​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

​

​

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024

OR

​

FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM                 TO                .

Commission File Number: 001-33807

EchoStar Corporation

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

​

​

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (303) 723-1000

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

​

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☒ 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 ☒

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 ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

As of June 30, 2024, the aggregate market value of Class A common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $2.153 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 the last trading day of the month.

As of February 20, 2025, the registrant’s outstanding common stock consisted of 155,094,308 shares of Class A common stock and 131,348,468 shares of Class B common stock, each $0.001 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 2025 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part III.

​

​

​

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

Unless otherwise required by the context, in this report, the words “EchoStar,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to EchoStar Corporation and its subsidiaries, “DISH Network” refers to DISH Network Corporation, our wholly owned subsidiary, and its subsidiaries, and “DISH DBS” refers to DISH DBS Corporation, a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of DISH Network, and its subsidiaries.

​

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including, in particular, statements about our plans, objectives and strategies, growth opportunities in our industries and businesses, our expectations regarding future results, financial condition, liquidity and capital requirements, our estimates regarding the impact of regulatory developments and legal proceedings, and other trends and projections. Forward-looking statements are not historical facts and may be identified by words such as “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “goal,” “seek,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “predict,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “can,” “may,” and similar terms. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. Accordingly, actual performance, events or results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including, but not limited to, those summarized below:

​

SUMMARY OF RISK FACTORS

​

Competition and Economic Risks

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

i

​

Operational and Service Delivery Risks

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Risks Related to our Human Capital

​

​

​

Risks Related to our Products and Technology

​

​

​

Risks Related to Cybersecurity

​

​

​

ii

Acquisition and Capital Structure Risks

​

​

​

​

​

​

Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Business

​

​

Other factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, those discussed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” herein and those discussed in other documents we file with the SEC. All cautionary statements made or referred to herein should be read as being applicable to all forward-looking statements wherever they appear. Investors should consider the risks and uncertainties described or referred to herein and should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made, and we expressly disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

​

​

iii

PART I

Item 1.BUSINESS

​

OVERVIEW

​

EchoStar Corporation is a holding company that was organized in October 2007 as a corporation under the laws of the State of Nevada. EchoStar Corporation together with its subsidiaries are referred to as “EchoStar,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and/or “our,” unless otherwise required by the context. Our Class A common stock is publicly traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market (“NASDAQ”) under the symbol “SATS.” Our principal executive offices are located at 9601 South Meridian Boulevard, Englewood, Colorado 80112 and our telephone number is (303) 723- 1000.

​

Merger with DISH Network

​

On December 31, 2023, we completed the acquisition of DISH Network pursuant to the Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 2, 2023 (the “Amended Merger Agreement”), by and among us, EAV Corp., a Nevada corporation and our wholly owned subsidiary (“Merger Sub”), and DISH Network, pursuant to which we acquired DISH Network by means of the merger of Merger Sub with and into DISH Network (the “Merger”), with DISH Network surviving the Merger as our wholly owned subsidiary. For further information, refer to the Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023.

​

Recent Developments

​

DIRECTV Transaction

​

On September 29, 2024, we and DIRECTV Holdings, LLC (“DTV”), entered into an Equity Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement, DTV agreed to acquire from us all of the issued and outstanding equity interests of DISH DBS Corporation (“DISH DBS”), which operates our Pay-TV business.

​

Following written notice from DTV received on November 20, 2024, DTV terminated the Purchase Agreement effective at 11:59 pm ET on November 22, 2024 pursuant to Section 7.01(a)(iv) of the Purchase Agreement because the DISH DBS Exchange Offers (as defined in Note 10 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K) were not consummated by the Exchange Offer Settlement Date (as defined in the Purchase Agreement). No termination fee or other payment was due from either party to the other as a result of the termination of the Purchase Agreement.

​

Segments

​

EchoStar Corporation is a holding company. Its subsidiaries currently operate three primary business segments: (1) Pay-TV; (2) Wireless; and (3) Broadband and Satellite Services. Historically, we reported four primary business segments: (1) Pay-TV; (2) Retail Wireless; (3) 5G Network Deployment; and (4) Broadband and Satellite Services. See Note 16 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Pay-TV

​

We offer pay-TV services under the DISH® brand and the SLING® brand (collectively “Pay-TV” services). The DISH branded pay-TV service consists of, among other things, FCC licenses authorizing us to use direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) and Fixed Satellite Service (“FSS”) spectrum, our owned and leased satellites, receiver systems, broadcast operations, a leased fiber optic network, in-home service and call center operations and certain other assets utilized in our operations (“DISH TV”).

​

1

​

We also design, develop and distribute receiver systems and provide digital broadcast operations, including satellite uplinking/downlinking, transmission and other services to third-party pay-TV providers. The SLING branded pay-TV services consist of, among other things, multichannel, live-linear and on-demand streaming over-the-top (“OTT”) Internet-based domestic, international, Latino and Freestream video programming services (“SLING TV”). As of December 31, 2024, we had 7.778 million Pay-TV subscribers in the United States, including 5.686 million DISH TV subscribers and 2.092 million SLING TV subscribers.

​

Wireless

​

Our Wireless segment provides wireless communication services (“Wireless” services) and products. We currently offer our Wireless services for 5G voice over new radio (“VoNR”) to over 220 million Americans and for 5G broadband service to over 268 million Americans, as well as a competitive portfolio of wireless devices.

​

We offer nationwide Wireless services to subscribers primarily under our Boost Mobile® and Gen Mobile® brands. Prepaid Wireless subscribers generally pay in advance for monthly access to wireless talk, text and data services. Postpaid Wireless subscribers are qualified to pay after receiving wireless talk, text and data services, and may also qualify for certain device financing arrangements.

​

We are currently operating primarily as a mobile virtual network operator (“MVNO”) as we continue our 5G Network Deployment and commercialize and grow customer traffic on our 5G Network. We are transitioning to a mobile network operator (“MNO”) as our 5G Network, defined below, has become commercially available and we grow customer traffic on our 5G Network. We are currently activating Boost Mobile subscribers with compatible devices onto our 5G Network in markets where we have reached VoNR. We currently offer a broad range of premium wireless devices on our 5G Network, including the Apple iPhone 15 and newer generation iPhones. We have deployed 5G VoNR covering over 220 million Americans. Within our MVNO operations, today we depend in part on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide us with network services under the amended Master Network Services Agreement (“MNSA”) and Network Services Agreement (the “NSA”), respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had 6.995 million Wireless subscribers.

​

We have invested a total of over $30 billion in Wireless spectrum licenses. The $30 billion of investments related to Wireless spectrum licenses does not include $10 billion of capitalized interest related to the carrying value of such licenses. See Note 2 and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information. We continue to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of the nation’s first cloud-native, Open Radio Access Network (“O-RAN”) based 5G network (our “5G Network Deployment”). We have committed to the FCC to deploy a facilities-based 5G broadband network (our “5G Network”) capable of serving increasingly larger portions of the U.S. population at different deadlines.

​

Our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to certain interim and final build-out requirements, as well as certain renewal requirements. On September 29, 2023, the FCC confirmed we met all of our June 14, 2023 band-specific 5G deployment commitments, and two of our three nationwide 5G commitments. The single remaining 5G commitment, that at least 70% of the U.S. population has access to average download speeds equal to 35 Mbps, was achieved in March 2024 using the drive test methodology previously agreed upon by us and the FCC and overseen by an independent monitor. We currently have the largest commercial deployment of 5G VoNR in the world covering over 220 million Americans and 5G broadband service covering over 268 million Americans.

​

In September 2024, the FCC conditionally granted our requests to extend the 5G deployment deadlines for certain of our Wireless spectrum licenses based on several commitments and in a January 10, 2025 filing to the FCC, we certified to meeting the accelerated buildout (Commitments #2 and #3 of the Extension Request) and the nationwide 80% coverage obligations (Commitment #1 of the Extension Request) due by December 31, 2024. Thus, pursuant to the Extension Request, the final deployment deadlines for the licenses subject to the Extension Request (listed in Appendix G) shall be extended to December 14, 2026.

​

2

​

In addition, the final deployment deadlines for the licenses subject to the Extension Request (listed in Appendix G) shall be further extended to June 14, 2028 as long as we satisfy the remaining Extension Request commitments. See Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for definitions and further details.

​

Broadband and Satellite Services 

​

We are an industry leader in both networking technologies and services, innovating to deliver the global solutions that power a connected future for people, enterprises and things everywhere. We provide broadband services to consumer customers, which include home and small to medium-sized businesses, and satellite, multi-transport technologies and managed network services to enterprise customers, telecommunications providers, airlines and government entities, including civilian and defense.

​

Our EchoStar XXIV satellite began service in December 2023, bringing additional broadband capacity across North and South America and is an integral part of our satellite services business. We have leveraged the EchoStar XXIV to deliver satellite services to unserved and underserved consumer markets in the Americas as well as enterprise, aeronautical and government markets.

​

We also design, provide and install gateway and terminal equipment to customers for other satellite systems. In addition, we design, develop, construct and provide telecommunication networks comprising satellite ground segment systems and terminals to mobile system operators and our enterprise customers. We offer a robust suite of integrated, multi-transport solutions to enable airline and airline service providers to deliver reliable in-flight network connectivity serving both commercial and business aviation.

​

PAY-TV

​

Business Strategy – Pay-TV

​

Our Pay-TV segment business strategy is to be the best provider of video services in the United States by providing products with the best technology, outstanding customer service and great value. We promote our Pay-TV services by providing our subscribers with a better “price-to-value” relationship and experience than those available from other subscription television service providers. We market our SLING TV services to consumers who do not subscribe to traditional satellite and cable pay-TV services, as well as to current and recent traditional pay-TV subscribers who desire a lower cost alternative.

​

​

​

​

3

​

​

Products and Services – Pay-TV

​

DISH TV services. We offer a wide selection of video services under the DISH TV brand, with access to hundreds of channels depending on the level of subscription. Our standard programming packages generally include programming provided by national cable networks. We also offer programming packages that include local broadcast networks, specialty sports channels, premium movie channels and Latino and international programming.

​

In addition, we offer our DISH TV subscribers streaming access through DISH On Demand® to thousands of movies and television shows via their TV or Internet-connected devices.

​

Our DISH TV subscribers also have the ability to use dishanywhere.com and our DISH Anywhere® mobile applications on Internet-connected devices to view authorized content, search program listings and remotely control certain features of their DVRs. Dishanywhere.com and our DISH Anywhere mobile applications provide access to thousands of movies and television shows.

​

SLING TV services. Our SLING TV services require an Internet connection and are available on multiple streaming-capable devices including, among others, streaming media devices, TVs, tablets, computers, game consoles and phones. We offer domestic, International, Latino and Freestream video programming services. We offer domestic SLING TV services as a single-stream service branded SLING Orange and a multi-stream service branded SLING Blue, which includes, among other things, the ability to stream on up to three devices simultaneously. We also offer add-on extras, direct to consumer services, pay-per-view events and a cloud-based DVR service.

​

Distribution Channels – Pay-TV

​

We operate in the consumer market in the United States and use print, radio, television and Internet media, on a local and national basis to motivate potential subscribers to contact DISH TV and SLING TV, visit our websites or contact independent third-party retailers. We often offer our new DISH TV subscribers certain programming at no additional charge and/or promotional pricing during a commitment period. We often offer our new SLING TV subscribers free trials and/or streaming-capable devices at no additional charge and/or promotional pricing.

​

While we offer receiver systems and programming through direct sales channels, a meaningful percentage of our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations are generated through independent third parties such as small retailers, direct marketing groups, local and regional consumer electronics stores, nationwide retailers and telecommunications companies. In general, we pay these independent third parties a mix of upfront and monthly incentives to solicit orders for our services and provide customer service. We offer our SLING TV services through direct sales channels and third-party marketing agreements.

