form10k.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
Form
10-K
(Mark
One)
|
x
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2007
|
OR
|
¨
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM _______________ TO
________________.
|
Commission
file number: 0-26176
DISH
Network Corporation
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Nevada
|
|
88-0336997
|
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9601
South Meridian Boulevard
|
|
|
|
|
Englewood,
Colorado
|
|
80112
|
|
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip
Code)
|
|
Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code: (303) 723-1000
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title
of Each Class
|
|
Name
of Exchange on Which Registered
|
Class
A common stock, $0.01 par value
|
|
The
Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act: None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No
¨
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section
15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes x No
¨
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of
“accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large
accelerated filer x Accelerated
filer ¨ Non-accelerated
filer ¨ Smaller
reporting company ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No
x
As of
June 29, 2007, the aggregate market value of Class A common stock held by
non-affiliates of the Registrant was $8.8 billion based upon the closing price
of the Class A common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market as of
the close of business on that date.
As of
February 19, 2008, the Registrant’s outstanding common stock consisted of
210,137,548 shares of Class A common stock and 238,435,208 shares of Class B
common stock, each $0.01 par value.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The
following documents are incorporated into this Form 10-K by
reference:
Portions
of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with
its 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part
III.
PART
I
|
Disclosure
regarding forward-looking statements
|
i
|
Item
1.
|
|
1
|
Item
1A.
|
|
19
|
Item
1B.
|
|
30
|
Item
2.
|
|
31
|
Item
3.
|
|
32
|
Item
4.
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
PART
II
|
|
|
|
Item
5.
|
|
36
|
Item
6.
|
|
37
|
Item
7.
|
|
39
|
Item
7A.
|
|
65
|
Item
8.
|
|
67
|
Item
9.
|
|
67
|
Item
9A.
|
|
67
|
Item
9B.
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
III
|
|
|
|
Item
10.
|
|
70
|
Item
11.
|
|
70
|
Item
12.
|
|
70
|
Item
13.
|
|
70
|
Item
14.
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
PART
IV
|
|
|
|
Item
15.
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
F-1
|
DISCLOSURE
REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
We make
“forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 throughout this report. Whenever you
read a statement that is not simply a statement of historical fact (such as when
we describe what we “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect” or
“anticipate” will occur and other similar statements), you must remember that
our expectations may not be correct, even though we believe they are
reasonable. We do not guarantee that any future transactions or
events described herein will happen as described or that they will happen at
all. You should read this report completely and with the
understanding that actual future results may be materially different from what
we expect. Whether actual events or results will conform to our
expectations and predictions is subject to a number of risks and
uncertainties. For further discussion see Item 1A. Risk
Factors. The risks and uncertainties include, but are not
limited to, the following:
|
·
|
we
face intense and increasing competition from satellite and cable
television providers as well as new competitors, including telephone
companies; our competitors are increasingly offering video service bundled
with 2-way high-speed Internet access and telephone
services that consumers may find attractive and which are likely to
further increase competition. We also expect to face increasing
competition from content and other providers who distribute video services
directly to consumers over the
Internet;
|
|
·
|
as
technology changes, and in order to remain competitive, we will have to
upgrade or replace some, or all, subscriber equipment periodically and
make substantial investments in our infrastructure. For
example, the increase in demand for high definition (“HD”) programming
requires not only upgrades to customer premises equipment but also
substantial increases in satellite capacity. We may not be able
to pass on to our customers the entire cost of these upgrades and there
can be no assurance that we will be able to effectively compete with the
HD programming offerings of our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
we
rely on EchoStar Corporation (“EchoStar”), which was owned by us prior to
its separation from DISH Network (the “Spin-off”) described in this Annual
Report, to design and develop set-top boxes and other digital equipment
for us. Equipment costs may increase beyond our current
expectations; we may be unable to renew agreements on acceptable terms or
at all; EchoStar’s inability to develop and produce or our inability to
obtain equipment with the latest technology could affect our subscriber
acquisition and churn and cause related revenue to
decline;
|
|
·
|
DISH
Network® subscriber growth may decrease and subscriber turnover may
increase, which may occur for a variety of factors, including some, such
as worsening economic conditions, that are outside of our control and
others, such as our own operational inefficiencies, customer satisfaction
with our products and services including our customer service performance,
and our spending on promotional packages for new and existing subscribers,
that will require us to invest in additional resources in order to
overcome;
|
|
·
|
subscriber
acquisition costs may increase and the competitive environment may require
us to increase promotional spending or accept lower subscriber
acquisitions and higher subscriber churn; we may also have difficulty
controlling other costs of continuing to maintain and grow our subscriber
base;
|
|
·
|
satellite
programming signals are subject to theft; and we are vulnerable to
subscriber fraud; theft of service will continue and could increase in the
future, causing us to lose subscribers and revenue, and also resulting in
higher costs to us;
|
|
·
|
we
depend on others to produce programming; programming costs may increase
beyond our current expectations; we may be unable to obtain or renew
programming agreements on acceptable terms or at all; existing programming
agreements could be subject to cancellation; we may be denied access to
sports programming; foreign programming is increasingly offered on other
platforms; our inability to obtain or renew attractive programming could
cause our subscriber additions and related revenue to decline and could
cause our subscriber turnover to
increase;
|
|
·
|
Current
dislocations in the credit markets, which have significantly impacted the
availability and pricing of financing, particularly in the high yield debt
and leveraged credit markets, may significantly constrain our ability to
obtain financing to support our growth initiatives. Such
financing may not be available on terms that would be attractive to us or
at all;
|
|
·
|
we
depend on Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) program access rules
and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as Amended to secure
nondiscriminatory access to programming produced by others, neither of
which assure that we have fair access to all programming that we need to
remain competitive;
|
|
·
|
our
industry is heavily regulated by the FCC. Those regulations
could become more burdensome at any time, causing us to expend additional
resources on compliance;
|
|
·
|
if
we are unsuccessful in subsequent appeals in the Tivo case or in defending
against claims that our alternate technology infringes Tivo’s patent,
we could be prohibited from distributing DVRs or be required to modify or
eliminate certain user-friendly DVR features that we currently offer to
consumers. The adverse affect on our business could be
material. We could also have to pay substantial additional
damages.
|
|
·
|
if
our EchoStar X satellite experienced a significant failure, we could lose
the ability to deliver local network channels in many markets; if either
of our EchoStar VII or the EchoStar VIII satellite experienced a
significant failure, we could lose the ability to provide certain
programming to the continental United
States;
|
|
·
|
our
satellite launches may be delayed or fail, or our owned or leased
satellites may fail in orbit prior to the end of their scheduled lives
causing extended interruptions of some of the channels we
offer;
|
|
·
|
we
currently do not have commercial insurance covering losses incurred from
the failure of satellite launches and/or in-orbit satellites we own or
lease from EchoStar;
|
|
·
|
service
interruptions arising from technical anomalies on satellites or on-ground
components of our direct broadcast satellite system, or caused by war,
terrorist activities or natural disasters, may cause customer
cancellations or otherwise harm our
business;
|
|
·
|
we
depend heavily on complex information technologies; weaknesses in our
information technology systems could have an adverse impact on our
business; we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified
personnel to maintain our information technology
infrastructure;
|
|
·
|
we
may face actual or perceived conflicts of interest with EchoStar in a
number of areas relating to our past and ongoing relationships,
including: (i) cross officerships, directorships and stock
ownership, (ii) intercompany transactions, and (iii) intercompany
agreements, including those that were entered into in connection with the
Spin-Off and (iv) future business
opportunities;
|
|
·
|
we
rely on key personnel including Charles W. Ergen, our chairman and chief
executive officer, and other executives, certain of whom will for some
period also have responsibilities with EchoStar through their positions at
EchoStar or our management services agreement with
EchoStar;
|
|
·
|
we
may be unable to obtain needed retransmission consents, FCC authorizations
or export licenses, and we may lose our current or future
authorizations;
|
|
·
|
we
are party to various lawsuits which, if adversely decided, could have a
significant adverse impact on our
business;
|
|
·
|
we
may be unable to obtain patent licenses from holders of intellectual
property or redesign our products to avoid patent
infringement;
|
|
·
|
we
depend on telecommunications providers, independent retailers and others
to solicit orders for DISH Network services. Certain of these
resellers account for a significant percentage of our total new subscriber
acquisitions. A number of these resellers are not exclusive to
us and also offer competitors’ products and services. Loss of
one or more of these relationships could have an adverse effect on our net
new subscriber additions and certain of our other key operating metrics
because we may not be able to develop comparable alternative distribution
channels;
|
|
·
|
we
are highly leveraged and subject to numerous constraints on our ability to
raise additional debt;
|
|
·
|
we
may pursue acquisitions, business combinations, strategic partnerships,
divestitures and other significant transactions that involve
uncertainties; these transactions may require us to raise additional
capital, which may not be available on acceptable terms. These
transactions, which could become substantial over time, involve a high
degree of risk and could expose us to significant financial losses if the
underlying ventures are not
successful;
|
|
·
|
weakness
in the global or U.S. economy may harm our business generally, and adverse
political or economic developments, including increased mortgage defaults
as a result of subprime lending practices and increasing oil prices, may
impact some of our markets;
|
|
·
|
we
periodically evaluate and test our internal control over financial
reporting in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Although our management concluded that our
internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31,
2007, and while no change in our internal control over financial reporting
occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting, if in the future we are unable to report
that our internal control over financial reporting is effective (or if our
auditors do not agree with our assessment of the effectiveness of, or are
unable to express an opinion on, our internal control over financial
reporting), we could lose investor confidence in our financial reports,
which could have a material adverse effect on our stock price and our
business; and
|
|
·
|
we
may face other risks described from time to time in periodic and current
reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”).
|
All
cautionary statements made herein should be read as being applicable to all
forward-looking statements wherever they appear. In this connection,
investors should consider the risks described herein and should not place undue
reliance on any forward-looking statements. We assume no
responsibility for updating forward-looking information contained or
incorporated by reference herein or in other reports we file with the
SEC.
In this
report, the words “DISH Network,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to
DISH Network Corporation and its subsidiaries, unless the context otherwise
requires. “EchoStar” refers to EchoStar Corporation and its
subsidiaries. “EDBS” refers to EchoStar DBS Corporation and its
subsidiaries.
PART
I
OVERVIEW
Our
Business
DISH
Network Corporation, formerly known as EchoStar Communications Corporation, is a
leading provider of satellite delivered digital television to customers across
the United States. DISH Network services include hundreds of video,
audio and data channels, interactive television channels, digital video
recording, high definition television, international programming, professional
installation and 24-hour customer service.
We
started offering subscription television services on the DISH Network in March
1996. As of December 31, 2007, we had approximately 13.780 million
subscribers. Our satellite fleet enables us to offer over 2,700 video
and audio channels to consumers across the United States. Since we
use many of these channels for local programming, no particular consumer could
subscribe to all channels, but all are available using small consumer satellite
antennae, or dishes. We promote the DISH Network programming packages
as providing our subscribers with a better “price-to-value” relationship than
those available from other subscription television providers. We
believe that there continues to be unsatisfied demand for high quality,
reasonably priced television programming services.
Our
principal business strategy is to continue developing our subscription
television service in the United States to provide consumers with a fully
competitive alternative to others in the pay TV industry.
On
January 1, 2008, we completed the Spin-off of our technology and certain
infrastructure assets into a separate publicly-traded company, EchoStar
Corporation, formerly known as EchoStar Holding Corporation, which was
incorporated in Nevada on October 12, 2007. DISH Network and EchoStar
now operate as separate publicly-traded companies, and neither entity has any
ownership interest in the other.
In
connection with the Spin-off, each of our shareholders received for each share
of common stock held, 0.20 of a share of the same class of common stock of
EchoStar. Also, in connection with the separation, DISH Network
contributed $1.0 billion in cash to EchoStar. EchoStar’s Class A
shares began trading on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on January 2, 2008,
under the symbol “SATS.”
Reasons
for the Spin-off
Our board
of directors regularly reviews our operations to ensure our resources are being
put to use in a manner that is in the best interests of DISH Network and its
shareholders. As a result of this ongoing evaluation, our board of
directors authorized the Spin-off. When doing so, our board
considered a number of benefits as well as a number of costs and risks
associated with the Spin-off. Among the significant benefits
identified by our board of directors were the ability to create more effective
management incentives and enhance the recruitment and retention of key
personnel, the creation of opportunities for expansion, creating separate
companies that appeal to different investor bases and allowing the separate
companies to pursue separate business strategies, and allowing each company to
pursue the business strategies that best suit their respective long-term
interests. The risks identified and evaluated included the potential
impact on credit ratings, the potential for disruptions and loss of synergies,
the risk that the Spin-off could result in lower combined trading prices of the
two companies and the risk that additional conflicts of interest may arise
between the two companies.
Other
Information
We were
organized in 1995 as a corporation under the laws of the State of
Nevada. Our common stock is publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global
Select Market under the symbol “DISH.” Our principal executive
offices are located at 9601 South Meridian Boulevard, Englewood, Colorado 80112
and our telephone number is (303) 723-1000.
DISH
NETWORK
Programming
Basic Programming
Packages. We use a
“value-based” strategy in structuring the content and pricing of programming
packages available from the DISH Network. For example, we currently
offer our “America’s Top 100” (“AT100”) package for $32.99 per
month. This package includes over 100 of our most popular digital
video and audio channels. We estimate that cable operators would
typically charge over $50.00 per month, on average, for comparable basic
service.
Our
“America’s Top 200” (“AT200”) package, which we currently offer for $44.99 per
month, is similar to an expanded basic cable package, and includes over 200 of
our most popular digital video and audio channels, including Sirius
Music Channels. We estimate that cable operators would typically
charge over $60.00 per month, on average, for a similar package. In
addition, most of our customers are eligible for a $49.99 per month package that
includes AT200, local channels and a digital video recorder
(“DVR”). We estimate that cable operators would typically charge over
$70.00 per month, on average, for a similar package.
Our
“America’s Top 250” (“AT250”) package, which we currently offer for $54.99 per
month, includes over 250 digital video and audio channels, and our
“America’s Everything Pak,” which combines our AT250 package and more than 30
commercial-free premium movie channels including HBO, Cinemax, Showtime and
Starz, is currently offered for $94.98 per month.
We offer
satellite-delivered local broadcast channels for an additional $5.00 per month,
when combined with qualifed programming, in over 175 markets in the United
States, representing over 97% of all of U.S. television
households. Cable operators typically include local channels in their
programming packages at no additional cost.
Movie
Packages. We offer HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, Starz and other
premium movie packages starting at $12.99 per month and including as many as 10
channels. We believe many of our movie packages are a better value
than similar packages offered by most other multi-channel video
providers.
High Definition
Programming Packages. DISH Network continues to be an industry
leader in HD programming distribution offering over 50
channels. Customers who subscribe to HBO, Showtime and Starz also
receive an HD feed of those channels at no additional cost. In
addition, we offer a standalone HD programming package which includes all of our
available HD channels. Similarly, customers who subscribe to standard
definition local channels also receive HD local channels, where
available. HD local channels are currently available to more than 50
percent of U.S. households and we expect to offer HD local channels to more than
80 percent of U.S. households by the end of 2008.
DISH Latino
Programming Packages. We offer a variety of Spanish-language
programming packages. Our “DISH Latino” package includes more than 35
Spanish-language programming channels for $27.99 per month. We also
offer “DISH Latino Dos,” which includes over 195 English and Spanish-language
programming channels for $39.99 per month. Our “DISH Latino Max”
package includes more than 220 Spanish and English-language channels for $49.99
per month. Additionally, subscribers may add more than 35
Spanish-language programming channels to any of our AT100, AT200 and AT250
packages for an additional $13.99 per month.
Family-Friendly
Programming Package. Our DishFAMILY package offers over 40
“family-friendly” channels including sports, news, children’s programming,
lifestyle, hobbies, shopping and public interest for $19.99 per month, or $24.99
including local channels. Comparatively, the family tier package
offered by most other pay TV providers is more than $30 per month.
International
Programming. We offer over 140 foreign-language channels
including Arabic, Portuguese, Hindi, Russian, Chinese, Greek and many
others. DISH Network remains the leader in delivering
foreign-language programming to customers in the United States, and our
foreign-language programming contributes significantly to our subscriber
growth. Foreign-language programming is a valuable niche product that
attracts new subscribers to DISH Network who are unable to get similar
programming elsewhere, and while this niche is becoming more competitive, we
will continue to explore opportunities to add foreign-language
programming.
DISH DVR
Advantage. We offer a number of packages that bundle
programming with a DVR at a ten to twelve percent savings per month compared to
the price a customer would pay if they subscribe to the components
individually.
Sales,
Marketing and Distribution
Sales
Channels. While we offer receiver systems and programming
directly, a majority of our new subscriber acquisitions are generated by
independent businesses offering our products and services, including small
satellite retailers, direct marketing groups, local and regional consumer
electronics stores, nationwide retailers, telecommunications providers and
others.
We
generally pay these independent businesses an incentive upon activation of each
new subscriber they acquire for us. We also typically pay them a
small monthly incentive for up to 60 months provided the customer continuously
subscribes to our programming and the retailer achieves required minimum
subscriber acquisition goals.
Marketing. We
use print, radio and television, on a local and national basis, to advertise and
promote the DISH Network. We also offer point-of-sale literature,
product displays, demonstration kiosks and signage for retail
outlets. We provide guides that describe DISH Network products and
services to our retailers and distributors and conduct periodic educational
seminars. Our mobile sales and marketing team visits retail outlets
regularly to reinforce training and ensure that these outlets have proper
point-of-sale materials for our current promotions. Additionally, we
dedicate a DISH Network television channel and websites to provide retailers and
customers with information about special services and promotions that we offer
from time to time.
Subscriber
Acquisition Strategy. Our future success in the subscription
television industry depends on, among other factors, our ability to acquire and
retain DISH Network subscribers. We provide varying levels of
subsidies and incentives to attract and retain customers, including leased, free
or subsidized receiver systems, installations, programming and other
items. This marketing strategy emphasizes our long-term business
strategy of maximizing future revenue by increasing our subscriber
base. Since we subsidize consumer up-front costs, we incur
significant costs each time we acquire a new subscriber. Although
there can be no assurance, we believe that, on average, we will be able to fully
recoup the up-front costs of subscriber acquisition from future subscription
television services revenue.
DISH
Network subscribers have the choice of purchasing or leasing the satellite
receiver and other equipment necessary to receive our programming. As
a result of our promotions, most of our new subscribers choose to lease their
equipment, including receiver models that provide HD, DVR, HD DVR and other
advanced capabilities for multiple rooms. Many of these lease
programs require the consumer to commit to continue to subscribe to a qualifying
programming package for 24 months. Subscribers in our lease programs
are required to return the receivers and certain other equipment to us or be
charged for the equipment if they terminate service. To the extent we
successfully retrieve and cost-effectively recondition and redeploy leased
equipment from subscribers who terminate service, we are able to reduce the cost
of future new subscriber acquisition. However, these cost savings are
limited as technological advances and consumer demand for new features result in
the need to replace older equipment for customers over time.
We base
our marketing promotions on, among other things, current competitive
conditions. In some cases, if competition increases, or we determine
for any other reason that it is necessary to increase our subscriber acquisition
costs to attract new customers, our profitability and costs of operation would
be adversely affected.
Bundling
Alliances
AT&T
Inc. (“AT&T”) and other telecommunications providers offer DISH Network
programming bundled with broadband, telephony and other
services. While these providers in the aggregate currently account
for less than 25% of our gross subscriber additions, the loss of certain of
these relationships could have an adverse effect on our new subscriber additions
to the extent other distribution channels could not be developed in those
markets. Our net new subscriber additions and certain of our other
key operating metrics could be adversely affected if AT&T or other
telecommunication providers de-emphasize or discontinue selling our services and
we are not able to develop comparable alternative distribution
channels. In addition, AT&T recently announced that they would
offer DISH Network programming bundled with broadband, telephony and other
services in the former BellSouth territory. We expect that this
expanded offering of DISH Network programming by AT&T will increase the
number of gross subscriber additions that are attributable to our relationship
with AT&T.
Components
of a DBS System
Overview. In order to
provide programming services to DISH Network subscribers, we have entered into
agreements with video, audio and data programmers who generally make their
programming content available to our digital broadcast operations centers via
commercial satellites or fiber optic networks. We monitor those
signals for quality, and can add promotional messages, public service
programming, advertising, and other information. Equipment at our
digital broadcast operations centers then digitizes, compresses, encrypts and
combines the signal with other necessary data, such as conditional access
information. We then “uplink” or transmit the signals to one or more
of our satellites and broadcast directly to DISH Network
subscribers.
In order
to receive DISH Network programming, a subscriber needs:
|
•
|
a
satellite antenna, which people sometimes refer to as a “dish,” and
related components;
|
|
•
|
a
satellite “receiver” or “set-top box”;
and
|
Receiver
Systems. Our receiver
systems include a small satellite dish, a digital satellite receiver that
decrypts and decompresses signals for television viewing, a remote control and
other related components. We offer a number of receiver
models. Our standard system comes with an infrared universal remote
control, an on-screen interactive program guide and V-chip type technology for
parental control. Our advanced models include a hard disk drive
enabling additional features such as digital video recording of up to 350 hours
of standard definition programming and up to 55 hours of high definition
entertainment and the flexibility to further increase storage capacity by
attaching an external hard drive. Certain of our standard and premium
systems allow independent satellite TV viewing on two separate televisions and
include UHF universal remotes, allowing control through walls when the satellite
receiver and TV are not located in the same room. We also offer a
variety of specialized products including HD receivers. Receivers
communicate with our authorization center through telephone lines to, among
other things, report the purchase of pay-per-view movies and other
events.
