The Mobile company provides tower rental space to affiliated and non-affiliated companies in the Company’s PCS markets and paging services throughout the northern Shenandoah Valley.
The results for the three months ended March 31, 2005 have been restated to reflect the correction of certain errors in the Company’s accounting for operating leases. See Note 2 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this report for additional information. The effect of these restatements on the Mobile segment’s operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was to decrease tower lease revenue-non-affiliate by $5 thousand, increase cost of goods and services by $40 thousand and decrease segment operating income by $45 thousand.
At March 31, 2006, the Mobile segment had 105 towers and 149 non-affiliate tenants compared to 90 towers and 142 non-affiliate tenants at March 31, 2005.
For the first three months of 2006, the Mobile Company did not have any additional significant changes from the prior period that need to be discussed.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The Company has four principal sources of funds available to meet the financing needs of its operations, capital projects, debt service, investments and potential dividends. These sources include cash flows from operations, cash and cash equivalents, the liquidation of investments and borrowings. Management routinely considers the alternatives available to determine what mix of sources are best suited for the long-term benefit of the Company.
Sources and Uses of Cash. The Company generated $10.4 million of net cash from operations in the 2006 three month period, compared to $9.5 million in the 2005 three month period.
Indebtedness. As of March 31, 2006, the Company’s indebtedness totaled $33.6 million, with an annualized overall weighted average interest rate of approximately 7.5%. As of March 31, 2006, the Company was in compliance with the covenants in its credit agreements.
On August 4, 2005, the board of directors of the Rural Telephone Bank (the “RTB”) adopted a number of resolutions for the purpose of dissolving the RTB as of October 1, 2005. The Company held 10,821,770 shares of Class B and Class C RTB Common Stock ($1.00 par value) which was reflected on the Company’s balance sheet at December 31, 2005, at $796,000 under the cost method. During the first quarter of 2006, the Company recognized a gain of approximately $6.4 million, net of tax, related to the dissolution of the RTB and the redemption of the stock. In April 2006, the Company received $11.3 million in proceeds from the RTB.
The Company has no off-balance sheet arrangements and has not entered into any transactions involving unconsolidated, limited purpose entities or commodity contracts.
Capital Commitments. Capital expenditures budgeted for 2006 total approximately $43.6 million, including approximately $21.3 million for additional PCS base stations, additional towers and switch upgrades to enhance the PCS network. Approximately $5.7 million is budgeted for NTC’s network upgrades and new apartment complex build outs, improvements and replacements, approximately $5.3 million for the telephone operations, approximately $2.4 million for wireless broadband projects, and approximately $8.4 million for technology upgrades and other capital needs. For the 2006 three month period, the Company spent $5.6 million on capital projects.
The Company believes that cash on hand, cash flow from operations, the April 2006 RTB distribution and borrowings expected to be available under the Company’s existing revolving credit facility will provide sufficient cash to enable the Company to fund its planned capital expenditures, make scheduled principal and interest payments, meet its other cash requirements and maintain compliance with the terms of its financing agreements for at least the next 12 months. Thereafter, capital expenditures will likely continue to be required to provide increased capacity to meet the Company’s expected growth in demand for its products and services. The actual amount and timing of the Company’s future capital requirements may differ materially from the Company’s estimate depending on the demand for its products and new market developments and opportunities. The Company currently expects that it will fund its future capital expenditures primarily with cash from operations and with borrowings.
These events include, but are not limited to; changes in overall economic conditions, regulatory requirements, changes in technologies, availability of labor resources and capital, changes in the Company’s relationship with Sprint Nextel, cancellations or non-renewal of NTC contracts and other conditions. The PCS subsidiary’s operations are dependent upon Sprint Nextel’s ability to execute certain functions such as billing, customer care, and collections; the subsidiary’s ability to develop and implement successful marketing programs and new products and services, and the subsidiary’s ability to effectively and economically manage other operating activities under the Company’s agreements with Sprint Nextel. The Company’s ability to attract and maintain a sufficient customer base is also critical to its ability to maintain a positive cash flow from operations. The foregoing events individually or collectively could affect the Company’s results. The Company continues to assess the impact of the planned merger of Sprint Nextel and Nextel Partners on the Company’s operations.