​

We incur significant upfront costs to provide our new DISH TV subscribers with in-home equipment, which most of our new DISH TV subscribers lease from us. We also incur significant upfront costs to install satellite dishes and receivers in the homes of our new DISH TV subscribers.

​

4

​

​

Competition – Pay-TV

​

Competition has intensified in recent years as the pay-TV industry has matured. We and our competitors increasingly must seek to attract a greater proportion of new subscribers from each other’s existing subscriber bases rather than from first-time purchasers of pay-TV services. We face substantial competition from established pay-TV providers and broadband service providers and increasing competition from companies providing/facilitating the delivery of video content via the Internet to computers, televisions and other streaming and mobile devices, including wireless service providers. In recent years, industry consolidation and convergence has created competitors with greater scale and multiple product/service offerings. These developments, among others, have contributed to intense and increasing competition, and we expect such competition to continue.

​

We incur significant costs to retain our existing DISH TV subscribers, generally as a result of upgrading their equipment to next generation receivers, primarily including our Hopper® receivers, and by providing retention credits. Our DISH TV subscriber retention costs may vary significantly from period to period.

​

Many of our competitors have been especially aggressive by offering discounted programming and services for both new and existing subscribers, including, but not limited to, bundled offers combining broadband, video and/or wireless services and other promotional offers. Certain competitors have been able to subsidize the price of video services with the price of broadband and/or wireless services.

​

Our Pay-TV services also face increased competition from programmers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunications companies that are rapidly increasing their Internet-based video offerings and direct-to-consumer exclusive and non-exclusive content. We also face competition from providers of video content, many of which are providers of programming content to us, that distribute content over the Internet including services with live-linear television programming, as well as single programmer offerings and offerings of large libraries of on-demand content, including in certain cases original content. These product offerings include, but are not limited to: Netflix, Hulu, Apple+, Prime Video, YouTube TV, Disney+, ESPN+, Paramount+, Max, STARZ, Peacock, Fubo, Philo and Tubi and certain bundles of these offerings.

​

Significant changes in consumer behavior regarding the means by which consumers obtain video entertainment and information in response to digital media competition could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition or otherwise disrupt our business.

​

In particular, consumers have shown increased interest in viewing certain video programming in any place, at any time and/or on any broadband or Internet-connected device they choose. Online content providers may cause our subscribers to disconnect our DISH TV services (“cord cutting”), downgrade to smaller, less expensive programming packages (“cord shaving”) or elect to purchase through these online content providers a certain portion of the services that they would have historically purchased from us.

​

Mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and alliances among cable television providers, telecommunications companies, programming providers and others may result in, among other things, greater scale and financial leverage and increase the availability of offerings from providers capable of bundling video, broadband and/or wireless services in competition with our services and may exacerbate the risks described in our public filings. These transactions may affect us adversely by, among other things, making it more difficult for us to obtain access to certain programming networks on nondiscriminatory and fair terms, or at all.

​

For further information see “Item 1A – Risk Factors – Competition and Economic Risks – We face intense and increasing competition from providers of video, broadband and/or wireless services, which may require us to further increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn.”

​

5

​

WIRELESS

​

Business Strategy - Wireless

​

Our Wireless segment business strategy is to expand our current target segments and profitably grow our Wireless subscriber base and commercialize and grow customer traffic on our 5G Network. We intend to grow our Wireless subscriber base by acquiring and retaining high quality subscribers with competitive offers, choice and outstanding customer service that better meet those subscribers’ needs and budget.

​

We offer nationwide Wireless services to subscribers primarily under our Boost Mobile and Gen Mobile brands, as well as a competitive portfolio of wireless devices. We offer customers value by providing choice and flexibility in our Wireless services. Prepaid Wireless subscribers generally pay in advance for monthly access to wireless talk, text and data services. Postpaid Wireless subscribers are qualified to pay after receiving wireless talk, text and data services, and may also qualify for certain device financing arrangements.

​

Boost Mobile postpaid. During 2023, we launched our nationwide expansion of our Boost Mobile postpaid Wireless service. At the end of the third quarter of 2023, we began offering premium wireless devices, including Apple products. We currently offer a broad range of premium wireless devices on our 5G Network, including the Apple iPhone 15 and newer generation iPhones.

​

We are currently operating primarily as an MVNO as we continue our 5G Network Deployment and commercialize and grow customer traffic on our 5G Network. We are transitioning to an MNO as our 5G Network has become commercially available and we grow customer traffic on our 5G Network. We are currently activating Boost Mobile subscribers with compatible devices onto our 5G Network in markets where we have reached VoNR. We have deployed 5G VoNR covering over 220 million Americans. Within our MVNO operations, today we depend in part on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide us with network services under the MNSA and NSA, respectively.

​

We have invested a total of over $30 billion in Wireless spectrum licenses. The $30 billion of investments related to Wireless spectrum licenses does not include $10 billion of capitalized interest related to the carrying value of such licenses. See Note 2 and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information. We continue to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of our 5G Network Deployment. We have committed to the FCC to deploy our 5G Network capable of serving increasingly larger portions of the U.S. population at different deadlines.

​

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all, to fund the efforts described below, as well as, among other things, make any potential Northstar Re-Auction Payment and SNR Re-Auction Payment for the AWS-3 licenses retained by the FCC. There can be no assurance that we will be able to complete all build-out requirements or profitably deploy our Wireless spectrum licenses, which may affect the carrying amount of these assets and our future financial condition or results of operations. See Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to certain interim and final build-out requirements, as well as certain renewal requirements. On September 29, 2023, the FCC confirmed we met all of our June 14, 2023 band-specific 5G deployment commitments, and two of our three nationwide 5G commitments. The single remaining 5G commitment, that at least 70% of the U.S. population has access to average download speeds equal to 35 Mbps, was achieved in March 2024 using the drive test methodology previously agreed upon by us and the FCC and overseen by an independent monitor. We currently have the largest commercial deployment of 5G VoNR in the world covering over 220 million Americans and 5G broadband service covering over 268 million Americans.

​

6

​

​

In September 2024, the FCC conditionally granted our requests to extend the 5G deployment deadlines for certain of our Wireless spectrum licenses based on several commitments and in a January 10, 2025 filing to the FCC, we certified to meeting the accelerated buildout (Commitments #2 and #3 of the Extension Request) and the nationwide 80% coverage obligations (Commitment #1 of the Extension Request) due by December 31, 2024. Thus, pursuant to the Extension Request, the final deployment deadlines for the licenses subject to the Extension Request (listed in Appendix G) shall be extended to December 14, 2026. In addition, the final deployment deadlines for the licenses subject to the Extension Request (listed in Appendix G) shall be further extended to June 14, 2028 as long as we satisfy the remaining Extension Request commitments. See Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for definitions and further details.

​

We may need to make significant additional investments or partner with others to, among other things, continue our 5G Network Deployment and further commercialize, build-out and integrate these licenses and related assets and any additional acquired licenses and related assets, as well as to comply with regulations applicable to such licenses. Depending on the nature and scope of such activities, any such investments or partnerships could vary significantly. In addition, as we continue our 5G Network Deployment, we have and may continue to incur significant additional expenses related to, among other things, research and development, wireless testing and ongoing upgrades to the wireless network infrastructure, software and third-party integration. As a result of these investments, among other factors, we may need to raise additional capital, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all. We may also determine that additional wireless spectrum licenses may be required for our 5G Network Deployment, which will enhance our ability to compete effectively with other wireless service providers.

​

Products and Services - Wireless

​

Currently, we offer Wireless subscribers competitive consumer plans with no annual service contracts and monthly service plans including high-speed data and unlimited talk and text. We also offer a variety of value-added services, including, but not limited to, device payment and protection plans and device financing arrangements for certain qualified subscribers.

​

Distribution Channels - Wireless

​

We operate in the consumer market in the United States and use, among other things, print, radio, television and Internet media, on a local and national basis to motivate potential subscribers to contact us, visit our websites or contact independent third-party retailers.

​

We have both an indirect sales channel, which includes third-party owned retail stores and big box stores and a direct sales channel, which services customers online. Through the indirect sales channel, we use direct distribution partners to facilitate product delivery to the third-party retailers. We currently market and distribute our products and services indirectly through third-party owned Boost-branded stores, multi-branded stores, national retail stores (such as Target, Best Buy and Walmart stores) and other stores (such as convenience and grocery stores).

​

We have relationships with most large manufacturers of wireless devices. We can incur significant upfront costs to subsidize wireless devices offered under promotional pricing to consumers.

​

7

​

​

Competition - Wireless

​

Wireless communication services is a mature market with moderate year over year organic growth. Competitors include, among others, providers who offer similar wireless communication services, such as talk, text and data. Competitive factors within the wireless communication services industry include, but are not limited to, pricing, market saturation, service and product offerings, customer experience and service quality. We compete with a number of national wireless carriers, including Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile, all of which are significantly larger than us, serve a significant percentage of all wireless subscribers and enjoy scale advantages compared to us. Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are currently the only nationwide MNOs in the United States.

​

Additional primary competitors include, but are not limited to, Metro PCS (owned by T-Mobile), Cricket Wireless (owned by AT&T), Visible (owned by Verizon), Tracfone Wireless (owned by Verizon), Total Wireless (owned by Verizon), and other MVNOs such as Consumer Cellular, Mint Mobile (owned by T-Mobile), Spectrum Mobile and Xfinity Mobile.

​

BROADBAND AND SATELLITE SERVICES

​

Business Strategy – Broadband and Satellite Services

​

Our Broadband and Satellite Services segment business strategy is to maintain and improve our leadership position and competitive advantage through development of leading-edge technologies and services marketed to selected sectors within the consumer, enterprise and government markets globally.

​

We expect demand for broadband internet access, connectivity, networking and related value-added services will continue to grow across all major end-user markets – consumer, business, enterprise, aeronautical and government. Our strategic objective is to maintain our leadership position and grow our competitive advantage by using our satellite assets, expertise, technologies, capital, investments, global presence, relationships, spectrum assets and other capabilities for development of leading-edge technologies and services marketed to targeted sectors within these markets globally.

​

Products and Services – Broadband and Satellite Services

​

We provide broadband satellite technologies and broadband internet products and services to consumer customers. We provide broadband network technologies, managed services, equipment, hardware, satellite services and communications solutions to government and enterprise customers. We also design, provide and install gateway and terminal equipment to customers for other satellite systems. In addition, we design, develop, construct and provide telecommunication networks comprising satellite ground segment systems and terminals to mobile system operators and our enterprise customers.

​

Customers – Broadband and Satellite Services

​

Our enterprise customers include, but are not limited to, retailers, financial institutions, aircraft connectivity providers, lottery agencies and companies with multi-branch networks that rely on satellite or terrestrial networks for critical communication across wide geographies, as well as the U.S government. Most of our enterprise customers have long-term contracts with us for the services they purchase. Our Broadband and Satellite Services segment also designs, provides and installs gateway and terminal equipment to customers for other satellite systems and provides satellite ground segment systems and terminals for other satellite systems, including, but not limited to, mobile system operators. Developments toward the launch of next-generation satellite systems, including LEO, MEO and geostationary systems, as well as other multi-transport technologies, could provide additional opportunities to increase demand for our equipment, hardware, technology and services.

​

Our consumer customers consist of home and small to medium-sized business in the Americas. We provide broadband satellite technologies and broadband internet products and services to these customers.

8

​

​

Competition – Broadband and Satellite Services

​

Our industry is highly competitive. As a global provider of network technologies, products and services, our Broadband and Satellite Services segment competes with a large number of telecommunications and satellite internet service providers.

