Use these links to rapidly review the document
Table of ContentsLEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FORM 10-K
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
| (Mark One) | |
ý | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, | |
OR | |
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to | |
Commission file number: 0-15658 | |
Commission file number: 0-15658
Level 3 Communications, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
| Delaware (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | 47-0210602 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | |
1025 Eldorado Boulevard, Broomfield, Colorado (Address of principal executive offices) | 80021-8869 (Zip code) | |
(720) 888-1000 (Registrant's telephone number including area code) | ||
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None | ||
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act: | ||
Common Stock, par value $.01 per share Rights to Purchase Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock, par value $.01 per share | ||
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 ý No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. Yes ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes oý No ýo
As of March 20,June 30, 2003 the aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant approximated $1.9$2.7 billion based upon the closing price of the common stock as reported on the Nasdaq National Market as of the close of business on that date. Shares of common stock held by each executive officer and director and by each entity that owns 10% or more of the outstanding common stock have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
| Title | Outstanding | |
|---|---|---|
| Common Stock, par value $.01 per share |
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
List hereunder the following documents if incorporated by reference and the Part of the Form 10-K (e.g., Part I, Part II, etc.) into which the document is incorporated: (1) Any annual report to security holders; (2) Any proxy or information statement; and (3) Any prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) or (c) under the Securities Act of 1933. The listed documents should be clearly described for identification purposes (e.g., annual report to security holders for fiscal year ended December 24, 1980).
Portions of the Company's Definitive Proxy Statement for the 20032004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K
Cautionary Factors That May Affect Future Results
(Cautionary Statements Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
This report contains forward looking statements and information that are based on the beliefs of management as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to Level 3 Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("Level 3" or the "Company"). When used in this report, the words "anticipate", "believe", "plans", "estimate" and "expect" and similar expressions, as they relate to the Company or its management, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such statements reflect the current views of the Company with respect to future events and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions.
Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described in this document. These forward-looking statements include, among others, statements concerning:
These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including financial, regulatory, environmental, industry growth and trend projections, that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the statements. The most important factors that could prevent Level 3 from achieving its stated goals include, but are not limited to, the Company's failure to:
2
The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Further disclosures that the
Company makes on related subjects in its additional filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission should be consulted. For further information regarding the risks and uncertainties that may affect the Company's future results, please review the information set forth below under "Forward Looking Statements."
Level 3 Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("Level 3" or the "Company") engage primarily in the communications and information services businesses. In late 1997, the Company announced a business plan to increase substantially its information services business and to expand the range of services it offers by building an advanced, international, facilities based communications network based on Internet Protocol technology (the "Business Plan").
The Company is a facilities based provider (that is, a provider that owns or leases a substantial portion of the plant, property and equipment necessary to provide its services) of a broad range of integrated communications services. The Company has created, generally by constructing its own assets, but also through a combination of purchasing and leasing of facilities, the Level 3 Network—network—an advanced, international, facilities based communications network. The Company has designed the Level 3 Network3's network to provide communications services, which employ and leverage rapidly improving underlying optical and Internet Protocol technologies.
Market and Technology Opportunity. The Company believes that ongoing technology advances in both optical and Internet Protocol and optical technologies arehave been revolutionizing the communications industry and will facilitate rapid decreases in unit costs for communications service providers that are able to most effectively leverage these technology advances. Service providers that can effectively leverage technology advances and rapidly reduce unit costs will be able to offer significantly lower prices, which, the Company believes, will drive substantial increases in the demand for communications services. The Company believes that there are two primary factors drivingthat are continuing to drive this market dynamic, which it refers to as "Silicon Economics":dynamic:
In connection with the Company's belief that communications services are direct substitutes for existing modes of information distribution, during 2002, the Company completed the acquisitionacquisitions of CorpSoft, Inc., and Software Spectrum, Inc. Today, this business is conducted under the name Software Spectrum, Inc.
32
of CorpSoft, Inc., which conducted its business under the name Corporate SoftwareSM, a global distributor, marketer and reseller of business software. In addition, during 2002, the Company completed the acquisition of Software Spectrum, Inc., a global business-to-business software services provider. At December 31, 2002, CorpSoft, Inc. was merged with and into Software Spectrum, Inc., with Software Spectrum as the surviving entity.
The CompanyLevel 3 believes that communications price performance will improve more rapidly than computing and data storage price performance and, as a result, companies will, over time, seek information technology operating efficiency by purchasing software functionality and data storage as commercial services procured over a broadband networks such as the Level 3 Network.
3's network. Level 3 believes that the combination of Level 3's network infrastructure and service development capabilities, and Software Spectrum's expertise in software lifecycle management and marketing, as well as strong customer relationships, will position Level 3 to benefit as companies change the manner in which they buy and use software capability.
The Company also believes that there are several significant implications that result from this Silicon Economics market dynamic:
Level 3's Communications Strategy. The Company is seeking to capitalize on the opportunities presented by significant and rapid advancements in optical and Internet Protocol technologies by pursuing its Business Plan.and optical technologies. Key elements of the Company's strategy include:
4
During 2003, the Company embarked on a program to develop new services that take advantage of the investment that the Company has made in the Company's network and that generally target large, existing markets. Through this effort, the Company is seeking to increase significantly its addressable market by adding new voice and data services that take advantage of the geographic coverage and cost advantages of Level 3's significant investment innetwork. These services include:
3
business oriented VoIP services, wholesale VoIP services, data services and additional MPLS-based services.
The Company provides customers with several options for accessing Level 3's intercity network—including its metropolitan optical networks enablesand colocation facilities. The Company's metropolitan networks enable the Company to connect directly to points of high traffic aggregation. These traffic aggregation facilities are typically locations where Level 3's customers wish to interconnect with the Level 3 Network.3's intercity network. Level 3's metropolitan backbone networks allow Level 3the Company to extend its network services to these aggregation points at low costs. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had constructed metropolitan networks totaling approximately 14,560 conduit miles and approximately 792,000 fiber miles in the United States, and approximately 3,580 conduit miles and approximately 155,000 fiber miles in Europe. The Company believes that these metropolitan networks are a significant strategic advantage versus other intercity communications companies that must connect to customers using potentially high cost, low capacity, legacy facilities provided by former local monopoly providers. This difficult situation is sometimes referred to as the "local loop bottleneck".
Level 3 believes that providing colocation services on its network attracts communications intensive customers by allowing Level 3 to offer those customers reduced bandwidth costs, rapid provisioning of additional bandwidth, interconnection with other third-party networks and improved network performance. Therefore, Level 3 believes that controlling colocation facilities in its Gateways provides it with a competitive advantage.
Additionally, the Company's metropolitan networks allow it to compete for certain local communications traffic, which constitutes a significant percentage of the communications market. As of December 31, 2002,2003, Level 3 had secured approximately 5.0 million square feet of space for its Gateway and colocation facilities and other technical space and had completed the buildoutbuild-out of approximately 3.23.3 million square feet of this space.
For those locations that are not on Level 3's network, the Company works with other network providers to access these customer locations.
4
the most cost-effective network equipment from multiple vendors and allow Level 3 to deploy new technology more rapidly and effectively.
5
On February 4, 2003, Level 3 announced An example of the implementation of this strategy was the Company's acquisition of substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity Inc., a Massachusetts-based provider of communications services ("Genuity"). UnderAs the agreement, Level 3 paid $60 million in net cash considerationCompany seeks to Genuity and assumed certain long-term operating agreements. As part ofexpand the transaction,addressable market for its services, the Company also paid $77 millionevaluates opportunities that would expand the Company's service capabilities. Transactions that would be included in cashthis category would expand the geographic scope of Level 3's network or would provide capabilities for assumed network obligations toadditional products or distribution channels. For these opportunities, the Company generally considers whether the targeted company's distribution strategy is consistent with Level 3's distribution strategy and whether management believes that the expenses of operating the target's business can be used bysignificantly reduced as a result of a combination with Level 3 during 2003. As part3's cost structure and network. An example of the transaction, Level 3 assumed mostimplementation of Genuity's existing customer contracts and in addition, has signed new multi-year customer contracts that together represent expected revenue in excessthis strategy was the Company's acquisition of $1 billion over the remaining life of the agreements.
Competitive Advantages. The Company believes that it has the following competitive advantages that, together with its strategy, will assist it in implementing the Business Plan:its strategy:
5
relationships to target these customers in an indirect manner. As a result, the Company is not in a position where it typically competes with its targeted customer base for these end user customers. The Company believes this positions it to become the vendor of choice for retail service providers looking to fill gaps in their communications service offerings.
6
The Level 3 Network.3's network.
The Level 3 Network3's network is an advanced, international, facilities based communications network. Today, the Company primarily provides its services over its own facilities. Through 2000, the Company primarily offered its communications services using local and intercity facilities that had been leased from third parties. This enabled the Company to develop and offer certain of its services during the construction of its own facilities. At December 31, 2002,2003, the Company's network encompasses:
7
Intercity Networks. The Company's nearly 16,00019,000 mile fiber optic intercity network in North America consists of the following:
6
North America. During the first quarter of 2001, the Company completed its construction activities relating to its North American intercity network. Also during 2001, the Company completed the migration of customer traffic from its original leased capacity network to the Company's completed North America intercity network. During 2000, the Company had substantially completed the construction of this intercity network. Deployment of the North American intercity network was accomplished through simultaneous construction efforts in multiple locations, with different portions being completed at different times. TheIn 2003, the Company has completed construction of 15,889 routeadded approximately 2,985 miles ofto its North AmericanAmerica intercity network. All route milesnetwork as part of the North American intercity network are operational.Genuity transaction.
Europe. In Europe, the Company has completed construction of, its approximately 3,600 route mile fiber optic intercity network with characteristics similar to those of the North American intercity network in a two Ring architecture. During 2000, the Company completed the construction of both Ring 1 and Ring 2 of its European network. Ring 1, which is approximately 1,800 miles, connects the major European cities of Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Brussels and London and was operational at December 31, 2000. Ring 2, which is approximately 1,600 miles, connects the major German cities of Berlin, Cologne, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich and Stuttgart. Ring 2 became operational during the first quarter of 2001.
During 2002, the Company completed an expansion of its European operations to 7seven additional cities. The additional European cities include: Karlsruhe and Cologne, Germany; Milan, Italy; Zurich and Geneva, Switzerland; Madrid, Spain; and Stockholm, Sweden. The Company's expansion to these additional locations was facilitated through the acquisition of available capacity from other carriers in the region. During 2003, the Company completed an expansion of its European operations to four additional cities. The additional European cities include: Copenhagen, Denmark; Leipzig, Germany; Manchester, England and Vienna, Austria.
8
Level 3's European network is linked to the Level 3 North American intercity network by the Level 3 transatlantic 1.28 Tbps cable system, which was also completed and placed into service during 2000. The transatlantic cable system—referred to by the Company as the Yellow system—has an initial capacity of 320 Gbps and is upgradeable to 1.28 Tbps. The deployment of Yellow was completed pursuant to a co-build agreement announced in February 2000, whereby Global Crossing Ltd. participated in the construction of, and obtained a 50% ownership interest in, Yellow. Under the co-build agreement, Level 3 and Global Crossing Ltd. each now separately own and operate two of the four fiber pairs on Yellow. Level 3 also acquired additional capacity on Global Crossing Ltd.'s transatlantic cable, Atlantic Crossing 1, during 2000 to serve as redundant capacity for its fiber pairs on Yellow.
Asia.7
The Company established an Asia Pacific headquarters in Hong Kong in 1999, and during 2000 the Company completed and opened Gateway facilities in Tokyo and Hong Kong. In January 2000, Level 3 announced its intention to develop and construct a Northern Asia undersea cable system initially connecting Hong Kong and Japan. The Hong Kong-Japan cable was intended to be the first stage of the Company's construction of an undersea network in the region. At that time, the Company indicated its intention to share construction and operating expenses of the system with one or more industry partners. In December 2000, the Company signed an agreement to collaborate with FLAG Telecom on the development of the Northern Asia undersea cable system connecting Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and Taiwan.
During the fourth quarter of 2001 the Company announced the disposition of its Asian operations in a sale transaction with Reach, Ltd. Although the Company believed that Asia represented an attractive longer-term investment opportunity, given current volatile market and economic conditions the Company determined that it was necessary to focus its resources, both capital and managerial, on the immediate opportunities provided by the Company's operational assets in North America and Europe. This transaction closed on January 18, 2002.