The Company has had discussions with Sprint Nextel regarding the continuance of their long-term relationship, the impact of the Sprint Nextel merger and potential changes to the management agreement necessary to reflect the merger of Sprint Corporation and Nextel Communications, Inc and the acquisition of Nextel Partners, Inc. by Sprint Nextel. As a result of the Sprint Nextel merger, Sprint Nextel may require the Company to meet additional program requirements, which the Company anticipates would increase capital expenditures and operating expenses. To date, the Company has been unable to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement with Sprint Nextel concerning such potential changes.
27
Accordingly the Company is now going to consider other alternatives in discussions with Sprint Nextel including the possible sale of its PCS business. The Company is unable to predict whether or on what terms it would be able to implement a sale of its PCS business, the ultimate resolution of its discussions with Sprint Nextel concerning its relationship, or the impact of any such action on its financial condition or future operating results or prospects.
Employee Stock Options
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123, “Share-Based Payment (Revised 2004)” (“SFAS 123(R)”) using the modified prospective application transition method, which establishes accounting for stock-based awards exchanged for employee services. Accordingly, for equity classified awards, stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized over the requisite service period. For those tandem awards of stock options and stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) which are liability classified awards, fair value is calculated at the grant date and each subsequent reporting date during both the requisite service period and each subsequent period until settlement.
See Note 5 to the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123(R), which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS 123(R) replaces SFAS No. 123, and supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and amends SFAS No. 95, “Statement of Cash Flows.” The approach in SFAS 123(R) is similar to the approach described in SFAS No. 123, however, SFAS 123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure will no longer be an alternative. SFAS 123(R) was effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2006. The Company recorded a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle of approximately $0.1 million as a result of implementing SFAS 123(R) in the first quarter 2006.
In March 2005, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 47 “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations—an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 143” (“FIN No. 47”). FIN No. 47 clarifies the timing of liability recognition for legal obligations associated with the retirement of a tangible long-lived asset when the timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future event. FIN No. 47 was effective for the Company as of December 31, 2005. The adoption of FIN No. 47 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial position.
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error Corrections—a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3” (“SFAS No. 154”). This Statement replaces APB Opinion No. 20, “Accounting Changes” and FASB Statement No. 3, “Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim Financial Statements,” and changes the requirements for the accounting for and reporting of a change in accounting principle. SFAS No. 154 applies to all voluntary changes in an accounting principle. It also applies to changes required by an accounting pronouncement in the unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition provisions. When a pronouncement includes specific transition provisions, those provisions should be followed. SFAS No. 154 was effective for accounting changes and error corrections occurring in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005.
| |
ITEM 3. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
The Company’s market risks relate primarily to changes in interest rates on instruments held for other than trading purposes. The Company’s interest rate risk involves three components. The first component is outstanding debt with variable rates. As of March 31, 2006, the Company has no variable rate debt outstanding. The Company’s debt has fixed rates through maturity. A 10.0% increase in interest rates would decrease the fair value of the Company’s total debt by approximately $0.8 million, while the estimated fair value of the fixed rate debt was approximately $33.9 million as of March 31, 2006.
The second component of interest rate risk consists of temporary excess cash, which is primarily invested in overnight repurchase agreements and Treasury bills with a maturity of less than 90 days. The cash is currently invested in short-term investment vehicles that have limited interest rate risk. Management continues to evaluate the most beneficial use of these funds.
The third component of interest rate risk is marked increases in interest rates that may adversely affect the rate at which the Company may borrow funds for growth in the future. Management does not believe that this risk is currently
28
significant because the Company’s existing sources of liquidity are adequate to provide cash for operations, payment of debt and near-term capital projects.
Management does not view market risk as having a significant impact on the Company’s results of operations, although future results could be adversely affected if interest rates were to increase significantly for an extended period and the Company were to require external financing. General economic conditions affected by regulatory changes, competition or other external influences may pose a higher risk to the Company’s overall results.
As of March 31, 2006, the Company has $6.5 million invested in privately held companies directly or through investments with portfolio managers. Most of the companies are in an early stage of development and significant increases in interest rates could have an adverse impact on their results, ability to raise capital and viability. The Company’s market risk is limited to the funds previously invested and an additional $0.7 million committed under contracts the Company has signed with portfolio managers.