Although,
historically, we have internally designed and engineered our receiver systems,
we have out-sourced manufacturing to high-volume contract electronics
manufacturers. As a result of the Spin-off, we will rely on EchoStar
to design, manufacture and engineer our receivers. We intend to
procure all of our receiver systems (other than refurbished or remanufactured
systems) from EchoStar for the foreseeable future. The loss of
EchoStar as a supplier of receivers to us would materially impact our business
because it would be difficult for us to transition to another maker of receivers
without incurring substantial costs.
Conditional
Access System. Conditional
access technology allows us to encrypt our programming so only those who pay can
receive it. We use microchips embedded in credit card-sized access
cards, called “smart cards,” or in security chips in the satellite receiver,
together referred to as “security access devices,” to limit access to authorized
programming content. When a consumer orders a particular channel, we
send a message by satellite that instructs the security access devices to permit
decryption of the programming for viewing by that consumer. The
receiver then decompresses the programming and sends it to the consumer’s
television. These security access devices, certain aspects of which
we can upgrade over the air or replace periodically, are a key element in
preserving the security of our conditional access system.
Increases
in theft of our signal, or our competitors’ signals, could limit our subscriber
growth and cause subscriber churn to increase. Our signal encryption
has been compromised by theft of service, and even though we continue to respond
to compromises of our encryption system with security measures intended to make
signal theft of our programming more difficult, theft of our signal is
increasing. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in
reducing or controlling theft of our service.
During
2005, we replaced our smart cards in order to reduce theft of our
service. However, the smart card replacement did not fully secure our
system, and we have since implemented software patches and other security
measures to help protect our service. Nevertheless, these security
measures are short-term fixes and we remain susceptible to additional signal
theft. Therefore, we have developed a plan to replace our existing
smart cards and/or security chips to re-secure our signals for a longer term
which will be implemented later this year. The project is expected to
take approximately nine to twelve months to complete. While our
existing smart cards installed in 2005 remain under warranty, we could incur
operational costs in excess of $50 million in connection with our smart
card replacement program.
We are
also vulnerable to fraud, particularly in the acquisition of new
subscribers. While we are addressing the impact of subscriber fraud
through a number of actions, including eliminating certain payment options for
subscribers, such as the use of pre-paid debit cards, there can be no assurance
that we will not continue to experience fraud which could impact our subscriber
growth and churn.
Installation. While some
consumers have the skills necessary to install our equipment in their homes, we
believe that most installations are best performed by professionals, and that on
time, quality installations are important to our
success. Consequently, we are continuing to expand our installation
business. We use both employees and independent contractors for
professional installations. Independent installers are held to our
service standards to attempt to ensure each DISH Network customer receives the
same quality installation and service. Our offices and independent
installers are strategically located throughout the continental United
States. Although there can be no assurance, we believe that our
internal installation business helps to improve quality control, decrease wait
time on service calls and new installations and helps us better accommodate
anticipated subscriber growth.
Digital Broadcast
Operations Centers. The principal
digital broadcast operations centers we use are EchoStar’s facilities located in
Cheyenne, Wyoming and Gilbert, Arizona. We also use five regional
digital broadcast operations centers owned and operated by EchoStar that allow
us to utilize the spot beam capabilities of our owned or leased
satellites. Programming and other data is received at these centers
by fiber or satellite, processed, and then uplinked to satellites for
transmission to consumers. Equipment at the digital broadcast
operations centers performs substantially all compression and encryption of DISH
Network’s programming signals.
In
connection with the Spin-off we entered into a broadcast agreement with EchoStar
pursuant to which EchoStar provides broadcast services including teleport
services such as transmission and downlinking, channel origination services, and
channel management services to us thereby enabling us to deliver satellite
television programming to subscribers. The broadcast agreement has a
term of two years; however, we have the right, but not the obligation, to extend
the agreement annually for successive one-year periods for up to two additional
years. We may terminate channel origination services and channel
management services for any reason and without any liability upon sixty days
written notice to us. However, if we terminate teleport services for
a reason other than EchoStar’s breach, we will need to pay EchoStar a sum equal
to the aggregate amount of the remainder of the expected cost of providing the
teleport service. The fees for the services provided under the
broadcast agreement are cost plus an additional amount that is equal to an
agreed percentage of EchoStar’s cost, which will vary depending on the nature of
the services provided.
Customer Service
Centers. We currently
operate eleven owned and several out-sourced customer service centers fielding
most of our customer service calls. Potential and existing
subscribers can call a single telephone number to receive assistance for sales,
hardware, programming, billing, installation and technical
support. We continue to work to automate simple phone responses and
to increase Internet-based customer assistance in order to better manage
customer service costs and improve the customer’s self-service
experience.
Subscriber
Management. We presently
use, and are dependent on, CSG Systems International, Inc.’s software system for
the majority of DISH Network subscriber billing and related
functions.
NEW
BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES
Acquisition
of Spectrum for New Services
The FCC
announced on January 14, 2008 that we were qualified to participate in the FCC
auction of the 700 MHz band. The 700 MHz spectrum is being returned
by television broadcasters as they move to digital from analog signals in early
2009. The spectrum has significant commercial value because 700 MHz
signals can travel long distances and penetrate thick walls. Under
the FCC’s anti-collusion and anonymous bidding rules for this auction, we are
not permitted to disclose publicly our interest level or activity level in the
auction, if any, at this time. Based on published reports, however,
we believe that any successful bidders will be required to expend significant
amounts to secure and commercialize these licenses. In particular if
we were to participate and be successful in this auction we could be required to
raise additional capital in order to secure and commercialize these licenses,
which may not be available to us on attractive terms in the current credit
market environment. Moreover, there can be no assurance that
successful bidders will be able to achieve a return on their investments in the
700MHz spectrum or to raise all the capital required to develop these
licenses.
OUR
SATELLITES
Our DISH
Network satellite television programming is currently transmitted to our
customers over satellites that operate in the “Ku” band portion of the microwave
radio spectrum. The Ku-band is divided into two spectrum
segments. The high power portion of the Ku-band 12.2 to 12.7 GHz
is known as the Broadcast Satellite Service (“BSS”) band, which is also referred
to as the Direct Broadcast Satellite (“DBS”) band. The low and medium
power portion of the Ku-band 11.7 to 12.2 GHz is known as the Fixed
Satellite Service (“FSS”) band.
Most of
our direct-to-home (“DTH”) programming is currently delivered using DBS
satellites. We continue to explore opportunities to expand our
available DTH satellite capacity through the use of other available
spectrum. Increasing our available spectrum for DTH applications is
particularly important as more bandwidth intensive HD programming is produced
and in order to address new video and data applications consumers may desire in
the future.
Overview
of Satellite Fleet Following the Spin-off
Prior to
the Spin-off, we operated 14 satellites in geostationary orbit approximately
22,300 miles above the equator. Of these 14 satellites, 11 were owned
and three were leased. The satellite fleet is a major component of
our DISH Network DBS System. As reflected in the table below, as of
January 1, 2008, we transferred six owned and two leased satellites to EchoStar
in connection with the Spin-off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Degree
|
|
Useful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Launch
|
|
Orbital
|
|
Life/
|
|
Satellites
|
|
Retained
|
|
Transferred
(1)
|
|
Date
|
|
Location
|
|
Lease
Term
|
|
Owned:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EchoStarI
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
December
1995
|
|
148
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStarII
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
September
1996
|
|
148
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
III (2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
October
1997
|
|
61.5
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
IV
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
May
1998
|
|
77
|
|
N/A
|
|
EchoStar
V
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
September
1999
|
|
129
|
|
9
|
|
EchoStar
VI (2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
July
2000
|
|
110
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
VII
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
February
2002
|
|
119
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
VIII(2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
August
2002
|
|
110
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
IX (2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
August
2003
|
|
121
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
February
2006
|
|
110
|
|
12
|
|
EchoStar
XII (2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
July
2003
|
|
61.5
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMC-15
(2)
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
December
2004
|
|
105
|
|
10
|
|
AMC-16
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
January
2005
|
|
85
|
|
10
|
|
Anik
F3
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
April
2007
|
|
118.7
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under
Construction:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EchoStar
XI
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
Mid-Year
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
EchoStar
XIV
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
Late
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
CMBStar
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
Late
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMC-14
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
March
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ciel
2
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
Late
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
As
of January 1, 2008, these satellites were transferred to EchoStar in
connection with the Spin-off.
|
|
(2)
|
After
the Spin-off, DISH Network entered into satellite capacity agreements with
EchoStar to lease satellite capacity on EchoStar III, EchoStar VI,
EchoStar VIII, EchoStar IX, EchoStar XII and
AMC-15.
|
Satellite
Capacity Lease Agreements
In
addition to our owned satellites, we currently lease six in-orbit
satellites which are being used to provide, among other things, standard and HD
programming to certain local markets, international programming and backup
capacity.
Short
Term Leased Capacity
As part
of the transactions entered into between DISH Network and EchoStar in connection
with the Spin-off, we entered into satellite capacity agreements with EchoStar
to lease satellite capacity on satellites owned by EchoStar and slots licensed
by EchoStar. These satellites are as follows:
|
·
|
EchoStar III - launched
in 1997 and is currently located at the 61.5 degree orbital
location.
|
|
·
|
EchoStar VI - launched
in 2000 and is currently located at the 110 degree orbital
location.
|
|
·
|
EchoStar VIII -
launched in 2002 and is currently located at the 110 degree orbital
location.
|
|
·
|
EchoStar IX - launched
in 2003 and is currently located at the 121 degree orbital
location.
|
|
·
|
EchoStar XII - launched
in 2003 and is currently located at the 61.5 degree orbital
location.
|
|
·
|
AMC-15 - launched in 2004 and is currently located at
the 105 degree orbital
location.
|
Certain
DISH Network subscribers currently point their satellite antenna at these slots
and these agreements were designed to facilitate the separation of EchoStar
and us by allowing a period of time for these DISH Network subscribers to be
moved to satellites owned by DISH Network and/or to slots that will be licensed
to DISH Network following the Spin-off. However, we may decide to
continue leasing these satellites from EchoStar following the initial terms of
these agreements, if we determine that it is beneficial for us to do
so. The fees for the services provided under the satellite capacity
agreements are based on spot market prices for similar satellite capacity and
depend upon, among other things, the orbital location of the satellite and the
frequency on which the satellite provides services. Generally, these
satellite capacity agreements will terminate upon the earlier of:
(a) the end of life or replacement of the satellite; (b) the date the
satellite fails; (c) the date that the transponder on which service is being
provided under the agreement fails; and (d) two years from the January 1, 2008
execution date.
Long-Term Leased
Capacity
Anik
F3. Anik F3, an FSS satellite, was launched and commenced
commercial operation during April 2007. This Telesat Canada
(“Telesat”) satellite is equipped with 32 Ku-band transponders, 24 C-band
transponders and a small Ka-band payload. We have leased all of the
Ku-band capacity on Anik F3 for a period of 15 years.
Ciel
2. Ciel 2, a Canadian DBS satellite, which is currently
expected to be launched in late 2008 and commence commercial
operation at the 129 degree orbital location, has both spot beam capabilities
and the ability to provide service to the entire continental United States
(“CONUS”). We will have the right to lease at least 50% of the
capacity of that satellite, with the remaining 50% required by Canadian
regulations to be offered for use by Canadians until the time of launch of the
satellite. Consequently, until Ciel 2 is launched, we will not know
the exact amount of capacity available to us on that satellite. This
satellite could be used to provide HD programming to CONUS and as additional
backup capacity.
Satellites
under Construction
We have
also entered into contracts to construct two new satellites which are
contractually scheduled to be completed within the next three
years.
|
·
|
EchoStar
XI, a Space Systems/Loral, Inc. (“SSL”) DBS satellite, which is expected
to be launched mid-year 2008, will provide service to CONUS from the 110
degree orbital location. This satellite will enable better
bandwidth utilization, provide back-up protection for our existing
offerings, and could allow DISH Network to offer other value-added
services.
|
|
·
|
During
2007, we entered into a contract for the construction of EchoStar XIV, an
SSL DBS satellite, which is expected to be completed during
2009. This satellite has been designed with a combination of
CONUS and spot beam capacity and could be used at multiple orbital
locations. EchoStar XIV could allow DISH Network to offer other
value-added services.
|
Satellite
Anomalies
While we
believe that overall our satellite fleet is generally in good condition, during
2007 and prior periods, certain satellites in our fleet have experienced
anomalies, some of which have had a significant adverse impact on their
commercial operation. We currently do not carry insurance for any of
our owned in-orbit satellites. We believe we generally have in-orbit
satellite capacity sufficient to recover, in a relatively short time frame,
transmission of most of our critical programming in the event one of our
in-orbit satellites were to fail. We could not, however, recover
certain local markets, international and other niche programming in the event of
such a failure, with the extent of disruption dependent on the specific
satellite experiencing the failure. Further, programming continuity
cannot be assured in the event of multiple satellite losses. In
addition, as part of the Spin-off, we transferred EchoStar III, IV, VI, VIII, IX
and XII to EchoStar.
Recent
developments with respect to certain of these satellites, including the
satellites that we contributed to EchoStar as part of the Spin-off and that we
currently lease, are discussed below.
EchoStar
I. EchoStar I can operate up to 16 transponders at 130 watts
per channel. Prior to 2007, the satellite experienced anomalies
resulting in the possible loss of two solar array strings. An
investigation of the anomalies is continuing. The anomalies have not
impacted commercial operation of the satellite to date. Even if
permanent loss of the two solar array strings is confirmed, the original minimum
12-year design life of the satellite is not expected to be impacted since the
satellite is equipped with a total of 104 solar array strings, only
approximately 98 of which are required to assure full power availability for the
design life of the satellite. However, there can be no assurance
future anomalies will not cause further losses which could impact the remaining
life or commercial operation of the satellite.
EchoStar
II. EchoStar II can operate up to 16 transponders at 130 watts
per channel. During February 2007, the satellite experienced an
anomaly which prevented its north solar array from
rotating. Functionality was restored through a backup
system. The useful life of the satellite has not been affected and
the anomaly is not expected to result in the loss of power to the
satellite. However, if the backup system fails, a partial loss of
power would result which could impact the useful life or commercial operation of
the satellite.
EchoStar
III. EchoStar III was originally designed to operate a maximum
of 32 transponders at approximately 120 watts per channel, switchable to 16
transponders operating at over 230 watts per channel, and was equipped with a
total of 44 transponders to provide redundancy. As a result of past
traveling wave tube amplifier (“TWTA”) failures on EchoStar III, TWTA anomalies
caused 26 transponders to fail leaving a maximum of 18 transponders currently
available for use. Due to redundancy switching limitations and
specific channel authorizations, we can only operate on 15 of the 19 FCC
authorized frequencies allocated to EchoStar III at the 61.5 degree
location. While we do not expect a large number of additional TWTAs
to fail in any year, and the failures have not reduced the original minimum
12-year design life of the satellite, it is likely that additional TWTA failures
will occur from time to time in the future, and those failures will further
impact commercial operation of the satellite.
EchoStar
V. EchoStar V was originally designed with a minimum 12-year
design life. Momentum wheel failures in prior years, together with
relocation of the satellite between orbital locations, resulted in increased
fuel consumption, as previously disclosed. These issues have not
impacted commercial operation of the satellite. However, as a result
of these anomalies and the relocation of the satellite, during 2005, we reduced
the remaining estimated useful life of this satellite. Prior to 2007,
EchoStar V also experienced anomalies resulting in the loss of seven solar array
strings. During 2007, the satellite lost three additional solar array
strings, one in June and two in October. The solar array anomalies
have not impacted commercial operation of the satellite to
date. Since EchoStar V will be fully depreciated in October 2008, the
solar array failures (which will result in a reduction in the number of
transponders to which power can be provided in later years), have not reduced
the remaining useful life of the satellite. However, there can be no
assurance that future anomalies will not cause further losses which could impact
commercial operation, or the remaining life, of the satellite.
EchoStar
VI. EchoStar VI, which is being used as an in-orbit spare, was
originally equipped with 108 solar array strings, approximately 102 of which are
required to assure full power availability for the original minimum 12-year
useful life of the satellite. Prior to 2007, EchoStar VI experienced
anomalies resulting in the loss of 17 solar array strings. During the
fourth quarter 2007, five additional solar array strings failed, reducing the
number of functional solar array strings to 86. While the useful life
of the satellite has not been affected, commercial operability has been
reduced. The satellite was designed to operate 32 transponders at
approximately 125 watts per channel, switchable to 16 transponders operating at
approximately 225 watts per channel. The power reduction resulting
from the solar array failures which currently limits us to operation of a
maximum of 26 transponders in standard power mode, or 13 transponders in high
power mode, is expected to decrease to 25 and 12, respectively, by September
2008. The number of transponders to which power can be provided is
expected to continue to decline in the future at the rate of approximately one
transponder every three years.
EchoStar
VII. During 2006, EchoStar VII experienced an anomaly which
resulted in the loss of a receiver. Service was quickly restored
through a spare receiver. These receivers process signals sent from
our uplink center for transmission back to earth by the
satellite. The design life of the satellite has not been affected and
the anomaly is not expected to result in the loss of other receivers on the
satellite. However, there can be no assurance future anomalies will
not cause further receiver losses which could impact the useful life or
commercial operation of the satellite. In the event the spare
receiver placed in operation following the 2006 anomaly also fails, there would
be no impact to the satellite’s CONUS capabilities when operating in CONUS
mode. However, we would lose one-fifth of the spot beam capacity when
operating in spot beam mode.
EchoStar
VIII. EchoStar VIII was designed to operate 32 transponders at
approximately 120 watts per channel, switchable to 16 transponders operating at
approximately 240 watts per channel. EchoStar VIII also includes
spot-beam technology. This satellite has experienced several
anomalies since launch, but none have reduced the 12-year estimated useful life
of the satellite. However, there can be no assurance that future
anomalies will not cause further losses which could materially impact its
commercial operation, or result in a total loss of the satellite. We
depend on leased capacity on EchoStar VIII to provide service to CONUS at least
until such time as our EchoStar XI satellite has commenced commercial operation,
which is currently expected mid-year 2008. In the event that EchoStar VIII
experienced a total or substantial failure, we could transmit many, but not all,
of those channels from other in-orbit satellites.
EchoStar
IX. EchoStar IX was designed to operate 32 FSS transponders
operating at approximately 110 watts per channel, along with transponders that
can provide services in the Ka-Band (a “Ka-band payload”). The
satellite also includes a C-band payload which is owned by a third
party. Prior to 2007, EchoStar IX experienced the loss of one of its
three momentum wheels, two of which are utilized during normal
operations. A spare wheel was switched in at the time and the loss
did not reduce the 12-year estimated useful life of the
satellite. During September 2007, the satellite experienced anomalies
resulting in the loss of three solar array strings. An investigation
of the anomalies is continuing. The anomalies have not impacted
commercial operation of the satellite to date. However, there can be
no assurance future anomalies will not cause further losses, which could impact
the remaining life or commercial operation of the satellite.
EchoStar
X. EchoStar X’s 49 spot beams use up to 42 active 140 watt
TWTAs to provide standard and HD local channels and other programming to markets
across the United States. During January 2008, the satellite
experienced an anomaly which resulted in the failure of one solar array circuit
out of a total of 24 solar array circuits, approximately 22 of which are
required to assure full power for the original minimum 12-year design life of
the satellite. The cause of the failure is still being
investigated. The design life of the satellite has not been
affected. However, there can be no assurance future anomalies will
not cause further losses, which could impact commercial operation of the
satellite or its useful life. In the event our EchoStar X satellite
experienced a significant failure, we would lose the ability to deliver local
network channels in many markets. While we would attempt to minimize
the number of lost markets through the use of spare satellites and programming
line up changes, some markets would be without local channels until a
replacement satellite with similar spot beam capability could be launched and
operational.
EchoStar
XII. EchoStar XII was designed to operate 13 transponders at
270 watts per channel in CONUS mode, or 22 spot beams using a combination of 135
and 65 watt TWTAs. We currently operate the satellite in CONUS
mode. EchoStar XII has a total of 24 solar array circuits,
approximately 22 of which are required to assure full power for the original
minimum 12-year design life of the satellite. Since late 2004, eight
solar array circuits on EchoStar XII have experienced anomalous behavior
resulting in both temporary and permanent solar array circuit
failures. The cause of the failures is still being
investigated. The design life of the satellite has not been
affected. However, these temporary and permanent failures have
resulted in a reduction in power to the satellite which will preclude us from
using the full complement of transponders on EchoStar XII for the 12-year design
life of the satellite. The extent of this impact is being
investigated. There can be no assurance future anomalies will not
cause further losses, which could further impact commercial operation of the
satellite or its useful life.
Competition
in the Subscription Television Business
We
compete in the subscription television service industry against other DBS
television providers, cable television and other system operators offering
video, audio and data programming and entertainment services. We
compete with these providers and operators on a number of fronts, including
programming, price, ancillary features and services such as availability and
quality of receiver, HD programming, VOD services, DVR functionality and
customer services, as well as subscriber acquisition and retention programs and
promotions. Many of our competitors have substantially greater
financial, marketing and other resources than we have. Our earnings
and other operating metrics could be materially and adversely affected if we are
unable to compete successfully with these and other new providers of
multi-channel video programming services.