​

In our enterprise markets, we compete against multiple categories of providers. In the managed services area, we compete against providers of satellite-based and terrestrial-based networks, including fiber optic, cable, wireless internet service and internet protocol-based virtual private networks (VPN), which vary by region. In the in-flight connectivity market, we compete against direct and indirect providers of in-flight WiFi services, such as ViaSat and SpaceX.

​

In our consumer broadband satellite technologies and internet services markets, we compete against traditional telecommunications and wireless carriers, other satellite internet providers, as well as fiber optic, cable and wireless internet service providers. Our primary satellite competitors in the North American consumer market are ViaSat Communications, Inc., which is owned by ViaSat, Inc. (“ViaSat”) and Starlink Services LLC, which is owned by Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“SpaceX”). Both ViaSat and SpaceX have also entered the South and Central American consumer markets.

​

Our principal competitors for the supply of satellite technology platforms are Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd, ViaSat and ST Engineering iDirect, Inc.

​

Manufacturing – Broadband and Satellite Services

​

Certain products in our Broadband and Satellite Services segment are assembled at our facilities, and we outsource a portion of the manufacturing of other products to third parties. We believe that our manufacturing facilities have sufficient capacity to handle current and future demand. We also contract with certain third-party vendors for the development and manufacture of components that are integrated into our products.

​

NEW BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES

​

From time to time we evaluate opportunities for strategic investments or acquisitions that may complement our current services and products, enhance our technical capabilities, improve or sustain our competitive position or otherwise offer growth opportunities.

​

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

​

Our operations, particularly our global satellite operations, Pay-TV operations, our Wireless and Broadband and Satellite Services businesses and our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to significant government regulation and oversight, primarily by the FCC and, to a certain extent, by Congress, other federal agencies and international, foreign, state and local authorities. We are subject to telecommunications regulation by a number of regulatory bodies including the FCC, other U.S. federal and state regulators and government agencies, the ITU and regulators and governments in other countries and regions where we hold licenses including the E.U., the U.K., India, Australia and several Latin American countries. We are also subject to export control laws and regulations and trade sanctions laws and regulations of the U.S. and other countries with respect to the export of telecommunications equipment and services. In addition, in the U.S. and some other countries, we are subject to country specific approvals of our products.

​

Depending upon the circumstances, non-compliance with applicable legislation or regulations could result in suspension or revocation of our licenses or authorizations, acceleration of requirements, 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. These governmental authorities could also adopt regulations or take other actions that would adversely affect our business prospects.

​

9

​

Furthermore, any government policy changes, which may be substantial, could increase regulatory uncertainty. The adoption or modification of laws or regulations relating to video programming distribution, satellite services, wireless telecommunications, broadband, the Internet or other areas of our business could limit or otherwise adversely affect the manner in which we currently conduct our business. In addition, the manner in which regulations or legislation in these areas may be interpreted and enforced cannot be precisely determined, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

As detailed below, our Pay-TV operations are subject to FCC jurisdiction, including, without limitation, the FCC’s rules for satellite licensing, placement of satellites, interference avoidance, spectrum sharing and coordination with other satellite systems. We must comply with FCC rules promulgating public interest requirements for DBS providers, security functionality for video providers, technology standards, media ownership, carriage of cable programming and net neutrality. In addition, the Copyright Act of 1976 (the “Copyright Act”) and the Communications Act of 1934 (the “Communications Act”) govern our carriage of broadcast signals.

​

Our 5G Network Deployment services and our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to regulation by the FCC and, depending on the jurisdiction, other federal, state and local, as well as international, governmental authorities and regulatory agencies, including, among other things, regulations governing the licensing, construction, operation, sale and interconnection arrangements of wireless telecommunications systems. In particular, the FCC imposes significant regulation on licensees of wireless spectrum with respect to how radio spectrum is used by licensees, the nature of the services that licensees may offer and how the services may be offered, and resolution of issues of interference between spectrum bands. The FCC grants wireless licenses for terms of generally 10-12 years that are subject to renewal or revocation. There can be no assurances that our Wireless spectrum licenses will be renewed. Failure to comply with FCC build-out requirements in a given license area may result in acceleration of other build-out requirements or in the modification, cancellation or non-renewal of licenses. For further information related to our licenses and build-out requirements related to our Wireless spectrum licenses see Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Our Pay-TV and 5G Network Deployment operations are subject to federal, state and international laws relating to the collection, use, retention, security and transfer of personally identifiable information. The regulatory framework for privacy and security issues worldwide is rapidly evolving and as a result implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. Any failure by us, our suppliers, or other parties with whom we do business to comply with these standards and practices or with other federal, state or international regulations could result in proceedings against us by governmental entities or others. In many jurisdictions, enforcement actions and consequences for noncompliance are rising. In the United States, these include enforcement actions in response to rules and regulations promulgated under the authority of federal agencies and state attorneys general and legislatures and consumer protection agencies. 

​

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, satellite services, wireless telecommunications, broadband and Internet industries. Government regulations that are currently the subject of judicial or administrative proceedings, legislative hearings or administrative proposals could change these industries to varying degrees. We cannot predict either the outcome of such proceedings or any potential impact they might have on these industries or on our operations.

​

10

​

​

FCC Regulations Applicable to Our Operations

​

FCC Jurisdiction over Satellite Operations. Non-governmental bodies, including commercial entities, that use radio frequencies to provide communications services to, from or within the U.S. are subject to the jurisdiction of the FCC under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the “Communications Act”). The Communications Act gives the FCC regulatory jurisdiction over many areas relating to communications operations, including:

​

We hold licenses and authorizations for satellite and earth stations as well as other services. All satellite licenses issued by the FCC are subject to expiration unless extended by the FCC. Our U.S. FSS licenses generally have 15 year terms. Our DBS licenses generally have 10 year terms. Our licenses are currently set to expire at various times. In addition, at various times we have relied on special temporary authorizations for our operations. A special temporary authorization is granted for a period of only 180 days or less, subject to possible renewal by the FCC. From time to time, we apply for authorizations to use new satellites at our existing orbital locations. To obtain and operate under such FCC licenses and authorizations, we must satisfy strict legal, technical and financial qualification requirements and other conditions including, among other things, satisfaction of certain technical and ongoing due diligence obligations, construction milestones, maintaining bonds, payment of annual regulatory fees and various reporting requirements. Generally, our FCC licenses and special temporary authorizations have been renewed, and our applications for new satellites at our existing orbital locations have been approved, by the FCC on a routine basis, but there can be no assurance that the FCC will continue to do so. Several third parties have opposed in the past, and we expect these or other parties to oppose in the future, some of our FCC satellite authorizations and pending and future requests to the FCC for extensions, modifications, waivers and approvals of our licenses. Necessary federal approval of these applications may not be granted, may not be granted in a timely manner, or may be granted subject to conditions that may be cumbersome. It is also possible the FCC could revoke or terminate certain of our authorizations or licenses if we do not meet the legal, technical and financial requirements discussed above.

​

Overview of our DBS Satellites, Authorizations and Contractual Rights for Satellite Capacity. 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. Each DBS orbital position has 500 MHz of available Ku-band spectrum that is divided into 32 frequency channels. Several of our satellites also include spot-beam technology that 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.

​

11

​

​

The FCC has licensed us to operate a total of 82 DBS frequency channels at the following orbital locations:

​

​

In addition, we currently lease or have entered into agreements to lease capacity on satellites using the following spectrum at the following orbital locations:

​

​

Interference from Other Services Sharing Satellite Spectrum. Non-geostationary orbit (“NGSO”) FSS satellites are permitted to operate on a co-primary basis in the same frequency band as our DBS and geostationary orbit (“GSO”) FSS satellites. The FCC has also authorized the use of multichannel video distribution and data service (“MVDDS”) licenses in the DBS band. MVDDS licenses were auctioned in 2004. MVDDS systems have been commercially deployed in a few markets. We have MVDDS licenses in 82 out of 214 geographical license areas, including Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and several other major metropolitan areas. The FCC currently has an open proceeding considering whether to permit MVDDS licensees to become Fixed Service operators. We cannot predict either the outcome of this proceeding or any potential impact it might have on our operations.

​

Despite regulatory provisions intended to protect DBS and FSS operations from harmful interference, there can be no assurance that operations by other satellites or terrestrial communication services in the DBS and FSS bands will not interfere with our DBS and FSS operations and adversely affect our business. SpaceX, Amazon’s Project Kuiper (“Kuiper”) and others have obtained FCC authority to launch and operate, or provide service from, NGSO satellite systems using a variety of spectrum bands, including the 12.2-12.7 GHz band, which we use for our DBS service, and where we also have certain licenses to provide one-way terrestrial MVDDS service. These systems are in the early stages of launch, deployment and operation. When fully deployed by SpaceX, Kuiper and others, there will be tens of thousands of NGSO satellites in orbit sharing our spectrum. There can be no assurance that they will not interfere with our DBS operations and adversely affect our business or that they will not hinder our ability to provide MVDDS service.

​

Satellite Competition from Additional Slots and Interference. Both DirecTV and us have obtained FCC authority to provide service to the United States from a Canadian DBS orbital slot. The possibility that the FCC will allow service to the United States 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 authority to add orbital locations serving the United States close to our licensed slots. Such operations could cause harmful interference to our satellites and constrain our future operations.

​

Public Interest Requirements. The FCC imposes certain public interest obligations on our DBS licenses. These obligations 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. The Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (“STELA”) required the FCC to decrease this set-aside to 3.5 percent for satellite carriers who provide retransmission of state public affairs networks in 15 states and are otherwise qualified. The FCC, however, has not yet determined whether we qualify for this decrease in set-aside.

​

12

​

The obligation to provide noncommercial programming may 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.

​

Retransmission Consent. The Copyright Act 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 local network stations that do not elect “must carry” status, as required by the Communications Act. If we fail to reach retransmission consent agreements with such broadcasters, we cannot carry their signals. This could have an adverse effect on our strategy to compete with cable and other satellite companies that provide local signals. While we have been able to reach retransmission consent agreements with most of these local network stations, from time to time, there are stations with which we have not been able to reach an agreement. We cannot be sure that we will secure these agreements or that we will secure new agreements on acceptable terms, or at all, upon the expiration of our current retransmission consent agreements, some of which are short-term.

​

In recent years, the rates we are charged for retransmitting local channels have been increasing substantially and may exceed our ability to increase our prices to our customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The broadcast stations’ demands for higher rates have resulted in more frequent negotiating impasses and programming interruptions. During these programming interruptions, our subscribers in the affected markets lack access to popular programming and may switch to another multichannel distributor that may be able to provide them with such programming. In addition, the national broadcasters have used their ownership of certain local broadcast stations to require us to carry additional cable programming in exchange for retransmission consent of their local broadcast stations. These requirements may place constraints on available capacity on our satellites for other programming.

​

The STELA Reauthorization Act of 2014 (“STELAR”) prohibits television stations from coordinating or engaging in joint retransmission consent negotiations with any other local television stations, unless the stations are “directly or indirectly under common de jure control,” expanding a previous FCC ruling prohibiting joint negotiations only among the top four stations in a market. In addition, STELAR prohibits a local television station from limiting an MVPD’s ability to carry other television signals that have been deemed by the FCC to be “significantly viewed” or to carry any other television signal the MVPD is otherwise entitled to carry under the Communications Act, unless such stations are “directly or indirectly under common de jure control” pursuant to FCC regulations. We cannot predict if these restrictions on broadcasters will result in more effective retransmission consent negotiations.