29
| |
ITEM 4. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Management, with the participation of our President and Chief Executive Officer, who is the principal executive officer, and the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, who is the principal financial officer, conducted an evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined by Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. As previously disclosed under “Item 9A. Controls and Procedures” in its 2005 Form 10-K filed on March 21, 2006, the Company identified material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting in accounting for leases and also in the calculation of the income tax provision. As further disclosed in that report, and as discussed below, the Company is in the process of remediating the two material weaknesses, but the remediation of these weaknesses has not yet been completed or fully tested. The Company’s principal executive officer and its principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of March 31, 2006.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
During the first fiscal quarter of 2006, there were changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal control over financial reporting as follows:
To remediate the two material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting disclosed under “Item 9A. Controls and Procedures” in the 2005 Form 10-K, the Company is implementing and refining review procedures for existing leases and new leases and is establishing review procedures over the selection of appropriate assumptions and factors affecting lease accounting during the quarter covered by this report. With respect to its accounting for income taxes, the Company is continuing to take steps to assure that personnel assigned have the necessary skills, knowledge and resources. Furthermore, the Company is reviewing its policies and procedures to provide adequate supervisory review of the analysis of income tax accounting amounts.
Other Matters Relating to Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Under the Company’s agreements with Sprint Nextel, Sprint Nextel provides the Company with billing, collections, customer care, certain network operations and other back office services for the PCS operation. As a result, Sprint Nextel remits to the Company approximately 66% of the Company’s total revenues, while approximately 33% of the expenses reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements relate to charges by or through Sprint Nextel for expenses such as billing, collections and customer care, roaming expense, long-distance, and travel. Due to this relationship, the Company necessarily relies on Sprint Nextel to provide accurate, timely and sufficient data and information to properly record the Company’s revenues, expenses and accounts receivable, which underlie a substantial portion of the Company’s periodic financial statements and other financial disclosures.
Information provided by Sprint Nextel includes reports regarding the subscriber accounts receivable in the Company’s markets. Sprint Nextel provides the Company with monthly accounts receivable, billing and cash receipts information on a market level, rather than a subscriber level. The Company reviews these various reports to identify discrepancies or errors. Under the Company’s agreements with Sprint Nextel, the Company is entitled to only a portion of the receipts, net of items such as taxes, government surcharges, certain allocable write-offs and the 8% of revenue retained by Sprint Nextel. Because of the Company’s reliance on Sprint Nextel for financial information, the Company must depend on Sprint Nextel to design adequate internal controls with respect to the processes established to provide this data and information to the Company and Sprint Nextel’s other Sprint PCS affiliate network partners. To address this issue, Sprint Nextel engages an independent registered public accounting firm to perform a periodic evaluation of these controls and to provide a “Report on Controls Placed in Operation and Tests of Operating Effectiveness for Affiliates” under guidance provided in Statement of Auditing Standards No. 70 (“SAS 70 reports”). The report is provided to the Company on semi-annual basis and covers a six-month period. The most recent report covers the period from April 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005. The most recent report indicated there were no material issues which would adversely affect the information used to support the recording of the revenues and expenses provided by Sprint Nextel related to the Company’s relationship with them.
30
| |
PART II. | OTHER INFORMATION |
| |
ITEM 1. | Legal Proceedings |
The Company had no material legal proceedings as of the date of this report.
As previously discussed, our actual results could differ materially from our forward looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed below. These and many other factors described in this report and in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 could adversely affect our operations, performance and financial condition.
Sprint Nextel. On August 12, 2005, Sprint Corporation and Nextel Communications, Inc. merged to form Sprint Nextel Corporation. Nextel and its affiliate Nextel Partners, Inc. are providers of digital wireless communications services in the Company’s PCS service area.
The Company’s PCS subsidiary is one of a number of companies we refer to as the “Sprint PCS Affiliates,” which had entered into substantially similar management and affiliation agreements with Sprint Communications Company, L.P. The agreements, including Shentel’s, were with several Sprint entities. In connection with the merger, a number of the Sprint PCS Affiliates filed suit against Sprint Nextel alleging that the merger would result in a breach of the exclusivity provisions of their agreements with Sprint Nextel. A number of these legal proceedings are pending. In addition, since the Sprint Nextel merger was announced, Sprint Nextel has acquired several of the Sprint PCS Affiliates.
Prior to the Sprint Nextel merger, the Company and Sprint Nextel entered into a forbearance agreement which sets forth Sprint Nextel’s agreement to observe specified limitations in operating Nextel’s wireless business in the Company’s PCS service area. The agreement also sets forth the Company’s agreement not to initiate litigation or seek certain injunctive or equitable relief under certain circumstances, in each case during the period in which the agreement remains in effect. Unless extended, the forbearance agreement is currently set to expire on the earlier of July 14, 2006 and the date any decision after trial is rendered by the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware.