Cable
Television. Cable
television operators have a large, established customer base, and many cable
operators have made significant investments in programming. Cable
television operators continue to leverage their incumbency advantages relative
to satellite operators by, among other things, bundling their video service with
2-way high speed Internet access and telephone services. Cable
television operators are also able to provide local and other programming in a
larger number of geographic areas. As a result of these and
other factors, we may not be able to continue to expand our subscriber base or
compete effectively against cable television operators.
Some
digital cable platforms currently offer a video on demand (“VOD”) service that
enables subscribers to choose from a library of programming selections for
viewing at their convenience. We are continuing to develop our own
VOD service experience through automatic video downloads to hard drives in
certain of our satellite receivers, the inclusion of broadband connectivity
components in certain of our satellite receivers, and other
technologies. There can be no assurance that our VOD services will
successfully compare with offerings from other video providers.
DBS and Other
Direct-to-Home System Operators. News Corporation
owns an approximately 40% controlling interest in the DirecTV Group, Inc.
(“DirecTV”). In December 2006, Liberty Media Corporation (“Liberty”)
agreed to exchange its 16.3% stake in News Corporation for News Corporation’s
stake in DirecTV, together with regional sports networks in Denver, Pittsburg
and Seattle. Although the deal is currently delayed by regulatory
approvals, it is expected to be completed in 2008. News Corporation
and Liberty each have ownership interests in diverse world-wide programming
content and other related businesses. These assets provide
competitive advantages to DirecTV with respect to the acquisition of
programming, content and other valuable business opportunities.
In
addition, DirecTV’s satellite receivers and services are offered through a
significantly greater number of consumer electronics stores than
ours. As a result of this and other factors, our services are less
well known to consumers than those of DirecTV. Due to this relative
lack of consumer awareness and other factors, we are at a competitive marketing
disadvantage compared to DirecTV. DirecTV also offers exclusive
programming that may be attractive to prospective subscribers, and may have
access to discounts on programming not available to us. DirecTV
launched a satellite in July 2007 with plans to launch another satellite in
early 2008 in order to offer local and national programming in HD to most of the
U.S. population. Although we have launched our own HD initiatives, if
DirecTV fully implements these plans, it may have an additional competitive
advantage.
New
entrants in the subscription satellite services business may also have a
competitive advantage over us in deploying some new products and technologies
because of the substantial costs we may be required to incur to make new
products or technologies available across our installed base of over 13.780
million subscribers.
VHF/UHF
Broadcasters. Most areas of
the United States can receive between three and 10 free over-the-air broadcast
channels, including local content most consumers consider
important. The FCC has allocated additional digital spectrum to these
broadcasters, which can be used to transmit multiple additional programming
channels. Our business could be adversely affected by increased program
offerings by traditional over-the-air broadcasters.
New
Technologies and
Competitors. New technologies could also have an adverse
effect on the demand for our DBS services. For example, we face an
increasingly significant competitive threat from the build-out of advanced fiber
optic networks by companies such as Verizon Communications, Inc. (“Verizon”) and
AT&T that allows them to offer video services bundled with traditional phone
and high speed Internet directly to millions of homes. In addition,
telephone companies and other entities are implementing and supporting digital
video compression over existing telephone lines which may allow them to offer
video services without having to build new infrastructure. We also
expect to face increasing competition from content and other providers who
distribute video services directly to consumers over the Internet.
With the
large increase in the number of consumers with broadband service, a significant
amount of video content has become available on the Internet for users to
download and view on their personal computers and other devices. In
addition, there are several initiatives by companies to make it easier to view
Internet-based video on television and personal computer screens. We
also could face competition from content and other providers who distribute
video services directly to consumers via digital air waves.
Mergers,
joint ventures, and alliances among franchise, wireless or private cable
television operators, telephone companies and others also may result in
providers capable of offering television services in competition with
us.
Impact of High
Definition TV. We believe that the availability and extent of
HD programming has become and will continue to be a significant factor in
consumer’s choice among multi-channel video providers. Although we
believe we currently offer consumers a compelling amount of HD programming
content, other multi-channel video providers may have more successfully marketed
and promoted their HD programming packages and may also be better equipped to
increase their HD offerings to respond to increasing consumer demand for this
content. For example, cable companies are able to offer local network
channels in HD in more markets than we can, and DirecTV could offer over 150
channels of HD programming by satellite in the near future. We could
be further disadvantaged to the extent a significant number of local
broadcasters begin offering local channels in HD because we will not initially
be in a position to offer local networks in HD in all of the markets that we
serve. We may be required to make substantial additional investments
in infrastructure to respond to competitive pressure to deliver additional HD
programming, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to compete
effectively with HD program offerings from other video providers.
Subscriber
Promotions. In addition to leasing receivers to subscribers,
we generally subsidize installation and all or a part of the cost of the
receivers as an incentive to attract subscribers. We may also from
time to time offer promotional pricing for programming and/or other services we
offer in order to attract subscribers. We also incur costs to retain
existing subscribers by, among other things, offering subsidized upgraded or
add-on equipment. Our cost to acquire subscribers through these
various programs may vary significantly from period to period and may also
materially affect our results of operations. The level of these
efforts (and consequent costs) may also significantly affect our subscriber
churn and subscriber additions from period to period, as market perceptions of
the relative merits of our promotions versus those offered by our competitors
may affect not only the purchase decisions of new subscribers, but also the
willingness of existing subscribers to change providers. We may from
time to time face competitive situations in which we would be required to
increase subscriber acquisition or retention costs to unacceptable levels in
order to attract new subscribers or forestall an increase in subscriber
churn. In those circumstances, we may decide to focus on maintaining
our financial performance and not seek to acquire or retain those marginal
subscribers.
GOVERNMENT
REGULATIONS
We are
subject to comprehensive regulation by the FCC for our domestic
operations. We are also regulated by other federal agencies, state
and local authorities and the International Telecommunication Union
(“ITU”). Depending upon the circumstances, noncompliance with
legislation or regulations promulgated by these entities could result in
suspension or revocation of our licenses or authorizations, the termination or
loss of contracts or the imposition of contractual damages, civil fines or
criminal penalties.
The
following summary of regulatory developments and legislation in the United
States is not intended to describe all present and proposed government
regulation and legislation affecting the video programming distribution
industry. Government regulations that are currently the subject of
judicial or administrative proceedings, legislative hearings or administrative
proposals could change our industry to varying degrees. We cannot
predict either the outcome of these proceedings or any potential impact they
might have on the industry or on our operations.
FCC
Regulation under the Communications Act
FCC Jurisdiction
over our Operations. The Communications Act gives the FCC broad
authority to regulate the operations of satellite
companies. Specifically, the Communications Act gives the FCC
regulatory jurisdiction over the following areas relating to communications
satellite operations:
|
·
|
the
assignment of satellite radio frequencies and orbital
locations;
|
|
·
|
licensing
of satellites, earth stations, the granting of related authorizations, and
evaluation of the fitness of a company to be a
licensee;
|
|
·
|
approval
for the relocation of satellites to different orbital locations or the
replacement of an existing satellite with a new
satellite;
|
|
·
|
ensuring
compliance with the terms and conditions of such assignments and
authorizations, including required timetables for construction and
operation of satellites and other due diligence
requirements;
|
|
·
|
avoiding
interference with other radio frequency emitters;
and
|
|
·
|
ensuring
compliance with other applicable provisions of the Communications Act and
FCC rules and regulations governing the operations of satellite
communications providers and multi-channel video
distributors.
|
In order
to obtain FCC satellite licenses and authorizations, satellite operators must
satisfy strict legal, technical and financial qualification
requirements. Once issued, these licenses and authorizations are
subject to a number of conditions including, among other things, satisfaction of
ongoing due diligence obligations, construction milestones, and various
reporting requirements.
Overview of Our
Satellites and FCC Authorizations. Our satellites
are located in orbital positions, or slots, that are designated by their western
longitude. An orbital position describes both a physical location and
an assignment of spectrum in the applicable frequency band. The FCC
has divided each DBS orbital position into 32 frequency
channels. Each transponder on our satellites typically exploits one
frequency channel. Through digital compression technology, we can
currently transmit between nine and 13 standard definition digital video
channels from each transponder. Several of our satellites also
include spot-beam technology which enables us to increase the number of markets
where we provide local channels, but reduces the number of video channels that
could otherwise be offered across the entire United States.
The FCC
has licensed us to operate a total of 82 DBS frequencies at the following
orbital locations:
|
·
|
21
frequencies at the 119 degree orbital location and 29 frequencies at the
110 degree orbital location, both capable of providing service to CONUS;
and
|
|
·
|
32
frequencies at the 148 degree orbital location, capable of providing
service to the Western United
States.
|
We
currently lease or have entered into agreements to lease capacity on satellites
at the following orbital locations:
|
·
|
500
MHz of Ku spectrum currently divided into 24 frequencies at the 118.7
degree orbital location, capable of providing service to CONUS, Alaska and
Hawaii; and
|
|
·
|
32 frequencies at a Canadian DBS
slot at the 129 degree orbital location, capable of providing service to
most of the United States.
|
We
currently broadcast the majority of our programming from the 110 and 119 degree
orbital locations. Almost all of our customers have satellite
receiver systems that are equipped to receive signals from both of these
locations.
Duration of our
DBS Satellite Licenses. Generally speaking, all of our
satellite licenses are subject to expiration unless renewed by the
FCC. The term of each of our DBS licenses is 10 years. Our
licenses are currently set to expire at various times. In addition,
our special temporary authorizations are granted for periods of only 180 days or
less, subject again to possible renewal by the FCC.
Opposition and
other Risks to our Licenses. Several third parties have
opposed, and we expect them to continue to oppose, some of our FCC satellite
authorizations and pending requests to the FCC for extensions, modifications,
waivers and approvals of our licenses. In addition, we may not have
fully complied with all of the FCC reporting and filing requirements in
connection with our satellite authorizations. Consequently, it is
possible the FCC could revoke, terminate, condition or decline to extend or
renew certain of our authorizations or licenses.
FCC
Actions Affecting
our
Licenses and Applications. A number of our other applications
have been denied or dismissed without prejudice by the FCC, or remain
pending. We cannot be sure that the FCC will grant any of our
outstanding applications, or that the authorizations, if granted, will not be
subject to onerous conditions. Moreover, the cost of building,
launching and insuring a satellite can be as much as $300.0 million or more, and
we cannot be sure that we will be able to construct and launch all of the
satellites for which we have requested authorizations.
4.5 Degree
Spacing Tweener Satellites. The FCC has proposed to allow
so-called “tweener” DBS operations – DBS satellites operating from orbital
locations 4.5 degrees (half of the usual 9 degrees) away from other DBS
satellites. The FCC has already granted authorizations to Spectrum
Five and us for tweener satellites at the 114.5 and 86.5 degree orbital
locations, respectively. We have challenged the Spectrum Five
authorization, and Telesat Canada, a Canadian satellite operator, has challenged
our license. Certain tweener operations, as proposed, could cause
harmful interference into our service and constrain our future
operations.
Interference from
Other Services
Sharing Satellite
Spectrum. The FCC has adopted rules that allow
non-geostationary orbit fixed satellite services to operate on a co-primary
basis in the same frequency band as DBS and Ku-band-based fixed satellite
services. The FCC has also authorized the use of terrestrial
communication services (“MVDDS”) in the DBS band. MVDDS licenses were
auctioned in 2004. Despite regulatory provisions to protect DBS
operations from harmful interference, there can be no assurance that operations
by other satellites or terrestrial communication services in the DBS band will
not interfere with our DBS operations and adversely affect our
business.
International
Satellite Competition
and
Interference. DirecTV has obtained FCC authority to provide
service to the United States from a Canadian DBS orbital slot. We
have also received authority to do the same from a Canadian orbital slot at 129
degrees. The possibility that the FCC will allow service to the U.S.
from additional foreign slots may permit additional competition against us from
other satellite providers. It may also provide a means by which to
increase our available satellite capacity in the United States. In
addition, a number of administrations, such as Great Britain and the
Netherlands, have requested to add orbital locations serving the U.S. close to
our licensed slots. Such operations could cause harmful interference
to our satellites and constrain our future operations at those slots if such
“tweener” operations are approved by the FCC. The risk of harmful
interference will depend upon the final rules adopted in the FCC’s “tweener”
proceeding.
Emergency
Alert System. The Emergency Alert System (“EAS”)
requires participants to interrupt programming during nationally-declared
emergencies and to pass through emergency-related information. The
FCC recently released an order requiring satellite carriers to participate in
the “national” portion of EAS. It is also considering whether to
mandate that satellite carriers also interrupt programming for local emergencies
and weather events. We cannot be sure that this requirement will not
affect us adversely by requiring us to devote additional resources to complying
with EAS requirements.
Rules Relating to
Broadcast Services. The FCC imposes different rules for
“subscription” and “broadcast” services. We believe that because we
offer a subscription programming service, we are not subject to many of the
regulatory obligations imposed upon broadcast licensees. However, we
cannot be certain whether the FCC will find in the future that we must comply
with regulatory obligations as a broadcast licensee, and certain parties have
requested that we be treated as a broadcaster. If the FCC determines
that we are a broadcast licensee, it could require us to comply with all
regulatory obligations imposed upon broadcast licensees, which are generally
subject to more burdensome regulation than subscription television service
providers.
Public Interest
Requirements. Under a requirement of the Cable Act, the FCC
imposed public interest requirements on DBS licensees. These rules
require us to set aside four percent of our channel capacity exclusively for
noncommercial programming for which we must charge programmers below-cost rates
and for which we may not impose additional charges on
subscribers. This could displace programming for which we could earn
commercial rates and could adversely affect our financial results. We
cannot be sure that if the FCC were to review our methodology for processing
public interest carriage requests, computing the channel capacity we must set
aside or determining the rates that we charge public interest programmers, it
would find them in compliance with the public interest
requirements.
Plug and
Play. The FCC has adopted the so-called “plug and play”
standard for compatibility between digital television sets and cable
systems. That standard was developed through negotiations involving
the cable and consumer electronics industries, but not us. The FCC is
now considering various proposals to establish two-way digital cable “plug and
play” rules. That proceeding also asks about means to incorporate all
pay TV providers into its “plug and play” rules. We are concerned
that the FCC may impose rules on our DBS operations that are based on cable
system architecture. Complying with the separate security and other
“plug and play” requirements would require potentially costly modifications to
our set-top boxes and operations. We cannot predict the timing or
outcome of this FCC proceeding.
Digital HD Must
Carry Requirement. In order to
provide any local broadcast signals in a market (“local-into-local authority”)
today, we are required to retransmit all qualifying broadcast signals in that
market. The FCC has adopted rules governing our carriage obligations
for analog commercial and non-commercial stations. The FCC has not
adopted rules with respect to our carriage obligation for digital
signals. The digital transition in February 2009 will require all
full-power broadcasters to cease transmission in analog and switch over to
digital signals. The switch to digital will provide broadcasters
significantly greater capacity to provide high definition and multi-cast
programming. Depending upon what rules the FCC adopts, the carriage
of digital signals on our DBS system could cause significant capacity
constraints, and limit the number of local markets that can be
served. For instance, we would face substantial operational
challenges if the FCC were to adopt a “HD carry-one, carry-all” requirement
effective February 2009, under which we would be required to carry all
broadcasters in HD if any broadcaster in that market is offered in
HD. We have proposed that the FCC provide sufficient time for DBS
providers to construct satellites to meet any new requirements, and that any
heightened capacity burden be phased-in over a number of years. The
FCC may adopt final digital HD must carry rules as soon as the FCC’s February
26, 2008 Open Meeting, but we cannot predict the exact timing or outcome of this
proceeding. The transition will also require resource-intensive
efforts by us to transition all broadcast signals from analog to digital at
hundreds of local receive facilities across the nation.
Digital
Transition Education. The digital transition in February 2009
will require all broadcasters to cease transmission in analog and switch over to
digital signals. The FCC has an open proceeding addressing the
obligation of broadcasters and multi-channel video programming distributors to
notify and educate viewers on the impact of the transition on their
household. It is possible that the FCC may require mandatory bill
notification and public service announcements to be aired on DISH Network as a
result of this proceeding.
Retransmission
Consent. The
Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (“SHVIA”), generally gives satellite
companies a statutory copyright license to retransmit local broadcast channels
by satellite back into the market from which they originated, subject to
obtaining the retransmission consent of the local network station. If
we fail to reach retransmission consent agreements with broadcasters, we cannot
carry their signals. This could have an adverse effect on our
strategy to compete with cable and other satellite companies which provide local
signals. While we have been able to reach retransmission consent
agreements with most local network stations in markets where we currently offer
local channels by satellite, roll-out of local channels in additional cities
will require that we obtain additional retransmission agreements. We
cannot be sure that we will secure these agreements or that we will secure new
agreements upon the expiration of our current retransmission consent agreements,
some of which are short term.
Dependence on
Cable Act for Program Access. We purchase a large percentage
of our programming from cable-affiliated programmers. The Cable Act’s
provisions prohibiting exclusive contracting practices with cable affiliated
programmers were extended for another five-year period in September
2007. Cable companies have appealed the FCC’s decision. We
cannot predict the outcome or timing of that litigation. Any change
in the Cable Act and the FCC’s rules that permit the cable industry or
cable-affiliated programmers to discriminate against competing businesses, such
as ours, in the sale of programming could adversely affect our ability to
acquire cable-affiliated programming at all or to acquire programming on a
cost-effective basis. Further, the FCC generally has not shown a
willingness to enforce the program access rules aggressively. As a
result, we may be limited in our ability to obtain access (or nondiscriminatory
access) to programming from programmers that are affiliated with the cable
system operators.
In
addition, affiliates of certain cable providers have denied us access to sports
programming they feed to their cable systems terrestrially, rather than by
satellite. To the extent that cable operators deliver additional
programming terrestrially in the future, they may assert that this additional
programming is also exempt from the program access laws. These
restrictions on our access to programming could materially and adversely affect
our ability to compete in regions serviced by these cable
providers.
MDU
Exclusivity. The FCC has found that cable companies should not
be permitted to have exclusive relationships with multiple dwelling units (e.g.,
apartment buildings). That decision is under appeal, and we cannot
predict the timing or outcome of that litigation. Nonetheless, the
FCC has now asked whether DBS and Private Cable Operators (“PCOs”) should be
permitted to have similar relationships with multiple dwelling
units. If the cable exclusivity ban were to be extended to DBS
providers, our ability to serve these types of buildings and communities would
be adversely affected.
The
International Telecommunication Union
Our DBS
system also must conform to the International Telecommunication Union, or ITU,
broadcasting satellite service plan for Region 2 (which includes the United
States). If any of our operations are not consistent with this plan,
the ITU will only provide authorization on a non-interference basis pending
successful modification of the plan or the agreement of all affected
administrations to the non-conforming operations. Accordingly, unless
and until the ITU modifies its broadcasting satellite service plan to include
the technical parameters of DBS applicants’ operations, our satellites, along
with those of other DBS operators, must not cause harmful electrical
interference with other assignments that are in conformance with the
plan. Further, DBS satellites are not presently entitled to any
protection from other satellites that are in conformance with the
plan.
In
addition, a number of administrations, such as Great Britain and the
Netherlands, have requested modifications to the plan to add orbital locations
serving the U.S. close to our licensed slots, similar to the “tweener”
operations discussed above. Such operations could cause harmful
interference into our satellites and constrain our future operations at those
slots.
Export
Control Regulation
The
delivery of satellites and related technical information for the purpose of
launch by foreign launch services providers is subject to strict export control
and prior approval requirements.
PATENTS
AND TRADEMARKS
Many
entities, including some of our competitors, have or may in the future obtain
patents and other intellectual property rights that cover or affect products or
services related to those that we offer. In general, if a court
determines that one or more of our products infringes on intellectual property
held by others, we may be required to cease developing or marketing those
products, to obtain licenses from the holders of the intellectual property at a
material cost, or to redesign those products in such a way as to avoid
infringing the patent claims. If those intellectual property rights
are held by a competitor, we may be unable to obtain the intellectual property
at any price, which could adversely affect our competitive
position.
We may
not be aware of all intellectual property rights that our products may
potentially infringe. In addition, patent applications in the United
States are confidential until the Patent and Trademark Office issues a patent
and, accordingly, our products may infringe claims contained in pending patent
applications of which we are not aware. Further, the process of determining
definitively whether a claim of infringement is valid often involves expensive
and protracted litigation, even if we are ultimately successful on the
merits.
We cannot
estimate the extent to which we may be required in the future to obtain
intellectual property licenses or the availability and cost of any such
licenses. Those costs, and their impact on our results of operations,
could be material. Damages in patent infringement cases may also
include treble damages in certain circumstances. To the extent that
we are required to pay unanticipated royalties to third parties, these increased
costs of doing business could negatively affect our liquidity and operating
results. We are currently defending multiple patent infringement
actions. We cannot be certain the courts will conclude these
companies do not own the rights they claim, that our products do not infringe on
these rights, that we would be able to obtain licenses from these persons on
commercially reasonable terms or, if we were unable to obtain such licenses,
that we would be able to redesign our products to avoid
infringement. See “Item 3 – Legal
Proceedings.”
ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATIONS
We are
subject to the requirements of federal, state, local and foreign environmental
and occupational safety and health laws and regulations. These
include laws regulating air emissions, water discharge and waste
management. We attempt to maintain compliance with all such
requirements. We do not expect capital or other expenditures for
environmental compliance to be material in 2008 or
2009. Environmental requirements are complex, change frequently and
have become more stringent over time. Accordingly, we cannot provide
assurance that these requirements will not change or become more stringent in
the future in a manner that could have a material adverse effect on our
business.
SEGMENT
REPORTING DATA AND GEOGRAPHIC AREA DATA
For
operating segment and principal geographic area data for 2007, 2006 and 2005 see
Note 10 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 15 of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.
EMPLOYEES
We had
approximately 23,000 employees at December 31, 2007, most of whom are located in
the United States. We generally consider relations with our employees
to be good. Approximately 1,500 of these employees employed by ETC
and other businesses transferred to EchoStar in connection with the Spin-off
became employees of EchoStar as of January 1, 2008.
Although
a total of approximately 33 employees in two of our field offices have voted to
unionize, we are not currently a party to any collective bargaining
agreements. However, we are currently negotiating collective
bargaining agreements at these offices.
WHERE
YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
We are
subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and accordingly
file our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current
reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and other information with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The public may read and copy any
materials filed with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street,
NE, Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 for
further information on the Public Reference Room. As an electronic
filer, our public filings are also maintained on the SEC’s Internet site that
contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information
regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address
of that website is http://www.sec.gov.
WEBSITE
ACCESS
Our
annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on
Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act also may be accessed free of charge through
our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we have electronically filed
such material with, or furnished it to, the SEC. The address of that
website is http://www.dishnetwork.com.
We have
adopted a written code of ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers
and employees, including our principal executive officer and senior financial
officers, in accordance with Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission promulgated
thereunder. Our code of ethics is available on our corporate website
at http://www.dishnetwork.com.
In the event that we make changes in, or provide waivers of, the provisions of
this code of ethics that the SEC requires us to disclose, we intend to disclose
these events on our website.
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
(furnished
in accordance with Item 401 (b) of Regulation S-K, pursuant to General
Instruction G(3) of Form 10-K)
The
following table sets forth the name, age and offices with DISH Network of each
of our executive officers, the period during which each executive officer has
served as such, and each executive officer’s business experience during the past
five years:
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles
W. Ergen
|
|
54
|
|
Chairman,
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|
W.
Erik Carlson
|
|
38
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Operations
|
Thomas
A. Cullen
|
|
48
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Corporate Development
|
James
DeFranco
|
|
55
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Sales & Distribution, Travel/Events and Marketing, and
Director
|
R.
Stanton Dodge
|
|
40
|
|
Executive
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
Bernard
L. Han
|
|
43
|
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
Michael
Kelly
|
|
46
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Commercial and Business Services
|
Carl
E. Vogel
|
|
50
|
|
Vice
Chairman and Director
|
Stephen
W. Wood
|
|
49
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Chief Human Resources
Officer
|
Charles W.
Ergen. Mr. Ergen has been Chairman of the Board of Directors
and Chief Executive Officer of DISH Network since its formation and, during the
past five years, has held various executive officer and director positions with
DISH Network’s subsidiaries. Mr. Ergen was appointed President of
DISH Network in February 2008. Mr. Ergen, along with his spouse and
James DeFranco, was a co-founder of DISH Network in 1980.
W. Erik
Carlson. Mr. Carlson was named Executive Vice President,
Operations in February 2008 and is responsible for overseeing our home and
commercial installations, customer service centers, internal customer billing
and equipment retrieval and refurbishment operations. Mr. Carlson
previously was Senior Vice President of Retail Services, a position he held
since mid-2006. He joined DISH Network in 1995 and has held
progressively larger operating roles over the years.
Thomas A.
Cullen. Mr. Cullen joined DISH Network in December 2006 as the
Executive Vice President, Corporate Development. Before joining DISH
Network, Cullen served as President of TensorComm, a venture-backed wireless
technology company. From August 2003 to April 2005, Mr. Cullen was
with Charter Communications Inc. (“Charter”), serving as Senior Vice President,
Advanced Services and Business Development from August 2003 until he was
promoted to Executive Vice President in August 2004. From January
2001 to October 2002, Mr. Cullen was General Partner of Lone Tree Capital, a
private equity partnership focused on investment opportunities in the technology
and communications sector.
James
DeFranco. Mr. DeFranco is currently our Executive Vice
President, Sales & Distribution, Travel/Events and Marketing and has held
various executive officer and director positions with DISH Network since its
formation. Mr. DeFranco, along with Mr. Ergen and Mr. Ergen’s spouse,
was a co-founder of DISH Network in 1980.
R.
Stanton Dodge. Mr. Dodge is currently the Executive Vice
President, General Counsel and Secretary of DISH Network
and is responsible
for all legal affairs for DISH Network and its
subsidiaries. Since joining DISH Network in
November 1996, he has held various positions in DISH Network’s
legal department.
Bernard L. Han. Mr. Han was
named Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of DISH Network in
September 2006 and is responsible for all accounting, finance and information
technology functions of the Company. From October 2002 to May 2005,
Mr. Han served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Northwest Airlines, Inc. Prior to October 2002, he held
positions as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Senior
Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer at America West Airlines,
Inc.
Michael Kelly. Mr.
Kelly is currently the Executive Vice President, Commercial and Business
Services. Mr. Kelly served as the Executive Vice President of DISH
Network Service LLC and Customer Service from February 2004 until December 2005
and as Senior Vice President of DISH Network Service L.L.C. from March 2001
until February 2004. Mr. Kelly joined DISH Network in March 2000 as
Senior Vice President of International Programming following our acquisition of
Kelly Broadcasting Systems, Inc.
Carl E. Vogel. Mr.
Vogel is currently serving as our Vice Chairman. Mr. Vogel served as
our President from September 2006 until February 2008 and has served on the
Board of Directors and as Vice Chairman in charge of all financial and strategic
initiatives since 2005. From 2001 until 2005, Mr. Vogel served as the
President and CEO of Charter, a publicly-traded company providing cable
television and broadband services to approximately six million
customers. Mr. Vogel was one of our executive officers from 1994
until 1997, including serving as our President from 1995 until 1997 and was a
key member of the executive team that created and launched DISH Network in
1996. Mr. Vogel is also currently serving on the Board of Directors
and the Audit Committee of Shaw Communications, Inc.
Stephen W.
Wood. Mr. Wood has served as our Executive Vice President and
Chief Human Resources Officer since May 2006 and is responsible for all human
resource functions of DISH Network and its subsidiaries. Prior to
joining DISH Network, Mr. Wood served as an Executive Vice President for Gate
Gourmet International from 2004 to 2006 and practiced employment and labor
law in Richmond, Virginia with McGuire Woods LLP, as well as held executive
and directorial Human Resources positions at Cigna Healthcare from 2001 to
2004.
There are
no arrangements or understandings between any executive officer and any other
person pursuant to which any executive officer was selected as
such. Pursuant to the Bylaws of DISH Network, executive officers
serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.
Mr. Ergen
also serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
EchoStar. Pursuant to a management services agreement with EchoStar
entered into in connection with the Spin-off, DISH Network has agreed to make
certain of its key officers, including Mr. Dodge and Mr. Han, available to
provide services to EchoStar.
The
risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing
us. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of or that
we currently believe to be immaterial also may become important factors that
affect us.
If
any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition or results
of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
We
compete with other subscription television service providers and traditional
broadcasters, which could affect our ability to grow and increase our earnings
and other operating metrics.
We
compete in the subscription television service industry against other DBS
television providers, cable television and other system operators offering
video, audio and data programming and entertainment services. We
compete with these providers and operators on a number of fronts, including
programming, price, ancillary features and services such as availability and
quality of HD programming, VOD services, DVR functionality and customer
services, as well as subscriber acquisition and retention programs and
promotions. Many of our competitors have substantially greater
financial, marketing and other resources than we have. Our earnings
and other operating metrics could be materially and adversely affected if we are
unable to compete successfully with these and other new providers of
multi-channel video programming services.
We
believe that the availability and extent of HD programming has become and will
continue to be a significant factor in consumer’s choice among multi-channel
video providers. Although we believe we currently offer consumers a
compelling amount of HD programming content, other multi-channel video providers
may have more successfully marketed and promoted their HD programming packages
and may also be better equipped to increase their HD offerings to respond to
increasing consumer demand for this content. For example, cable
companies are able to offer local network channels in HD in more markets than we
can, and DirecTV could offer over 150 channels of HD programming by satellite in
the near future. We could be further disadvantaged to the extent a
significant number of local broadcasters begin offering local channels in HD
because we will not initially be in a position to offer local networks in HD in
all of the markets that we serve. We may be required to make
substantial additional investments in infrastructure to respond to competitive
pressure to deliver additional HD programming, and there can be no assurance
that we will be able to compete effectively with HD program offerings from other
video providers.
Cable
television operators have a large, established customer base, and many cable
operators have made significant investments in programming. Cable
television operators continue to leverage their incumbency advantages relative
to satellite operators by, among other things, bundling their video service with
2-way high speed Internet access and telephone services. Cable
television operators are also able to provide local and other programming in a
larger number of geographic areas. As a result of these and
other factors, we may not be able to continue to expand our subscriber base or
compete effectively against cable television operators.
Some
digital cable platforms currently offer a VOD service that enables subscribers
to choose from an extensive library of programming selections for viewing at
their convenience. We are continuing to develop our own VOD service
experience through automatic video downloads to hard drives in certain of our
satellite receivers, the inclusion of broadband connectivity components in
certain of our satellite receivers, and other technologies. There can
be no assurance that our VOD services will successfully compare with offerings
from other video providers.
News
Corporation owns an approximately 40% controlling interest in the DirecTV Group,
Inc. (“DirecTV”). In December 2006, Liberty Media Corporation
(“Liberty”) agreed to exchange its 16.3% stake in News Corporation for News
Corporation’s stake in DirecTV, together with regional sports networks in
Denver, Pittsburg and Seattle. Although the deal is currently delayed
by regulatory approvals, it is expected to be completed in 2008. News
Corporation and Liberty each have ownership interests in diverse world-wide
programming content and other related businesses. These assets
provide competitive advantages to DirecTV with respect to the acquisition of
programming, content and other valuable business opportunities.
In
addition, DirecTV’s satellite receivers and services are offered through a
significantly greater number of consumer electronics stores than
ours. As a result of this and other factors, our services are less
well known to consumers than those of DirecTV. Due to this relative
lack of consumer awareness and other factors, we are at a competitive marketing
disadvantage compared to DirecTV. DirecTV also offers exclusive
programming that may be attractive to prospective subscribers, and may have
access to discounts on programming not available to us. DirecTV
launched a satellite in July 2007 with plans to launch another satellite in
early 2008 in order to offer local and national programming in HD to most of the
U.S. population. Although we have launched our own HD initiatives, if
DirecTV fully implements these plans, it may have an additional competitive
advantage.
New
entrants in the subscription satellite services business may also have a
competitive advantage over us in deploying some new products and technologies
because of the substantial costs we may be required to incur to make new
products or technologies available across our installed base of over 13 million
subscribers.
Most
areas of the United States can receive between three and 10 free over-the-air
broadcast channels, including local content most consumers consider
important. The FCC has allocated additional digital spectrum to these
broadcasters, which can be used to transmit multiple additional programming
channels. Our business could be adversely affected by increased program
offerings by traditional over-the-air broadcasters.
New
technologies could also have an adverse effect on the demand for our DBS
services. For example, we face an increasingly significant
competitive threat from the build-out of advanced fiber optic networks by
companies such as Verizon Communications, Inc. (“Verizon”) and AT&T that
allows them to offer video services bundled with traditional phone and high
speed Internet directly to millions of homes. In addition, telephone
companies and other entities are implementing and supporting digital video
compression over existing telephone lines which may allow them to offer video
services without having to build new infrastructure. We also expect
to face increasing competition from content and other providers who distribute
video services directly to consumers over the Internet.
With the
large increase in the number of consumers with broadband service, a significant
amount of video content has become available on the Internet for users to
download and view on their personal computers and other devices. In
addition, there are several initiatives by companies to make it easier to view
Internet-based video on television and personal computer screens. We
also could face competition from content and other providers who distribute
video services directly to consumers via digital air waves.
Mergers,
joint ventures, and alliances among franchise, wireless or private cable
television operators, telephone companies and others also may result in
providers capable of offering television services in competition with
us.
Increased
subscriber turnover could harm our financial performance.
Our
future subscriber churn may be negatively impacted by a number of factors,
including but not limited to, an increase in competition from existing
competitors and new entrants offering more compelling promotions, customer
satisfaction with our products and services including our customer service
performance, whether we are able to offer promotions that customers view as
compelling on cost effective terms, as well as our ability to successfully
introduce new advanced products and services. Competitor bundling of
video services with 2-way high speed Internet access and telephone services may
also contribute more significantly to churn over time. There can be
no assurance that these and other factors will not contribute to relatively
higher churn than we have experienced historically. Additionally,
certain of our promotions allow consumers with relatively lower credit scores to
become subscribers and these subscribers typically churn at a higher
rate. In addition, if adverse conditions in the economy continue or
conditions worsen, we would expect that our subscriber churn would
increase. In particular, subscriber churn may increase with respect
to subscribers who purchase our lower tier programming packages and who may be
more sensitive to deteriorating economic conditions.
Additionally,
as the size of our subscriber base increases, even if our churn percentage
remains constant or declines, increasing numbers of gross new DISH Network
subscribers are required to sustain our net subscriber growth
rates.
Increases
in theft of our signal, or our competitors’ signals, also could cause subscriber
churn to increase in future periods. There can be no assurance that
our existing security measures will not be further compromised or that any
future security measures we may implement will be effective in reducing theft of
our programming signals.
Increased
subscriber acquisition and retention costs could adversely affect our financial
performance.
In
addition to leasing receivers, we generally subsidize installation and all or a
portion of the cost of receiver systems in order to attract new DISH Network
subscribers. Our costs to acquire subscribers, and to a lesser extent
our subscriber retention costs, can vary significantly from period to period and
can cause material variability to our net income (loss) and free cash
flow.
In
addition to new subscriber acquisition costs, we incur costs to retain existing
subscribers. In an effort to reduce subscriber turnover, we offer
existing subscribers a variety of options for upgraded and add on
equipment. We generally lease receivers and subsidize installation of
receiver systems under these subscriber retention programs. We also
upgrade or replace subscriber equipment periodically as technology
changes. As a consequence, our retention and our capital expenditures
related to our equipment lease program for existing subscribers will increase,
at least in the short term, to the extent we subsidize the costs of those
upgrades and replacements. Our capital expenditures related to
subscriber retention programs could also increase in the future to the extent we
increase penetration of our equipment lease program for existing subscribers, if
we introduce other more aggressive promotions, if we offer existing subscribers
more aggressive promotions for HD receivers or receivers with other enhanced
technologies, or for other reasons.
Cash
necessary to fund retention programs and total subscriber acquisition costs are
expected to be satisfied from existing cash and marketable investment securities
balances and cash generated from operations to the extent
available. We may, however, decide to raise additional capital in the
future to meet these requirements. There can be no assurance that
additional financing will be available on acceptable terms, or at all, if needed
in the future.
In
particular, current dislocations in the credit markets, which have significantly
impacted the availability and pricing of financing, particularly in the high
yield debt and leveraged credit markets, may significantly constrain our ability
to obtain financing to support our growth initiatives. These
developments in the credit markets may have a significant effect on our cost of
financing and our liquidity position and may, as a result, cause us to defer or
abandon profitable business strategies that we would otherwise pursue if
financing were available on acceptable terms.
In
addition, any material increase in subscriber acquisition or retention costs
from current levels could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Satellite
programming signals have been subject to theft, and we are vulnerable to
subscriber fraud, which could cause us to lose subscribers and
revenue.
Increases
in theft of our signal, or our competitors’ signals, could also limit subscriber
growth and cause subscriber churn to increase. We use microchips
embedded in credit card-sized access cards, called “smart cards,” or security
chips in our receiver systems to control access to authorized programming
content. However, our signal encryption has been compromised by theft
of service, and even though we continue to respond to compromises of our
encryption system with security measures intended to make signal theft of our
programming more difficult, theft of our signal is increasing. We
cannot assure you that we will be successful in reducing or controlling theft of
our service.
During
2005, we replaced our smart cards in order to reduce theft of our
service. However, the smart card replacement did not fully secure our
system, and we have since implemented software patches and other security
measures to help protect our service. Nevertheless, these security
measures are short-term fixes and we remain susceptible to additional signal
theft. Therefore, we have developed a plan to replace our existing
smart cards and/or security chips to re-secure our signals for a longer term
which will commence later this year and is expected to take approximately nine
to twelve months to complete. While our existing smart cards
installed in 2005 remain under warranty, we could incur operational costs
in excess of $50 million in connection with our smart card replacement
program.
We are
also vulnerable to fraud, particularly in the acquisition of new
subscribers. While we are addressing the impact of subscriber fraud
through a number of actions, including eliminating certain payment options for
subscribers, such as the use of pre-paid debit cards, there can be no assurance
that we will not continue to experience fraud which could impact our subscriber
growth and churn.
Our
local programming strategy faces uncertainty.
SHVIA
generally gives satellite companies a statutory copyright license to retransmit
local broadcast channels by satellite back into the market from which they
originated, subject to obtaining the retransmission consent of the local network
station. If we fail to reach retransmission consent agreements with
broadcasters we cannot carry their signals. This could have an
adverse effect on our strategy to compete with cable and other satellite
companies which provide local signals. While we have been able to
reach retransmission consent agreements with most local network stations in
markets where we currently offer local channels by satellite, roll-out of local
channels in additional cities will require that we obtain additional
retransmission agreements. We cannot be sure that we will secure
these agreements or that we will secure new agreements upon the expiration of
our current retransmission consent agreements, some of which are short
term.
We
depend on the Cable Act for access to others’ programming.
We
purchase a large percentage of our programming from cable-affiliated
programmers. The Cable Act’s provisions prohibiting exclusive
contracting practices with cable affiliated programmers were extended for
another five-year period in September 2007. Cable companies have
appealed the FCC’s decision. We cannot predict the outcome or timing
of that litigation. Any change in the Cable Act and the FCC’s rules
that permit the cable industry or cable-affiliated programmers to discriminate
against competing businesses, such as ours, in the sale of programming could
adversely affect our ability to acquire cable-affiliated programming at all or
to acquire programming on a cost-effective basis. Further, the FCC
generally has not shown a willingness to enforce the program access rules
aggressively. As a result, we may be limited in our ability to obtain
access (or nondiscriminatory access) to programming from programmers that are
affiliated with the cable system operators.
In
addition, affiliates of certain cable providers have denied us access to sports
programming they feed to their cable systems terrestrially, rather than by
satellite. To the extent that cable operators deliver additional
programming terrestrially in the future, they may assert that this additional
programming is also exempt from the program access laws. These
restrictions on our access to programming could materially and adversely affect
our ability to compete in regions serviced by these cable
providers.
We
depend on others to produce programming.
We depend
on third parties to provide us with programming services. Unlike our
larger cable and satellite competitors, we have not made significant investments
in programming providers. Our programming agreements have remaining
terms ranging from less than one to up to ten years and contain various renewal
and cancellation provisions. We may not be able to renew these
agreements on favorable terms or at all, and these agreements may be canceled
prior to expiration of their original term. If we are unable to renew
any of these agreements or the other parties cancel the agreements, we cannot
assure you that we would be able to obtain substitute programming, or that such
substitute programming would be comparable in quality or cost to our existing
programming. In addition, we expect programming costs to continue to
increase. We may be unable to pass programming costs on to our
customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
We
face increasing competition from other distributors of foreign language
programming.
We face
increasing competition from other distributors of foreign language programming,
including programming distributed over the Internet. There can be no
assurance that we will continue to experience growth in subscribers to our
foreign-language programming services. In addition, the increasing
availability of foreign language programming from our competitors, which in
certain cases has resulted from our inability to renew programming agreements on
an exclusive basis or at all, could contribute to an increase in our subscriber
churn. Our agreements with distributors of foreign language
programming have varying expiration dates, and some agreements are on a
month-to-month basis. There can be no assurance that we will be able
to renew these agreements on acceptable terms or at all.
We
are subject to significant regulatory oversight and changes in applicable
regulatory requirements could adversely affect our business.
DBS
operators are subject to significant government regulation, primarily by the FCC
and, to a certain extent, by Congress, other federal agencies and international,
state and local authorities. Depending upon the circumstances,
noncompliance with legislation or regulations promulgated by these entities
could result in the suspension or revocation of our licenses or registrations,
the termination or loss of contracts or the imposition of contractual damages,
civil fines or criminal penalties any of which could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations. You should review the regulatory disclosures under the
caption “Item
1. Business — Government Regulation — FCC Regulation under the
Communication Act” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
During
January 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a Texas jury verdict that certain
of our digital video recorders, or DVRs, infringed a patent held by
Tivo.
If we are
unsuccessful in subsequent appeals or in defending against claims that our
alternate technology infringes Tivo’s patent, we could be prohibited from
distributing DVRs or be required to modify or eliminate certain user-friendly
DVR features that we currently offer to consumers. In that event, we
would be at a significant disadvantage to our competitors who could offer this
functionality and, while we would attempt to provide that functionality through
other manufacturers, the adverse affect on our business could be
material. We could also have to pay substantial additional
damages.