​

Early Termination Fees. In December 2023, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on proposals that would prohibit pay-TV providers from imposing early termination fees on consumers and from practices that require customers who cancel service mid-billing cycle to pay for a complete cycle. If adopted, such prohibitions could impact our pricing and packages. We cannot predict the timing or outcome of this proceeding.

​

Blackout Rebates. In January 2024, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on a proposal that would require MVPDs to issue rebates to subscribers during programming blackouts on both broadcast and non-broadcast networks that result from failed negotiations. If adopted, such requirements could negatively impact our carriage negotiations. We cannot predict the timing or outcome of this proceeding.

​

13

​

​

Media Ownership Rules. In 2016, the broadcast industry petitioned the FCC to relax its media ownership rules, which, among other things, limit the number of commonly owned TV stations per market and restrict newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership and radio/TV cross-ownership. In November 2017, the FCC voted to: (i) eliminate the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule; (ii) eliminate the radio/television cross-ownership rule; (iii) relax the local television ownership rules to eliminate certain restrictions and modify others; and (iv) eliminate the attribution rule for television joint-sales agreements (collectively, the “2017 Order”). In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the 2017 Order. Pursuant to this decision in Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC, on December 20, 2019, the FCC amended its rules to reverse the 2017 Order and reinstate the rules as they existed prior to the 2017 Order. The FCC, though, petitioned for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court to reverse the Third Circuit’s decision. On April 1, 2021, in FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project, the Supreme Court reversed the Third Circuit, finding that “the FCC’s analysis was reasonable and reasonably explained for purposes of the APA’s deferential arbitrary and capricious standard.” On June 4, 2021, the FCC released an Order reinstating the rule changes from the 2017 Order.

​

In December 2017, the FCC initiated a rulemaking proceeding seeking comment on changes to the national television multiple-ownership rule, including changes that could relax or eliminate the current limits that prevent entities from owning or controlling television stations that, in the aggregate, reach more than 39 percent of the television households in the country.  If the FCC were to relax or eliminate some or all of the national television multiple-ownership rule, it could increase the negotiating leverage that broadcasters hold in retransmission consent negotiations.

​

In December 2023, the FCC concluded its 2018 quadrennial proceeding and issued an Order that, among other things, retained the FCC’s general prohibition on a broadcaster owning two or more of the top four stations in a market and added language intended to prevent broadcasters from circumventing this rule by acquiring a top four affiliation and placing it on a multicast or low power television signal on a going forward basis. We cannot predict whether there will be additional challenges to these rules or whether the FCC may address media ownership issues going forward, either through the imposition of new rules or the relaxation of remaining ownership restrictions.

​

Digital HD Carry-One, Carry-All Requirement. To provide any full-power local broadcast signal in any market, we are required to retransmit all qualifying broadcast signals in that market (“carry-one, carry-all”), including the carriage of full-power broadcasters’ HD signals in markets in which we elect to provide local channels in HD. The carriage of additional HD signals on our DISH TV services could cause us to experience significant capacity constraints and prevent us from carrying additional popular national channels and/or carrying those national channels in HD.

​

Distant Signals. Pursuant to STELA, we obtained a waiver of a court injunction that previously prevented us from retransmitting certain distant network signals under a statutory copyright license. Because of that waiver, we may provide distant network signals to eligible subscribers. To qualify for that waiver, we are required to provide local service in all 210 local markets in the United States on an ongoing basis. This condition poses a significant strain on our capacity. Moreover, we may lose that waiver if we are found to have failed to provide local service in any of the 210 local markets. If we lose the waiver, the injunction could be reinstated. Furthermore, depending on the severity of the failure, we may also be subject to other sanctions, which may include, among other things, damages.

​

Cable Act and Program Access. We purchase a large percentage of our programming from cable-affiliated programmers. We may be limited in our ability to obtain access on nondiscriminatory terms, or at all, to programming from programmers that are affiliated with cable system operators. In addition, any other changes in the Cable Act, and/or the FCC’s rules that implement the Cable Act, that currently limit the ability of cable-affiliated programmers to discriminate against competing businesses such as ours, could adversely affect our ability to acquire cable-affiliated programming at all or to acquire programming on nondiscriminatory terms. In addition, affiliates of certain cable providers have denied us access to sports programming that they supply to their cable systems terrestrially, rather than by satellite. The FCC has held that new denials of such service are unfair if they have the purpose or effect of significantly hindering us from providing programming to consumers.

14

​

However, we cannot be sure that we can prevail in a complaint related to such programming and gain access to it. Our continuing failure to access such programming could materially and adversely affect our ability to compete in regions serviced by these cable providers.

​

Open Internet (also known as “Net Neutrality”). In 2015, the FCC adopted Open Internet rules, which applied to both fixed and mobile broadband access providers and prohibited them from, among other things, blocking or throttling traffic, paid prioritization and unreasonably interfering with, or disadvantaging, consumers’ or content providers’ access to the Internet. In addition, because the FCC reclassified broadband access providers as common carriers, these providers were subject to the general common carrier requirements of reasonableness and nondiscrimination. In December 2017, the FCC reversed course and voted to reclassify broadband access providers as information service providers, instead of common carriers. The FCC also voted to eliminate the majority of the Open Internet rules, leaving only certain ISP transparency requirements in place. In 2024, the FCC reversed course yet again by adopting a Declaratory Ruling, Order, Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration that reestablished the FCC’s authority over broadband internet access services under Title II of the Communications Act, mostly replicating its 2015 decision. On January 2, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that the FCC lacks the statutory authority to impose these rules and set aside the 2024 Order. We cannot predict the future of these rules or the impact to our Wireless business.

​

To the extent that network operators implement usage-based pricing, including, but not limited to, meaningful bandwidth caps, or otherwise try to monetize access to their networks by data providers, we could incur greater operating expenses and our Pay TV subscriber count could be negatively impacted. Furthermore, to the extent network operators create tiers of Internet access service and either charge us for or prohibit us from being available through these tiers, our Pay TV business could be negatively impacted. We cannot predict with any certainty the impact to our Pay TV business resulting from changes in how network operators handle and charge for access to data that travels across their networks.

​

Definition of MVPD. In December 2014, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the definition of an MVPD. Among other things, the FCC is considering whether the definition of an MVPD should apply to Internet-based streaming services, thus making such services subject to the same regulations as an MVPD. The FCC is also considering the appropriate treatment of purely Internet-based linear video programming services that cable operators and DBS providers offer in addition to their traditional video services. This proceeding remains pending. We cannot predict the timing or outcome of this rulemaking or other related rulemaking proceedings.

​

Federal Trade Commission. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and other federal agencies also have jurisdiction over some consumer protection and elimination and prevention of anticompetitive business practices.

​

Telecommunications Regulation. Many of the services we provide are also subject to FCC regulation as telecommunications services. For certain services in the U.S., we are required to contribute fees, computed as a percentage of our revenue from telecommunications services to various funds, including the Universal Service Fund (“USF”) to support mechanisms that subsidize the provision of services to low-income consumers, high-cost areas, schools, libraries and rural health care providers. Current FCC rules permit us to pass these contributions through to our customers. The FCC also requires broadband internet access and internet telephony service providers to comply with the requirements of the Federal Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which generally requires telecommunications carriers to ensure that law enforcement agencies are able to conduct lawfully-authorized surveillance of users of their services. In addition, as a provider of interconnected voice over internet protocol services, we are required to abide by a number of rules related to telephony service, including rules dealing with the protection of customer information and the processing of emergency calls.

​

15

​

​

State and Local Regulation

​

We are also regulated by state and local authorities. While the FCC has preempted many state and local regulations that impair the installation and use of towers for wireless operations and VSAT and other consumer satellite dishes, our business nonetheless may be subject to state and local regulation, including, among others, zoning regulations that affect the ability to install consumer satellite antennas or build out wireless telecommunications networks. In addition, in order to obtain universal service funding, we are subject to being an eligible telecommunications carrier in all 50 states.

​

International Regulation

​

We are subject to certain regulations adopted by the International Telecommunication Union (“ITU”). The orbital location and frequencies for certain of our satellites are subject to the frequency registration and coordination process of the ITU. The ITU Radio Regulations define the international rules, regulations and rights for a satellite and associated earth stations to use specific radio frequencies at a specific orbital location. These rules, which include deadlines for the bringing of satellite networks into use, differ depending on the type of service to be provided and the frequencies to be used by the satellite. On our behalf, various countries have made and may in the future make additional filings for the frequency assignments at particular orbital locations that are used or to be used by our current satellite networks and potential future satellite networks we may build or acquire.

​

In the event the international coordination process that is triggered by ITU filings under applicable rules is not successfully completed, or that the requests for modification of the broadcast satellite services plan regarding the allocation of orbital locations and frequencies are not granted by the ITU, we will have to operate the applicable satellite(s) on a non-interference basis, which could have an adverse impact on our business operations. If we cannot do so, we may have to cease operating such satellite(s) at the affected orbital locations. We cannot be sure of the successful outcome of these ITU coordination processes. We make commercially reasonable efforts to cooperate with the filing nation in the preparation of ITU filings, coordination of our operations in accordance with the relevant ITU Radio Regulations and responses to relevant ITU inquiries.

​

Certain of our satellite services also must conform to the ITU service plans for Region 2 (which includes the United States). If any of our operations are inconsistent 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. Certain of our satellites are not presently entitled to any interference protection from other satellites that are in conformance with the plan. Accordingly, unless and until the ITU modifies its service plans to include the technical parameters of our non-conforming operations, our non-conforming satellites, along with those of other non-conforming satellite operators, must not cause harmful electrical interference with other assignments that are in conformance with the ITU service plans.

​

The ITU also endeavors to standardize frequency allocations globally, which has led it to work on standards for terrestrial services as well as satellite operations. Combined with the work of international industry-led standards bodies such as 3GPP, these efforts could have a significant effect on the development of our Wireless services.

​

Foreign Administrations’ Jurisdiction Over Satellite and Terrestrial Operations. Certain of our satellites and earth stations are licensed in foreign jurisdictions. We also have terrestrial authorizations in foreign jurisdictions. In order to provide service to a foreign location from our U.S. satellites, we are required to obtain approvals from the FCC and foreign administrative agencies. The laws and regulations addressing access to satellite and terrestrial systems vary from country to country. In most countries, a license is required to provide our services and to operate satellite systems and earth stations.

​

Such licenses may impose certain conditions, including implementation and operation of the satellite system in a manner consistent with certain milestones (such as for contracting, satellite design, construction, launch and implementation of service), that the satellite or its launch be procured through a national entity, that the satellite control center be located in a national territory, that a license be obtained prior to launching or operating the satellite or that a license be obtained before interconnecting with the local switched telephone network and we may be subject to penalties or fines for failing to meet such conditions.

16

​

Additionally, some countries may have restrictions on the services we provide and how we provide them and/or may limit the rates that can be charged for the services we provide or impose other service terms or restrictions. Furthermore, foreign countries in which we currently, or may in the future, operate may not authorize us access to all of the spectrum that we need to provide service in a particular country.

​

Registration in the UN Registry of Space Objects

​

The United States and other jurisdictions in which we license satellites are parties to the United Nations (“UN”) Convention on the Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (“The UN Convention”). The UN Convention requires a satellite’s launching state to register the satellite as a space object with an UN Registry of Space Objects. The act of registration carries liability for the registering country in the event that the satellite causes third-party damage. Administrations may place certain requirements on satellite licensees in order to procure the necessary launch or operational authorizations that accompany registration of the satellite. In some jurisdictions, these authorizations are separate and distinct, with unique requirements, from the authorization to use a set of frequencies to provide satellite services. There is no guarantee that we will be able to procure such authorizations even if we already possess a frequency authorization.