As part of the agreement, Reach and the CompanyLevel 3 agreed that Level 3 will provide capacity and services to Reach over Level 3's North American intercity network, and Level 3 will buy capacity and services from Reach in Asia each on agreed upon terms and conditions.Asia. This arrangement will allow Level 3 to continue to service its customer base with capacity needs in Asia and provide Reach access to a the Level 3 intercity networks in North America and Europe.
Local Market Infrastructure. The Company's local facilities include fiber optic metropolitan networks connecting Level 3's intercity network Gateway sitesand Gateway's to ILEC and CLEC central offices, long distance carrier points-of-presence ("POPs"),or POPs, buildings housing communication-intensive end users and Internet peering and transit facilities. Level 3's high fiber count metropolitan networks allow the Company to extend its services directly to its customers' locations at low costs, because the availability of this network infrastructure does not require extensive multiplexing equipment to reach a customer location, which is required in ordinary fiber constrained metropolitan networks. In addition, at December 31, 2003, the Company had an aggregate of approximately 740 points POPs located on Level 3's network in the United States and Europe.
The Company had secured approximately 5.0 million square feet of space for its Gateway and transmission facilities as of December 31, 20022003, and had completed the buildout of approximately 3.23.3 million square feet of this space. The Company's initial Gateway facilities were designed to house local sales staff, operational staff, the Company's transmission and Internet Protocol routing and Softswitch facilities and technical space to accommodate (3)CenterSM Colocationcolocation services—that is, the colocation of equipment by high-volume Level 3 customers, in an environmentally controlled, secure site with direct access to the Level 3 Network3's network generally through dual, fault tolerant connections. The Company's newer facilities are typically larger than the Company's initial facilities and were designed to include a smaller percentage of total square feet for the Company's transmission and Internet Protocol routing/Softswitch facilities and a larger percentage of total square feet for the provision of (3)CenterSM Colocationto support colocation services. The Company is offering its (3)LinkSM Transport services, (3)CenterSM Colocation
9
services, (3)CrossroadsSM services, (3)PacketSM, (3)ConnectSM Modem services and (3)VoiceSM services at its Gateway sites. The availabilityAvailability of these services varies by location.
As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had operational, facilities based local metropolitan networks in 27 U.S. markets and nine European markets. Also as of December 31, 2002, the Company had entered into interconnection agreements covering 120 North American markets.
The Company has negotiated master leases with several CLECs and ILECs to obtain leased capacity from those providers so that the Company can provide its customers with local transmission capabilities before its own local networks are complete and in locations not directly accessed by the Company's owned facilities.8
At March 10, 2003,2004, the Company had a total of 7392 markets in service: 5772 in the United States and 1620 in Europe. In the United States, the Company markets in service include:
| Akron Albany Atlanta Austin Baltimore Birmingham Boston Buffalo Charlotte Chicago Cincinnati Cleveland Columbus Dallas Denver Detroit Durham El Paso | Fort Worth Hartford Houston Indianapolis Jacksonville Jersey City Kalamazoo Kansas City Las Vegas Long Island Los Angeles Louisville Manchester Memphis Miami Milwaukee Minneapolis Nashville | New Orleans New York Newark Oakland Oklahoma City Omaha Orlando Orange County Philadelphia Phoenix Pittsburgh Portland Poughkeepsie Princeton Providence Raleigh Richmond Sacramento | Salt Lake City | |||
San Antonio | ||||||
San Diego | ||||||
San Francisco | ||||||
San Jose | ||||||
San Luis Obispo | ||||||
Santa Barbara Seattle | ||||||
Springfield St. Louis | ||||||
Stamford | ||||||
Syracuse Tampa | ||||||
Toledo Tulsa Washington, D.C. | ||||||
White Plains Wilmington | ||||||
In Europe, the markets in service include:
| Amsterdam Berlin Brussels Cologne Copenhagen Dusseldorf Frankfurt | Geneva | |||||
Hamburg | ||||||
Karlsruhe | ||||||
Leipzig London | ||||||
Madrid | ||||||
Manchester | Milan | Munich Paris Stockholm Vienna Zurich |
Products and Services
Level 3 offers a comprehensive range of communications services, which currently includes the following:
9
and processed by the Level 3 Softswitch platform. Level 3 believes that the (3)Tone Business service allows its customers to save both capital and operating costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure for business voice services. The (3)Tone Business service provides cost advantages over PBX models by providing a hosted service that does not require customers to purchase costly telephone line connections from another provider, install a telephone switch on their premise, or hire specialized staff for installation and ongoing management of the telephone service. The (3)Tone Business service is sold through third party distributors. In 2004, Level 3 plans to expand the portfolio of IP voice services to include a comprehensive set of consumer-oriented, business-oriented and wholesale Voice-over-IP or VoIP services, which will be delivered through a range of third party distributors.
As part of this service, Level 3 arranges for the provision of local network coverage, dedicated local telephone numbers, racks and modems as well as dedicated connectivity from the customer's location to the Level 3 Gateway facility. Level 3 also provides monitoring of this infrastructure 24 hours a day, seven days a week. By providing a turn-key infrastructure modem solution, Level 3 believes that this service allows its customers to save both capital and operating costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure.
10
11
communicate securely over Level 3's Internet backbone or over the Internet from virtually anywhere in the world where a connection to the Internet is possible. With VPN Advantage, customers benefit from the capabilities of a large, shared IP-based network infrastructure while maintaining the look and feel of their own private corporate network.
The Company's Transport services are branded "(3)LinkSM" and consist of (3)LinkSM Global Wavelengths,Link® Inter-City Wavelength, (3)LinkLink® Metro Wavelength, (3)Link® Metro Ethernet, (3)Link® Private Line, (3)HubSM Private Line, services, and (3)LinkSMLink® Dark Fiber.Fiber services.
10
equipment at the end points where the wavelength is delivered. Level 3 typically offers (3)Link Global Wavelength services are typically offeredservice through short term,short-term, annual and long-term pre-paid agreements.
12
The Company's infrastructure services are branded (3)Center® colocation space in its Gateway and intercity re-transmission facilities to these customers for their transmission electronics.services.
13
At its colocation sites, the Company offers high-speed, reliable connectivity to the Level 3 Network3's network and to other networks, including both local and wide area networks, the PSTN and
11
the Internet. Level 3 also offers customers AC/DC power, emergency back-up generator power, HVAC, fire protection and security. These sites are monitored and maintained 24 hours a day, seven days a week.week, 365 days per year.
As of December 31, 2002,2003, Level 3 offered (3)Center Colocation service in 73 facilities in 66 markets located in the United States and Europe. Level 3 believes that its ability to offer both metropolitan and intercity communications services to its (3)Center Colocation customers provides it with an advantage over its competitors, because(3)Center Colocation customers often spend a substantial portion of their operating expenses on communications services. This service is typically offered through annual and long-term contracts.
For a high quality, high speed Internet access product offering. The service is offered in a variety of capacities—100BaseT, GigE, DS-1, DS-3, OC-3 and OC-12—using a variety of interfaces including Ethernet and SONET. A unique featurediscussion of the service is Destination Sensitive Billing or DSB. Through DSB, (3)CrossRoads customers pay for bandwidth based on the destination of their traffic. DSB customers pay for either "Sent" or "Received" bandwidth, but not both.
Level 3 believes that the combination of Destination Sensitive Billing with metropolitan and intercity networks and significant colocation space is a competitive advantage and that this accounts for the rapid market acceptance of (3)CrossRoads to date. These services are typically offered through short-term and annual contracts.
12
offered by the Company that used Softswitch technology to seamlessly interconnect to the PSTN. ISPs comprise a majority of the customer base for (3)Connect Modem and are provided a fully managed dial up network infrastructure for access to the public Internet. Corporate customers that purchase (3)Connect Modem services receive connectivity for remote users to support data applications such as telecommuting, e-mail retrieval, and client/server applications.
As part of this service, Level 3 arranges for the provision of local network coverage, dedicated local telephone numbers (which the (3)Connect Modem customer distributes to its customers in the case of an ISP or to its employees in the case of a corporate customer), racks and modems as well as dedicated connectivity from the customer's location to the Level 3 Gateway facility. Level 3 also provides monitoring of this infrastructure 24 hours a day, seven days a week. By providing a turn-key infrastructure modem solution, Level 3 believes that this product allows its customers to save both capital and operating costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure.
Currently, the Company's (3)Connect Modem product processes approximately 20 billion minutes per month and is available to address approximately 93% of the U.S. population.
13
number of services including Remote Data Replication, On-Demand Capacity and Remote Site Failover.
report. Level 3 management continues to review its existing lines of business to determine how those lines of business assist with the Company's focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching consolidated free cash flow breakeven.meeting its financial objectives. To the extent that certain lines of business are not considered to be compatible with the delivery of communicationcommunications and information services or with obtaining cash flowfinancial objectives, Level 3 may exit those lines of businesses.business.
14
Distribution Strategy
Level 3's communications services sales strategy is to utilize a direct sales force focused on high bandwidth generating businesses. These businesses include incumbent local exchange carriers, established next generation carriers, international carriers also known as PTTs, major ISPs, broadband cable television operators, major interexchange carriers, governments and media and entertainment content providers. Providing continually declining bandwidth costs to these companies is at the core of Level 3's market enabling strategy.
Beginning in 2001, Level 3 changed its communications services customer focus to the top 300 global users of bandwidth capacity. These top 300 global userscustomers tend to be financially more viable than certain Internet early stage companies. The Company has in place policies and procedures to review the financial condition of potential and existing customers and concludes that collectibility is probable prior to commencement of services. If the financial condition of an existing customer deteriorates to a point where payment for services is in doubt, the Company will not recognize revenue attributable to that customer until cash is received. Based on these policies and procedures, the Company believes its exposure to collection risk within the communications business and effect to the financial statements is limited. The Company is not immune from the affects of the downturn in the economy and specifically the telecommunications industry; however, the Company believes the concentration of credit risk with respect to receivables is mitigated due to the dispersion of the Company's customer base among geographic areas and remedies provided by terms of contracts and statutes.
The Company is also seeking to offer communications services to enterprises and consumers through third party distributor relationships. The Company is focusing these relationship development efforts on those value-added resellers, systems integrators, PTTs, interexchange carriers, ISPs and enhanced service providers that are used by its targeted customers, as many of these companies have significant direct relationships with end users. The Company believes that the gaps in geographic
14
coverage and service offerings that many of these distributors have will present the Company with an attractive means of increasing the addressable market for the Company's communications services.
The Company is developing new voice services that in addition to its existing voice services target large and existing markets. The Company believes that the efficiencies of Level 3's IP and optical based network, including its Softswitch technology, will provide customers a lower cost alternative than the existing circuit-switched networks of its competitors. Several other competitors with IP technologies have recently announced that they will be entering this market as well. In order to expedite the penetration of this market, Level 3 has expanded its sales force to specifically target voice service providers, value added resellers and other channels that reach both the consumer and enterprise markets for voice services. While the new voice services being launched by Level 3 target a large addressable market, the Company must quickly develop both its capability to market and sell through various channels in the voice market and develop the internal systems and processes necessary to support the new products being launched. The market for voice services is large, however it is expected to continue to decline over time as a result of the new low cost IP and optical based technologies.
For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, approximately 49%43% of the Company's sales were to network providers (which includes carriers and broadband access providers), 43%50% were to service providers (which includes ISPs and web-based service providers) and 8%7% were fromto end-users. For the year ended December 31, 2002, no single customer2003, two customers accounted for more than 10% of the Company's communications services or consolidated total revenues.revenue. Time Warner, Inc. and its affiliates represented approximately 24% of communications revenue and approximately 11% of consolidated total revenue and Verizon Communications, Inc. and its affiliates represented approximately 10% of communications revenue and approximately 5% of consolidated total revenue. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, the Company's top 10 communications services customers accounted for approximately 47%61% of the Company's total communications revenues. Revenue from the Company's largest communications customer, America Online, Inc. ("America Online") represented approximately 13% of the Company's communications revenues for 2002 and approximately 4% of the Company's consolidated revenues. With the acquisition of Genuity's contract with America Online and additional contracts executed in the second half of 2002, the Company expects communications services revenue attributable to America Online will range from approximately 23% to 25% of total communications revenue in 2003.revenue.