We
currently have no commercial insurance coverage on the satellites we
own.
We do not
use commercial insurance to mitigate the potential financial impact of in-orbit
failures because we believe that the cost of insurance premiums is uneconomical
relative to the risk of satellite failure. We believe we generally
have in-orbit satellite capacity sufficient to recover, in a relatively short
time frame, transmission of most of our critical programming in the event one of
our in-orbit satellites fails. We could not, however, recover certain
local markets, international and other niche programming. Further,
programming continuity cannot be assured in the event of multiple satellite
losses.
We
currently do not have adequate backup satellite capacity to recover all of the
local network channels broadcast from our EchoStar X satellite in the event of a
complete failure of that satellite. Therefore, our ability to deliver
local channels in many markets, as well as our ability to comply with SHVERA
requirements without incurring significant additional costs, depends on, among
other things, the continued successful commercial operation of EchoStar
X.
We also
depend on EchoStar VIII, which we now lease from EchoStar, to provide service
for us in the continental United States at least until such time as our EchoStar
XI satellite has commenced commercial operation, which is currently expected to
occur in mid-year 2008. Otherwise in the event that EchoStar VIII
experienced a total or substantial failure, we could transmit many, but not all,
of those channels from other in-orbit satellites.
Our
satellites are subject to risks related to launch.
Satellite
launches are subject to significant risks, including launch failure, incorrect
orbital placement or improper commercial operation. Certain launch
vehicles that may be used by us have either unproven track records or have
experienced launch failures in the past. The risks of launch delay
and failure are usually greater when the launch vehicle does not have a track
record of previous successful flights. Launch failures result in
significant delays in the deployment of satellites because of the need both to
construct replacement satellites, which can take more than two years, and to
obtain other launch opportunities. Such significant delays could
materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenues. If
we were unable to obtain launch insurance, or obtain launch insurance at rates
we deem commercially reasonable, and a significant launch failure were to occur,
it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenues and
fund future satellite procurement and launch opportunities.
In
addition, the occurrence of future launch failures may materially and adversely
affect our ability to insure the launch of our satellites at commercially
reasonable premiums, if at all. Please see further discussion under
the caption “We currently have
no commercial insurance coverage on the satellites we own”
above.
Our
satellites are subject to significant operational risks.
Satellites
are subject to significant operational risks while in orbit. These
risks include malfunctions, commonly referred to as anomalies, that have
occurred in our satellites and the satellites of other operators as a result of
various factors, such as satellite manufacturers’ errors, problems with the
power systems or control systems of the satellites and general failures
resulting from operating satellites in the harsh environment of
space.
Although
we work closely with the satellite manufacturers to determine and eliminate the
cause of anomalies in new satellites and provide for redundancies of many
critical components in the satellites, we may experience anomalies in the
future, whether of the types described above or arising from the failure of
other systems or components.
Any
single anomaly or series of anomalies could materially and adversely affect our
operations and revenues and our relationship with current customers, as well as
our ability to attract new customers for our multi-channel video
services. In particular, future anomalies may result in the loss of
individual transponders on a satellite, a group of transponders on that
satellite or the entire satellite, depending on the nature of the
anomaly. Anomalies may also reduce the expected useful life of a
satellite, thereby reducing the channels that could be offered using that
satellite, or create additional expenses due to the need to provide replacement
or back-up satellites. You should review the disclosures relating to
satellite anomalies set forth under Note 4 in the Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements in Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Meteoroid
events pose a potential threat to all in-orbit satellites. The
probability that meteoroids will damage those satellites increases significantly
when the Earth passes through the particulate stream left behind by
comets. Occasionally, increased solar activity also poses a potential
threat to all in-orbit satellites.
Some
decommissioned spacecraft are in uncontrolled orbits which pass through the
geostationary belt at various points, and present hazards to operational
spacecraft, including our satellites. We may be required to perform
maneuvers to avoid collisions and these maneuvers may prove unsuccessful or
could reduce the useful life of the satellite through the expenditure of fuel to
perform these maneuvers. The loss, damage or destruction of any of
our satellites as a result of an electrostatic storm, collision with space
debris, malfunction or other event could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our
satellites have minimum design lives of 12 years, but could fail or suffer
reduced capacity before then.
Our
ability to earn revenue depends on the usefulness of our satellites, each of
which has a limited useful life. A number of factors affect the
useful lives of the satellites, including, among other things, the quality of
their construction, the durability of their component parts, the ability to
continue to maintain proper orbit and control over the satellite’s functions,
the efficiency of the launch vehicle used, and the remaining on-board fuel
following orbit insertion. Generally, the minimum design life of each
of our satellites is 12 years. We can provide no assurance, however,
as to the actual useful lives of the satellites.
In the
event of a failure or loss of any of our satellites, we may need to acquire or
lease additional satellite capacity or relocate one of our other satellites and
use it as a replacement for the failed or lost satellite, any of which could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations. A relocation would require FCC approval and,
among other things, a showing to the FCC that the replacement satellite would
not cause additional interference compared to the failed or lost
satellite. We cannot be certain that we could obtain such FCC
approval. If we choose to use a satellite in this manner, this use
could adversely affect our ability to meet the operation deadlines associated
with our authorizations. Failure to meet those deadlines could result
in the loss of such authorizations, which would have an adverse effect on our
ability to generate revenues.
Complex
technology used in our business could become obsolete.
Our
operating results are dependent to a significant extent upon our ability to
continue to introduce new products and services on a timely basis and to reduce
costs of our existing products and services. We may not be able to
successfully identify new product or service opportunities or develop and market
these opportunities in a timely or cost-effective manner. The success
of new product development depends on many factors, including proper
identification of customer need, cost, timely completion and introduction,
differentiation from offerings of competitors and market
acceptance.
Technology
in the multi-channel video programming industry changes rapidly as new
technologies are developed, which could cause our services and products to
become obsolete. We and our suppliers may not be able to keep pace
with technological developments. If the new technologies on which we
intend to focus our research and development investments fail to achieve
acceptance in the marketplace, our competitive position could be impaired
causing a reduction in our revenues and earnings. We may also be at a
competitive disadvantage in developing and introducing complex new products and
technologies because of the substantial costs we may incur in making these
products or technologies available across our installed base of over 13 million
subscribers. For example, our competitors could be the first to
obtain proprietary technologies that are perceived by the market as being
superior. Further, after we have incurred substantial research and
development costs, one or more of the technologies under our development, or
under development by one or more of our strategic partners, could become
obsolete prior to its introduction. In addition, delays in the
delivery of components or other unforeseen problems in our DBS system may occur
that could materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenue,
offer new services and remain competitive.
Technological
innovation is important to our success and depends, to a significant degree, on
the work of technically skilled employees. Competition for the
services of these types of employees is vigorous. We may not be able
to attract and retain these employees. If we are unable to attract
and retain appropriately technically skilled employees, our competitive position
could be materially and adversely affected.
We
may have potential conflicts of interest with EchoStar.
Questions
relating to conflicts of interest may arise between EchoStar and us in a number
of areas relating to our past and ongoing relationships. Areas in which
conflicts of interest between EchoStar and us could arise include, but are not
limited to, the following:
·
|
Cross officerships,
directorships and stock ownership. We have
significant overlap in directors and executive officers with EchoStar,
which may lead to conflicting interests. For instance, certain
of our executive officers, including Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer, serve as executive officers of EchoStar.
Three of our executive officers provide management services to
EchoStar pursuant to a management services agreement between EchoStar and
us. These individuals may have actual or apparent conflicts of
interest with respect to matters involving or affecting each
company. Furthermore, our board of directors includes persons
who are members of the board of directors of EchoStar, including Mr.
Ergen, who serves as the Chairman of EchoStar and us. The executive
officers and the members of our board of directors who overlap with
EchoStar will have fiduciary duties to EchoStar’s shareholders. For
example, there will be the potential for a conflict of interest when we or
EchoStar look at acquisitions and other corporate opportunities that may
be suitable for both companies. In addition, our directors and
officers own EchoStar stock and options to purchase EchoStar stock, which
they acquired or were granted prior to the Spin-off of EchoStar from us,
including Mr. Ergen, who owns approximately 50.0% of the total equity and
controls approximately 80.0% of the voting power of each of EchoStar and
us. These ownership interests could create actual, apparent or
potential conflicts of interest when these individuals are faced with
decisions that could have different implications for us and
EchoStar.
|
·
|
Intercompany agreements
related to the Spin-off. We have
entered into certain agreements with EchoStar pursuant to which we will
provide EchoStar with certain management, administrative, accounting, tax,
legal and other services, for which EchoStar will pay us our cost
plus an additional amount that is equal to a fixed percentage of our cost.
In addition, we have entered into a number of intercompany
agreements covering matters such as tax sharing and EchoStar’s
responsibility for certain liabilities previously undertaken by us for
certain of EchoStar’s businesses. We have also entered into certain
commercial agreements with EchoStar pursuant to which EchoStar will, among
other things, be obligated to sell to us at specified prices, set-top
boxes and related equipment. The terms of these agreements were
established while EchoStar was a wholly-owned subsidiary of us and were
not the result of arm’s length negotiations. In addition, conflicts
could arise between us and EchoStar in the interpretation or any extension
or renegotiation of these existing
agreements.
|
·
|
Future intercompany
transactions. In the future, EchoStar or its affiliates may
enter into transactions with us or our subsidiaries or other affiliates.
Although the terms of any such transactions will be established
based upon negotiations between EchoStar and us and, when appropriate,
subject to the approval of the disinterested directors on our board or a
committee of disinterested directors, there can be no assurance that the
terms of any such transactions will be as favorable to us or our
subsidiaries or affiliates as may otherwise be obtained in arm’s length
negotiations.
|
·
|
Business
Opportunities. We have retained interests in various
U.S. and international companies that have subsidiaries or controlled
affiliates that own or operate domestic or foreign services that may
compete with services offered by EchoStar. We may also compete with
EchoStar when we participate in auctions for spectrum or orbital slots for
our satellites. In addition, EchoStar may in the future use its
satellites, uplink and transmission assets to compete directly against us
in the subscription television
business.
|
We may
not be able to resolve any potential conflicts, and, even if we do so, the
resolution may be less favorable to us than if we were dealing with an
unaffiliated party.
We do not
have any agreements with EchoStar that restrict us from selling our products to
competitors of EchoStar. We also do not have any agreements with EchoStar that
would prevent either company from competing with the other.
Our agreements
with EchoStar may not reflect
what two unaffiliated parties might have agreed to.
The
allocation of assets, liabilities, rights, indemnifications and other
obligations between EchoStar and us under the separation and other intercompany
agreements we entered into with EchoStar in connection with the Spin-off of
EchoStar from us do not necessarily reflect what two unaffiliated parties might
have agreed to. Had these agreements been negotiated with unaffiliated
third parties, their terms may have been more favorable, or less favorable, to
us.
We depend on
EchoStar for many
services, including the design, manufacture and supply of digital set-top
boxes.
EchoStar
is our sole supplier of digital set-top boxes. In addition, EchoStar
is a key supplier of uplink, satellite transmission and other services to
us. Because purchases from DISH Network are made pursuant to
contracts that generally expire on January 1, 2010, EchoStar will have no
obligation to supply digital set-top boxes and satellite services to us after
that date. Therefore, if we are unable to extend these contracts with
EchoStar, or we are unable to obtain digital set-top boxes and satellite
services from third parties after that date, there could be a significant
adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial
position.
Furthermore,
any transition to a new supplier of set-top boxes could result in increased
costs, resources and development and customer qualification time. Any reduction
in our supply of set-top boxes could significantly delay our ability to ship
set-top boxes to our subscribers and potentially damage our relationships with
our subscribers.
We
rely on key personnel.
We
believe that our future success will depend to a significant extent upon the
performance of Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and
certain other executives. The loss of Mr. Ergen or of certain other
key executives could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations. Although all of our executives
have executed agreements limiting their ability to work for or consult with
competitors if they leave us, we do not have employment agreements with any of
them. Pursuant to a management services agreement with EchoStar
entered into at the time of the Spin-off, we have agreed to make certain of our
key officers available to provide services to EchoStar. In addition
Mr. Ergen also serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
EchoStar. To the extent Mr. Ergen and such other officers are
performing services for EchoStar, this may divert their time and attention away
from our business and may therefore adversely affect our business.
We
are controlled by one principal stockholder.
Charles
W. Ergen, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, currently beneficially owns
approximately 50.0% of our total equity securities and possesses approximately
80.0% of the total voting power. Thus, Mr. Ergen has the ability to
elect a majority of our directors and to control all other matters requiring the
approval of our stockholders. As a result of Mr. Ergen’s voting
power, DISH Network is a “controlled company” as defined in the Nasdaq listing
rules and is, therefore, not subject to Nasdaq requirements that would otherwise
require us to have (i) a majority of independent directors; (ii) a
nominating committee composed solely of independent directors; (iii)
compensation of our executive officers determined by a majority of the
independent directors or a compensation committee composed solely of independent
directors; and (iv) director nominees selected, or recommended for the Board’s
selection, either by a majority of the independent directors or a nominating
committee composed solely of independent directors.
We may pursue new
acquisitions, joint ventures and other transactions to complement or expand our
business which may not be successful.
Our
future success may depend on opportunities to buy other businesses or
technologies that could complement, enhance or expand our current business or
products or that might otherwise offer us growth opportunities. We may not be
able to complete such transactions and such transactions, if executed, pose
significant risks and could have a negative effect on our operations. Any
transactions that we are able to identify and complete may involve a number of
risks, including:
|
·
|
the
diversion of our management’s attention from our existing business to
integrate the operations and personnel of the acquired or combined
business or joint venture;
|
|
·
|
possible
adverse effects on our operating results during the integration process;
and
|
|
·
|
our
possible inability to achieve the intended objectives of the
transaction.
|
In
addition, we may not be able to successfully or profitably integrate, operate,
maintain and manage our newly acquired operations or employees. We may not be
able to maintain uniform standards, controls, procedures and policies, and this
may lead to operational inefficiencies.
New
acquisitions, joint ventures and other transactions may require the commitment
of significant capital that would otherwise be directed to investments in our
existing businesses or be distributed to shareholders. Commitment of this
capital may cause us to defer or suspend any share repurchases that we otherwise
may have made.
Our
business depends substantially on FCC licenses that can expire or be revoked or
modified and applications that may not be granted.
If the
FCC were to cancel, revoke, suspend or fail to renew any of our licenses or
authorizations, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition, profitability and cash flows. Specifically, loss of a
frequency authorization would reduce the amount of spectrum available to us,
potentially reducing the amount of programming and other services available to
our subscribers. The materiality of such a loss of authorizations
would vary based upon, among other things, the location of the frequency used or
the availability of replacement spectrum. In addition, Congress often
considers and enacts legislation that could affect us, and FCC proceedings to
implement the Communications Act and enforce its regulations are
ongoing. We cannot predict the outcomes of these legislative or
regulatory proceedings or their effect on our business.
Our
business relies on intellectual property, some of which is owned by third
parties, and we may inadvertently infringe their patents and proprietary
rights.
Many
entities, including some of our competitors, have or may in the future obtain
patents and other intellectual property rights that cover or affect products or
services related to those that we offer. In general, if a court
determines that one or more of our products infringes on intellectual property
held by others, we may be required to cease developing or marketing those
products, to obtain licenses from the holders of the intellectual property at a
material cost, or to redesign those products in such a way as to avoid
infringing the patent claims. If those intellectual property rights
are held by a competitor, we may be unable to obtain the intellectual property
at any price, which could adversely affect our competitive
position. Please see further discussion under Item 1. Business — Patents and
Trademarks of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We
depend on other telecommunications providers, independent retailers and others
to solicit orders for DISH Network services.
While we
offer receiver systems and programming directly, a majority of our new
subscriber acquisitions are generated by independent businesses offering our
products and services, including small satellite retailers, direct marketing
groups, local and regional consumer electronics stores, nationwide retailers,
telecommunications providers and others. If we are unable to continue
our arrangements with these resellers, we cannot guarantee that we would be able
to obtain other sales agents, thus adversely affecting our
business.
Certain
of these resellers also offer the products and services of our competition and
may favor our competitors products and services over ours based on the relative
financial arrangements associated with selling our products and those of our
competitors.
We
have substantial debt outstanding and may incur additional debt
As of
December 31, 2007, our total debt, including the debt of our subsidiaries, was
$6.126 billion. Our debt levels could have significant consequences,
including:
|
·
|
making
it more difficult to satisfy our
obligations;
|
|
·
|
increasing
our vulnerability to general adverse economic conditions, including
changes in interest rates;
|
|
·
|
limiting
our ability to obtain additional
financing;
|
|
·
|
requiring
us to devote a substantial portion of our available cash and cash flow to
make interest and principal payments on our debt, thereby reducing the
amount of available cash for other
purposes;
|
|
·
|
limiting
our financial and operating flexibility in responding to changing economic
and competitive conditions; and
|
|
·
|
placing
us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less
debt.
|
In
addition, we may incur substantial additional debt in the future. The
terms of the indentures relating to our senior notes permit us to incur
additional debt. If new debt is added to our current debt levels, the
risks we now face could intensify.
We
may need additional capital, which may not be available, in order to continue
growing, to increase earnings and to make payments on our debt.
Our
ability to increase earnings and to make interest and principal payments on our
debt will depend in part on our ability to continue growing our business by
maintaining and increasing our subscriber base. This may require
significant additional capital that may not be available to us or may only be
available on terms that are not attractive to us.
Funds
necessary to meet subscriber acquisition and retention costs are expected to be
satisfied from existing cash and marketable investment securities balances and
cash generated from operations to the extent available. We may,
however, decide to raise additional capital in the future to meet these
requirements. There can be no assurance that additional financing
will be available on acceptable terms, or at all, if needed in the
future.
In
particular, current dislocations in the credit markets, which have significantly
impacted the availability and pricing of financing, particularly in the high
yield debt and leveraged credit markets, may significantly constrain our ability
to obtain financing to support our growth initiatives. These
developments in the credit markets may have a significant effect on our cost of
financing and our liquidity position and may, as a result, cause us to defer or
abandon profitable business strategies that we would otherwise pursue if
financing were available on acceptable terms.
We may
need to raise additional capital to construct, launch, and insure satellites and
complete these systems and other satellites we may in the future apply to
operate. We also periodically evaluate various strategic initiatives,
the pursuit of which also could require us to raise significant additional
capital. There can be no assurance that additional financing will be
available on acceptable terms, or at all.
We
may be unable to manage rapidly expanding operations.
If we are
unable to manage our growth effectively, it could have a material adverse effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations. To
manage our growth effectively, we must, among other things, continue to develop
our internal and external sales forces, installation capability, customer
service operations and information systems, and maintain our relationships with
third party vendors. We also need to continue to expand, train and
manage our employee base, and our management personnel must assume even greater
levels of responsibility. If we are unable to continue to manage
growth effectively, we may experience a decrease in subscriber growth and an
increase in churn, which could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
We
cannot be certain that we will sustain profitability.
Due to
the substantial expenditures necessary to complete construction, launch and
deployment of our DBS system and to obtain and service DISH Network customers,
we have in the past sustained significant losses. If we do not have
sufficient income or other sources of cash, our ability to service our debt and
pay our other obligations could be affected. While we had net income
of $756 million, $608 million and $1.515 billion for the years ended December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, we may not be able to sustain this
profitability. Improvements in our results of operations will depend
largely upon our ability to increase our customer base while maintaining our
price structure, effectively managing our costs and controlling
churn. We cannot assure you that we will be effective with regard to
these matters.
We
depend on few manufacturers, and in some cases a single manufacturer, for many
components of consumer premises equipment; we may be adversely affected by
product shortages.
We depend
on relatively few sources, and in some cases a single source, for many
components of the consumer premises equipment that we provide to subscribers in
order to deliver our digital television services. Following the
Spin-off, we will depend solely on EchoStar for all of the set top boxes we sell
or lease to subscribers. Product shortages and resulting installation
delays could cause us to lose potential future subscribers to our DISH Network
service.
We
cannot assure you that there will not be deficiencies leading to material
weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting.
We
periodically evaluate and test our internal control over financial reporting in
order to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act. This evaluation and testing of internal control over financial
reporting includes internal control over financial reporting relating to our
operations. Although our management has concluded that our internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2007, if in
the future we are unable to report that our internal control over financial
reporting is effective (or if our auditors do not agree with our assessment of
the effectiveness of, or are unable to express an opinion on, our internal
control over financial reporting), investors, customers and business partners
could lose confidence in the accuracy of our financial reports, which could in
turn have a material adverse effect on our business.