​

Export Control and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

​

In the operation of our business, we must comply with all applicable export control and trade sanctions laws and regulations of the U.S. and other countries. Applicable U.S. laws and regulations include the Arms Export Control Act, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”), the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) and the trade sanctions laws and regulations administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”).

​

The export of certain hardware, technical data and services relating to satellites and the supply of certain ground control equipment, technical data and services to non-U.S. persons or to destinations outside the U.S. is regulated by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) under the EAR. Among other things, we are required to obtain import and export licenses from the United States government to receive and deliver certain components of direct-to-home satellite television systems. In addition, BIS regulates our export of satellite communications network equipment to non-U.S. persons or to destinations outside of the U.S. The export of other items is regulated by the U.S. Department of State’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls under the ITAR and are subject to strict export control and prior approval requirements government (including prohibitions on the sharing of certain satellite-related goods and services with China). In addition, we cannot provide certain equipment or services to certain countries subject to U.S. trade sanctions unless we first obtain the necessary authorizations from OFAC. We are also subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions that generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments or giving or promising to give anything of value to foreign government officials and other individuals for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business or gaining a competitive advantage.

​

Non-U.S. Telecommunications Regulation

​

Many of the services we provide are also subject to the regulation of other countries as telecommunications services. For certain services, we may be required to contribute fees to a universal service or other fund to support mechanisms that subsidize the provision of services to designated groups. Many countries also impose requirements on telecommunications carriers to ensure that law enforcement agencies are able to conduct lawfully-authorized surveillance of users of their services. In addition, we are subject to a number of other rules, including rules related to telephony service such as the protection of customer information and processing of emergency calls.

​

17

​

Regulations Governing our Wireless Operations

​

The FCC regulates many aspects of our Wireless and 5G Network Deployment operations. Generally, the FCC has jurisdiction over the construction, operation, acquisition and transfer of wireless communications systems. All wireless services require use of radio frequency spectrum, the assignment and distribution of which is subject to FCC regulations and oversight. The FCC can also determine what services can be offered and how they can be offered over certain frequency bands. For more information regarding our FCC Licenses, see discussion above and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Additionally, the FCC and the Federal Aviation Administration regulate the siting, lighting and construction of transmitter towers and antennae. Tower siting and construction are also subject to, among other things, state and local zoning, as well as federal statutes regarding environmental and historic preservation. The future costs to comply with all relevant regulations are to some extent unknown and changes to regulations, or the applicability of regulations, could result in higher operating and capital expenses, or reduced revenues in the future. Furthermore, the FCC has also imposed certain specific mandates on wireless carriers, including, but not limited to, construction and geographic coverage requirements, technical operating standards, provision of enhanced 911 services, roaming obligations, assistance to law enforcement and requirements for wireless tower and antenna facilities.

​

The FTC and other federal agencies also have jurisdiction over some consumer protection and elimination and prevention of anticompetitive business practices with respect to the provision of non-common carrier services.

​

Meanwhile, our 5G Network Deployment will involve significant deployment of certain equipment and therefore increase the need for local permitting processes that allow for the placement of equipment on reasonable timelines and terms. While the Communications Act generally preempts state and local governments from regulating the entry of, or the rates charged by, wireless communications services providers, certain state and local governments regulate other terms and conditions of wireless service, including, but not limited to, billing, termination of service arrangements and the imposition of early termination fees, advertising, network outages, the use of devices while driving, zoning and land use. The Communications Act also does not prohibit state and local governments from regulating the other “terms and conditions” of wireless service. For example, some states attempt to regulate wireless customer billing matters and impose reporting requirements. Several states also have laws or regulations that address safety issues (e.g., use of wireless handsets while driving) and taxation matters. In addition, wireless tower and antenna facilities are often subject to state and local zoning and land use regulation, and securing approvals for new or modified facilities is often a lengthy and expensive process.

​

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, waste-water discharge and waste management, most significantly the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (“EPCRA”). Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, our Hughes segment is considered a small quantity generator.

​

As required by the EPCRA, we file annual reports with regulatory agencies covering four areas: Emergency Planning, Emergency Release, Hazardous Chemical Storage and Toxic Chemical Release Inventory. We maintain small quantities of hazardous materials on our premises and, therefore, have relatively modest reporting requirements under the EPCRA. We are also subject to the requirements of other environmental and occupational safety and health laws and regulations. Additionally, we review the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act Title III regulatory requirements and annually report quantities of onsite material storage using Tier II, state DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) reporting systems.

​

​

18

​

​

Our environmental compliance costs, capital and other expenditures to date have not been material, and we do not expect them to be material in 2025 or 2026. However, 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 and/or environmental compliance costs, capital or other expenditures.

​

PATENTS AND OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

​

Many entities, including, but not limited to, some of our competitors, have or may in the future obtain patents and other intellectual property rights that cover or affect products or services that we offer or that we may offer in the future. In general, if a court determines that one or more of our products or services infringe intellectual property rights held by others, we may be required to cease developing or marketing those products or services, to obtain licenses from the holders of the intellectual property rights at a material cost or to redesign those products or services in such a way as to avoid infringing any patent claims. If those intellectual property rights are held by a competitor, we may be unable to obtain the intellectual property rights at any price, which could adversely affect our competitive position.

​

We may not be aware of all intellectual property rights that our products or services may potentially infringe. In addition, patent applications in the United States are confidential until the Patent and Trademark Office either publishes the application or issues a patent (whichever arises first) 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 can be substantial, and in certain circumstances can be trebled. 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 and/or that these rights are not valid. Furthermore, we cannot be certain 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.

​

SEGMENT REPORTING DATA AND GEOGRAPHIC AREA DATA

​

For segment reporting data and principal geographic area data for 2024, 2023 and 2022, see Note 16 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

HUMAN CAPITAL

​

We believe that our future success will depend to a significant extent upon the performance of Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman 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 with certain non-competition restrictions that apply if they leave us, we generally do not have employment agreements with them.

​

We believe that our Wireless business, including our ability to complete our 5G Network Deployment, is dependent on our ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain a team of highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry. Our Wireless business will be adversely affected if we fail to effectively identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry.

​

19

​

​

We had approximately 13,700 employees at December 31, 2024, the majority of whom were located in the United States and approximately 600 internationally. We generally consider relations with our employees to be good. Approximately 400 of our employees located in Italy and Brazil are represented by a union. Our mission is to be a global connectivity provider for people, enterprises and things.

​

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

​

We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and accordingly file our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. 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 reports 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 https://ir.echostar.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 SEC promulgated thereunder. Our code of ethics is available on our corporate website at https://ir.echostar.com/corporate-governance. 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.

​

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

​

(furnished in accordance with Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K, pursuant to General Instruction G(3) of Form 10-K)

​

The following table and information below sets forth the name, age and position with EchoStar 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:

​

​

Charles W. Ergen. Mr. Ergen has served as our executive Chairman since November 2009 and Chairman of the Board of Directors since our formation in 2007. Mr. Ergen served as our Chief Executive Officer from our formation in 2007 until November 2009. Mr. Ergen serves as executive Chairman and has been Chairman of the Board of Directors of DISH Network Corporation (“DISH”) since its formation and, during the past five years, has held executive officer and director positions with DISH and its subsidiaries (together with DISH, “Dish Network”) most recently serving as the Chief Executive Officer of DISH from March 2015 to December 2017.

​

20

​

Hamid Akhavan. Mr. Akhavan has served as our Chief Executive Officer and President since April 2022. Following the announcement of the agreement to enter into the business combination with DISH Network, Mr. Akhavan served as the DISH Network’s Chief Executive Officer from November 2023 to December 2023. Prior to joining EchoStar, Mr. Akhavan has accumulated extensive leadership experience at major telecommunications and technology companies, including Chief Executive Officer of Unify, Inc, and Chief Executive Officer of T-Mobile International, where he also served as a member of the Board of Management of Deutsche Telekom. In recent years, Akhavan has been active in private equity and serving on the board of directors of several public and private companies.

​

Paul Gaske. Mr. Gaske became Chief Operating Officer, Hughes effective January 1, 2023, reporting to the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. Prior to becoming the Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Gaske was the Executive President and General Manager of the North American Division of Hughes Network Systems, LLC since 1999. Mr. Gaske also oversees Hughes manufacturing.

​

Dean A. Manson. Mr. Manson has served as our Chief Legal Officer and Secretary since November 2011 and is responsible for all our legal, government affairs and corporate information security. Mr. Manson joined our subsidiary Hughes Network Systems, LLC in 2000 and was appointed its General Counsel in 2004. He was previously with the law firm of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, where he focused on international project finance and corporate transactions.

​

Paul W. Orban. Mr. Orban has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, DISH since December 2023 and is responsible for all aspects of DISH Network’s finance, accounting, tax, treasury, internal audit and supply chain departments. Mr. Orban has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of DISH Network since July 2019 and has had responsibility for all aspects of DISH Network’s finance, accounting, tax, treasury, internal audit and supply chain departments. Mr. Orban served as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer from December 2015 to July 2019, Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller from September 2006 to December 2015 and as Vice President and Corporate Controller from September 2003 to September 2006. He also served as EchoStar’s Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller from 2008 to 2012 pursuant to a management services agreement between DISH Network and EchoStar. Since joining DISH Network in 1996, Mr. Orban has held various other positions of increasing responsibility in our accounting department. Prior to DISH Network, Mr. Orban was an auditor with Arthur Andersen LLP.

​

Gary Schanman. Mr. Schanman has served as Executive Vice President and Group President, Video Services since December 2023 and is responsible for the DISH TV and SLING TV businesses, including product, media sales, marketing and programming. Mr. Schanman previously served as Executive Vice President and Group President, Video Services for DISH Network since July 2023. Mr. Schanman previously served as Executive Vice President and Group President, SLING TV since April 2022 and has had responsibility for all aspects of the SLING TV business. Prior to EchoStar, Mr. Schanman was the Founder and President of GB Monday, while also acting as Chief Product and Technology Officer for Common Sense Networks and its kids streaming service, Sensical from July 2020 to April 2022. Prior to that, from March 2014 to March 2020, he served as Senior Vice President of Spectrum Video Products at Charter Communications.

​

John W. Swieringa. Mr. Swieringa has served as President of Technology and Chief Operating Officer since December 2023 and is responsible for all the technology and operational aspects of our business. Mr. Swieringa previously served as the President of Technology and Chief Operating Officer of DISH Network since August 2023. Mr. Swieringa previously served as President and Chief Operating Officer of DISH Network’s Wireless business segment from January 2022 to August 2023 and has had responsibility for all operational aspects of DISH Network’s Wireless business segment. Mr. Swieringa previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of DISH Network since December 2017 and as Group President, Retail Wireless since July 2020 and has had responsibility for all aspects of DISH Network’s Retail Wireless business. Mr. Swieringa previously served as Executive Vice President, Operations from December 2015 to December 2017, as Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer from March 2014 to December 2015 and as Vice President of Information Technology Customer Applications from March 2010 to March 2014. Mr. Swieringa joined DISH Network in December 2007 serving in our finance department.

21

​

​

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 EchoStar, executive officers serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

​

Item 1A.RISK FACTORS

​

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. If any of the following events occur or evolve in a way different than expected, our business, financial condition, or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

​

Competition and Economic Risks

​

We face intense and increasing competition from providers of video, broadband and/or wireless services, which may require us to further increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn.