Business Support Systems
In order to pursue its sales and distribution strategies, the Company has developed and is continuing to develop and implement a set of integrated software applications designed to automate the Company's operational processes. Through the development of a robust, scalable business support system, the Company believes that it has the opportunity to develop a competitive advantage relative to traditional telecommunications companies. Whereas traditional telecommunications companies operate extensive legacyIn addition, the Company recognizes that for its strategy of increasing its relationships with third party distributors to succeed, Level 3's business support systems with compartmentalized architectures that limit their abilitywill need to scale rapidlybe easily accessible and introduce enhanced services and features, Level 3 has developed a business support system architecture intended to maximize both reliability and scalability.usable by these third party distributors.
Key design aspects of the business support system development program are:
15
15
Interconnection and Peering
As a result of the Telecom Act, properly certificated companies may, as a matter of law, interconnect with ILECs on terms designed to help ensure economic, technical and administrative equality between the interconnected parties. The Telecom Act provides, among other things, that ILECs must offer competitors the services and facilities necessary to offer local switched services. See "—Regulation."
As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had entered into approximately 150 interconnection agreements covering 120 North American markets.agreements. The Company may be required to negotiate new or renegotiate existing interconnection agreements as Level 3 expands its operations in current and additional markets in the future and as existing agreements expire or are terminated.
Peering agreements between the Company and ISPs are necessary in order for the Company to exchange traffic with those ISPs without having to pay transit costs. The Company is considered a Tier 1 Internet Service Provider and has settlement free peering arrangements with all Tier 1 ISPs in North America. In Europe, the Company has settlement free peering arrangements with all ISPs except one major Tier 1ISP. The Company is currently negotiating settlement free peering arrangements with this ISP.ISPs. The basis on which the large national ISPs make peering available or impose settlement charges is evolving as the provision of Internet access and related services has expanded.
Employee Recruiting and Retention
As of December 31, 2002,2003, Level 3 had 2,725approximately 3,275 employees in the communications portion of its business and information services had approximately 3,5501,375 employees, for a total of 6,275approximately 4,650 employees. These numbers do not include the employees of Genuity, since this transaction closed on February 4, 2003. Level 3 has hired approximately 1,400 Genuity employees, who become part of the transitional organization that is assisting with the integration efforts. The Company expects to reduce communications headcount throughout 2003 as the Genuity integration efforts are concluded. The Company believes that its success depends in large part on its ability to attract and retain substantial numbers of qualified employees.
The primary purpose of the Company's 1995 Stock Plan, as amended, has been to increase the value of Shares and the profitability of the Company and its subsidiaries (i) by enabling the Company to attract, retain, motivate and reward certain employees, directors and service providers and (ii) by aligning the interests of those employees, directors and service providers with the interests of the Company and the holders of the Company's common stock.
In order to attract and retain highly qualified employees, the Company believes that it is important to provide a work environment that encourages each individual to perform to his or her potential and facilitates cooperation towards shared goals and a compensation program designed to attract the kinds of individuals the Company needs and to align employees' interests with the Company's stockholders.
16
With respect to compensation programs, the Company believes that short-term financial rewards alone are not sufficient to attract and retain qualified employees, and a properly designed long-term compensation program is a necessary component of employee recruitment and retention. In this regard the Company's philosophy is to pay annual cash salary compensation that is moderately less than the annual cash salary compensation paid by competitors and an annual performance-based cash bonus, which, if the Company's annual goals are met, when added to the annual cash salary cash compensation results in a total that is moderately greater than the total annual cash compensation paid on average by competitors. In addition, employees may, from time to time, receive additional cash bonus compensation relating to the individual employee's contribution to the Company achieving special initiatives or programs. The Company's non-cash benefit programs (including medical and health insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, etc.) are designed to be comparable to those offered by its competitors.
16
The Company continues to believe that the qualified candidates it seeks, as well as the current employees it wants to retain and motivate, place particular emphasis on equity-based long term incentive ("LTI") programs. The Company currently has two complementary programs: (i) a 401(k) Plan matching contribution in the form of shares of Level 3 common stock up to 7% of eligible earnings or regulatory limits for 401(k) Plan contributions; and (ii) an innovative stock-indexed program referred to as the Outperform Stock Option ("OSO")or OSO program. If an employee remains employed by the Company for three years from the date of hire, the shares that are contributed by the Company to the 401(k) Plan vest. The 401(k) Plan also provides the Company with the flexibility, subject to satisfactory Company performance, to make discretionary grants to the employees' 401(k) Plan accounts of shares of Level 3's common stock of up to a set percentage of the employees' compensation determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, all of which shares will vest three years from the employee's date of hire. These grants would be in addition to contributions made by the employee during the course of the year, which are matched by the Company as described above. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, the Company approved a 3% discretionary grant to eligible employees, to be deposited in their 401(k) Plan accounts.
The Company has adopted the OSO program, which differs from LTI programs generally adopted by many public companies in which employees are typically eligible for conventional non-qualified stock options ("NQSOs").or NQSOs. NQSO programs generally award the recipient the right to purchase stock at a fixed price, typically at the price on the date the NQSO was granted. While widely adopted, the Company believes such NQSO programs sometimes reward employees even if company stock price performance is inferior to investments of similar risks, dilute public stockholders in a manner not directly proportional to performance and fail to provide a preferred return on stockholders' invested capital over the return to option holders. The Company believes that the OSO program is superior to an NQSO-based program with respect to these issues while, at the same time, providing employees a success-based reward balancing the associated risk.
The Company's OSO program has been the primary component of Level 3's stock based LTI compensation programs. The Company designed the OSO program so that the Level 3 common stockCommon Stock price performance must exceed a broad-based, market stock index before OSO holders receive any return on their options. In other words, the Level 3 common stockCommon Stock price must pass a "hurdle" of a stock index growth prior to the OSO having any value upon exercise. Currently, the broad-based, market stock index used in the OSO program is the Standard & Poor's 500S&P 500® Index, although the Compensation Committee reserves the right to select another broad-based, market stock index for use in this program.
The Company believes that an OSO-style program better aligns employees' and stockholders' interests by basing stock option value on the Company's ability to outperform the market in general, as measured by the relative performance of the Company's common stock to the Standard & Poor's 500S&P 500® Index. The value received for options under the OSO plan is based on a formula involving a multiplier related to how much the Company's common stock outperforms the Standard & Poor's 500S&P 500® Index. Participants in the OSO program do not realize any value from options unless the Level 3 common stockCommon Stock price outperforms the Standard & Poor's 500 S&P 500®Index. To the extent that the Level 3 common stockCommon Stock significantly outperforms the Standard & Poor's 500,S&P 500® Index, the value of OSOs to an option holder may exceed the value of NQSOs issued to comparable employees at other companies.
17
In July 2000, the Company adopted a convertible outperform stock option program ("C-OSO")or C-OSO, as an extension of the existing OSO plan. The program is a component of the Company's ongoing employee retention efforts and offers similar features to those of an OSO, but provides an employee with the greater of the value of a single share of the Company's common stock at exercise, or the calculated OSO value of a single OSO at the time of exercise.
C-OSO awards were made to eligible employees employed on the date of the grant. The awards were made in September 2000 and December 2000. Each award vests over three years as follows: 1/1/6 of
17
each grant at the end of the first year, a further 2/2/6 at the end of the second year and the remaining 3/3/6 in the third year. Each award is immediately exercisable upon vesting. Awards expire four years from the date of the grant. In September 2001, the Company granted Special Convertible Outperform Stock Option ("or Special COSO")COSO to certain employees on the date of grant. Each Special COSO vests in equal quarterly installments over three years and is immediately exercisable upon vesting. Special COSOs expire four years from the date of grant.
As stated above, since late 1997 the Company adhered to a compensation philosophy that includes the payment of annual cash compensation, which, if the Company's annual goals are met, is moderately greater than the cash compensation paid on average by competitors, and the delivery of equity based, LTI compensation that is based on the performance of the Level 3 common stock.Common Stock. In determining the levels of grants of LTI compensation, the Company has strived to deliver approximately 25 percent of the "outperformance" value of the Level 3 common stockCommon Stock to employees. The Compensation Committee defines "outperformance" as the increase in the price of a share of Level 3 common stockCommon Stock from the date of grant until the date of exercise, relative to the increase in a broad-based, market stock index such as the Standard & Poor's 500S&P 500® Index. In addition, the Compensation Committee of the Board has determined that LTI compensation grants by the Company are to be set at levels necessary to control the overall amount of dilution to public stockholders, even in the situation of extreme common stock price appreciation, while maintaining the goal of delivering on average no more than approximately 25 percent of the outperformance to employees.
The following modifications, affecting August 19, 2002, and later grants, were made to the OSO program in August 2002:program:
The mechanics for determining the value of an individual OSO is described below:
The initial strike price, as determined on the OSO grant date, is adjusted over time (the "Adjusted Strike Price"), until the exercise date. The adjustment is an amount equal to the percentage appreciation or depreciation in the value of the S&P 500500® Index from the date of grant to the date of exercise. The value of the OSO increases for increasing levels of outperformance. OSOs granted prior to August 19, 2002, have a multiplier range from zero to eight depending upon the performance of Level 3 common stock relative to the S&P 500500® Index as shown in the following table. OSOs granted
18
August 19, 2002, and later have a multiplier range from zero to four depending upon the performance of Level 3 common stock relative to the S&P 500500® Index as shown in the following table.
| | Then the Pre-multiplier Gain Is Multiplied by a Success Multiplier of: | Then the Pre-multiplier Gain Is Multiplied by a Success Multiplier of: | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| If Level 3 Stock Outperforms the S&P 500 Index by: | Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 and Later Grants | ||||||
| If Level 3 Stock Outperforms the S&P 500® Index by: | Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 and Later Grants | ||||||
| 0% or Less | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
More than 0% but Less than 11% | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 8/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 4/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 8/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 4/11 | ||||
11% or More | 8.00 | 4.00 | 8.00 | 4.00 | ||||
18
The Pre-multiplier gain is the Level 3 common stock price minus the Adjusted Strike Price on the date of exercise.
Subsequent toThe Company adopted the recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 in March 31, 1998 (the effective date of the separation of the Company's former construction business), the Company adopted the recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123. Under SFAS No. 123, and amortizes the fair value of an OSO (as computed in accordance with accepted option valuation models) on the date of grant is amortizedOSO's over thetheir vesting period of the OSO.period. The recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 are applied prospectively upon adoption. As a result, they are applied to all stock awards granted in the year of adoption and are not applied to awards granted in previous years unless those awards are modified or settled in cash after adoption of the recognition provisions. The adoption of SFAS No. 123 resulted in non-cash charges to continuing operations of $86 million in 2003, $181 million in 2002, and $314 million in 2001 and $236 million in 2000 and will continue to result in non-cash charges to operations for future periods that the Company believes will also be material. The amount of the non-cash charge will be dependent upon a number of factors, including the number of options granted and the fair value estimated at the time of grant.
Competition
The communications industry is highly competitive. ManyA number of factors in the past eight years have increased the number of competitors in the market. First, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 created opportunities for non-incumbent providers to enter the marketplace. Second, the capital markets responded by making funding more available to new and existing competitors. Third, enthusiasm over the early evolution of the Internet led the capital markets in general to overestimate the rate at which demand for communications services would grow. Finally, the emergence of new IP-based services has created prospects for new entrants with non-traditional business models to compete with legacy providers.
The Company believes that a confluence of these factors created an unsustainable level of competition in the market. Level 3 believes that this was evidenced by both the number of competitors vying for similar business and by the amount of inventory or capacity each brings to the market for many services. The result of these actions was an oversupply of capacity and an intensely competitive environment.
The Company does not believe the current industry structure can be sustained over the long-term. With the growth of communications demand, excess capacity will be absorbed over some timeframe. Similarly, some form of consolidation will occur based on underlying industry economics. Given the large ongoing fixed costs associated with operating a backbone network, Level 3 believes that the natural industry structure will evolve to a more limited number of competitors with each having high traffic scale across their networks.
While the long-run structure appears clear, great uncertainty surrounds how the existing competitive landscape will evolve toward this new structure. For example, while a number of next-generation and incumbent providers have entered and emerged from bankruptcy protection, the Company believes these competitors are still operating fundamentally poor business models, have severe resource constraints, and are unlikely to be long-term survivors in their current forms. The exact timeframe for the new industry structure to evolve is unknowable. Until it does, the competitive environment is likely to remain intense.