The Company believes that a significant portion of its PCS service area overlaps the service area operated by Nextel Partners under the Nextel brand. Nextel Partners was not a party to the Sprint Nextel merger. The agreements between Nextel Partners and Nextel contain exclusivity and other provisions that remain in place following the Sprint Nextel merger until such time that the acquisition of Nextel Partners by Sprint Nextel is completed. The Company believes that the provisions under the agreements between Nextel and Nextel Partners conflict with the Company’s rights under its management and affiliation agreements. Even if such provisions do not conflict, as long as Nextel Partners remains an independent entity, the Company’s ability to fully realize any of the benefits from the merger of Sprint and Nextel may be limited. Further, the continued operation by Nextel Partners of a competing network could have a negative impact on the Company’s results of operations. Sprint Nextel has entered into an agreement to acquire Nextel Partners. The acquisition of Nextel Partners by Sprint Nextel is subject to certain regulatory approvals, the timing of which are uncertain.
The Company has had discussions with Sprint Nextel regarding the continuance of their long-term relationship, the impact of the Sprint Nextel merger and potential changes to the management agreement necessary to reflect the merger of Sprint Corporation and Nextel Communications, Inc. and the acquisition of Nextel Partners, Inc. by Sprint Nextel. As a result of the Sprint Nextel merger, Sprint Nextel may require the Company to meet additional program requirements, which the Company anticipates would increase capital expenditures and operating expenses. To date, the Company has been unable to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement with Sprint Nextel concerning such potential changes. Accordingly, the Company is now going to consider other alternatives in discussions with Sprint Nextel including the possible sale of its PCS business. The Company is unable to predict whether or on what terms it would be able to implement a sale of its PCS business, the ultimate resolution of its discussions with Sprint Nextel concerning its relationship, or the impact of any such action on its financial condition or future operating results or prospects.
Access Charges. The Company’s access revenue may be adversely impacted by legislative or regulatory actions, or technology developments, that decrease access rates or exempt certain traffic from paying for access to the Company’s regulated telephone network. The Federal Communications Commission is currently reviewing the issue of access charges as well as an overhaul of intercarrier compensation. An unfavorable change may have an adverse effect on the Company’s telephone operations.
31
Telephone Competition. There has been a trend for incumbent local exchange carriers to see a decrease in access lines due to the effect of wireless and wireline competition and the elimination of second lines dedicated to dial-up Internet as customers migrate to broadband connections. Although the Company has not seen a material reduction in its number of access lines to date, and reported a slight increase during the 2006 three month period, the dominating nationwide trend has been a decline in the number of access lines. There is a significant risk that a downward trend could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s telephone operations in the future.
Fiber Facilities. The Company’s revenue from fiber leases may be adversely impacted by price competition for these facilities. The Company monitors each of its fiber lease customers to minimize the risk related to this business.
Cable Franchising.The Company operates the cable television system in Shenandoah County, Virginia. The Company has seen increased competition from satellite providers that are larger and have cost advantages over the Company in the procurement of programming. The continued success of the satellite television providers may have an adverse impact on the Company’s cable television results.
In 2006, the State of Virginia adopted legislation to make it easier for companies to obtain local franchises to provide cable television service. In addition, Congress is currently considering legislation which would either eliminate the requirement for a local cable television franchise or substantially reduce the cost of obtaining or competing with a local franchise. Any such change, while making it easier for the Company to expand its NTC and cable television business, may also result in increased competition for such businesses.
Net Neutrality. Although the broadband Internet services industry has largely remained unregulated, there has been legislative and regulatory interest in adopting so-called “net neutrality” principles that could, among other things, prohibit service providers from slowing or blocking access to certain content, applications, or services available on the Internet and otherwise limit their ability to manage their networks efficiently and develop new products and services. The FCC last year adopted a non-binding policy statement expressing its view that consumers are entitled to access lawful Internet content and to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement. If some form of net neutrality legislation or regulations were adopted, it could impair the Company’s ability to effectively manage its broadband network and explore enhanced service options for customers.
| |
ITEM 6. | Exhibits |
| |
(a) The following exhibits are filed with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q: |
| |
31.1 | Certifications pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
| |
31.2 | Certifications pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
| |
32 | Certifications pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. 1350. |
| |
99.1 | Amendment No. 3 to the Sprint/Shenandoah Forbearance Agreement. |
32
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY |
| (Registrant) |
| /s/ EARLE A. MACKENZIE | |
|
| |
| Earle A. MacKenzie, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| Date: May 9, 2006 |
33
EXHIBIT INDEX
34