​

Our Pay-TV business faces substantial competition from established pay-TV providers and broadband service providers and increasing competition from companies providing/facilitating the delivery of video content via the Internet to computers, televisions and other streaming and mobile devices, including, but not limited to, wireless service providers. In recent years, the traditional pay-TV industry has matured, and industry consolidation and convergence have created competitors with greater scale and multiple product/service offerings. Some of these services charge nominal or no fees for access to their content, which could adversely affect demand for our Pay-TV services. Moreover, new technologies have been, and will likely continue to be, developed that further increase the number of competitors we face with respect to video services, including, but not limited to, competition from piracy-based video offerings. These developments, among others, have contributed to intense and increasing competition, which we expect to continue.

​

We face increasing competition from content providers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet. These content providers and other companies, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunication companies, are rapidly increasing their Internet-based video offerings. See “Item 1. Business – Overview – Competition” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Trends in our Pay-TV Segment” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and alliances among cable television providers, telecommunications companies, programming providers and others may result in, among other things, greater scale and financial leverage and increase the availability of offerings from providers capable of bundling video, broadband and/or wireless services in competition with our services and may exacerbate the risks described herein. Such providers may be able to, among other things, utilize their increased leverage over third-party content owners and programmers to withhold online rights from us and reduce the price they pay for programming at the expense of other MVPDs, including us; thwart our ability to compete in the wireless market, by, among other things, refuse to enter into data roaming agreements; underutilize key orbital spectrum resources that could be more efficiently used by us; foreclose or degrade our online video offerings at various points in the broadband pipe; and impose data caps on consumers who access our online video offerings. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Trends in our Pay-TV Segment – Programming” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

We believe that the availability and extent of programming, including, but not limited to, unique programming services such as foreign language, sports programming and original content, and other value-added services such as access to video via mobile devices, continue to be significant factors in consumers’ choice among pay-TV providers. Other pay-TV providers may have more successfully marketed and promoted their programming packages and value-added services and may also be better equipped and have greater resources to increase their programming offerings and value-added services to respond to increasing consumer demand.

​

22

​

We may be required to make substantial additional investments in infrastructure to respond to competitive pressure to deliver enhanced programming and other value-added services, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to compete effectively with offerings from other pay-TV providers.

​

Furthermore, this increasingly competitive environment may require us to increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn. Increasingly, we must seek to attract a greater proportion of new subscribers from our competitors’ existing subscriber bases rather than from first-time purchasers of pay-TV services. In addition, because other pay-TV providers may be seeking to attract a greater proportion of their new subscribers from our existing subscriber base, we may be required to increase retention spending and/or provide greater discounts or credits to acquire and retain subscribers who may spend less on our services. Our SLING TV subscribers on average purchase lower-priced programming services than do DISH TV subscribers. Accordingly, an increase in SLING TV subscribers has a negative impact on our Pay-TV average monthly revenue per subscriber (“Pay-TV ARPU”). If our Pay-TV ARPU decreases or does not increase commensurate with increases in programming or other costs, our margins may be reduced and the long-term value of a subscriber would then decrease and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

In addition, as a result of this increased competitive environment and the maturation of the pay-TV industry, future growth opportunities of our DISH TV business may be limited and our margins may be reduced, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations continue to be negatively impacted by stricter subscriber acquisition policies (including, but not limited to, a focus on attaining higher quality subscribers) and increased competitive pressures, including, but not limited to, aggressive marketing, more aggressive retention efforts, bundled discount offers combining broadband, video and/or wireless services and other discounted promotional offers. In addition, we face increased competitive pressures from content providers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet. These content providers and other companies, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunication companies, are rapidly increasing their Internet-based video offerings and direct-to-consumer exclusive and non-exclusive content. There can be no assurance that our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations, net DISH TV subscriber additions and DISH TV churn rate will not continue to be negatively impacted and that the pace of such negative impact will not accelerate. In the event that our DISH TV subscriber base continues to decline or such decline accelerates, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

Changing consumer behavior and new technologies in our Pay-TV business may reduce our subscriber activations and may cause our subscribers to purchase fewer services from us or to cancel our services altogether, resulting in less revenue to us.

​

New technologies, products and services are driving rapid changes in consumer behavior as consumers seek more control over when, where and how they consume content and access communication services. In particular, through technological advancements and with the large increase in the number of consumers with broadband service, a significant amount of video content has become available through online content providers for users to stream and view on their personal computers, televisions, phones, tablets, video game consoles and other devices, in some cases without a fee required to access the content. While our subscribers can use their traditional video subscription to access mobile programming, an increasing number of subscribers are also using mobile devices as the sole means of viewing video, and an increasing number of non-traditional video providers is developing content and technologies to satisfy that demand. For example, these technological advancements, changes in consumer behavior and the increasing number of choices available to consumers regarding the means by which consumers obtain video content may cause DISH TV subscribers to disconnect our services (“cord cutting”), downgrade to smaller, less expensive programming packages (“cord shaving”) or elect to purchase through online content providers a certain portion of the services that they would have historically purchased from us.

​

23

​

​

These technological advancements and changes in consumer behavior and/or our failure to effectively anticipate or adapt to such changes, could reduce our gross new Pay-TV subscriber activations and increase our subscriber churn rate and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

New technologies could also create new competitors for us. For instance, we face increasing consumer demand for the delivery of digital video services via the Internet. We expect to continue to face increased competition from companies who use the Internet to deliver digital video services as the speed and quality of broadband and wireless networks continue to improve.

​

We face certain risks competing in the wireless services industry and operating a facilities-based wireless services business.

​

As a result of certain acquisitions we have entered the Wireless business. We have made substantial investments to acquire certain wireless spectrum licenses. We plan to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of our 5G Network Deployment. A Wireless services business presents certain risks. Any of the following risks, among others, may have a material adverse effect on our future business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

​

24

​

​

25

​

In particular, the FCC imposes significant regulation on licensees of wireless spectrum with respect to, among other things, how radio spectrum is used by licensees, the nature of the services that licensees may offer and how the services may be offered and resolution of issues of interference between spectrum bands. The FCC grants wireless licenses for terms of generally 10-12 years that are subject to acceleration, renewal or revocation based on certain factors depending on the license including, among others, public interest considerations, level and quality of services and/or operations provided by the licensee, frequency and duration of any interruptions or outages of services and/or operations provided by the licensee, and the extent to which service is provided to, and/or operation is provided in, rural areas and tribal lands. For example, the FCC currently has an open proceeding considering whether to permit MVDDS licensees to become Fixed Service operators. We cannot predict either the outcome of this proceeding or any potential impact it might have on our operations. There can be no assurances that our Wireless spectrum licenses will be renewed or that we will be able to obtain additional licenses. Failure to comply with FCC requirements in a given license area could result in revocation of the license for that license area. In addition, the FCC uses its transactional “spectrum screen” to identify prospective wireless transactions that may require additional competitive scrutiny. If a proposed transaction would exceed the spectrum screen threshold, the FCC undertakes a more detailed analysis of relevant market conditions in the impacted geographic areas to determine whether the transaction would reduce competition without offsetting public benefits. If a proposed spectrum acquisition exceeds the spectrum screen trigger, such additional review could extend the duration of the regulatory review process and there can be no assurance that such proposed spectrum acquisition would ultimately be completed, in whole or in part. In addition, from time to time, we may seek modification and/or waiver of certain build out or other requirements of our licenses from the applicable government agency. Historically, we have successfully negotiated such modifications and/or waivers. However, there can be no guarantee that we will continue to be successful and that failure to meet requirements of our license may result in, among other things, adverse government action, including, but not limited to, acceleration of build out deadlines or cancellation or revocation of our licenses. 

​

Our pay-TV competitors may be able to leverage their relationships with programmers to reduce their programming costs and/or offer exclusive content that will place them at a competitive advantage to us.

​

The cost of programming represents the largest percentage of our overall Pay-TV costs. Certain of our competitors own directly, partner with and/or are affiliated with companies that own programming content that may enable them to obtain lower programming costs or offer exclusive programming that may be attractive to prospective or existing subscribers. Unlike our larger cable and satellite competitors, some of which also provide internet or broadband based pay-TV services, we have not made significant investments in programming providers. In addition, certain programmers have begun offering a greater amount of their content on a direct-to-consumer basis, including, but not limited to, exclusive and non-exclusive content. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to obtain access to such programming networks on nondiscriminatory and fair terms, or at all. See “Item 1. Business – Government Regulations – FCC Regulations Applicable to Our Operations – Cable Act and Program Access” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Through the MNSA and the NSA, we depend in part on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide network services to our Wireless subscribers. Our failure to effectively manage these relationships, including without limitation, our minimum commitments, any system failure in their wireless networks, interruption in the services provided to us and/or the termination of the MNSA or the NSA could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

In July 2021, we entered into the NSA with AT&T to provide us with wireless network services. Under the NSA, we have committed to activate on AT&T a minimum percentage of certain of our Wireless subscribers and to utilize AT&T’s network for a minimum specified percentage of our domestic roaming data usage.

​

26

​

In 2020 in connection with the Asset Purchase Agreement, we entered into a master network services agreement with T-Mobile to provide us with wireless network services for a period of seven years (the “Prior MNSA”). In June 2022, we and T-Mobile entered into the MNSA, which amended the Prior MNSA. Under the MNSA, we agreed to a minimum purchase commitment to T-Mobile, subject to certain terms and conditions.

​

As a result, failure to meet the minimum commitments to AT&T or T-Mobile could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, failure to meet our minimum commitments could result in, among other things, the acceleration of financial commitments and potential termination of the NSA or the MNSA, respectively.

​

As we continue our 5G Network Deployment, we currently depend in part on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide us with network services pursuant to the MNSA and the NSA, respectively, primarily in areas our 5G Network doesn’t cover. We rely on T-Mobile and AT&T to, among other things, maintain their wireless facilities and government authorizations and to comply with government policies and regulations. If T-Mobile or AT&T fails to do so, our subscriber activations and churn rate could be negatively impacted, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. As a result, failure to manage these relationships, including, but not limited to, effectively activating subscribers on the optimal network, transitioning subscribers to a different network, managing the existing subscriber base and vendor relationships and meeting certain minimum commitments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

In the event that a termination under the NSA or the MNSA were to occur, our Wireless subscribers may need to obtain a new device, a new SIM card or receive a software update to continue receiving Wireless services from us. These required measures could cause significant disruption to our Wireless subscriber base which could result in, among other things, a significant increase in our churn rate. A termination of either the NSA or the MNSA, respectively, could result in significant financial and operational challenges to mitigate such termination, and there can be no assurances that any attempts to mitigate a termination event would be successful on an acceptable timeframe or at all.

​

We compete with the MNOs whose networks we partially rely on to provide wireless services to our customers, and they may seek to limit, reduce or terminate our network access to the extent that it becomes competitively advantageous to do so.

​

We are able to offer wireless services to our customers through the 5G Network, and through our existing agreements with AT&T and T-Mobile, both of whom are competitors of ours. While our agreements with AT&T and T-Mobile had ten and seven-year terms from the date of signing, respectively, to the extent that either network service provider experiences, among other things, network capacity challenges, it is possible that our subscribers could be de-prioritized for access to those networks. Further, AT&T and/or T-Mobile may decide not to renew their agreements with us at acceptable rates, or at all or impose other obligations that we are unable or unwilling to accept. Any reduction in, or loss of, access to those networks in the future could significantly impact our ability to provide services to our subscribers and in turn have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

Changes in how network operators handle and charge for access to data that travels across their networks could adversely impact our Pay-TV business.

​

With respect to our Pay-TV business, we rely upon the ability of consumers to access our SLING TV services and certain DISH TV functionality through the Internet. If network operators block, restrict, slow-down or throttle or otherwise impair access to our services over their networks, our business could be negatively affected. To the extent that network operators implement usage-based pricing including, but not limited to, meaningful bandwidth caps, or otherwise try to monetize access to their networks by data providers, we could incur greater operating expenses and our SLING TV subscriber count could be negatively impacted.