The Company believes that each competitor's long-run success in the market will be driven by its available resources (for example, financial, personnel, marketing, customers) and the effectiveness of its business model (for example, service focus and mix, cost effectiveness, ability to adapt to new technologies, channel effectiveness). Level 3 recognizes that many of the Company's existing and potential competitors in the communications industry have financial, personnel, marketing and other resources significantly greater than those of the Company, as well as other competitive advantages including larger customer bases. Increased consolidation and strategic alliances in the industry resulting from the Telecom Act, the opening of the U.S. market to foreign carriers, technological advances and further deregulation could give rise to significant new competitors to the Company.
In recent years, competition has increased in all areas of Level 3's communications services market. The increased number of competitors and resulting investment in telecommunications networks has created a substantial oversupply of network capacity in the industry. While the Company believes that this oversupply condition is temporary, the oversupply has resulted in an intensely competitive environment forcing numerous competitors to curtail their business plans and, in a number of cases, to file for protection under bankruptcy or protection from creditor statutes. The Company's primary competitors are IXCs, ILECs, CLECs, ISPsPTTs and other companies that provide communications products and services. The following information identifies key competitors for each of the Company's product offerings.
The Company's key competitors for its managed modem services are other providers of dial up Internet access including MCI, Sprint, Qwest, ICG and AT&T. In addition, the key competitors for the Company's voice service offerings are other providers of wholesale communications services including AT&T, MCI, Sprint and certain RBOCs and CLECs.
For the Company's IP and Data services, Level 3 competes with companies that include MCI, Sprint, AT&T, Savvis Communications, and Qwest in North America, and Sprint, MCI, France Telecom and Deutsche Telecom in Europe.
For transport services, Level 3's key competitors in the United States are other facilities based communications companies including AT&T, MCI, Sprint, WilTel Communications, Global Crossing and Qwest Communications, and Broadwing.Communications. In Europe, the Company's key competitors are other carriers such as PTTs, Telia International, Colt Telecom Group plc, WorldCom,MCI, and Global Crossing.
19
The Company's key competitors for its (3)Connect Modem services are other providers of dial up Internet access including WorldCom, Sprint, Qwest, ICG and AT&T. In addition, the key competitors for the Company's (3)Voice service offering are other providers of wholesale long distance communications services including AT&T, WorldCom, Sprint and certain RBOCs. The RBOCs are seeking authorizations to provide certain long distance services which will further increase competition in the long distance services market. See "—Regulation."
Level 3's key competitors for its (3)Center Colocationcolocation services are other facilities based communications companies, and other colocation providers such as web hosting companies and third party colocation companies. TheseIn the United States, these companies include Cable & Wireless,AT&T, Savvis Communications, Equinix, Switch & Data and Qwest CommunicationsCommunications. In Europe, competitors include Global Switch, InterXion, Redbus, Telecity and Broadwing.
For the Company's (3)Crossroads Internet access service, Level 3 competes with companies that include WorldCom, Sprint, AT&T, Cable & Wireless, and Qwest.Telehouse Europe.
The communications industry is subject to rapid and significant changes in technology. For instance, recent technological advances permit substantial increases in transmission capacity of both new and existing fiber, and the introduction of new products or emergence of new technologies may reduce the cost or increase the supply of certain services similar to those which the Company plans on providing. Accordingly, in the future the Company's most significant competitors may be new entrants to the communications and information services industry, which are not burdened by an installed base of outmoded or legacy equipment.
Regulation
The Company's communications and information services business will be subject to varying degrees of federal, state, local and international regulation.
20
Federal Regulation
The Federal Communications Commission or the FCC regulateshas jurisdiction over interstate and international telecommunications services.services, among other things. The FCC imposes extensive regulations on common carriers such as incumbent local exchange carriers ("ILECs")or ILECs that have some degree of market power. The FCC imposes less regulation on common carriers without market power, such as the Company. The FCC permits these nondominantnon-dominant carriers to provide domestic interstate services (including long distance and access services) without prior authorization; but it requires carriers to receive an authorization to construct and operate telecommunications facilities and to provide or resell telecommunications services, between the United States and international points. The Company has obtained FCC approval to land its transatlantic cable in the U.S. The Company has obtained FCC authorization to provide international services on a facilities and resale basis. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the "1996 Act"),or the 1996 Act, any entity, including cable television companies, and electric and gas utilities, may enter any telecommunications market, subject to reasonable state regulation of safety, quality and consumer protection. Because implementation of the 1996 Act is subject to numerous federal and state policy rulemaking proceedings and judicial review, there is still uncertainty as to what impact it will have on the Company. The 1996 Act is intended to increase competition. The 1996 Act opens the local services market by requiring ILECs to permit interconnectioncompetitive carriers to interconnect to their networks and establishing ILEC obligations with respect to:requires them to lease certain parts of their networks at FCC-regulated (generally cost-based) rates; it also establishes requirements applicable to all local exchange carriers.
20
wholesale versions of all retail services to other telecommunications carriers for resale at discounted rates, based on the costs avoided by the ILEC in the wholesale offering.
21
systems) access to poles, ducts, conduits and rights-of-way at regulated prices. CLEC rates for access to poles, ducts, conduits and rights-of-way, however, are not regulated.
ILECsGenerally speaking, CLEC access to ILEC networks and utility poles are required to negotiate in good faith with carriers requesting any or all of the above arrangements. If the negotiating carriers cannot reach agreement within a prescribed time, either carrier may request binding arbitration of the disputed issuesimplemented through individual negotiations, which are governed by the state regulatory commission. Even when an agreement has not been reached, ILECs remain subjectTelecom Act and applicable FCC Rules. Under the Telecom Act, CLEC access to interconnection obligations established byILEC networks is heavily regulated and the FCC and state telecommunications regulatory commissions.
In August 1996, the FCC released a decision (the "Local Competition Order") establishing rules implementing the above-listed requirements and providing guidelines for review of interconnection agreements by state public utility commissions. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (the "Eighth Circuit") vacated certain portions of the Local Competition Order. On January 25, 1999, the Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit with respect to the FCC's jurisdiction to issue regulations governing local interconnection pricing (including regulations governing reciprocal compensation). The Supreme Court also found that the FCC had authority to promulgate a "pick and choose" rule and upheld most of the FCC's rules governing that access to unbundled network elements. The Supreme Court,have been contentious. Over the past several years, however, remanded to the FCC the standard by which the FCC identified the network elements that must be made available on an unbundled basis.
On November 5, 1999, the FCC released an order (the "UNE Remand Order") largely retaining its list of unbundled network elements but eliminating the requirement that ILECs provide unbundled access to local switching for customers with four or more lines in the densest portion of the top 50 Metropolitan Statistical Areas, and the requirement to unbundle operator services and directory assistance. In its decision, the FCC reaffirmed that network elements should be priced using a total element long-run incremental cost pricing ("TELRIC") methodology. A number of parties challenged the FCC's TELRIC finding.
On May 13, 2002, the United States Supreme Court inVerizon Communications v.has affirmed FCC issued an opinion that upheld the FCC's TELRIC pricing methodology which requires state commissions to set
21
the rates charged by ILECs for network elements leased to CLECs based upon forward looking pricing rather than on the prior investment of such incumbents. The opinion focused on the possible interpretations for the term "cost," finding that a forward-looking interpretation put forth by the FCC was within the mandate for "just jurisdiction over ILEC unbundling, certain specific unbundling requirements and reasonable rates" under the 1996 Act. In addition, the Supreme Court upheld the FCC's authority to requireset the mechanism which governs the rates ILECs who lease elements of their networks to bundle servicesmay charge for CLECs that are unable to bundle the services themselves.interconnection and unbundling.
In December 2001,On August 21, 2003, the FCC initiatedissued new rules, in a comprehensive evaluation of its network element unbundling rules. Referred toproceeding known as the UNE Review, this proceeding will consider what"UNE Triennial Review", governing ILEC obligations to provide unbundled network elements or UNEs ILECs must make available to CLECs and under what terms and conditions.
Onat cost-based rates. These rules were issued in response to a May 24, 2002 decision in which the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ("(or D.C. Circuit") released anCircuit) overturned two earlier FCC decisions establishing ILEC unbundling obligations. The FCC's August 2003 order, also known as the "Triennial Review Order" or "TRO" eliminated some ILEC unbundling requirements, limited others, and delegated to state public utility commissions the task of determining whether ILECs must still unbundle specific network elements on a route-specific basis.
On March 2, 2004, the DC Circuit, in a case entitledUSTA v. FCC, vacated much of the FCC's unbundling determinations contained in its August 21, 2003 TRO. The court specifically vacated the FCC's delegation of power to state public utility commissions for determining where competitive "impairment" existed such that ILECs should be required to provide CLECs access to UNEs. The court additionally vacated the FCC's interpretation of what constitutes "impairment", resulting in a determination that almost all of the FCC's rules requiring ILEC unbundling of loops, transport and other network elements are no longer valid. The court, however, stayed the effectiveness of this order for 60 days, presumably to give the FCC and parties time to seek reconsideration and a longer stay from the full appeals court, or a direct appeal and request for stay to the Supreme Court. If the full appeals court or Supreme Court does not grant a stay, ILECs may argue that most, if not all, of their UNE obligations are unenforceable starting in early May.
In addition to the significant regulatory uncertainty the DC Circuit's opinion inUnited States Telecom AssociationUSTA v. FCC creates at the federal level, it also affects the state regulatory landscape. If the court's ruling is not stayed, it is likely that overturned two decisionsILECs will trigger change of law provisions in existing CLEC interconnection agreements to replace unbundling commitments with new language reflecting the FCC. First, the Court remanded to the FCC for further consideration the UNE Remand Order, which required ILECs to lease numerous UNEs to CLECs. Second, the Court vacated and remanded the Line Sharing Order, which unbundled a portion of the spectrum of local copper loops so that data local exchange carriers (DLECs) can offer competitive advanced services such as Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) services.court's opinion.
The FCC has consolidated To the issues remanded by the D.C. Circuit into the UNE Review proceeding initiated in December 2001. On February 20, 2003, the FCC addressed the decision in USTA vs. FCC by adopting rules concerning the obligation of incumbent local exchange carriers to make unbundled elements of their networks available to new entrants. Since the FCC has yet to release its order or its underlying rules,limited extent that the Company has not been able to fullyrelies upon unbundled network elements, therefore, the Company cannot at this time assess whathow the DC Circuit's opinion inUSTA v. FCC will impact if any, they will have on its telecommunications operations.business.
The 1996 Act also codifies the ILECs' equal access and nondiscrimination obligations and preempts inconsistent state regulation. The 1996 Act contains special provisions that modify previous court decrees that prevented BOCsRBOCs from providing long distance services and engaging in telecommunications equipment manufacturing. These provisions permit a BOCRBOC to enter the long distance market in its traditional service area if it satisfies several procedural and substantive requirements, including obtaining FCC approval upon a showing that the BOCRBOC has entered into interconnection agreements (or, under some circumstances, has offered to enter into such agreements) in those states in which it seeks long distance relief, the interconnection agreements satisfy a 14-point "checklist" of competitive requirements, and the FCC is satisfied that the BOC'sRBOC's entry into long distance markets is in the public interest. To date, the FCC has approved petitions to provide long distance service byAs of January 1, 2004, Qwest, Verizon, in New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Jersey, Virginia, New Hampshire, Maine, Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia,BellSouth and the District of Columbia. SBC hasCommunications had received approval for Texas, Oklahoma Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri, and California, and it has applications pending for Michigan and Nevada. BellSouth has received approval for its entire region of Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and Tennessee. Qwest has received approval for Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. It has applications pending for New Mexico, Oregon, and South Dakota. The 1996 Act permitted the BOCsauthority to enter the out-of-region long distance market immediately upon its enactment.in the in-region service territories.
22
In October 1996, the FCC adopted an order in which it eliminated the requirement that non-dominant carriers such as the Company maintain tariffs on file with the FCC for domestic interstate services. On February 13, 1997, the D.C. Circuit stayed implementation of the FCC order. On April 28, 2000, all litigation with respect to the FCC's order was resolved in favor of the FCC. As a result, a deadline of August 1, 2001, was established for non-dominant carriers, such as the Company, to eliminate tariffs for interstate end user services. In March 2001, the FCC also ordered that all nondominantnon-dominant interexchange carriers detariff international interexchange services by January 28, 2002.
22
Pursuant to these orders, the Company cancelled its tariff for domestic interstate and international private line services effective July 31, 2001. The Company's state tariffs remain in place. While tariffs provided a means of providing notice of prices as well as terms and conditions for the provision of service, the Company has historically relied primarily on its sales force and marketing activities to provide information to its customers regarding these matters and expects to continue to do so. Further, in accordance with the FCC's orders the Company maintains a schedule of its rates, terms and conditions for its domestic and international private line services on its website atwww.leve13.com.