Item
1B.
|
UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
|
The
following table sets forth certain information concerning our principal
properties
Description/Use/Location
|
Segment(s)
Using
Property
|
|
Approximate
Square
Footage
|
|
Owned
or
Leased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
headquarters, Englewood, Colorado*
|
All
|
|
|
476,000 |
|
Owned
|
EchoStar
Technologies Corporation engineering offices and service
center, Englewood, Colorado*
|
ETC
|
|
|
144,000 |
|
Owned
|
EchoStar
Technologies Corporation engineering offices, Englewood,
Colorado*
|
ETC
|
|
|
124,000 |
|
Owned
|
EchoStar
Data Networks engineering offices, Atlanta, Georgia
|
ETC
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
Leased
|
Digital
broadcast operations center, Cheyenne, Wyoming*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
143,000 |
|
Owned
|
Digital
broadcast operations center, Gilbert, Arizona*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
124,000 |
|
Owned
|
Regional
digital broadcast operations center, Monee, Illinois*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
45,000 |
|
Owned
|
Regional
digital broadcast operations center, New Braunsfels,
Texas*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
Owned
|
Regional
digital broadcast operations center, Quicksberg, Virginia*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
Owned
|
Regional
digital broadcast operations center, Spokane, Washington*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
Owned
|
Regional
digital broadcast operations center, Orange, New Jersey
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
8,800 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center and data center, Littleton, Colorado*
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
202,000 |
|
Owned
|
Service
center, Spartanburg, South Carolina
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
316,000 |
|
Leased
|
Customer
call center, warehouse and service center, El Paso, Texas
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center, McKeesport, Pennsylvania
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
106,000 |
|
Leased
|
Customer
call center, Christiansburg, Virginia
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
103,000 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center and general offices, Tulsa, Oklahoma
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
79,000 |
|
Leased
|
Customer
call center and general offices, Pine Brook, New Jersey
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
67,000 |
|
Leased
|
Customer
call center, Alvin, Texas
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
Leased
|
Customer
call center, Thornton, Colorado
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
55,000 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center, Harlingen, Texas
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
54,000 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center, Bluefield, West Virginia
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
Owned
|
Customer
call center, Hilliard, Ohio
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
Leased
|
Warehouse,
distribution and service center, Atlanta, Georgia
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
Leased
|
Warehouse
and distribution center, Denver, Colorado
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
209,000 |
|
Leased
|
Warehouse
and distribution center, Sacramento, California
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
82,000 |
|
Owned
|
Warehouse
center, Denver, Colorado
|
DISH
Network
|
|
|
44,000 |
|
Owned
|
Engineering
offices and warehouse, Almelo, The Netherlands*
|
All
Other
|
|
|
55,000 |
|
Owned
|
Engineering
offices, Steeton, England*
|
All
Other
|
|
|
43,000 |
|
Owned
|
* As
of January 1, 2008, these
principal properties were transferred to EchoStar in connection with the
Spin-off. Following the Spin-off, we will lease certain of these
properties back from EchoStar at what we believe are market
rates.
In
addition to the principal properties listed above, we operate several DISH
Network service centers strategically located in regions throughout the United
States.
Item
3. LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
Acacia
During
2004, Acacia Media Technologies (“Acacia”) filed a lawsuit against us in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California. The suit also named DirecTV, Comcast, Charter, Cox and a
number of smaller cable companies as defendants. Acacia is an
intellectual property holding company which seeks to license the patent
portfolio that it has acquired. The suit alleges infringement of
United States Patent Nos. 5,132,992 (the ‘992 patent), 5,253,275 (the ‘275
patent), 5,550,863 (the ‘863 patent), 6,002,720 (the ‘720 patent) and 6,144,702
(the ‘702 patent). The ‘992, ‘863, ‘720 and ‘702 patents have been asserted
against us.
The
patents relate to various systems and methods related to the transmission of
digital data. The ‘992 and ‘702 patents have also been asserted
against several Internet content providers in the United States District Court
for the Central District of California. During 2004 and 2005, the
Court issued Markman rulings which found that the ‘992 and ‘702 patents were not
as broad as Acacia had contended, and that certain terms in the ‘702 patent were
indefinite. In April 2006, DISH Network and other defendants asked
the Court to rule that the claims of the ‘702 patent are invalid and not
infringed. That motion is pending. In June and September
2006, the Court held Markman hearings on the ‘992, ‘863 and ‘720 patents, and
issued a ruling during December 2006.
Acacia’s
various patent infringement cases have been consolidated for pre-trial purposes
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California. We intend to vigorously defend this case. In
the event that a Court ultimately determines that we infringe any of the
patents, we may be subject to substantial damages, which may include treble
damages and/or an injunction that could require us to materially modify certain
user-friendly features that we currently offer to consumers. We
cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome of the suit or determine
the extent of any potential liability or damages.
Broadcast Innovation,
L.L.C.
In 2001,
Broadcast Innovation, L.L.C. (“Broadcast Innovation”) filed a lawsuit against
us, DirecTV, Thomson Consumer Electronics and others in Federal District Court
in Denver, Colorado. The suit alleges infringement of United States
Patent Nos. 6,076,094 (the ‘094 patent) and 4,992,066 (the ‘066
patent). The ‘094 patent relates to certain methods and devices for
transmitting and receiving data along with specific formatting information for
the data. The ‘066 patent relates to certain methods and devices for
providing the scrambling circuitry for a pay television system on removable
cards. We examined these patents and believe that they are not
infringed by any of our products or services. Subsequently, DirecTV
and Thomson settled with Broadcast Innovation leaving us as the only
defendant.
During
2004, the judge issued an order finding the ‘066 patent invalid. Also
in 2004, the Court ruled the ‘094 patent invalid in a parallel case filed by
Broadcast Innovation against Charter and Comcast. In 2005, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the ‘094 patent
finding of invalidity and remanded the case back to the District
Court. During June 2006, Charter filed a reexamination request with
the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The Court has stayed
the case pending reexamination. Our case remains stayed pending
resolution of the Charter case.
We intend
to vigorously defend this case. In the event that a Court ultimately
determines that we infringe any of the patents, we may be subject to substantial
damages, which may include treble damages and/or an injunction that could
require us to materially modify certain user-friendly features that we currently
offer to consumers. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty
the outcome of the suit or determine the extent of any potential liability or
damages.
Channel
Bundling Class Action
On
September 21, 2007, a purported class of cable and satellite subscribers filed
an antitrust action against us in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California. The suit also names as defendants DirecTV,
Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, Charter, Time Warner, Inc., Time Warner Cable, NBC
Universal, Viacom, Fox Entertainment Group, and Walt Disney
Company. The suit alleges, among other things, that the defendants
engaged in a conspiracy to provide customers with access only to bundled channel
offerings as opposed to giving customers the ability to purchase channels on an
“a la carte” basis. We filed a motion to dismiss, which the court has
not yet ruled upon. We intend to vigorously defend this
case. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome of
the suit or determine the extent of any potential liability or
damages.
Distant
Network Litigation
During
October 2006, a District Court in Florida entered a permanent nationwide
injunction prohibiting us from offering distant network channels to consumers
effective December 1, 2006. Distant networks are ABC, NBC, CBS and
Fox network channels which originate outside the community where the consumer
who wants to view them, lives. We have turned off all of our distant
network channels and are no longer in the distant network
business. Termination of these channels resulted in, among other
things, a small reduction in average monthly revenue per subscriber and free
cash flow, and a temporary increase in subscriber churn. The
plaintiffs in that litigation allege that we are in violation of the Court’s
injunction and have appealed a District Court decision finding that we are not
in violation. We intend to vigorously defend this case. We
cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome of the appeal or
determine the extent of any potential liability or damages.
Enron
Commercial Paper Investment
During
October 2001, we received approximately $40 million from the sale of Enron
commercial paper to a third party broker. That commercial paper was
ultimately purchased by Enron. During November 2003, an action was
commenced in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New
York against approximately 100 defendants, including us, who invested in Enron’s
commercial paper. The complaint alleges that Enron’s October 2001
purchase of its commercial paper was a fraudulent conveyance and voidable
preference under bankruptcy laws. We dispute these
allegations. We typically invest in commercial paper and notes which
are rated in one of the four highest rating categories by at least two
nationally recognized statistical rating organizations. At the time
of our investment in Enron commercial paper, it was considered to be high
quality and low risk. We intend to vigorously defend this
case. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome of
the suit or determine the extent of any potential liability or
damages.
Finisar
Corporation
Finisar
Corporation (“Finisar”) obtained a $100 million verdict in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against DirecTV for patent
infringement. Finisar alleged that DirecTV’s electronic program guide
and other elements of its system infringe United States Patent No. 5,404,505
(the ‘505 patent).
In July
2006, we, together with NagraStar LLC, filed a Complaint for Declaratory
Judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware
against Finisar that asks the Court to declare that they and we do not infringe,
and have not infringed, any valid claim of the ‘505 patent. Trial is
not currently scheduled. The District Court has stayed our action
until the Federal Circuit has resolved DirecTV’s appeal.
We intend
to vigorously prosecute this case. In the event that a Court
ultimately determines that we infringe this patent, we may be subject to
substantial damages, which may include treble damages and/or an injunction that
could require us to modify our system architecture. We cannot predict
with any degree of certainty the outcome of the suit or determine the extent of
any potential liability or damages.
Forgent
During
2005, Forgent Networks, Inc. (“Forgent”) filed a lawsuit against us in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The
suit also named DirecTV, Charter, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cable One and Cox
as defendants. The suit alleged infringement of United States Patent
No. 6,285,746 (the ‘746 patent). The ‘746 patent discloses, among
other things, a video teleconferencing system which utilizes digital telephone
lines. Prior to trial, all of the other defendants settled with
Forgent. Forgent sought over $200 million in damages from DISH
Network. On May 21, 2007, the jury unanimously ruled in favor of DISH
Network, finding the ‘746 patent invalid. Forgent filed a motion for
a new trial, which the District Court denied. Forgent did not
appeal, so the District Court’s finding of invalidity is now
final.
Global
Communications
On April
19, 2007, Global Communications, Inc. (“Global”) filed a patent infringement
action against us in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Texas. The suit alleges infringement of United States Patent No.
6,947,702 (the ‘702 patent). This patent, which involves satellite
reception, was issued in September 2005. On October 24, 2007, the
United States Patent and Trademark Office granted our request for reexamination
of the ‘702 patent and issued an Office Action finding that all of the claims of
the ‘702 patent were invalid. Based on the PTO’s decision, we have
asked the District Court to stay the litigation until the reexamination
proceeding is concluded. We intend to vigorously defend this
case. In the event that a Court ultimately determines that we
infringe the ‘702 patent, we may be subject to substantial damages, which may
include treble damages and/or an injunction that could require us to materially
modify certain user-friendly features that we currently offer to
consumers. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome
of the suit or determine the extent of any potential liability or
damages.
Katz
Communications
On June
21, 2007, Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. (“Katz”) filed a patent
infringement action against us in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California. The suit alleges infringement of 19
patents owned by Katz. The patents relate to interactive voice
response, or IVR, technology. We intend to vigorously defend this
case. In the event that a Court ultimately determines that we
infringe any of the asserted patents, we may be subject to substantial damages,
which may include treble damages and/or an injunction that could require us to
materially modify certain user-friendly features that we currently offer to
consumers. We cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome
of the suit or determine the extent of any potential liability or
damages.
Retailer
Class Actions
During
2000, lawsuits were filed by retailers in Colorado state and federal court
attempting to certify nationwide classes on behalf of certain of our
retailers. The plaintiffs are requesting the Courts declare certain
provisions of, and changes to, alleged agreements between us and the retailers
invalid and unenforceable, and to award damages for lost incentives and
payments, charge backs, and other compensation. We are vigorously
defending against the suits and have asserted a variety of
counterclaims. The federal court action has been stayed during the
pendency of the state court action. We filed a motion for summary
judgment on all counts and against all plaintiffs. The plaintiffs
filed a motion for additional time to conduct discovery to enable them to
respond to our motion. The Court granted limited discovery which
ended during 2004. The plaintiffs claimed we did not provide adequate
disclosure during the discovery process. The Court agreed, and
recently denied our motion for summary judgment as a result. The
final impact of the Court’s ruling cannot be fully assessed at this
time. Trial has been set for August 2008. We intend to
vigorously defend this case. We cannot predict with any degree of
certainty the outcome of the suit or determine the extent of any potential
liability or damages.
Superguide
During
2000, Superguide Corp. (“Superguide”) filed suit against us, DirecTV, Thomson
and others in the United States District Court for the Western District of North
Carolina, Asheville Division, alleging infringement of United States Patent Nos.
5,038,211 (the ‘211 patent), 5,293,357 (the ‘357 patent) and 4,751,578 (the ‘578
patent) which relate to certain electronic program guide functions, including
the use of electronic program guides to control VCRs. Superguide
sought injunctive and declaratory relief and damages in an unspecified
amount.
On
summary judgment, the District Court ruled that none of the asserted patents
were infringed by us. These rulings were appealed to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. During 2004, the
Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the District Court’s
findings and remanded the case back to the District Court for further
proceedings. In 2005, Superguide indicated that it would no longer
pursue infringement allegations with respect to the ‘211 and ‘357 patents and
those patents have now been dismissed from the suit. The District
Court subsequently entered judgment of non-infringement in favor of all
defendants as to the ‘211 and ‘357 patents and ordered briefing on Thomson’s
license defense as to the ‘578 patent. During December 2006, the
District Court found that there were disputed issues of fact regarding Thomson’s
license defense, and ordered a trial solely addressed to that
issue. That trial took place in March 2007. In July 2007,
the District Court ruled in favor of Superguide. As a result,
Superguide will be able to proceed with its infringement action against us,
DirecTV and Thomson.
We intend
to vigorously defend this case. In the event that a Court ultimately
determines that we infringe the ‘578 patent, we may be subject to substantial
damages, which may include treble damages and/or an injunction that could
require us to materially modify certain user-friendly electronic programming
guide and related features that we currently offer to consumers. We
cannot predict with any degree of certainty the outcome of the suit or determine
the extent of any potential liability or damages.
Tivo
Inc.
On
January 31, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in
part and reversed in part the April 2006 jury verdict concluding that certain of
our digital video recorders, or DVRs, infringed a patent held by
Tivo. In its decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the jury’s
verdict of infringement on Tivo’s “software claims,” upheld the award of damages
from the district court, and ordered that the stay of the district court’s
injunction against us, which was issued pending appeal, will dissolve when the
appeal becomes final. The Federal Circuit, however, found that we did
not literally infringe Tivo’s “hardware claims,” and remanded such claims back
to the district court for further proceedings. We are appealing the
Federal Circuit’s ruling.
In
addition, we have developed and deployed ‘next-generation’ DVR software to our
customers’ DVRs. This improved software is fully operational and has
been automatically downloaded to current customers (the
“Design-Around”). We have formal legal opinions from outside counsel
that conclude that our Design-Around does not infringe, literally or under the
doctrine of equivalents, either the hardware or software claims of Tivo’s
patent.
In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, “Accounting
for Contingencies” (“SFAS 5”), we recorded a total reserve of $128 million in
“Litigation expense” on our Consolidated Balance Sheets to reflect the jury
verdict, supplemental damages and pre-judgment interest awarded by the Texas
court. This amount also includes the estimated cost of any software
infringement prior to the Design-Around, plus interest subsequent to the jury
verdict.
If the
Federal Circuit’s decision is upheld and Tivo decides to challenge the
Design-Around, we will mount a vigorous defense. If we are
unsuccessful in subsequent appeals or in defending against claims that the
Design-Around infringes Tivo’s patent, we could be prohibited from distributing
DVRs, or be required to modify or eliminate certain user-friendly DVR features
that we currently offer to consumers. In that event we would be at a
significant disadvantage to our competitors who could offer this functionality
and, while we would attempt to provide that functionality through other
manufacturers, the adverse affect on our business could be
material. We could also have to pay substantial additional
damages.
Trans
Video
In August
2006, Trans Video Electronic, Ltd. (“Trans Video”) filed a patent infringement
action against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District
of California. The suit alleges infringement of United States Patent
Nos. 5,903,621 (the ‘621 patent) and 5,991,801 (the ‘801 patent). The
patents relate to various methods related to the transmission of digital data by
satellite. On May 14, 2007, we reached a settlement with Trans Video
which did not have a material impact on our results of operations.
Other
In
addition to the above actions, we are subject to various other legal proceedings
and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our
opinion, the amount of ultimate liability with respect to any of these actions
is unlikely to materially affect our financial position, results of operations
or liquidity.
Item
4.
|
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY
HOLDERS
|
No items
were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of
2007.
PART
II
Item
5.
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
|
Market
Price of and Dividends on the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters
Market
Information. Our Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq Global Select Market
under the symbol “DISH.” The sale prices shown below reflect
inter-dealer quotations and do not include retail markups, markdowns, or
commissions and may not necessarily represent actual
transactions. The high and low closing sale prices of our Class A
common stock during 2007 and 2006 on the Nasdaq Global Select Market (as
reported by Nasdaq) are set forth below. The sales prices of our
Class A common stock reported below are not adjusted to reflect the
Spin-off.
2007
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
44.43 |
|
|
$ |
38.21 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
49.56 |
|
|
|
42.89 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
46.81 |
|
|
|
38.00 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
51.08 |
|
|
|
36.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
29.98 |
|
|
$ |
27.20 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
32.25 |
|
|
|
29.85 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
35.44 |
|
|
|
30.02 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
38.45 |
|
|
|
32.07 |
|
As of
February 19, 2008, there were approximately 11,435 holders of record of our
Class A common stock, not including stockholders who beneficially own Class A
common stock held in nominee or street name. As of February 19, 2008,
208,059,154 of the 238,435,208 outstanding shares of our Class B common stock
were held by Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and
the remaining 30,376,054 were held in a trust for members of Mr. Ergen’s
family. There is currently no trading market for our Class B common
stock.
Spin-off. On
January 1, 2008, DISH Network spun off EchoStar as a separate publicly-traded
company in the form of a stock dividend distributed to DISH Network
shareholders. DISH Network stockholders received for each share of
common stock held on the record date for the Spin-off, 0.20 of a share of the
same class of common stock of EchoStar. On February 19, 2008, the
closing sale price per share of our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select
Market was $30.33.
We
currently do not intend to declare additional dividends on our common
stock. Payment of any future dividends will depend upon our earnings
and capital requirements, restrictions in our debt facilities, and other factors
the Board of Directors considers appropriate. We currently intend to
retain our earnings, if any, to support future growth and expansion although we
expect to repurchase shares of our common stock from time to
time. See “Item 7. - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital
Resources.”
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans. See
Item 12 – Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management.
Purchases
of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
The
following table provides information regarding purchases of our Class A common
stock made by us for the period from October 1, 2007 through December 31,
2007.
Period
|
|
Total
Number
of
Shares
Purchased
(a)
|
|
|
Average
Price
Paid
per
Share
|
|
|
Total
Number of
Shares
Purchased
as
Part of Publicly
Announced
Plans
or
Programs
|
|
|
Maximum
Approximate
Dollar
Value of Shares
that
May Yet be
Purchased
Under the
Plans
or Programs (b)
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands, except share data)
|
|
October
1 - October 31, 2007
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
625,811 |
|
November
1 - November 30, 2007
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
1,000,000 |
|
December
1 - December 31, 2007
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
1,000,000 |
|
Total
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
1,000,000 |
|
|
(a)
|
During
the period from October 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007, we did not
repurchase any of our Class A common stock pursuant to our repurchase
program.
|
|
(b)
|
During
November 2007, our Board of Directors authorized an increase in the
maximum dollar value of shares that may be repurchased under our stock
repurchase program, such that we are currently authorized to repurchase up
to an aggregate of $1.0 billion of our outstanding shares through and
including December 31, 2008. Purchases under our repurchase
program may be made through open market purchases, privately negotiated
transactions, or Rule 10b5-1 trading plans, subject to market conditions
and other factors. We may elect not to purchase the maximum
amount of shares allowable under this program and we may also enter into
additional share repurchase programs authorized by our Board of
Directors.
|
The
selected consolidated financial data as of and for each of the five years ended
December 31, 2007 have been derived from, and are qualified by reference to our
Consolidated Financial Statements. Certain prior year amounts have
been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. See
further discussion under Item 7. – “Explanation of Key Metrics and Other
Items.” This data should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated
Financial Statements and related Notes thereto for the three years ended
December 31, 2007, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this
report.