​

27

​

Furthermore, to the extent network operators create tiers of Internet access service and either charge us for or prohibit us from being available through these tiers, our SLING TV business could be negatively impacted. In addition, many network operators that provide consumers with broadband service also provide these consumers with video programming, and these network operators may have an incentive to use their network infrastructure in a manner adverse to our continued growth and success. These risks may be exacerbated to the extent network operators are able to provide preferential treatment to their data, including, for example, by offering wireless subscribers access to owned or preferred video content over the Internet without counting against a subscriber’s monthly data caps, which may give an unfair advantage to the network operator’s own or partners video content.

​

We cannot predict with any certainty the impact to our business that may result from changes in how network operators handle and charge for access to data that travels across their networks.

​

Economic weakness and uncertainty may adversely affect our ability to grow or maintain our business.

​

Our ability to grow or maintain our business may be adversely affected by economic weakness and uncertainty, which could result in the following:

​

​

We are also subject to inflationary cost pressures, and if inflation continues or worsens, it could negatively impact us by increasing, among other things, our operating expenses. Inflation may lead to cost increases in multiple areas across our business, for example, rises in the prices of raw materials and manufactured goods, increased energy rates, as well as increased wage pressures and other expenses related to our labor, programming and other costs. While we attempt to increase our revenue to offset increases in costs, there is no assurance that we will be able to do so on an acceptable timeline or at all. Therefore, costs could rise faster than associated revenue, thereby resulting in a negative impact on our operating results, cash flows and liquidity.

​

28

​

​

We are facing increasing competition which could impact demand for, and result in, increasing pricing pressures with respect to, our products and services.

Our Broadband and Satellite Services segment operates in an intensely competitive, consumer- and enterprise-driven and rapidly changing environment and competes with a growing number of companies that provide similar products and services to consumer and enterprise customers. There can be no assurance that we will be able to effectively compete against our competitors due to, among other factors, their significant resources and operating history. Material competitive risks to our business include, but are not limited to, the following:

​

​

If we are unable to take advantage of technological developments on a timely basis, or at all, we may experience a decline in demand for our services or face challenges in implementing or evolving our business strategy.

​

In order to grow and remain competitive, we will need to adapt to changes in available technology, including, but not limited to, artificial intelligence and machine learning, continually invest in our 5G Network Deployment, increase 5G Network capacity, enhance our existing service offerings and introduce new offerings to meet our current and potential subscribers’ changing service demands. Enhancing our 5G Network, including, but not limited to, our ongoing 5G Network Deployment, is subject to risks related to, among other things, equipment choices, network deployment and management and service offerings. In addition, our 5G Network Deployment utilizes an O-RAN architecture, which is designed to, among other things, incorporate components sourced from various third-party suppliers. Generally, these third-party suppliers do not ensure that their products will integrate with components provided by other third-party suppliers. Therefore, we generally serve as the overall system integrator.

​

As a result, adopting new and sophisticated technologies may result in implementation issues, such as scheduling and supplier delays, unexpected or increased costs, technological constraints, regulatory permitting issues, actual or perceived subscriber dissatisfaction and other issues that could cause delays in launching new technological capabilities, which in turn could result in significant costs or reduce the anticipated benefits of the upgrades. If our new services fail to retain or gain acceptance in the marketplace or if costs associated with these services are higher than anticipated, this could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

​

Operational and Service Delivery Risks

​

Any deterioration in our operational performance and subscriber satisfaction could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

If our operational performance and subscriber satisfaction with respect to our Pay-TV, Wireless, and/or Broadband and Satellite Services businesses were to deteriorate, we may experience a decrease in subscriber activations and an increase in our subscriber churn rate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. To improve our operational performance, we continue to make investments in staffing, training, information systems and other initiatives, primarily in our call center and in-home service operations, and our Broadband and Satellite Services and Wireless business operations.

​

29

​

These investments are intended to, among other things, help combat inefficiencies introduced by the increasing complexity of our business, improve subscriber satisfaction, reduce subscriber churn, increase productivity and allow us to scale better over the long run. We cannot, however, be certain that our spending will ultimately be successful in improving our operational performance, and if unsuccessful, we may have to incur higher costs to improve our operational performance. While we believe that such costs will be outweighed by longer-term benefits, there can be no assurance when or if we will realize these benefits at all.

​

If our subscriber activations decrease, or if our subscriber churn rate, subscriber acquisition costs or retention costs increase, our financial performance will be adversely affected.

​

We may incur increased costs to acquire new subscribers and retain existing subscribers to some or all of our Pay-TV, Wireless or Broadband and Satellite Services businesses. For example, with respect to our Pay-TV business, our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations, net DISH TV subscriber additions, and DISH TV churn rate continue to be negatively impacted by stricter subscriber acquisition and retention policies for our DISH TV subscribers, including, but not limited to, higher quality subscribers. Retention costs with respect to our DISH TV services may be driven higher by, among other things, increased upgrades of existing subscribers’ equipment.

​

​

Although we expect to continue to incur expenses, such as providing retention credits and other subscriber acquisition and retention expenses, including, but not limited to, device subsidies and upgrade discounts, to attract and retain subscribers, there can be no assurance that our efforts will generate new subscribers or result in a lower churn rate. Our subscriber acquisition costs and 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. 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.

​

With respect to our Pay-TV business, programming expenses are increasing, which may adversely affect our future financial condition and results of operations.

​

Our programming costs represent a significant component of our total expense and we expect these costs to continue to increase on a per subscriber basis. The pay-TV industry has continued to experience an increase in the cost of programming, especially local broadcast channels and sports programming. In addition, certain programming costs are rising at a much faster rate than wages or inflation. These factors may be exacerbated by, among other factors, the increasing trend of consolidation in the media industry, partnerships between companies that offer pay-TV services and programmers and increased direct-to-consumer offerings of both exclusive and non-exclusive content, which may further increase our programming expenses. Our ability to compete successfully will depend, among other things, on our ability to continue to obtain desirable programming and deliver it to our subscribers at competitive prices.

​

In addition, increases in programming costs cause us to increase the rates that we charge our Pay-TV subscribers, which could in turn cause our existing Pay-TV subscribers to disconnect service. Therefore, we may be unable to pass increased programming costs on to our subscribers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

We depend on others to provide the programming that we offer to our Pay-TV subscribers and, if we fail to obtain or lose access to certain programming, our Pay-TV subscriber activations and our subscriber churn rate may be negatively impacted.

​

We depend on certain third parties to provide us with programming services. Our programming agreements have remaining terms ranging from less than one to up to several years and contain various renewal, expiration and/or termination provisions. We may not be able to renew these agreements on acceptable terms or at all, and these agreements may be terminated prior to expiration of their original terms.

​

30

​

In addition, our ability to provide services under these agreements and negotiate acceptable terms depends on, among other things, the number of Pay-TV subscribers we have, our actual, perceived or anticipated financial condition and our negotiating power against each programmer, which can vary depending on the size and scale of such programmer.

​

Negotiations over programming carriage contracts are generally contentious, and certain programmers have, in the past, limited our access to their programming in connection with those negotiations and the scheduled expiration of their programming carriage contracts with us. In recent years, our net Pay-TV subscriber additions have been negatively impacted as a result of programming interruptions and threatened programming interruptions in connection with the scheduled expiration of programming carriage contracts with content providers. In addition, certain content providers have begun making a greater percentage of their content available as a stand-alone product available direct-to-consumer and acceleration of this trend may result in lower net Pay-TV subscriber additions, higher net Pay-TV subscriber losses and increased DISH TV churn rate.

​

We cannot predict with any certainty the impact to our net Pay-TV subscriber additions, gross new DISH TV subscriber activations and DISH TV churn rate resulting from programming interruptions or threatened programming interruptions that may occur in the future. As a result, we may at times suffer from periods of lower net Pay-TV subscriber additions or higher net Pay-TV subscriber losses.

​

We typically have a few programming contracts with major content providers up for renewal each year and if we are unable to renew any of these agreements on acceptable terms or at all, or the other parties terminate the agreements, there can be no assurance 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, failure to obtain access to certain programming or loss of access to programming, particularly programming provided by major content providers and/or programming popular with our subscribers, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including, among other things, our net Pay-TV subscriber additions. Our programming signals in our Pay-TV business are subject to theft, and we are vulnerable to other forms of fraud that could require significant expenditures to remedy. Increases in theft of our signal or our competitors’ signals could, in addition to reducing gross new DISH TV subscriber activations, also cause our DISH TV churn rate to increase.

​

We may not be able to obtain necessary retransmission consent agreements at acceptable rates, or at all, from local network stations.

​

The Copyright Act 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 local broadcast television stations that do not elect “must carry” status, as required by the Communications Act. If we fail to reach retransmission consent agreements with such broadcasters, we cannot carry their signals. This could have an adverse effect on our strategy to compete with cable and other satellite companies that provide local signals. While we have generally been able to reach retransmission consent agreements with most of these local network stations, from time to time there are stations with which we have not been able to reach an agreement, resulting in the removal of their channels primarily from our DISH TV lineup. There can be no assurance that we will secure these agreements or that we will secure new agreements on acceptable terms, or at all, upon the expiration of our current retransmission consent agreements, some of which are short-term.

​

In recent years, national broadcasters have used their ownership of certain local broadcast stations to require us to carry additional cable programming in exchange for retransmission consent of their local broadcast stations. These requirements may place constraints on available capacity on our satellites for other programming. Furthermore, the rates we are charged for retransmitting local channels have been increasing substantially and may exceed our ability to increase our prices to our subscribers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

31

​

​

We have limited satellite capacity and failures or reduced capacity could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

Operation of our Pay-TV and Broadband and Satellite Services businesses requires that we have adequate satellite transmission capacity for the programming and services we offer. While we generally have had in-orbit satellite capacity sufficient to transmit our existing channels and provide satellite internet coverage and some backup capacity to recover the transmission of certain critical programming and coverage, our backup capacity is limited.

​

Our ability to earn revenue from our Pay-TV and Broadband and Satellite Services businesses depends on, among other things, the usefulness of our owned and leased 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 orbits and control over the satellites’ functions, the efficiency of the launch vehicles used and the remaining on-board fuel following in-orbit insertion. Generally, the minimum design life of each of our owned and leased satellites ranges from 12 to 15 years. We can provide no assurance, however, as to the actual useful lives of any of these satellites. Our operating results could be adversely affected if the useful life of any of our owned or leased satellites was significantly shorter than the minimum design life.

​

See “Item 1A. Risk Factors – Risks Related to our Satellites” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Extreme weather may result in risk of damage to our infrastructure and therefore our ability to provide services, and may lead to changes in federal, state and foreign government regulation, all of which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

Extreme weather has the potential to directly damage our network facilities and other infrastructure and/or disrupt our ability to build and maintain portions of our network and could potentially disrupt suppliers’ ability to, among other things, provide the products and services we require to support our operations. Any such disruption could delay our 5G Network Deployment plans, interrupt service for our customers, increase our costs and have a negative effect on our operating results and financial condition. The potential physical effects of extreme weather, such as storms, floods, fires, freezing conditions, sea-level rise and other adverse weather events could negatively affect our operations and infrastructure and, as a result, our financial results. Operational impacts resulting from extreme weather, such as, among other things, damage to our 5G Network infrastructure, could result in increased costs and loss of revenue. We could be required to incur significant costs to improve the resiliency of our infrastructure and otherwise prepare for, respond to and mitigate such weather events. It is impossible to accurately predict the materiality of any potential losses or costs associated with extreme weather.

​

Our failure to effectively invest in, introduce and implement new competitive products and services could cause our products and services to become obsolete and could negatively impact our business.