In 2001, the FCC adopted its CLEC access charge order adopting a benchmark rate for CLEC access charges. The order became effective in June 2001. The rules establish a conclusive presumption that CLEC access rates at or below the benchmark are just and reasonable. The FCC adopted a three-year transition period until the rates reach the rates charged by the ILEC in the same area. In addition, the FCC clarified that an interexchange carrier's refusal to serve customers of a CLEC that tariffs access rates at or below the benchmark rate, when the interexchange carrier serves ILEC end users in the same area, generally constitutes a violation of their duty to provide service upon reasonable request. The CLEC access charge order is subject to both petitions for reconsideration at the FCC and appeals in the U.S. Court of Appeals. In addition, CLEC access charges are among the intercarrier compensation issues addressed in the FCC's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding a unified intercarrier compensation regime. The Company's long standing policy has been to mirror the access rates charged by the ILECs. Because the rates established by the FCC in the CLEC access charge order are consistent with the ILEC rates, the Company is not required to change the manner in which access charges are assessed or collected.
Beginning in June 1997, every BOCRBOC advised CLECs that they did not consider calls in the same local calling area from their customers to CLEC customers, who are ISPs, to be local calls under the interconnection agreements between the BOCsRBOCs and the CLECs. The BOCsRBOCs claim that these calls are exchange access calls for which exchange access charges would be owed. The BOCsRBOCs claimed, however, that the FCC exempted these calls from access charges so that no compensation is owed to the CLECs for transporting and terminating such calls. As a result, the BOCsRBOCs threatened to withhold, and in many cases did withhold, reciprocal compensation for the transport and termination of such calls. To date, thirty-six state commissions have ruled on this issue in the context of state commission arbitration proceedings or enforcement proceedings. In thirty threethirty-three states, to date, the state commission has determined that reciprocal compensation is owed for such calls. Several of these cases are presently on appeal. Reviewing courts have upheld the state commissions in eleven decisions rendered to date on appeal. Decisions in the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Seventh U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal have affirmed the reviewing courts and upheld state determinations that reciprocal compensation is owed for ISP bound traffic. On February 25, 1999, the FCC issued a Declaratory Ruling on the issue of inter-carrier compensation for calls bound to ISPs. The FCC ruled that the calls are largely jurisdictionally interstate calls, not local calls. The FCC, however, determined that this issue was not dispositive of whether inter-carrier compensation is owed.
The FCC noted a number of factors which would allow the state commissions to leave their decisions requiring the payment of compensation undisturbed. That decision was appealed to the D.C. Circuit which held on appeal that the FCC had failed to adequately support its conclusions under the requirements of the 1996 Act. On April 18, 2001, the FCC adopted a new order regarding intercarrier compensation for ISP-bound traffic. In that Order, the Commission set out to address the issues raised by the D.C. Circuit and established a new intercarrier compensation mechanism for ISP-bound traffic with declining rates over a three year period. In addition to establishing a new rate structure, the Commission capped through 2003 the amount of ISP bound traffic that would be "compensable" and prohibited payment for ISP-bound traffic to carriers entering new markets. The April 2001 order was appealed to the D.C. Circuit. On May 3, 2002, the Court of Appeals released its decision, finding that the FCC had failed to justify its reliance on Section 251(g) of the Communications Act in adopting its new
23
intercarrier compensation regime. The court found that the FCC had not provided an adequate legal basis for its ruling, and therefore remanded the matter to the FCC for further explanation as to the legal theory supporting the FCC's rules. In the interim, the court let the FCC's rules stand on the ground that the FCC may likely have authority on other legal grounds to adopt those rules. It is unclear when the FCC will issue revised findings in response to the latest remand.
Although there is a fair amount of uncertainty surroundingPrior to 2004, the regulatory and economic treatment of ISP-bound traffic, the Company has over the past several years entered into agreements providing for payment of compensation for terminating ISP-bound traffic with Verizon, that provides for payment for ISP- bound traffic in theits former Bell Atlantic operating territory, with SBC
23
Corporation for the 13-state operating territory that includes its affiliates Pacific Bell, Southwestern Bell, Ameritech and Southern New England Telephone, and with BellSouth in its nine-state operating territory. The Company has also entered into interconnection agreements with Qwest, Cincinnati Bell Telephone, and Sprint that reflect the intercarrier compensation rates adopted by the FCC in its most recent order. Given the general uncertainty surrounding the effect of these decisions, appeals, and the remand, the Company may have to change how it treats the compensation it receives for terminating calls bound for ISP- bound traffic if the agreements under which compensation is paid provides for the incorporation of changes in FCC rules and regulations.
On June 10, 2003, Verizon notified Level 3 of its intention to invoke the intercarrier compensation regime in the FCC's ISP Order on Remand with respect to traffic exchanged under the companies' interconnection agreements. The FCC has to date treated ISPs as "enhanced service providers," exempt from federal and state regulations governing common carriers, including the obligation to pay access charges and contribute to the universal service fund. Nevertheless, regulations governing disclosureeffect of confidential communications, copyright, excise tax, and other requirements may apply to the Company's provision of Internet access services. The Company cannot predict the likelihood that state, federal or foreign governments will impose additional regulationthis decision on the Company's Internet business, nor can it predictcompensation each carrier receives from the impact that future regulation will haveother for terminating traffic is uncertain. In addition, the interconnection agreement between Level 3 and BellSouth expired on December 31, 2003. BellSouth has expressed its intention to invoke the FCC's ISP Order on Remand. The effect of this decision on the Company's operations.compensation each carrier receives from the other for terminating ISP-bound traffic is uncertain. In February 2004, the Company filed petitions for arbitration with BellSouth in nine states. In late 2003, Level 3 and SBC reached a separate agreement continuing payment for the exchange of ISP-bound traffic that could run through the end of 2004.
In December 1996, the FCC initiated a Notice of Inquiry regarding whether to impose regulations or surcharges upon providers of Internet access and information services (the "Internet NOI")Internet NOI). The Internet NOI sought public comment upon whether to impose or continue to forebear from regulation of Internet and other packet-switched network service providers. The Internet NOI specifically identifies Internet telephony as a subject for FCC consideration. On April 10, 1998, the FCC issued a Report to Congress on its implementation of the universal service provisions of the 1996 Act. In that Report, the FCC stated, among other things, that the provision of transmission capacity to ISPs constitutes the provision of telecommunications and is, therefore, subject to common carrier regulations. The FCC indicated that it would reexamine its policy of not requiring an ISP to contribute to the universal service mechanisms when the ISP provides its own transmission facilities and engages in data transport over those facilities in order to provide an information service. Any such contribution by a facilities based ISP would be related to the ISP's provision of the underlying telecommunications services. In the Report, the FCC also indicated that it would examine the question of whether certain forms of "phone-to-phone Internet Protocol telephony" are information services or telecommunications services. It noted that the FCC did not have an adequate record on which to make any definitive pronouncements on that issue at this time, but that the record the FCC had reviewed suggests that certain forms of phone-to-phone Internet Protocol telephony appear to have similar functionality to non-Internet Protocol telecommunications services and lack the characteristics that would render them information services. If the FCC were to determine that certain Internet Protocol telephony services are subject to FCC regulations as telecommunications services, the FCC noted it may find it reasonable that the ISPs pay access charges and make universal service contributions similar to non-Internet Protocol based telecommunications service providers. The FCC also noted that other forms of Internet Protocol telephony appear to be information services.
Regulation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)
Federal and State
Due to the growing acceptance and deployment of VoIP services, the FCC and state public utility commissions are conducting regulatory proceedings that could affect the regulatory duties and rights of entities such as Level 3 or its affiliates that provide IP-based voice applications. There is regulatory uncertainty as to the imposition of access charges and other taxes, fees and surcharges on VoIP services that use the public switched telephone network. There is regulatory uncertainty as to the imposition of
24
traditional retail, common carrier regulation on VoIP products and services. The FCC has initiated a rulemaking proceeding to consider changes in FCC rules for IP-based voice services. The FCC has indicated that this rulemaking may address, among other things, 911 requirements, disability access requirements, access charges, and universal service requirements. The FCC has further indicated that it will begin a separate rulemaking proceeding to consider the obligations of IP-based voice services providers and network providers under the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act, which establishes federal requirements for wiretapping and other electronic surveillance capabilities. The FCC is also considering several petitions filed by individual companies concerning the regulatory rights and obligations of providers of IP-based voice services, and networks that handle IP-based voice traffic or that exchange that traffic with operators of Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) facilities. On December 23, 2003, the Company filed a forbearance petition with the FCC with respect to intercarrier compensation for certain types of IP-based voice communications. Specifically, the Company requested that the FCC forbear from enforcing provisions of the Communications Act that might otherwise result in the application of interstate and intrastate access charges to certain IP communications. The forbearance petition extends only to communications that either originate on the PSTN and terminate on an IP network, originate on an IP network and terminate on the PSTN, and certain traffic that originates and terminates on the PSTN that is incidental to an IP-PSTN service. The petition does not request forbearance with respect to IP-based voice communications that both originate and terminate on the PSTN, other than incidental traffic, or that originate and terminate on an IP network. The FCC has sought public comment with respect to the Company's forbearance petition. Under the Communications Act, the FCC must make a decision on the petition within one year of the petition's filing (plus one 90-day extension available at the FCC's discretion) or the petition is deemed granted as a matter of law. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this proceeding, nor can it anticipate the manner in which the FCC's decision may affect the Company's operations or regulatory obligations. Several other petitions are also pending. In response to one such petition filed by pulver.com, the FCC ruled that peer-to-peer IP-based voice applications between end users using IP for which a fee is not charged are not "telecommunications services" under the federal Communications Act, but are information services. On October 18, 2002, AT&T Corporation filed a petition On September 22, 2003, Vonage Holdings Corporation or Vonage filed a petition with the FCC requesting a declaration that its offerings, which originate on a broadband network in IP format and terminate on the On February 5, 2004, SBC Communications Inc. filed two petitions with the FCC relating to IP communications. The first requests a declaratory ruling that all services offered on an IP platform are interstate information services, not telecommunications services, and that they are immune from state regulation as a result. The second requests that the FCC forbear from applying certain common carrier regulation to services offered on IP platforms. The FCC has sought public comment with respect to SBC's forbearance petition, and, under the Communications Act, the FCC must make a decision on the petition within one year of the petition's filing (with the possibility of a single 90-day extension available at the FCC's discretion). If the FCC does not act with respect to SBC's forbearance petition, 25 the petition is deemed granted as a matter of law. The FCC has not yet requested comment with respect to SBC's petition for declaratory ruling, and it is not clear when the FCC will rule. The state public utility commissions are also conducting regulatory proceedings that could impact our rights and obligations with respect to IP-based voice applications. Previously, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission or MPUC ruled that Vonage's DigitalVoice service was a telephone service under state law, and ordered Vonage to obtain state certification, file tariffs, and comply with 911 requirements before continuing to offer the service in the state. Vonage filed a request in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota to enjoin the MPUC's decision. On October 16, 2003, a federal judge granted Vonage's request for an injunction, concluding that Vonage provides an information service immune from state regulation and thereby barring the MPUC from enforcing its decision. The MPUC has appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. That appeal is pending. The California Public Utilities Commission or CPUC, on February 11, 2004, initiated a rulemaking about the appropriate regulatory framework to govern Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP. Among the issues the CPUC may consider is whether VoIP is subject to CPUC's regulatory authority, including whether VoIP providers should be required to contribute to state universal service programs, whether VoIP providers should be required to pay intrastate access charges, whether VoIP should be subject to basic consumer protection rules, and whether exempting VoIP providers from requirements applicable to traditional voice providers would create unfair competitive advantages for VoIP providers. Proceedings and petitions relating to IP-based voice applications are also under consideration in a number of other states, including but not limited to Alabama, Kansas, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. The Company cannot predict the outcome of any these petitions and regulatory proceedings or for declaratory ruling with the FCC with respect to phone-to-phone Internet Protocol telephony. The petition requestedrequesting a declaratory ruling that calls that originate and terminate on the FCC affirm that such servicesPSTN, but which may be converted into IP during some part of the transmission, are exempt from the access charges applicable to circuit switched interexchange calls and that it is lawful to provide such service through local end user services. Comments were filedunder existing FCC rules. The FCC has received public comment with the FCC in responserespect to the AT&T petition, andbut it is unclear when the FCC might rulewill rule.question presented.PSTN, or vice versa, are interstate information services not subject to state regulation under the federal Communications Act and existing FCC rules. The FCC has received public comment with respect to the Vonage petition, but it is unclear when the FCC will rule.otherany similar petitions and regulatory proceedings pending before the FCC or state proceedings thatpublic utility commissions. Moreover, the Company cannot predict how their outcomes may affect the Company's operations or whether the FCC or state public utility commissions will impose additional requirements, regulations or charges upon the Company's provision of Internet access andservices related Internet Protocol-based telephony services.
