.
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.
F-64
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
|
|
17. |
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 the Company.
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 | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(103 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,261 |
) |
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,307 |
) |
Add back stock-based compensation expense related to stock
options included in reported net loss
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Less employee stock-based compensation expense determined under
fair value based method for all employee stock option awards
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
Effects of unvested options in stock option exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
(103 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,259 |
) |
|
$ |
(239 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,262 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
F-65
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 $2 million and
$8 million during the three and nine months ended
September 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 and the Company recognized approximately
$1 million during the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2005.
|
|
18. |
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.
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
F-66
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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, indirectly
through a company controlled by him, Charter Investment, Inc.
(CII), became the holder of the CC VIII
interest. Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in the
next paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter has been
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, an indirect subsidiary of Charter
(CC V), and Mr. Allen in proportion to
CC Vs 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 arose 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 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 contract reformation
were 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.
F-67
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
Mr. Allen disagreed with the Special Committees
determinations described above and so notified the Special
Committee. Mr. Allen contended that the transaction was
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 evaluated what further actions or processes to
undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further
deliberation, each party agreed to refrain from initiating legal
proceedings over this matter until it had given at least ten
days prior notice to the other. In addition, the Special
Committee and Mr. Allen 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.
As of October 31, 2005, Mr. Allen, the Special
Committee, Charter, Charter Holdco and certain of their
affiliates, having investigated the facts and circumstances
relating to the dispute involving the CC VIII interest,
after consultation with counsel and other advisors, and as a
result of the Delaware Chancery Courts non-binding
mediation program, agreed to settle the dispute, and execute
certain permanent and irrevocable releases pursuant to the
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release agreement dated
October 31, 2005 (the Settlement).
Pursuant to the Settlement, CII has retained 30% of its
CC VIII interest (the Remaining Interests). The
Remaining Interests are subject to certain drag along, tag along
and transfer restrictions as detailed in the revised
CC VIII Limited Liability Company Agreement. CII
transferred the other 70% of the CC VIII interest directly and
indirectly, through Charter Holdco, to a newly formed entity,
CCHC (a direct subsidiary of Charter Holdco and the direct
parent of Charter Holdings). Of that other 70% of the
CC VIII preferred interests, 7.4% has been transferred by
CII for a subordinated exchangeable note of CCHC with an initial
accreted value of $48.2 million, accreting at 14%,
compounded quarterly, with a
15-year maturity (the
Note). The remaining 62.6% has been transferred for
no consideration.
As part of the Settlement, CC VIII issued approximately
49 million additional Class B units to CC V in
consideration for prior capital contributions to CC VIII by
CC V, with respect to transactions that were unrelated to
the dispute in connection with CIIs membership units in
CC VIII. As a result, Mr. Allens pro rata share
of the profits and losses of CC VIII attributable to the
Remaining Interests is approximately 5.6%.
The Note is exchangeable, at CIIs option, at any time, for
Charter Holdco Class A Common units at a rate equal to then
accreted value, divided by $2.00 (the Exchange
Rate). Customary anti-dilution protections have been
provided that could cause future changes to the Exchange Rate.
Additionally, the Charter Holdco Class A Common units
received will be exchangeable by the holder into Charter common
stock in accordance with existing agreements between CII,
Charter and certain other parties signatory thereto. Beginning
three years and four months after the closing of the Settlement,
if the closing price of Charter common stock is at or above the
Exchange Rate for a certain period of time as specified in the
Exchange Agreement, Charter Holdco may require the exchange of
the Note for Charter Holdco Class A Common units at the
Exchange Rate.
CCHC has the right to redeem the Note under certain
circumstances, for cash in an amount equal to the then accreted
value. CCHC must redeem the Note at its maturity for cash in an
amount equal to the initial stated value plus the accreted
return through maturity.
The Board of Directors has determined that the transferred
CC VIII interests remain at CCHC.
F-68
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004, the Company recognized
approximately $0.3 million and $1 million,
respectively, of the Vulcan Programming payment as an offset to
programming expense. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2005, the Company paid approximately
$1 million and $2 million, respectively, and for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2004, the Company
paid approximately $0.5 million and $1 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.
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 Mr. 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
F-69
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
$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 $2 million for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively, and
$1 million and $2 million for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2004, respectively, for
customized 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
F-70
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
$1 million in license and maintenance fees for each of the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2005.
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 $7 million and $9 million for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively, and
$0.2 million for each of the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2004 in capital purchases under this
agreement.
In late 2003, Microsoft sued 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.
In October 2005, Charter Holdco and Digeo Interactive entered
into a binding Term Sheet for the test market deployment of the
Moxi Entertainment Applications Pack (MEAP). The
MEAP is an addition to the Moxi Client Software and will contain
ten games (such as Video Poker and Blackjack), a photo
application and jukebox application. The term sheet is limited
to a test market application of approximately 14,000 subscribers
and the aggregate value is not expected to exceed
$0.1 million. In the event the test market proves
successful, the companies will replace the Term Sheet with a
long form agreement including a planned roll-out across
additional markets. The Term Sheet expires on May 1, 2006.
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 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) 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
F-71
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005, the Company paid Oxygen approximately
$2 million and $7 million, respectively, and for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2004, the Company
paid Oxygen approximately $3 million and $11 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and $0.4 million and
$1 million for the three and nine months ended
September 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2005, the Company recorded approximately
$2 million as a reduction of programming expense and for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004, the
Company recorded approximately $3 million and
$11 million as a reduction of programming expense,
respectively. The carrying value of the Companys
investment in Oxygen was approximately $33 million and
$32 million as of September 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 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.
F-72
CCO HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(dollars in millions, except where indicated)
As of September 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. Mr. Nathanson has an indirect beneficial
interest of less than 1% in Oxygen.
In 1999, the Company 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 had the right to
sell any or all of the interest to Mr. Allen prior to its
mandatory redemption in cash on July 30, 2009. 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 remained subject to the put to
Mr. Allen. Such preferred interest was recorded in other
long-term liabilities as of September 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004. On October 6, 2005, Charter
Helicon, LLC redeemed all of the preferred membership interest
for the redemption price of $25 million plus accrued
interest.
F-73