​

Technology in the pay-TV, wireless and broadband and satellite services industries changes rapidly as new technologies are developed, which could cause our products and services to become obsolete. We and our suppliers may not be able to keep pace with technological developments. Our operating results are dependent to a significant extent upon our ability to continue to introduce new products and services, to upgrade existing 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 research and development of new, technologically advanced products is a complex and uncertain process requiring high levels of innovation and investment. The success of new product and service development depends on many factors, including among others, the following:

​

32

​

​

If the new technologies on which we focus our research and development investments fail to achieve acceptance in the marketplace, our competitive position could be negatively impacted, causing a reduction in our revenues and earnings. For example, our competitors could use proprietary technologies that are perceived by the market as being superior. In addition, delays in the delivery of components or other unforeseen problems associated with our technology may occur that could materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenue, offer new products and services and remain competitive. Furthermore, after we have incurred substantial costs, one or more of the products or services under our development, or under development by one or more of our strategic partners, could become obsolete prior to it being widely adopted.

​

If our products and services are not competitive or perceived as not competitive, our business could suffer and our financial performance could be negatively impacted. Our products and services may also experience quality problems, including, but not limited to, outages and service slowdowns, from time to time. If the quality of our products and services does not meet our subscribers’ expectations, then our business, and ultimately our reputation, could be negatively impacted.

​

We rely on a single vendor or a limited number of vendors to provide certain key products or services to us, and the inability of these key vendors to meet our needs could have a material adverse effect on our business.

​

Historically, we have contracted with and rely on a single vendor or a limited number of vendors to provide certain key products or services to us such as information technology support, billing systems, security access devices and many components that we provide to subscribers in order to deliver services from our Pay-TV, Wireless and Broadband or Satellite Services businesses. We also rely on a limited number of vendors to supply our wireless devices and wireless network equipment used in connection with our 5G Network Deployment. If these vendors are unable to meet our needs because, among other things, they fail to perform adequately, are no longer in business, are experiencing shortages or supply chain issues or discontinue a certain product or service we need, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

​

We have experienced in the past and may continue to experience shortages driven by raw material availability (which may be negatively impacted by, among other things, trade protection policies such as tariffs and or/escalating trade tensions, particularly with countries in Asia), manufacturing capacity, labor shortages, industry allocations, natural disasters, logistical delays and significant changes in the financial or business conditions of its suppliers that negatively impact our operations.

​

While alternative sources for these products and services exist, we may not be able to develop these alternative sources quickly and cost-effectively, or at all, which could materially impair our ability to timely deliver our products to our subscribers or operate our business. Furthermore, our vendors may request changes in pricing, payment terms or other contractual obligations between the parties, which could require us to make substantial additional investments or find alternative arrangements.

​

33

​

​

We depend on independent third parties to solicit orders for our services that represent a meaningful percentage of our total gross new subscriber activations.

​

While we offer products and services through direct sales channels, a meaningful percentage of our total gross new subscriber activations are generated through independent third parties such as small retailers, direct marketing groups, local and regional consumer electronics stores, nationwide retailers and telecommunications companies. Most of our independent third-party retailers are not exclusive to us and some of our independent third-party retailers may favor our competitors’ products and services over ours based on the relative financial arrangements associated with marketing our products and services and those of our competitors. Furthermore, most of these independent third-party retailers are significantly smaller than we are and may be more susceptible to economic weaknesses that make it more difficult for them to operate profitably. From time to time, we may adjust the economic terms of agreements with our independent third-party retailers to, among other things, further align our interests with theirs. It may be difficult to better align our interests with our independent third-party retailers because of their capital and liquidity constraints. In addition, any changes we may make may not result in the intended benefits on an acceptable timeline or at all and as a result, negatively affect our operating results. Loss of these relationships could have an adverse effect on our subscriber base and certain of our other key operating metrics because we may not be able to develop comparable alternative distribution channels.

​

Risks Related to our Human Capital

​

We rely on highly skilled personnel for our business, and any inability to hire and retain key personnel or to hire qualified personnel may negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

We believe that our future success depends to a significant extent upon the performance of Mr. Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman, and certain other key executives. The loss of Mr. Ergen or certain other key executives, the ability to effectively provide for the succession of our senior management or the ability of Mr. Ergen or such other key executives to devote sufficient time and effort to our businesses could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Although some of our key executives may have agreements relating to their equity compensation that limit their ability to work for or consult with competitors, we generally do not have employment agreements with them.

​

Our business growth and customer retention strategies rely in part on the work of technically skilled employees.

​

Our response to technological developments depends, to a significant degree, on the work of technically skilled employees. In addition, we have made and will continue to make significant investments in, among other things, research, development and marketing for new products, services, satellites and related technologies, as well as entry into new business areas. Investments in new technologies, satellites and business areas are inherently dependent on these technically skilled employees as well. Competition for the services of such employees has become more intense as demand for these types of employees grows. We compete with other companies for these employees and although we strive to attract, retain, motivate and manage these employees, we may not succeed in these respects. Additionally, if we were to lose certain key technically skilled employees, the loss of knowledge and intellectual capital might have an adverse impact on our business. Furthermore, we believe that our Wireless business, including, but not limited to, our ability to complete our 5G Network Deployment, is dependent on our ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain a team of highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry. Our Wireless business will be adversely affected if we fail to effectively hire, develop, motivate and retain highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry.

​

The success of our business is also dependent on our ability to recruit engineers and other professionals, including those who are citizens of other countries. Immigration laws in the U.S. and other countries in which we operate are subject to legislative and regulatory changes, as well as variations in the standards of application and enforcement due to, among other things, political forces and economic conditions.

34

​

It is difficult to predict the political and economic events that could affect immigration laws, or the restrictive impact they could have on obtaining or renewing work visas for our professionals. If immigration laws are changed or if new and more restrictive government regulations are enacted or increased, our access to qualified and skilled professionals may be limited.

​

Risks Related to our Satellites

​

Our owned and leased satellites in orbit are subject to significant operational and environmental risks that could limit our ability to utilize these satellites.

Satellites are subject to significant operational risks while in orbit. These risks include, but are not limited to, malfunctions, commonly referred to as anomalies, which have occurred and may occur in the future in our satellites and the satellites of other operators. Any single anomaly could materially and adversely affect our ability to utilize the satellite. Anomalies may also reduce, among other things, the expected capacity, commercial operation and/or useful life of a satellite, thereby reducing the revenue that could be generated by that satellite, or create additional expenses due to the need to provide replacement or back-up satellites or satellite capacity earlier than planned and could have a material adverse effect on our business. We may not be able to prevent or mitigate the impacts of anomalies in the future.

​

Meteoroid events, decommissioned satellites, increased solar activity and other adverse events also pose a potential threat to all in-orbit 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.

​

Generally, the minimum design life of each of our satellites is 15 years. We can provide no assurance, however, as to the actual operational lives of our satellites, which may be shorter or longer than their design lives. Our ability to earn revenue depends on the continued operation of our satellites, each of which has a limited useful life.

​

We generally do not carry in-orbit insurance on our satellites or payloads because we have assessed that the cost of insurance is not economical relative to the risk of failures. If one or more of our in-orbit uninsured satellites or payloads fail, we could be required to record significant impairment charges for the satellite or payload.

​

Our satellites under construction are subject to risks related to, among other things, construction, technology, regulations and launch that could limit our ability to utilize these satellites, increase costs and adversely affect our business.

Satellite construction and launch are subject to significant risks, including, but not limited to, manufacturing and delivery delays, anomalies, launch failure and incorrect orbital placement. The technologies in our satellite designs are very complex and difficulties in constructing our designs could result in delays in the deployment of our satellites or increased or unanticipated costs. There can be no assurance that the technologies in our existing satellites or in new satellites that we design, acquire and build will work as we expect, will not become obsolete, that we will realize any or all of the anticipated benefits of our satellite designs or our new satellites and/or that we will obtain all regulatory approvals required to operate our new or acquired satellites on an acceptable timeline, or at all. Launch anomalies and failures can result in significant delays in the deployment of satellites because of the need both to construct replacement satellites, which can take significant amounts of time and to obtain other launch opportunities. Such significant delays have and could in the future materially affect, among other things, our business, our ability to meet regulatory or contractual required milestones, the availability and our use of other or replacement satellite resources and our ability to provide services to customers. In addition, significant delays in a satellite program could give customers who have purchased or reserved capacity on that satellite a right to terminate their service contracts relating to the satellite. We may not be able to accommodate affected customers on other satellites until a replacement satellite is available. In addition, we generally do not carry in-orbit insurance on our satellites or payloads because we have assessed that the cost of insurance is not economical relative to the risk of failures.

35

​

If we do obtain launch or in-orbit insurance, it may not cover the full cost of constructing and launching or replacing a satellite nor fully cover our losses in the event of a launch failure or significant degradation.

Our use of certain satellites is often dependent on satellite coordination agreements, which may be difficult to obtain.

​

Satellite operators are required to enter into international spectrum coordination agreements with other affected satellite operators and must be approved by the relevant governments. If a required agreement cannot be negotiated, we may have to operate the applicable satellite(s) in a manner that does not cause harmful radio frequency interference with the affected satellite. If we cannot do so, we may have to cease operating such satellite(s) at the affected orbital locations.

​

We may face interference from other services sharing satellite spectrum.

The FCC and other national, state, local and international regulators have adopted rules or may adopt rules in the future that require us to share spectrum on a basis with other radio services. There can be no assurance that these operations would not interfere with our operations and adversely affect our business. In the event that the FCC and/or another regulator determines that our spectrum interferes with another service, we may be required to, among other things, find or develop a solution. We cannot make any assurance that we will be able to do so on an acceptable timeline or at all, or that such solution will not adversely affect our business.

​

Risks Related to our Products and Technology

Our business depends on certain intellectual property rights and on not infringing the intellectual property rights of others. 

We rely on our patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets, as well as licenses and other agreements with our vendors and other parties, to use our technologies, conduct our operations and sell our products and services. Legal challenges to our intellectual property rights and claims of intellectual property infringement by third parties could require that we enter into royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms, incur substantial monetary liability or be enjoined preliminarily or permanently from further use of the intellectual property in question or from the continuation of our business as currently conducted, which could require us to change our business practices or limit our ability to compete effectively or could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

​

Even if we believe any such challenges or claims are without merit, they can be time consuming and costly to defend and divert management’s attention and resources away from our business. Moreover, because of the rapid pace of technological change, we rely on technologies developed by or licensed from third parties, and if we are unable to obtain or continue to obtain licenses from these third parties on reasonable terms or at all, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

​

In addition, we work with certain third parties such as vendors, contractors and suppliers for the development and manufacture of components that are integrated into our products and services, and our products and services may contain technologies provided to us by these third parties or other third parties. We may have little or no ability to determine in advance whether any such technology infringes the intellectual property rights of others. Our vendors, contractors and suppliers may not be required to indemnify us if a claim of infringement is asserted against us, license the potential infringing technology from other third parties or they may be required to indemnify us only up to a maximum amount, above which we would be responsible for any further costs or damages.

​

36

​

​

Legal challenges to these intellectual property rights may impair our ability to use the products, services and technologies that we need in order to operate our business and may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, our digital content offerings depend in part on effective digital rights management technology to control access to digital content. If the digital rights management technology that we use is compromised or otherwise malfunctions, content providers may be unwilling to provide access to their content. Changes in the copyright laws or how such laws may be interpreted could impact our ability to deliver content and provide certain features and functionality, particularly over the Internet. 

​

We are, and may become, party to various lawsuits which, if adversely decided, could have a significant adverse impact on our business, particularly lawsuits regarding intellectual property.