The Communications Act requires that every telecommunications carrier contribute, on an equitable and non-discriminatory basis, to federal universal service mechanisms established by the FCC, and the FCC also requires providers of non-common carrier telecommunications to contribute to universal service, subject to some exclusions and limitations. At present, these contributions are calculated based on contributors' interstate and international revenuesrevenue derived from U.S. domestic end users for telecommunications or telecommunications services, as those terms are defined under FCC regulations. The Company, pursuant to federal regulations, pays these contributions. The amount of the Company's contributions can vary based upon the total amount of federal universal service support being provided under the FCC's federal mechanisms and associated administrative expenses, the methodology used by the FCC to calculate each carrier's contributions, and, at present, the proportion of the Company's assessable interstate and international revenuesrevenue derived from its domestic end users for telecommunications or telecommunications services to, for all contributors, the total amount of assessable interstate and international revenuesrevenue derived from domestic end users for telecommunications or telecommunications services. The extent to which the Company's services are viewed as telecommunications/ telecommunications services or as information services will also affect the Company's contributions. On December 13, 2002, the FCC adopted a Report and Order modifying the current method of carrier contributions to the universal service fund. The revised revenue-based methodology will impose universal service contributions on the basis of projected, collected end-user interstate revenues,revenue, in lieu of the current system of basing contributions on historical, gross-billed revenues.revenue. This revised methodology is intended to operate as an interim solution only, subject to further revision following the comments in response to the Commission's Second Further Notice of Proposed
26
Rulemaking included in this Order. The FCC also increased the wireless safe harbor from 15% to 28.5% to address concerns that the current interim safe harbor for mobile wireless providers is inappropriate in light of changing market conditions. The interim changes adopted by the FCC will not have a material impact on the amount of the Company's contributions. In the Second Further Notice, the FCC seeks comment on how to further reform the manner in which the FCC assesses carrier contributions to the universal service fund. The Company is unable to predict the changes, if any, the FCC will adopt and the cumulative effect of any such changes on the Company's total universal service contribution payments.
Europe
Unlike the United States which has a fractured regulatory scheme with respect to VoIP services, the European Union has adopted a more systematic approach to the convergence of networks and VoIP regulation specifically. The European Commission will oversee the implementation by its member-states of six new directives developed to regulate electronic communications in a technology and platform-neutral manner. Implementation of the directives has not been uniform across the Member States and it is difficult to predict when they will be implemented at the national level. Even with harmonization, the national regulatory agencies will continue to be responsible for issuing general authorizations and specific licenses.
The European Union's approach to the regulation of VoIP turns on whether VoIP is voice telephony. The European Commission has defined voice telephony to have four elements: (1) commercial offering as voice telephony; (2) provision to the public; (3) provision to and from the public switched telephone network termination points; and (4) direct speech transport and switching of speech in real time, particularly at the same level of reliability and speech quality as provided by the PSTN. In 1999,its Communication from the FCC strengthened its existing colocation rulesCommission, Consultation on Voice on the Internet in June 2000, the commission directed that "Member States should continue to encourage competitive deployment of high-speed data services. The order, among other things, restricted the ability of ILECs to prevent certain types of equipment from being colocated and required ILECsallow Internet access providers to offer alternative colocation arrangementsvoice over Internet protocol under data transmission general authorizations, and that specific licensing conditions are not justified."
The Commission has subsequently redefined its definitions to suggest that some VoIP offerings are voice telephony. In its December 2000 communication, the Commission noted that increasing quality and reliability as well as marketing of voice capabilities with bundled services, made certain kinds of "voice over Internet" much more like voice services. While the current Commission directives do not mandate the treatment of VoIP as voice telephony, the commission will continue to reevaluate the regulation of VoIP as service quality becomes the equivalent of traditional voice telephony.
In February 2003, the European Union adopted a new regulatory framework for electronic communications that is designed to address in a technologically neutral manner the convergence of communications across telecommunications, computer and broadcasting networks. The directives address: (1) framework (2) interconnection and access, (3) authorization and licensing, (4) universal service and (5) privacy. These directives and an additional decision on radio spectrum replace the existing 20 directives on electronic communications. Under the framework, voice telephony providers will face additional obligations, including specific licensing and universal service obligations. Others will likely face new regulation. One example could be less costly. EarlyVoIP. If it is classified as an electronic communications service, rather than voice telephony, it would still be subject to additional regulations to achieve regulatory parity with other electronic communications.
In 2004, Level 3 anticipates that it will begin to offer VoIP applications in 2000, the D.C. Circuit struck down several aspectsUnited Kingdom. The United Kingdom was one of the colocation order and remandedfirst countries to fully implement the European Union's new framework for electronic communications, which it back to the FCC for further consideration. In response to the remand, the FCC released an order in August 2001. Indid by July 25, 2003. At that order, the FCC found that multifunctional equipment could be collocated only if the primary purpose and functiontime, certain provisions of the equipment is for the CLECUnited Kingdom's Telecommunications Act of 1984 were repealed. Pursuant to obtain "equal in quality" interconnection or nondiscriminatory access to UNEs. The FCC also eliminated its rules that gave CLECs the option of picking their physical collocation space. Following this remand order, several ILECs filed petitions for review with the D.C. Circuit. In June 2002, the D.C. Circuit issued its decision inVerizon Telephone Companies v. FCC upholding the FCC's colocation rules in their entirety and denying the ILEC petitions for review.framework,
2527
In 2001the licensing regime was replaced with a general authorization. Level 3's existing licenses were canceled and 2002,replaced with a general authorization.
Under the FCC initiatedregime, the United Kingdom regulates VoIP as an electronic communication service. The degree of regulation imposed on the service depends upon whether the service is considered to be a numberPublicly Available Telephone Service (PATS). A service is considered to be a PATS if the following conditions are met: it is marketed as a substitute for the traditional telephone service; the service appears to the customer to be a substitute for the traditional public telephone service over which they expect access to emergency services; or the service provides the customers sole means of proceedings that may have an effect on howaccess to the FCC regulates local competitiontraditional circuit switched public telephone network.
While the Ofcom, the United Kingdom regulator, has established technical standards and broadband services as well as howinterconnection rights for VoIP service providers, it assesses universal service contribution requirements. Because the FCC has not released orders adopting new regulations governing these issues,the Company is unablerecently opened a consultation to assess the potential effect atappropriate allocation of phone numbers to VoIP providers. The Company cannot predict the result of this time.proceeding and how it will affect its ability to use phone numbers associated with its VoIP services.
As Level 3 expands the deployment of its VoIP applications in Europe, it will have to consider the appropriate regulatory requirements for each nation before deploying services.
State Regulation
The 1996 Act is intended to increase competition in the telecommunications industry, especially in the local exchange market. With respect to local services, ILECs are required to allow interconnection to their networks and to provide unbundled access to network facilities, as well as a number of other procompetitive measures. Because the implementation of the 1996 Act is subject to numerous state rulemaking proceedings on these issues, it is currently difficult to predict how quickly full competition for local services including local dial tone, will be introduced.
State regulatory agencies have jurisdiction when Company facilities and services are used to provide intrastate telecommunications services. A portion of the Company's traffic may be classified as intrastate telecommunications and therefore subject to state regulation. The Company expects that it will offer more intrastate telecommunications services (including intrastate switched services) as its business and product lines expand. To provide intrastate services, the Company generally must obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the state regulatory agency and comply with state requirements for telecommunications utilities, including state tariffing requirements. The Company currently is authorized to provide telecommunications services in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. In addition, the Company will be required to obtain and maintain interconnection agreements with ILECs where it wishes to provide service. The Company has approximately 150 interconnection agreements many of which have terms that expire during 2003.with limited terms. The Company expects that itis should be able to negotiate or otherwise obtain renewals or successor agreements over the course of 2003 through adoption of others' contracts or arbitration proceedings, although the rates, terms, and conditions applicable to interconnection and the exchange of traffic with certain ILECs could change significantly in certain cases. The degree to which the rates, terms, and conditions may change will depend not only upon the negotiation and arbitration process and availability of other interconnection agreements, but will also depend in significant part upon state commission proceedings during 2003 that either uphold or modify the current regimes governing interconnection and the exchange of certain kinds of traffic between carriers. In February of 2004, Level 3 filed arbitration petitions in respect to interconnection agreements with BellSouth in all 9 of the BellSouth states to both assert Level 3's rights and allow for continuing negotiations while the arbitration process proceeds. Interconnection agreement negotiations are continuing with Qwest, Verizon, SBC and others in an effort to avoid the necessity of pursuing arbitrations at the state level. Should such negotiations fail to result in interconnection agreements acceptable to Level 3, arbitration proceedings may need to be pursued against these carriers during the remainder of 2004.
States also often require prior approvals or notifications for certain transfers of assets, customers or ownership of certificated carriers and for issuances by certified carriers of equity or debt.
28
Local Regulation
The Company's networks will be subject to numerous local regulations such as building codes and licensing. Such regulations vary on a city-by-city, county- by-countycounty-by-county and state-by-state basis. To install its own fiber optic transmission facilities, the Company will need to obtain rights-of-way over privately and publicly owned land. Rights-of-way that are not already secured may not be available to the Company on economically reasonable or advantageous terms.
Canadian Regulation
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, (the "CRTC")or the CRTC, generally regulates long distance telecommunications services in Canada. Regulatory developments over the past several years have terminated the historic monopolies of the regional telephone companies, bringing significant competition to this industry for both domestic and international long distance services, but also lessening regulation of domestic long distance companies. Resellers, which, as well as facilities-based carriers, now have interconnection rights, but which are not obligated to file tariffs, may not only
26
provide transborder services to the U.S. by reselling the services provided by the regional companies and other entities but also may resell the services of the former monopoly international carrier, Teleglobe Canada ("Teleglobe"),or Teleglobe, including offering international switched services provisioned over leased lines. Although the CRTC formerly restricted the practice of "switched hubbing" over leased lines through intermediate countries to or from a third country, the CRTC recently lifted this restriction. The Teleglobe monopoly on international services and undersea cable landing rights terminated as of October 1, 1998, although the provision of Canadian international transmission facilities-based services remains restricted to "Canadian carriers" with majority ownership by Canadians. Ownership of non-international transmission facilities are limited to Canadian carriers but the Company can own international undersea cables landing in Canada. The Company cannot, under current law, enter the Canadian market as a provider of transmission facilities-based domestic services. In February 2003, the Canadian House of Commons began holding hearings on whether to lift the foreign ownership restrictions that prohibit carriers like the Company from owning intra-Canadian transmission facilities. If the ownership restrictions are repealed, the Company anticipates that it will be able to expand its operations and service offerings in Canada. Recent CRTC rulings address issues such as the framework for international contribution charges payable to the local exchange carriers to offset some of the capital and operating costs of the provision of switched local access services of the incumbent regional telephone companies, in their capacity as ILECs, and the new entrant CLECs.