|
|
For
the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
Statements
of Operations Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
revenue
|
|
$ |
10,690,976 |
|
|
$ |
9,422,274 |
|
|
$ |
8,027,664 |
|
|
$ |
6,724,757 |
|
|
$ |
5,439,638 |
|
Equipment
sales
|
|
|
362,185 |
|
|
|
362,098 |
|
|
|
367,968 |
|
|
|
364,929 |
|
|
|
285,551 |
|
Other
|
|
|
37,214 |
|
|
|
34,114 |
|
|
|
51,543 |
|
|
|
68,785 |
|
|
|
14,107 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
|
11,090,375 |
|
|
|
9,818,486 |
|
|
|
8,447,175 |
|
|
|
7,158,471 |
|
|
|
5,739,296 |
|
Costs
and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
expenses (exclusive of depreciation shown below
|
|
|
5,496,579 |
|
|
|
4,807,872 |
|
|
|
4,095,986 |
|
|
|
3,618,259 |
|
|
|
2,738,821 |
|
Satellite
and transmission expenses (exclusive of depreciation shown
below
|
|
|
180,687 |
|
|
|
147,450 |
|
|
|
134,545 |
|
|
|
112,238 |
|
|
|
79,322 |
|
Cost
of sales – equipment
|
|
|
270,389 |
|
|
|
282,420 |
|
|
|
271,697 |
|
|
|
259,058 |
|
|
|
161,724 |
|
Cost
of sales – other
|
|
|
11,333 |
|
|
|
7,260 |
|
|
|
23,339 |
|
|
|
33,265 |
|
|
|
3,496 |
|
Subscriber
acquisition costs
|
|
|
1,570,415 |
|
|
|
1,596,303 |
|
|
|
1,492,581 |
|
|
|
1,527,887 |
|
|
|
1,312,068 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
624,251 |
|
|
|
551,547 |
|
|
|
456,206 |
|
|
|
398,898 |
|
|
|
336,267 |
|
Litigation
expense
|
|
|
33,907 |
|
|
|
93,969 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
1,329,410 |
|
|
|
1,114,294 |
|
|
|
805,573 |
|
|
|
505,561 |
|
|
|
400,050 |
|
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
9,516,971 |
|
|
|
8,601,115 |
|
|
|
7,279,927 |
|
|
|
6,455,166 |
|
|
|
5,031,748 |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
1,573,404 |
|
|
$ |
1,217,371 |
|
|
$ |
1,167,248 |
|
|
$ |
703,305 |
|
|
$ |
707,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
756,054 |
|
|
$ |
608,272 |
|
|
$ |
1,514,540 |
(1) |
|
$ |
214,769 |
|
|
$ |
224,506 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
net income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
756,054 |
|
|
$ |
608,272 |
|
|
$ |
1,514,540 |
|
|
$ |
214,769 |
|
|
$ |
224,506 |
|
Diluted
net income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
765,571 |
|
|
$ |
618,106 |
|
|
$ |
1,560,688 |
(1) |
|
$ |
214,769 |
|
|
$ |
224,506 |
|
Basic
weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
447,302 |
|
|
|
444,743 |
|
|
|
452,118 |
|
|
|
464,053 |
|
|
|
483,098 |
|
Diluted
weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
456,834 |
|
|
|
452,685 |
|
|
|
484,131 |
|
|
|
467,598 |
|
|
|
488,314 |
|
Basic
net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
1.69 |
|
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
$ |
3.35 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
Diluted
net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
1.68 |
|
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
$ |
3.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
Cash
dividend per common share
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
As
of December 31,
|
|
Balance
Sheet Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
Cash,
cash equivalents and marketable investment securities
|
|
$ |
2,788,196 |
|
|
$ |
3,032,570 |
|
|
$ |
1,181,361 |
|
|
$ |
1,155,633 |
|
|
$ |
3,972,974 |
|
Restricted
cash and marketable investment securities
|
|
|
172,520 |
|
|
|
172,941 |
|
|
|
67,120 |
|
|
|
57,552 |
|
|
|
19,974 |
|
Cash
reserved for satellite insurance
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
176,843 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
10,086,529 |
|
|
|
9,768,696 |
|
|
|
7,410,210 |
|
|
|
6,029,277 |
|
|
|
7,585,018 |
|
Long-term
debt and capital lease obligations (including current
portion)
|
|
|
6,125,704 |
|
|
|
6,967,321 |
|
|
|
5,935,301 |
|
|
|
5,791,561 |
|
|
|
6,937,673 |
|
Total
stockholders' equity (deficit)
|
|
|
639,989 |
|
|
|
(219,383 |
) |
|
|
(866,624 |
) |
|
|
(2,078,212 |
) |
|
|
(1,032,524 |
) |
|
|
For
the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
Other
Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
DISH
Network subscribers, as of period end (in millions)
|
|
|
13.780 |
|
|
|
13.105 |
|
|
|
12.040 |
|
|
|
10.905 |
|
|
|
9.425 |
|
DISH
Network subscriber additions, gross (in millions)
|
|
|
3.434 |
|
|
|
3.516 |
|
|
|
3.397 |
|
|
|
3.441 |
|
|
|
2.894 |
|
DISH
Network subscriber additions, net (in millions)
|
|
|
0.675 |
|
|
|
1.065 |
|
|
|
1.135 |
|
|
|
1.480 |
|
|
|
1.245 |
|
Average
monthly subscriber churn rate
|
|
|
1.70 |
% |
|
|
1.64 |
% |
|
|
1.65 |
% |
|
|
1.62 |
% |
|
|
1.57 |
% |
Average
monthly revenue per subscriber ("ARPU")
|
|
$ |
65.83 |
|
|
$ |
62.78 |
|
|
$ |
58.34 |
|
|
$ |
55.26 |
|
|
$ |
51.30 |
|
Average
subscriber acquisition costs per subscriber ("SAC")
|
|
$ |
656 |
|
|
$ |
686 |
|
|
$ |
693 |
|
|
$ |
611 |
|
|
$ |
491 |
|
Net
cash flows from (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
activities
|
|
$ |
2,616,721 |
|
|
$ |
2,279,242 |
|
|
$ |
1,774,074 |
|
|
$ |
1,001,442 |
|
|
$ |
575,581 |
|
Investing
activities
|
|
$ |
(2,382,992 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,993,953 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,460,342 |
) |
|
$ |
1,078,281 |
|
|
$ |
(1,761,870 |
) |
Financing
activities
|
|
$ |
(976,016 |
) |
|
$ |
1,022,147 |
|
|
$ |
(402,623 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,666,022 |
) |
|
$ |
994,070 |
|
|
(1)
|
Net
income in 2005 includes $593 million and $322 million resulting from the
reversal and current year activity, respectively, of our recorded
valuation allowance for those net deferred tax assets that we believe are
more likely than not to be realized in the future (see Note 6 in the Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 15 of this Annual Report
on Form 10-K).
|
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Overview
We have
historically positioned the DISH Network as the leading low-cost provider of
multi-channel pay TV principally by offering lower cost programming
packages. At the same time we have sought to offer high quality
programming, equipment and customer service.
We invest
significant amounts in subscriber acquisition and retention programs based on
our expectation that long-term subscribers will be profitable. To
attract subscribers, we subsidize the cost of equipment and installation and may
also from time to time offer promotional pricing on programming and other
services to increase our subscriber base. We also seek to
differentiate DISH Network through the quality of the equipment we provide to
our subscribers, including our highly rated digital video recorder (“DVR”) and
high definition (“HD”) equipment which we promote to drive subscriber growth and
retention. Subscriber growth is also impacted, positively and
negatively, by customer service and customer experience in order, installation
and troubleshooting interactions.
During
2007, our subscriber base continued to grow, but at a slower pace than in
previous periods. We believe that our slower subscriber growth
was driven in part by competitive factors including the
effectiveness of certain competitors’ promotional offers, the number of
markets in which competitors offer local HD channels, and their aggressive
marketing of such advantages. Satellite launch delays at DISH Network have
slowed its growth of local HD markets which in turn has delayed its own
aggressive retention marketing efforts. Subscriber growth was also
affected by worsening economic conditions which included a
slowdown in new housing starts. Additional impacts to subscriber growth
included operational inefficiencies at DISH Network and piracy and other forms
of fraud. Most of the factors described above have affected both the
growth of new subscribers and the churn of existing customers.
Slower
subscriber growth rates continued in the fourth quarter of 2007, during which we
added 85,000 net new DISH Network subscribers. This rate of growth was
substantially lower than we have historically experienced on a quarterly basis
for the reasons mentioned above, and was particularly slow given that we
typically record relatively higher net subscriber growth rates in the fourth
fiscal quarter of each year.
We
believe opportunities exist to continue growing our subscriber base but whether
we will be able to achieve net subscriber growth is subject to a number of risks
and uncertainties, including those described elsewhere in this annual
report.
The
Spin-off. Effective January 1, 2008, we completed the
separation of the assets and businesses we owned and operated historically into
two companies (the “Spin-off”):
|
·
|
DISH
Network, through which we retain our pay-TV business,
and
|
|
·
|
EchoStar
Corporation (“EchoStar”), formerly known as EchoStar Holding Corporation,
which holds the digital set top box business, certain satellites, uplink
and satellite transmission assets, real estate and other assets and
related liabilities formerly held by DISH
Network.
|
DISH Network and
EchoStar now
operate separately, and neither entity has any ownership interest in the
other. In connection with the Spin-off, DISH Network entered
into certain agreements with EchoStar to define responsibility for obligations
relating to, among other things, set-top box sales, transition services, taxes,
employees and intellectual property which will have an impact in the future on
several of our key operating metrics.
We
believe that the Spin-off will enable us to focus more directly on the business
strategies relevant to subscription television business, but we recognize that,
particularly during 2008, we may experience disruptions and loss of synergies in
our business due to the separation of the two businesses, which could in turn
increase our costs.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
Operational
Results and Goals
Adding new
subscribers. During 2007, DISH Network added 675,000 net new
subscribers ending the year with approximately 13.780 million subscribers
compared to approximately 13.105 million subscribers at December 31, 2006, an
increase of 5.2%. Although this growth rate was slower than in prior
years and this deceleration continued in the fourth quarter, we intend to
continue to seek to add new subscribers by offering compelling value-based
consumer promotions in a disciplined manner. These promotions include
offers of free or low cost advanced consumer electronics products, such as
receivers with multiple tuners, HD receivers, DVRs, HD DVRs and place shifting
technology (“Slingbox”), as well as programming packages which we position to
have a better “price-to-value” relationship than packages offered by our
competitors.
However,
there are many reasons we may not be able to maintain subscriber growth, which
will depend in part on general economic conditions affecting demand for
multi-channel video programming generally. In addition, many of our
competitors are better equipped than we are to offer video services bundled with
broadband and other telecommunications services that may be attractive to
prospective subscribers. Our subscriber growth would also be
negatively impacted to the extent our competitors offer more attractive consumer
promotions or are perceived in the market as offering more compelling services,
such as a broader range of HD programming or exclusive programming
packages.
Minimize existing
customer churn. In
order to continue growing our subscriber base, we must minimize our rate of
customer turnover, or “churn.” Our average monthly subscriber churn for
the year ended December 31, 2007 was approximately 1.70%, a rate greater than
we’ve experienced in recent years due mostly to high churn in the second half of
2007. We attempt to contain churn by tailoring our promotions towards
DVRs, HD, and other advanced products which attract customers who tend to churn
at slower rates. We continue to require and have lengthened service
commitments from subscribers and have strengthened credit
requirements. Beyond these efforts, the competitive environment may
require us to increase promotional spending substantially or accept lower
subscriber acquisitions. Moreover, given the increasing customer demand
for advanced products such as DVRs and HD, it may not be possible to reduce
churn without significantly increasing our spending on customer retention, which
would have a negative effect on our earnings and free cash
flow.
Reduce
costs. We believe that our low cost structure is one of our
key competitive advantages and we continue to work aggressively to retain this
position. We are attempting to control costs by improving the quality
of the initial installation of subscriber equipment, improving the reliability
of our equipment, providing better subscriber education in the use of our
products and services, and enhancing our training and quality assurance programs
for our in-home service and call center representatives, all of which should
reduce the number of in-home installation and service calls. We
believe that further standardization of our receiver systems, introduction of
new installation technology and the migration away from relatively expensive and
complex subscriber equipment installations may also reduce in-home service and
customer service calls. In addition, we hope to further reduce our
customer service calls by simplifying processes such as billing and
non-technical equipment issues. However, these initiatives may not be
sufficient to maintain or increase our operational efficiencies and we may not
be able to continue to grow our operations cost effectively.
We also
attempt to reduce subscriber acquisition and retention costs by lowering the
overall cost of subsidized equipment we provide to new and existing customers
and improving the cost effectiveness of our sales efforts. Our
principal method for reducing the cost of subscriber equipment is to lease our
receiver systems to new and existing subscribers rather than selling systems to
them at little or no cost. Leasing enables us to, among other things,
reduce our future subscriber acquisition costs by redeploying equipment returned
by disconnected lease subscribers. We are further reducing the cost
of subscriber equipment through our design and deployment of receivers with
multiple tuners that allow the subscriber to receive our DISH Network services
in multiple rooms using a single receiver, thereby reducing the number of
receivers we deploy to each subscriber household. Additionally, we
continue to re-engineer our equipment to reduce the manufacturing
costs.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
However,
our overall costs to retain existing subscribers and acquire new subscribers,
including amounts expensed and capitalized, both in the aggregate and on a per
subscriber basis, may materially increase in the future to the extent that we
respond to the competitive environment by introducing more aggressive promotions
or newer, more expensive consumer electronics products. In addition,
expanded use of new compression technologies, such as MPEG-4 and 8PSK, will
inevitably render some portion of our current and future receivers obsolete, and
we will incur additional costs, which may be substantial, to upgrade or replace
these receivers. While we may be able to generate increased revenue
from such conversions, the deployment of equipment including new technologies
will increase the cost of our consumer equipment, at least in the short
term. Our subscriber acquisition and retention costs will increase to
the extent we subsidize those costs for new and existing
subscribers.
Prior to
the Spin-off, our set-top boxes and other customer equipment and satellite,
uplink and transmission services were recorded at cost. Following the
Spin-off, we will purchase set-top boxes from EchoStar at its cost plus an
additional incremental amount that is equal to a fixed percentage of its
cost. The specific amounts that we pay for set-top boxes will depend on a
variety of factors including the types of set-top boxes that we
purchase. In addition, we will purchase and/or lease satellite,
uplink and transmission services from EchoStar at higher rates than we have
traditionally paid. The prices that we pay for these services will
depend upon the nature of the services that we obtain from EchoStar and the
competitive market for these services. Furthermore, as part of the
Spin-off, certain real estate was contributed to EchoStar and leased back to us
and we will incur additional costs in the form of rent paid on these
leases. These additional anticipated costs are not reflected in our
historical consolidated financial statements for periods prior to January 1,
2008.
Pursue growth
initiatives. Our ability to achieve future growth and success
may require that we seek out opportunities to acquire other businesses or
technologies to complement, enhance or expand our current business or products,
or offer us other growth opportunities or that we make other significant
investments in technologies or in alternative or expanded means of distributing
our programming. Any of these acquisitions, investments or other
transactions may require that we commit significant capital that would otherwise
be directed to investments in our existing businesses or available for
distribution to our shareholders
Current
dislocations in the credit markets, which have significantly impacted the
availability and pricing of financing, particularly in the high yield debt and
leveraged credit markets, may limit our ability to obtain financing to support
our growth initiatives. These developments in the credit markets may
have a significant effect on our cost of financing and may, as a result, cause
us to defer or abandon profitable business strategies that we would otherwise
pursue if financing were available on acceptable terms
The FCC
announced on January 14, 2008 that we were qualified to participate in the FCC
auction of the 700 MHz band. The 700 MHz spectrum is being returned
by television broadcasters as they move to digital from analog signals in early
2009. The spectrum has significant commercial value because 700 MHz
signals can travel long distances and penetrate thick walls. Under
the FCC’s anti-collusion and anonymous bidding rules for this auction, we are
not permitted to disclose publicly our interest level or activity level in the
auction, if any, at this time. Based on published reports, however,
we believe that any successful bidders will be required to expend significant
amounts to secure and commercialize these licenses. In particular if
we were to participate and be successful in this auction we could be required to
raise additional capital in order to secure and commercialize these licenses,
which may not be available to us on attractive terms in the current credit
market environment. Moreover, there can be no assurance that
successful bidders will be able to achieve a return on their investments in the
700MHz spectrum or to raise all the capital required to develop these
licenses.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
EXPLANATION
OF KEY METRICS AND OTHER ITEMS
Subscriber-related
revenue. “Subscriber-related
revenue” consists principally of revenue from basic, movie, local, pay-per-view,
and international subscription television services, equipment rental fees,
additional outlet fees from subscribers with multiple receivers, DVR fees,
advertising sales, fees earned from our DishHOME Protection Plan, equipment
upgrade fees, HD programming and other subscriber revenue. Therefore,
not all of the amounts we include in “Subscriber-related revenue” are recurring
on a monthly basis.
Effective
the third quarter of 2007, we reclassified certain revenue from programmers from
“Other” sales to “Subscriber-related revenue.” All prior period
amounts were reclassified to conform to the current period
presentation.
Equipment
sales. “Equipment sales”
include sales of non-DISH Network digital receivers and related components to an
international DBS service provider and to other international
customers. “Equipment sales” also includes unsubsidized sales of DBS
accessories to retailers and other distributors of our equipment domestically
and to DISH Network subscribers. Following the Spin-off, our set-top
box business, consisting of sales of non-DISH Network digital receivers and
related components to an international DBS service provider and to other
international customers, is being operated by EchoStar, a separate,
publicly-traded company.
“Other”
sales. “Other” sales consist principally of satellite transmission
revenue.
Effective
in the third quarter of 2007, we reclassified certain revenue from programmers
from “Other” sales to “Subscriber-related revenue.” All prior period
amounts were reclassified to conform to the current period
presentation.
Subscriber-related
expenses. “Subscriber-related
expenses” principally include programming expenses, costs incurred in connection
with our in-home service and call center operations, copyright royalties,
billing costs, residual commissions paid to our distributors, refurbishment and
repair costs related to receiver systems, subscriber retention and other
variable subscriber expenses. All prior period amounts were
reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.
Satellite and
transmission expenses. “Satellite and
transmission expenses” include costs associated with the operation of our
digital broadcast centers, the transmission of local channels, satellite
telemetry, tracking and control services, satellite and transponder leases, and
other related services. Following the Spin-off, we lease satellite
and transponder capacity on several satellites that we formerly owned, and we
will incur higher satellite and transmission expenses with respect to that
leased capacity.
Cost of sales –
equipment. “Cost of sales – equipment” principally includes
costs associated with non-DISH Network digital receivers and related components
sold to an international DBS service provider and to other international
customers. “Cost of sales – equipment” also includes unsubsidized
sales of DBS accessories to retailers and other distributors of our equipment
domestically and to DISH Network subscribers. Following the Spin-off,
our set-top box business, consisting of sales of non-DISH Network digital
receivers and related components to an international DBS service provider and to
other international customers, is being operated by EchoStar.
Cost of sales –
other. “Cost of sales – other” principally includes costs
related to satellite transmission services.
Subscriber
acquisition costs. In addition to leasing
receivers, we generally subsidize installation and all or a portion of the cost
of our receiver systems in order to attract new DISH Network
subscribers. Our “Subscriber acquisition costs” include the cost of
our receiver systems sold to retailers and other distributors of our equipment,
the cost of receiver systems sold directly by us to subscribers, net costs
related to our promotional incentives, and costs related to installation and
acquisition advertising. We exclude the value of equipment
capitalized under our lease program for new subscribers from “Subscriber
acquisition costs.”
SAC. Management
believes subscriber acquisition cost measures are commonly used by those
evaluating companies in the multi-channel video programming distribution
industry. We are not aware of any uniform standards for calculating
the “average subscriber acquisition costs per new subscriber activation,” or
SAC, and we believe presentations of SAC may not be calculated consistently by
different companies in the same or similar businesses. Our SAC is
calculated as “Subscriber acquisition costs,” plus the value of equipment
capitalized under our lease program for new subscribers, divided by gross
subscriber additions. We include all the costs of acquiring
subscribers (i.e. subsidized and capitalized equipment) as our management
believes it is a more comprehensive measure of how much we are spending to
acquire subscribers. We also include all new DISH Network subscribers
in our calculation, including DISH Network subscribers added with little or no
subscriber acquisition costs.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
General and
administrative expenses. “General and
administrative expenses” consists primarily of employee-related costs associated
with administrative services such as legal, information systems, accounting and
finance, including non-cash, stock-based compensation
expense. It also includes outside professional fees (i.e. legal,
information systems and accounting services) and other items associated with
facilities and administration. Following the Spin-off, the general
and administrative expenses associated with our set-top box business and certain
infrastructure assets now held by EchoStar, including in particular research and
development expenses for those businesses, will be incurred by
EchoStar.
Interest
expense. “Interest expense”
primarily includes interest expense, prepayment premiums and amortization of
debt issuance costs associated with our senior debt and convertible subordinated
debt securities (net of capitalized interest) and interest expense associated
with our capital lease obligations.
“Other” income
(expense). The main components of
“Other” income and expense are unrealized gains and losses from changes in fair
value of non-marketable strategic investments accounted for at fair value,
equity in earnings and losses of our affiliates, gains and losses realized on
the sale of investments, and impairment of marketable and non-marketable
investment securities.
Earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
(“EBITDA”). EBITDA is defined as “Net income (loss)” plus
“Interest expense” net of “Interest income,” “Taxes” and “Depreciation and
amortization.”
DISH Network
subscribers. We include customers obtained through direct
sales, and through our retail networks and other distribution relationships, in
our DISH Network subscriber count. We also provide DISH Network service to
hotels, motels and other commercial accounts. For certain of these
commercial accounts, we divide our total revenue for these commercial accounts
by an amount approximately equal to the retail price of our most widely
distributed programming package, America’s Top 100 (but taking into account,
periodically, price changes and other factors), and include the resulting
number, which is substantially smaller than the actual number of commercial
units served, in our DISH Network subscriber count.
Average monthly
revenue per subscriber (“ARPU”). We are not aware
of any uniform standards for calculating ARPU and believe presentations of ARPU
may not be calculated consistently by other companies in the same or similar
businesses. We calculate average monthly revenue per subscriber, or
ARPU, by dividing average monthly “Subscriber-related revenues” for the period
(total “Subscriber-related revenue” during the period divided by the number of
months in the period) by our average DISH Network subscribers for the
period. Average DISH Network subscribers are calculated for the
period by adding the average DISH Network subscribers for each month and
dividing by the number of months in the period. Average DISH Network
subscribers for each month are calculated by adding the beginning and ending
DISH Network subscribers for the month and dividing by two.