While competition is permitted in virtually all other Canadian telecommunications market segments, the Company believes that the regional companies continue to retain a substantial majority of the local and calling card markets. Beginning in May 1997, the CRTC released a number of decisions opening to competition the Canadian local telecommunications services market, which decisions were made applicable in the territories of all of the regional telephone companies except SaskTel (although Saskatchewan has subsequently allowed local service competition in that province). As a result, networks operated by CLECs may now be interconnected with the networks of the ILECs. Transmission facilities-based CLECs are subject to the same majority Canadian ownership "Canadian carrier" requirements as transmission facilities-based long distance carriers. CLECs have the same status as ILECs, but they do not have universal service or customer tariff-filing obligations. CLECs are subject to certain consumer protection safeguards and other CRTC regulatory oversight requirements. CLECs must file interconnection tariffs for services to interexchange service providers and wireless service providers. Certain ILEC services must be provided to CLECs on an unbundled basis and subject to mandatory pricing, including central office codes, subscriber listings, and local loops in small urban and rural areas. For a five-year period, certain other important CLEC services must be provided on an unbundled basis at mandated prices, notably unbundled local loops in large, urban areas. ILECs, which, unlike CLECs, remained fully regulated, will be subject to price cap regulation in respect of
29
their utility services for an initial four-year period beginning May 1, 1997, and these services must not be priced below cost. Interexchange contribution payments are now pooled and distributed among ILECs and CLECs according to a formula based on their respective proportions of residential lines, with no explicit contribution payable from local business exchange or directory revenues.revenue. CLECs must pay an annual telecommunications fee based on their proportion of total CLEC operating revenues.revenue. All bundled and unbundled local services (including residential lines and other bulk services) may now be resold, but ILECs need not provide these services to resellers at wholesale prices. Transmission facilities-based local and long distance carriers (but not resellers) are entitled to colocate equipment in ILEC central offices pursuant to terms and conditions of tariffs and intercarrier agreements. Certain local competition issues are still to be resolved. The CRTC has ruled that resellers cannot be classified as CLECs, and thus are not entitled to CLEC interconnection terms and conditions.
27
Information Services Business
Software Spectrum
In connection with the Company's belief that as communications price-performance improves, communications services are direct substitutes for existing modes of information distribution, during 2002, the Company completed the acquisition of CorpSoft, Inc., which conducted its business under the name Corporate Software,SM, a major distributor, marketer and reseller of business software. In addition, during 2002, the Company completed the acquisition of Software Spectrum, Inc., a global business-to-business software services provider. At December 31, 2002, CorpSoft, Inc. was merged with and into Software Spectrum, Inc., with Software Spectrum as the surviving entity.
The Company believes that communications price performance will improve more rapidly than computing and data storage price performance and, as a result, companies will, over time, seek information technology operating efficiency by purchasing software functionality and data storage as commercial services procured over broadband networks such as the Level 3 Network.
3's network. Level 3 believes that the combination of Level 3's network infrastructure, and Software Spectrum's expertise in software lifecycle management and marketing, as well as strong customer relationships, will position Level 3 to benefit as companies change the manner in which they buy and use software capability.
Through its Software Spectrum subsidiaries, ("collectively Software Spectrum"),Spectrum, the Company is a global business-to-business software services provider with sales locations operations and contact centersoperations located in North America, Europe and Asia/Pacific. Software Spectrum primarily sells software through volume licensing and maintenance ("VLM")or VLM agreements, or right-to-copy arrangements, and full-packaged software products. In addition, Software Spectrum provides contact center solutions to software publishers, Internet service providers, original equipment manufacturers and other organizations. Software Spectrum has established supply arrangements with major software publishers, including Microsoft, IBM/Lotus, Adobe Systems, Symantec, Novell and McAfee. Software Spectrum markets software titles for all major operating systems such as Windows NT, WindowsNT®, Windows® 2000, WindowsWindows® XP, Linux and Novell Netware.Netware®.
In 2003, Software Spectrum management, along with Level 3 management, completed their review of Software Spectrum's lines of business to determine how those lines of business assist with the Company's focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching consolidated free cash flow breakeven. From this review, Software Spectrum and Level 3 management determined to exit the contact center business. In June 2003, Software Spectrum sold substantially all of the assets of its North American contact center business, and in October 2003, sold substantially all of the assets of its Irish contact center business. The proceeds from these sales were immaterial.
Software Spectrum's strategy is to achieve industry-leading adjusted OIBDA margins by building best-in-class operational capability and to leverage its global infrastructure to expand its product offerings and customer base while continuing to provide a high level of customer service, to maintain a cost-efficient operating structure and to grow its product services businesses.service. Software Spectrum controls its costs by centralizing its administrative and customer service and contact services operations while utilizing a geographically dispersed field sales force strategically located in major business markets worldwide. The majority of Software Spectrum's revenuesrevenue are derived from sales to large organizations,
30
including Fortune 500500® and Fortune Global 500500® companies, as well as thousands of mid-sized customers from many industries.
The largest component of Software Spectrum's business is providing third-party software, licenses and related services to large organizations, including companies in the Fortune 500500® and Fortune Global 500.500® rankings. Software Spectrum concentrates on building and expanding these relationships through personal sales contacts made throughout major global computing markets. Software Spectrum maintains a sales force which focuses on the software licensing and distribution needs of its larger customers and serves small to mid-sized customers through a combined fieldfield-based telephone sales and outbound telephone-based sales effort.representatives located in major geographic markets. Through its strategically located, centralized operations centers in North America, Europe and Asia/Pacific, Software Spectrum supports the global marketing efforts of its sales force.
Software Spectrum's Internet Web site,www.softwarespectrum.com, includes an e-commerce business center, "My Account Center" ("Accountor "Account Center"), which helps customers meet their total procurement, asset management, reporting, standards management and order tracking needs. The Account Center also provides customers the option of obtaining their software electronically. In addition, Software Spectrum partners with its customers on e-procurement platform implementations
28
with providers such as Ariba and Commerce One.Perfect Commerce. In conjunction with its electronic business-to-business Web tool, Software Spectrum maintains headquarters-based sales representatives to facilitate purchases and self-help services by Software Spectrum's customers over the Internet. See "Sales and Marketing."
Software Spectrum provides outsourced technical support and customer service through its contact centers located in the United States and Ireland. These services are utilized by software publishers, Internet service providers, original equipment manufacturers and other businesses that desire to outsource their various forms of contact services. Software Spectrum employed over 1,600 technical support analysts and other contact services personnel as of December 31, 2002, including a dedicated sales force.
Software Spectrum adapts its product-related services to specific customer requests, consults with customers on developing strategies to efficiently acquire and manage the customer's investment in distributed computing software and manages the accurate and timely delivery of products. Software Spectrum provides its customers with information, advice and assistance through its marketing, sales and technical staff on the wide range of software procurement choices available. For customers electing to standardize desktop software applications or otherwise take advantage of right-to-copy arrangements, Software Spectrum provides volume licensing and maintenance ("VLM") agreement services and support. Under VLM agreements, Software Spectrum acts as a designated service provider to sell software licensing rights that permit customers to make copies of a publisher's software program from a master disk and distribute this software within a customer's organization for a fee per copy made. Maintenance agreements entitle customers to all updates and upgrades of covered products during the term of the Agreement, typically three years following the software purchase. By utilizing VLM agreements, customers are able to consolidate their worldwide purchases and acquire software under a single master agreement for a given publisher from a global supplier such as Software Spectrum. Increasingly, customers are electing to use enterprise-wide licensing agreements, which give the customer the right to use a particular suite of products offered by a publisher on all desktops across its enterprise. Software Spectrum's licensing consultants can assist customers in selecting the most advantageous form of licensing available based on specific needs or constraints. Among its other services, Software Spectrum offers on-site consultants for large corporations, who provide software selection assistance, software asset management and determination of price and availability of hard-to-find software products.
Software Spectrum serves an important role in the software industry by providing a service-oriented and cost-effective means for software publishers to market, sell, distribute and provide support for their products. The services provided by Software Spectrum assist publishers by building product awareness, marketing products directly on behalf of publishers to businesses and other organizations, and providing additional technical support related to those software products. Software Spectrum is also instrumental in the selection, design and implementation of VLM programs for its customers. Software Spectrum believes that maintaining its relationships with major publishers is important to Software Spectrum's future growth and profitability. Software Spectrum will often coordinate product
31
introductions and marketing programs with publishers, which may involve joint regional product seminars and cross-selling of selected complementary products. By providing presales services and marketing support, Software Spectrum can obtain competitive discounts from many software publishers, avail itself of marketing funds provided by major publishers and work closely with publisher personnel on various marketing and selling matters such as the introduction of new products, programs and related service opportunities.
Software Spectrum continues to sell most software to its customers through VLM agreements, including enterprise-wide licensing arrangements. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, sales through VLM agreements represented over 90%80% of software sales of Software Spectrum. SinceBecause individual software packages and documentation may not be provided to each user, and due to volume pricing incentives and lower distribution costs, customers utilizing VLM agreements can purchase licenses for
29
software at a lower cost than by purchasing individual shrink-wrapped software packages. In general, Software Spectrum receives lower gross margins, as a percent of sales, on sales made through VLM agreements. Lower gross margins are partially offset by lower operating costs associated with such agreements.
Under VLM agreements, multinational customers can consolidate their worldwide volume software purchases under a single master agreement for a given publisher. Software Spectrum's ability to sell software globally through these programs is a key factor in its global expansion.
Software Spectrum's North American operations are based in Dallas, Texas.Texas, and Software Spectrum has majoralso maintains a product centerscenter located in Dallas, Texas; Spokane, Washington; and Boston, Massachusetts and contact services centers in Dallas, Texas; Spokane, Washington; Eugene, Oregon and Tampa, Florida.Washington. Software Spectrum's major European officesoperations are locatedbased in Munich, Germany; Paris, France;Germany, and Dublin, Ireland. In addition, Software Spectrum hasalso maintains offices in Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Sweden, Belgium and Spain.Kingdom. Software Spectrum's Asia/Pacific headquarters is located in Sydney, Australia. Software Spectrum also has offices in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Hong Kong. In Japan, Software Spectrum operates through a joint venture named Uchida-Spectrum, Inc.).
With centralized operations centers in North America, Europe and Asia/Pacific, Software Spectrum is able to serve the major computing technology markets around the world. Today, Software Spectrum provides software or fulfillment services to customers located in over 100140 countries, provides contact services in eight languages, invoices customers in many local currencies and provides consolidated worldwide reporting for its customers.
Product Services
Licensing, Procurement and Deployment Services. Software Spectrum's customers can purchase software applications in a number of different ways. VLM agreements, or right-to-copy agreements, allow a customer to either to purchase a license for each user in a transaction-based process or track and periodically report its software copies, paying a license fee for each copy made. Software Spectrum sells, supports and services the various VLM arrangements currently utilized by software publishers. For customers, the overall cost of using one of these methods of acquiring software may be substantially less than purchasing shrink-wrapped, full-packaged software products.
SinceBecause each software publisher has chosen a different set of procedures for implementing VLM agreements, businesses are faced with a significant challenge to sort through all the alternatives and procedures to ensure that they are utilizing the appropriate agreements, complying with the publishers' licensing terms and properly reporting and paying for their software licenses. Certain publishers offer licensing programs that reduce the reporting burden of customers and Software Spectrum by requiring annual payments over a twotwo- to three yearthree-year term, provided the customer agrees to standardize certain applications within its organization. In order to address the wide range of procurement choices available to its customers, Software Spectrum provides information, analysis, advice and assistance to its customers relating to their procurement decisions and negotiations through its team of licensing
32
consultants as well as by means of Software Spectrum's marketing and sales staff and through its publications. See "Publications" and "Sales and Marketing."
Increasingly, large corporate customers are electing to standardize desktop applications and coordinate their enterprise-wide computer management responsibilities. In response to this trend, publishers have developed enterprise-wide VLM agreements, which simplify the terms, conditions and administration of VLM arrangements and provide the customer with more predictable annual costs. Software Spectrum works closely with its customers to educate them regarding the options available under VLM agreements and has developed the systems needed to provide the global integration and reporting required under these programs.
30
New Microsoft enterprise-wide licensing arrangements are priced, billed and collected directly by Microsoft. Software Spectrum provides sales and support services related to these transactions, and earns a service fee directly from Microsoft for these activities.
Software Spectrum's sales representatives and licensing consultants are software managers certified by the Software and Information Industry Association, andspecialists are trained to provide customers with advice in the evaluation of the various VLM programs offered by publishers. In addition to Software Spectrum's extensive experience in dealing with VLM agreements, it has continued to invest in technology-based systems to support the special requirements necessary to service VLM agreements for its customers. Software Spectrum has developed a custom,Spectrum's client/server-based system which provides individualized customer contract management data, assists customers in complying with VLM agreements and provides customers with necessary reporting mechanisms.
To help customers develop or improve their software management programs, Software Spectrum developed a software management processprovides white papers and corresponding implementation services thatconsulting advice to its customers to allow customers to effectively utilize the benefits associated with VLM programs. Software Spectrum provides its customers with a methodology for evaluating thetheir individual customer's software management process and analyzing issues in implementing the VLM programs offered by various publishers. The service optionsadvice available from Software Spectrum areis designed to assist the customer in implementing its software management plan, including internal distribution services, communicating with end-users, reporting and compliance under VLM agreements.