Subscriber
churn rate/subscriber turnover. We are not
aware of any uniform standards for calculating subscriber churn rate and believe
presentations of subscriber churn rates may not be calculated consistently by
different companies in the same or similar businesses. We calculate
percentage monthly subscriber churn by dividing the number of DISH Network
subscribers who terminate service during each month by total DISH Network
subscribers as of the beginning of that month. We calculate average
subscriber churn rate for any period by dividing the number of DISH Network
subscribers who terminated service during that period by the average number of
DISH Network subscribers subject to churn during the period, and further
dividing by the number of months in the period. Average DISH Network
subscribers subject to churn during the period are calculated by adding the DISH
Network subscribers as of the beginning of each month in the period and dividing
by the total number of months in the period.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
Free cash
flow. We define free
cash flow as “Net cash flows from operating activities” less “Purchases of
property and equipment,” as shown on our Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Year
Ended December 31, 2007 Compared to the Year Ended December 31,
2006.
|
|
For
the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
Statements
of Operations Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
revenue
|
|
$ |
10,690,976 |
|
|
|
9,422,274 |
|
|
$ |
1,268,702 |
|
|
|
13.5 |
|
Equipment
sales
|
|
|
362,185 |
|
|
|
362,098 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
NM
|
|
Other
|
|
|
37,214 |
|
|
|
34,114 |
|
|
|
3,100 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
Total
revenue
|
|
|
11,090,375 |
|
|
|
9,818,486 |
|
|
|
1,271,889 |
|
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
expenses
|
|
|
5,496,579 |
|
|
|
4,807,872 |
|
|
|
688,707 |
|
|
|
14.3 |
|
%
of Subscriber-related revenue
|
|
|
51.4 |
% |
|
|
51.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Satellite
and transmission expenses
|
|
|
180,687 |
|
|
|
147,450 |
|
|
|
33,237 |
|
|
|
22.5 |
|
%
of Subscriber-related revenue
|
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales - equipment
|
|
|
270,389 |
|
|
|
282,420 |
|
|
|
(12,031 |
) |
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
%
of Equipment sales
|
|
|
74.7 |
% |
|
|
78.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales - other
|
|
|
11,333 |
|
|
|
7,260 |
|
|
|
4,073 |
|
|
|
56.1 |
|
Subscriber
acquisition costs
|
|
|
1,570,415 |
|
|
|
1,596,303 |
|
|
|
(25,888 |
) |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
General
and administrative
|
|
|
624,251 |
|
|
|
551,547 |
|
|
|
72,704 |
|
|
|
13.2 |
|
%
of Total revenue
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation
expense
|
|
|
33,907 |
|
|
|
93,969 |
|
|
|
(60,062 |
) |
|
|
(63.9 |
) |
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
1,329,410 |
|
|
|
1,114,294 |
|
|
|
215,116 |
|
|
|
19.3 |
|
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
9,516,971 |
|
|
|
8,601,115 |
|
|
|
915,856 |
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
1,573,404 |
|
|
|
1,217,371 |
|
|
|
356,033 |
|
|
|
29.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
137,872 |
|
|
|
126,401 |
|
|
|
11,471 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
Interest
expense, net of amounts capitalized
|
|
|
(405,319 |
) |
|
|
(458,150 |
) |
|
|
52,831 |
|
|
|
11.5 |
|
Other
|
|
|
(55,804 |
) |
|
|
37,393 |
|
|
|
(93,197 |
) |
|
NM
|
|
Total
other income (expense)
|
|
|
(323,251 |
) |
|
|
(294,356 |
) |
|
|
(28,895 |
) |
|
|
(9.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
1,250,153 |
|
|
|
923,015 |
|
|
|
327,138 |
|
|
|
35.4 |
|
Income
tax benefit (provision), net
|
|
|
(494,099 |
) |
|
|
(314,743 |
) |
|
|
(179,356 |
) |
|
|
(57.0 |
) |
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
756,054 |
|
|
$ |
608,272 |
|
|
$ |
147,782 |
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DISH
Network subscribers, as of period end (in millions)
|
|
|
13.780 |
|
|
|
13.105 |
|
|
|
0.675 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
DISH
Network subscriber additions, gross (in millions)
|
|
|
3.434 |
|
|
|
3.516 |
|
|
|
(0.082 |
) |
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
DISH
Network subscriber additions, net (in millions)
|
|
|
0.675 |
|
|
|
1.065 |
|
|
|
(0.390 |
) |
|
|
(36.6 |
) |
Average
monthly subscriber churn rate
|
|
|
1.70 |
% |
|
|
1.64 |
% |
|
|
0.06 |
% |
|
|
3.7 |
|
Average
monthly revenue per subscriber ("ARPU")
|
|
$ |
65.83 |
|
|
$ |
62.78 |
|
|
$ |
3.05 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
Average
subscriber acquisition costs per subscriber ("SAC")
|
|
$ |
656 |
|
|
$ |
686 |
|
|
$ |
(30 |
) |
|
|
(4.4 |
) |
EBITDA
|
|
$ |
2,847,010 |
|
|
$ |
2,369,058 |
|
|
$ |
477,952 |
|
|
|
20.2 |
|
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
DISH Network
subscribers. As of December 31,
2007, we had approximately 13.780 million DISH Network subscribers compared to
approximately 13.105 million subscribers at December 31, 2006, an increase of
5.2%. DISH Network added approximately 3.434 million gross new
subscribers for the year ended December 31, 2007, compared to approximately
3.516 million gross new subscribers during 2006, a decrease of approximately
82,000 gross new subscribers. We believe our gross new subscriber
additions have been and are likely to continue to be negatively impacted by
increased competition, including the relative attractiveness of promotions and
market perceptions of the availability of attractive programming, particularly
the relative quantity of HD programming offered, operational inefficiencies
which resulted in lower customer satisfaction with our products and services and
adverse economic conditions.
DISH
Network added approximately 675,000 net new subscribers for the year ended
December 31, 2007, compared to approximately 1.065 million net new subscribers
during 2006, a decrease of 36.6%. This decrease primarily resulted
from an increase in our subscriber churn rate, churn on a larger subscriber
base, and the decrease in gross new subscribers discussed above. Our
percentage monthly subscriber churn for the year ended December 31, 2007 was
1.70%, compared to 1.64% for the same period in 2006. We believe our
subscriber churn rate has been and is likely to continue to be negatively
impacted by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, increased
competition, an increase in non-pay disconnects primarily resulting from adverse
economic conditions, continuing effects of customer commitment expirations, and
increases in the theft of our signal or our competitors’ signals. In
addition, we also believe that churn was adversely affected by a number of
operational inefficiencies which, among other things, impacted our customer
service and overall customer experience.
We cannot
assure you that we will be able to lower our subscriber churn rate, or that our
subscriber churn rate will not increase. We believe we can reduce
churn by improving customer service and other areas of our operations in which
have recently experienced operational inefficiencies. However, given
the increasingly competitive nature of our industry, it may not be possible to
reduce churn without significantly increasing our spending on customer
retention, which would have a negative effect on our earnings and free cash
flow.
Our gross
new subscribers, our net new subscriber additions, and our entire subscriber
base are negatively impacted when existing and new competitors offer attractive
promotions or attractive product and service alternatives, including, among
other things, video services bundled with broadband and other telecommunications
services, better priced or more attractive programming packages and more
compelling consumer electronic products and services, including DVRs, video on
demand services, receivers with multiple tuners, HD programming, and HD and
standard definition local channels. We also expect to face increasing
competition from content and other providers who distribute video services
directly to consumers over the Internet.
As the
size of our subscriber base increases, even if our subscriber churn rate remains
constant or declines, increasing numbers of gross new DISH Network subscribers
are required to sustain net subscriber growth.
AT&T
and other telecommunications providers offer DISH Network programming bundled
with broadband, telephony and other services. Our net new subscriber
additions and certain of our other key operating metrics could be adversely
affected if AT&T or other telecommunication providers de-emphasize or
discontinue selling our services and we are not able to develop comparable
alternative distribution channels.
Subscriber-related
revenue. DISH Network “Subscriber-related revenue” totaled
$10.691 billion for the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $1.269
billion or 13.5% compared to 2006. This increase was directly
attributable to continued DISH Network subscriber growth and the increase in
“ARPU” discussed below.
ARPU. Monthly average
revenue per subscriber was $65.83 during the year ended December 31, 2007 versus
$62.78 during the same period in 2006. The $3.05 or 4.9% increase in
ARPU is primarily attributable to price increases in February 2007 and 2006 on
some of our most popular programming packages, increased penetration of HD
programming, higher equipment rental fees resulting from increased penetration
of our equipment leasing programs, other hardware related fees, fees for DVRs,
and revenue from increased availability of standard definition and HD local
channels by satellite.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS –
Continued
|
Equipment
sales. “Equipment sales”
totaled $362 million during each of the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006. During 2007, we experienced a slight increase in sales of
non-DISH Network digital receivers and related components to international
customers, offset by a decrease in domestic sales of DBS
accessories. A substantial portion of our “Equipment sales” in 2007
consisted of sales of non-DISH Network digital receivers and related components
to an international DBS service provider and to other international
customers. This set-top box business is, following the Spin-off,
operated by EchoStar. As a result, our “Equipment sales” are likely
to be substantially lower in 2008 than those recorded in 2007.
Subscriber-related
expenses. “Subscriber-related expenses” totaled $5.497 billion
during the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $689 million or 14.3%
compared to 2006. The increase in “Subscriber-related expenses” was
primarily attributable to the increase in the number of DISH Network subscribers
and the items discussed below that contributed to the increase in the expense to
revenue ratio. “Subscriber-related expenses” as a percentage of
“Subscriber-related revenue” increased to 51.4% from 51.0% in the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to 2006. The increase in this expense to
revenue ratio primarily resulted from increases in: (i) programming
costs, (ii) in-home service, refurbishment and repair costs for our receiver
systems associated with increased penetration of our equipment lease programs,
and (iii) bad debt expense resulting from an increase in the number of
subscribers who we deactivated for non-payment of their bill. These increases
were partially offset by a decline in costs associated with our call center
operations and in costs associated with our previous co-branding arrangement
with AT&T.
In the
normal course of business, we enter into various contracts with programmers to
provide content. Our programming contracts generally require us to
make payments based on the number of subscribers to which the respective content
is provided. Consequently, our programming expenses will continue to
increase to the extent we are successful in growing our subscriber
base. In addition, because programmers continue to raise the price of
content, our “Subscriber-related expenses” as a percentage of
“Subscriber-related revenue” could materially increase absent corresponding
price increases in our DISH Network programming packages.
Satellite and
transmission expenses. “Satellite and
transmission expenses” totaled $181 million during the year ended December 31,
2007, an increase of $33 million or 22.5% compared to 2006. This
increase primarily resulted from higher operational costs associated with our
capital lease of Anik F3 which commenced commercial operations in April 2007 and
the higher costs associated with our enhanced content platform including a
broader distribution of more extensive HD programming. “Satellite and
transmission expenses” as a percentage of “Subscriber-related revenue” increased
to 1.7% from 1.6% in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to
2006.
Following
the Spin-off, we are leasing satellite and transponder capacity on several
satellites that we formerly owned. As a result, we will, beginning
January 1, 2008, record higher satellite and transmission expenses for this
leased satellite capacity. This will be offset to some extent by
lower depreciation expense as we will no longer record depreciation on these
satellites which are now owned by EchoStar. Satellite and
transmission expenses are likely to increase further in the future to the extent
we increase the size of our owned and leased satellite fleet, obtain in-orbit
satellite insurance, increase our uplinking capacity and launch additional
HD local markets and other programming services.
Cost of sales –
equipment. “Cost of sales – equipment” totaled $270 million
during the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $12 million or 4.3%
compared to 2006. This decrease primarily resulted from a decline in
charges for defective, slow moving and obsolete inventory and in the cost of
non-DISH Network digital receivers and related components sold to international
customers. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in the cost
of domestic sales of DBS accessories. “Cost of sales – equipment” as
a percentage of “Equipment sales” decreased to 74.7% from 78.0% in the year
ended December 31, 2007 compared to 2006. The decrease in the expense to
revenue ratio is principally related to lower 2007 charges for defective, slow
moving and obsolete inventory and an increase in margins on sales of non-DISH
Network digital receivers and related components sold to international
customers, partially offset by the decrease in margins on domestic sales of DBS
accessories. A substantial portion of our “Cost of sales – equipment”
in 2007 consisted of sales of non-DISH Network digital receivers and related
components to an international DBS service provider and to other international
customers. This set-top box business is, following the Spin-off,
operated by EchoStar. As a result, our “Cost of sales – equipment”
are likely to be substantially lower in 2008 than those recorded in
2007.
Subscriber
acquisition costs. “Subscriber acquisition costs” totaled $1.570
billion for the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $26 million or 1.6%
compared to 2006. The decrease in “Subscriber acquisition costs” was
attributable to a decrease in gross new subscribers, a decrease in SAC
discussed below and a higher number of DISH Network subscribers participating in
our equipment lease program for new subscribers.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
SAC. SAC
was $656 during the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $686 during 2006, a
decrease of $30, or 4.4%. This decrease was primarily attributable to
the redeployment benefits of our equipment lease program for new subscribers and
lower average equipment costs, partially offset by higher acquisition
advertising. As a result of the Spin-off, we are likely to incur
higher SAC as we will be acquiring equipment, particularly digital receivers,
from third parties. This equipment was historically designed in-house
and procured at our cost. We initially expect to acquire this
equipment from EchoStar at its cost, plus an additional amount representing an
agreed margin on that cost.
During
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the amount of equipment capitalized
under our lease program for new subscribers totaled approximately $682 million
and $817 million, respectively. This decrease in capital expenditures
under our lease program for new subscribers resulted primarily from an increase
in redeployment of equipment returned by disconnecting lease program
subscribers, decreased subscriber growth, fewer receivers per installation as
the number of dual tuner receivers we install continues to increase, lower
average equipment costs and a reduction in accessory costs.
Capital
expenditures resulting from our equipment lease program for new subscribers have
been, and we expect will continue to be, partially mitigated by, among other
things, the redeployment of equipment returned by disconnecting lease program
subscribers. However, to remain competitive we will have to upgrade
or replace subscriber equipment periodically as technology changes, and the
associated costs may be substantial. To the extent technological
changes render a portion of our existing equipment obsolete, we would be unable
to redeploy all returned equipment and would realize less benefit from the SAC
reduction associated with redeployment of that returned lease
equipment.
Our SAC
calculation does not include the benefit of payments we received in connection
with equipment not returned to us from disconnecting lease subscribers and
returned equipment that is made available for sale rather than being redeployed
through our lease program. During the years ended December 31, 2007
and 2006, these amounts totaled approximately $87 million and $121 million,
respectively.
Our
“Subscriber acquisition costs,” both in aggregate and on a per new subscriber
activation basis, may materially increase in the future to the extent that we
introduce more aggressive promotions if we determine that they are necessary to
respond to competition, or for other reasons. See further discussion
under “Liquidity and Capital
Resources – Subscriber Retention and Acquisition Costs.”
Litigation
expense. During
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, we recorded “Litigation expense” in
the Tivo case of $34 million and $94 million, respectively. The $94 million
reflects the jury verdict, supplemental damages and pre-judgment interest
awarded by the Texas court. The $34 million additional expense in
2007 represents the estimated cost of any software infringement prior to the
implementation of the alternative technology, plus interest subsequent to the
jury verdict. See Note 9 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial
Statements in Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further
discussion.
General and
administrative expenses. “General and administrative expenses”
totaled $624 million during the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $73
million or 13.2% compared to 2006. This increase was primarily
attributable to an increase in administrative costs to support the growth of the
DISH Network and outside professional fees. In addition, this
increase primarily related to the expensing of the in-process research and
development costs associated with the acquisition of Sling Media. “General
and administrative expenses” represented 5.6% of “Total revenue” during each of
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. Following the Spin-off, we
anticipate that “General and administrative expenses” should decline as overhead
and other expenses, particularly research and development expenses, associated
with the set-top box and certain infrastructure assets, are incurred at
EchoStar.
Depreciation and
amortization. “Depreciation and amortization” expense totaled
$1.329 billion during the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $215
million or 19.3% compared to 2006. The increase in “Depreciation and
amortization” expense was primarily attributable to depreciation on equipment
leased to subscribers resulting from increased penetration of our equipment
lease programs, additional depreciation related to satellites and other
depreciable assets placed in service to support the DISH Network, and the
write-off of costs associated with obsolete fixed assets. Several
satellites and other infrastructure assets formerly owned by us were contributed
to EchoStar in the Spin-off and, as a result, we will no longer record
depreciation expense related to these assets.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
Interest expense,
net of amounts capitalized. “Interest expense”
totaled $405 million during the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $53
million or 11.5% compared to 2006. This decrease primarily resulted
from a net decrease in interest expense related to redemptions and issuances of
debt during 2006 and 2007.
Other. “Other” expense totaled
$56 million during the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $93 million
compared to “Other” income of $37 million during 2006. The decrease
in “Other” primarily resulted from $56 million in charges to earnings for other
than temporary declines in fair value of our common stock investment in a
foreign public company and a non-marketable investment security during
2007. In addition, we had a decrease in net unrealized and realized
gains during 2007 compared to 2006.
Earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. EBITDA was $2.847
billion during the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $478 million or
20.2% compared to 2006. The following table reconciles EBITDA to the
accompanying financial statements:
|
|
For
the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$ |
2,847,010 |
|
|
$ |
2,369,058 |
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense, net
|
|
|
267,447 |
|
|
|
331,749 |
|
Income
tax provision (benefit), net
|
|
|
494,099 |
|
|
|
314,743 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
1,329,410 |
|
|
|
1,114,294 |
|
Net
income (loss
|
|
$ |
756,054 |
|
|
$ |
608,272 |
|
EBITDA is
not a measure determined in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States, or GAAP, and should not be considered a
substitute for operating income, net income or any other measure determined in
accordance with GAAP. EBITDA is used as a measurement of operating
efficiency and overall financial performance and we believe it to be a helpful
measure for those evaluating companies in the multi-channel video programming
distribution industry. Conceptually, EBITDA measures the amount of
income generated each period that could be used to service debt, pay taxes and
fund capital expenditures. EBITDA should not be considered in
isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance
with GAAP.
Income
tax
(provision)
benefit,
net. Our income tax provision was $494 million during the year
ended December 31, 2007, an increase of $179 million or 57.0% compared to during
the same period in 2006. The increase in the provision was primarily
related to the improvement in “Income (loss) before income taxes” and an
increase in the effective state tax rate due to changes in state apportionment
percentages. The year ended December 31, 2007 includes a deferred tax
liability of $16 million related to the conversion of one of our subsidiaries to
a limited liability company from a corporation in connection with the
Spin-off. In addition, the year ended December 31, 2007, includes a
reversal of $4 million related to state tax valuation allowances. The
year ended December 31, 2006 includes a credit of $13 million related to the
recognition of state net operating loss carry forwards ("NOLs") for prior
periods. During 2008, we expect our income tax provision to reflect
statutory Federal and state tax rates.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
|
|
For
the Years
|
|
|
|
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted
income tax benefit (provision), net
|
|
$ |
(474,581 |
) |
|
$ |
(338,514 |
) |
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
year valuation allowance activity
|
|
|
3,845 |
|
|
|
(7,324 |
) |
Deferred
tax liability corporate restructuring
|
|
|
15,673 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Deferred
tax asset for filed returns
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5,319 |
|
Prior
period adjustments to state NOLs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(13,461 |
) |
Amended
state filings
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(8,305 |
) |
Income
tax benefit (provision), net
|
|
$ |
(494,099 |
) |
|
$ |
(314,743 |
) |
Net income
(loss). Net
income was $756 million during the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of
$148 million compared to $608 million in 2006. The increase was
primarily attributable to the changes in revenue and expenses discussed
above.
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -
Continued
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 Compared to the Year Ended December 31,
2005.
|
|
For
the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
Statements
of Operations Data
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
revenue
|
|
$ |
9,422,274 |
|
|
$ |
8,027,664 |
|
|
$ |
1,394,610 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Equipment
sales
|
|
|
362,098 |
|
|
|
367,968 |
|
|
|
(5,870 |
) |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
34,114 |
|
|
|
51,543 |
|
|
|
(17,429 |
) |
|
|
(33.8 |
) |
Total
revenue
|
|
|
9,818,486 |
|
|
|
8,447,175 |
|
|
|
1,371,311 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscriber-related
expenses
|
|
|
4,807,872 |
|
|
|
4,095,986 |
|
|
|
711,886 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
%
of Subscriber-related revenue
|
|
|
51.0 |
% |
|
|
51.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Satellite
and transmission expenses
|
|
|
147,450 |
|
|
|
134,545 |
|
|
|
12,905 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
%
of Subscriber-related revenue
|
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales - equipment
|
|
|
282,420 |
|
|
|
271,697 |
|
|
|
10,723 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
%
of Equipment sales
|
|
|
78.0 |
% |
|
|
73.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales - other
|
|
|
7,260 |
|
|
|
23,339 |
|
|
|
(16,079 |
) |
|
|
(68.9 |
) |
Subscriber
acquisition costs
|
|
|
1,596,303 |
|
|
|
1,492,581 |
|
|
|
103,722 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
551,547 |
|
|
|
456,206 |
|
|
|
95,341 |
|
|
|
20.9 |
|
%
of Total revenue
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation
expense
|
|
|
93,969 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
93,969 |
|
|
NM
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
1,114,294 |
|
|
|
805,573 |
|
|
|
308,721 |
|
|
|
38.3 |
|
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
8,601,115 |
|
|
|
7,279,927 |
|
|
|
1,321,188 |
|
|
|
18.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|