Most of Software Spectrum's products are ordered by the customer's procurement or information systems department and may be billed to theanother department of the end-user, which may be located at a different site than the procurement or information systems department. Software Spectrum provides customers, upon request, open-order status and purchase activity reports formatted to each customer's specifications. Software Spectrum has also enabled its customers to obtain this information directly from Software Spectrum's Web site. The majority of Software Spectrum's customers now determine the status of their orders via this Internet tool. Also, customers can submit orders or other data to Software Spectrum from their computer systems via Software Spectrum's electronic data interchange ("EDI") capabilities. EDI and online Web order placement improve order accuracy and reduce administrative costs for corporate customers and Software Spectrum.
The majority of customers who have elected to purchase software licenses through VLM agreements have also purchased software maintenance, which allows customers to receive new versions, upgrades or updates of software products released during the maintenance period in exchange for a specified annual fee, which may be paid in monthly, quarterly or annual installments. Upgrades and updates are revisions to previously publishedpreviously-published software that improve or enhance certain features of the software and/or correct errors found in previous versions. Customers that have elected not to purchase maintenance agreements are still able to upgrade multiple units of specific products through Software Spectrum for a separate fee. Software Spectrum assists publishers and customers in tracking and renewing these agreements.
Electronic Software Distribution. Electronic software distribution ("ESD") supports the fast, convenient delivery of software products between businesses via electronic links such as the Internet.
33
Software Spectrum currently delivers a limited amount of software in this manner and intends to continue to participate in this method of distribution as demand for this service by large organizations emerges and as communication technology improvements enable this form of ESD to become more widely used.
E-procurement. Software Spectrum participates in the electronic procurement arena in two primary ways: through its online Account Center and through its Electronic Business-to-Business Partner Program ("or e-B2B Partner Program") in which Software Spectrum partners with e-procurement providers, such as Ariba and Commerce One.
31
Program. Software Spectrum's online Account Center contains an Internet-based suite of tools that enable customers to manage their software procurement. For most of its larger customers, Software Spectrum creates customized electronic product catalogs containing product information and pricing. These catalogs are accessed through search engine functionality, which enables customers to quickly locate products they need. Customers are also able to determine the status of open orders and obtain certain real-time standard reports online. The Account Center also provides tools which allow customers to restrict purchasing only to pre-approved products or allow an administrator at a customer location to give users within that organization access to the Account Center, but restrict the level of their activity and the features and options available to them. These e-procurement tools help customers control costs and potentially eliminate the need for enterprise-wide e-procurement systems.
Under the e-B2B Partner Program, Software Spectrum supportspartners with e-procurement providers, such as Ariba and Perfect Commerce to support customers' implementations of the various e-procurement platforms in an effort to streamline procurement processes and improve operational efficiencies. Software Spectrum was the first among its competitors to achieve the "Ariba Ready" distinction, an award that certifies an organization's e-commerce expertise, and has served as an advisor to the leading e-procurement organizations.
Publications. Software Spectrum's customer magazine, In Touch, provides new product information and case studies from existing customers who are implementing the latest products and technologies from the leading software publishers worldwide and offers the latest news and commentary on industry trends and Company sponsored seminars and other technology-related events.
Software Spectrum prepares and distributes an annual publication, which includes in-depth analysis of various product offerings, called the Licensing and Software Management Guide. This publication provides comprehensive information on the many facets of software licensing. The Licensing and Software Management Guide provides the purchasing requirements and qualification restrictions of the numerous VLM publisher programs. Issues such as concurrent licensing and copying software on home or laptop computers are identified. Because of the potential savings a corporation can realize by utilizing alternative procurement methods, customers have expressed a significant amount of interest in this publication, and it has been made available online.
Software Spectrum's web site contains company news and information designed to educate customers about Software Spectrum's areas of expertise, its products (including third-party reviews) and services, the publishers represented by Software Spectrum and the latest trends in the industry. Software Spectrum also provides information through various Company publications. A portion of the marketing funds provided to Software Spectrum by publishers is used to offset Software Spectrum's cost of producing these publications. Software Spectrum publishes newsletters, service and product brochures and product catalogs and also provides other timely information coincident with major product releases.
Contact Services. Software Spectrum provides telephone and Internet-based contact services on behalf of software publishers, Internet service providers, original equipment manufacturers and other organizations. Services are provided through Software Spectrum's facilities in Dallas, Texas; Spokane, Washington; Tampa, Florida; Eugene, Oregon and Dublin, Ireland. Software Spectrum's commitment to management strength, technology and service is critical in meeting the needs of its clients.
Software Spectrum's technical support services cover a number of technologies, including desktop applications and operating systems and network operating systems. The staff in Software Spectrum's contact centers are experienced in over fifty major software applications and can provide support for software products running on most major operating systems and environments, including Windows 2000, Windows 98, Macintosh, Microsoft Windows NT, Novell NetWare and other network operating systems.
Software Spectrum provides services using several different media including telephone, e-mail and the Internet. Software Spectrum's contact centers employ advanced technology that includes digital
32
switching and skill-based call routing. This technology enables Software Spectrum to optimize its call handling and personnel scheduling, thereby increasing its efficiency and enhancing the quality of the services it provides to its clients and their customers. Software Spectrum maintains a series of online knowledge bases that support the contact services representatives. In addition, contact services representatives are typically able to access knowledge bases owned and maintained by Software Spectrum's clients. The contact centers include large capacity file servers, multiple CD ROM databases and other resources that enable Software Spectrum's contact services personnel to recreate a customer's individual problem, develop a solution, and guide the customer through the solution on a step-by-step basis.
Software Spectrum focuses on creating customized solutions that meet each client's specialized needs while minimizing their total support costs. Each account has a dedicated account management team, including an operations manager and an account manager. The operations manager takes full responsibility for tactical operations and is responsible for effective, ongoing communication with the client. The account manager is responsible for facilitating all financial discussions, completing monthly and quarterly business reviews and assisting clients with account growth and development. The account management team works together to explore ways to increase customer satisfaction and provide additional value to the client.
Software Spectrum's contact services representatives are monitored by a team of professional quality specialists located at each domestic contact center. Using criteria mutually developed by Software Spectrum and the client, the quality assurance professionals monitor, evaluate and provide feedback to the representatives on a regular basis. The quality assurance team analyzes quality trends, reports potential areas of concern, identifies improvement opportunities and assists management in capitalizing on these opportunities. In addition, Software Spectrum's major clients also survey a statistically significant percentage of customers to gain feedback on their customer service experiences. The results of these surveys are reviewed regularly and used to enhance training and development initiatives.
Software Spectrum's ability to provide high quality technical support and customer service solutions depends upon its success in recruiting, hiring and training large numbers of skilled employees. Each contact services representative is trained and certified internally for customer service skills and knowledge of the client's specific product and/or service offerings prior to interacting with the client's customers. Software Spectrum also provides ongoing on-site and computer-based training to allow representatives to further enhance their skills.
Software Spectrum management, along with Level 3 management, continue to review Software Spectrum's existing lines of business to determine how those lines of business assist with the Company's focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching consolidated free cash flow breakeven. To the extent that certain lines of business are not considered to be compatible with the delivery of communication and information services or with obtaining cash flow objectives, Software Spectrum may exit those lines of businesses.
Sales and Marketing
Software Spectrum sells and markets its products and services to existing and potential large customers through its account executives, customer service representatives and its marketing and support staff, as well as its Internet site. Software Spectrum organizes account management teams to serve and support each of its customers' needs. Generally, each team consists of one account executive, supported by technical, marketing, customer service and sales support personnel at Software Spectrum's operations centers, as well as Web-based self-service capabilities. Software Spectrum's contact services offerings are marketed and sold by a dedicated team of account executives that focus exclusively on custom contact services solutions for potential customers.
3334
In its product business,
Account executives work directly with senior and mid-level procurement managers, IT managers and computer support managers of existing and potential customers to identify the specific needs of each customer and to facilitate the purchase of software products and services by the customer's organization. Account executives maintain close contact with customers in order to provide them with timely communications and assistance with any special or strategic requests. Account executives are responsible for providing customers with useful and relevant product information to assist the customer in its selection of software available for the desired application, providing customers with information and guidance on software procurement options including VLM agreements, implementation and deployment of software under VLM agreements and planning product presentations and seminars by representatives of Software Spectrum and publishers.
Software Spectrum's licensing consultantsaccount executives leverage its sales support personnel with expertise in VLM to work with its customers to provide advice and consultation on VLM programs and to produce detailed customer account analysis and reporting. Software Spectrum also assigns a team of customer service representatives to each product account.account, generally with each customer having a dedicated team member as its primary contact. Customer service representatives, who are based primarily at Software Spectrum's operations centers, handle all aspects of the day-to-day customer account servicing, including common presale questions, customer order placement, order status inquiries, requests for demonstration products for evaluation and searches for hard-to-find products. They also help customers perform many of these functions directly by guiding them through the variety of options available on Software Spectrum's Web site. This structure enables customer service representatives to develop close relationships with individuals within the customer's organization and to better serve them by being familiar with their account. By assigning a specific team of customer service representatives to specific customers, Software Spectrum adds additional direct contacts that reinforce customer relationships.
To solicit software business from small to mid-sized organizations, Software Spectrum utilizes a coordinated effort from fieldfield-based telephone sales and outbound telephone-based sales representatives located in major geographic markets, as well as a network of business partners who provide technical services to mid-sizedsuch customers. While product price and delivery terms are key factors in small to mid-sized organizations, Software Spectrum also provides a broad range of VLM agreement support and services to this category of customers. Initial contact and sales are made typically through field sales,engagement, telephone inquiries, or business partner referrals. Software Spectrum interfaces with smaller customers via outbound telephone inquiries as well asreferrals or Web-based self-service offerings.
Software Spectrum has established relationships with many of the leading electronic procurement companies including Ariba and Commerce One.Perfect Commerce. These e-procurement companies serve a broad base of businesses in many markets and allow Software Spectrum to expand its customer base by opening new customer relationships with little added expense.
Software Spectrum sells its telephone and Internet-based contact services through a dedicated sales force, which focuses on the types of organizations who most often require such services. Software publishers typically outsource some or all of their telephone support on some portion of their product offerings, which allows Software Spectrum to leverage its existing relationships with software publishers.
34
Software Spectrum's market for contact services also extends to a number of other organizations, including Internet service providers and original equipment manufacturers.
Support Systems
Software Spectrum has developed certain proprietary support systems that facilitate the delivery of products and services to its customers and has invested in technology-based systems to support the special requirements necessary to service VLM agreements for its customers. iCARE, a custom,Software Spectrum's
35
customized web-based customer service system is written in Microsoft ASP.NEt, provides individualized contract management data, assists customers in complying with the terms of their VLM agreements and provides customers with necessary reporting mechanisms. Using individualized data in iCARE,this system, in conjunction with Software Spectrum's contract management database, Software Spectrum's representatives can guide a customer through the various purchasing options and assist in administering VLM agreements. iCAREThe system also provides Software Spectrum's customer service representatives with a customer profile, account status, order status and product pricing and availability details.
Products and Distribution
The software products offered by Software Spectrum include all major business programs for the desktop and server environment including strategic product categories for security storage and Web infrastructure. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, the top 10 software titles sold by Software Spectrum represented approximately 90%50% of Software Spectrum's net software sales.
In North America, Software Spectrum has outsourced substantially all of the fulfillment of shrink-wrapped software for its customers to Ingram Micro, Inc., a leading technology distributor. Under this arrangement, Ingram Micro provides distribution services for product purchased directly from Ingram Micro as well as for odd and hard to find product purchased elsewhere by Software Spectrum. The agreement with Ingram Micro extends through December 2003.March 2004.
Outside of North America, Software Spectrum uses the services of distributors or publishers to ship shrink-wrapped products directly to its customers, usually the same day Software Spectrum receives the order. As of December 31, 2002,2003, Software Spectrum did not have a significant order backlog.
Customers
In 2002,2003, Software Spectrum handled more than 12,000approximately 5,500 active customer accounts. Software Spectrum's customer base includes corporations, government agencies, educational institutions, non-profit organizations and other business entities. Sales contracts with large customers for the procurement of products generally cover a one to three year period subject to the customers' rights to terminate the contract upon notice. These contracts usually include provisions regarding price, availability, payment terms and return policies. Standard payment terms with Software Spectrum's customers are net 30 days from the date of invoice or net 10 days in the case of summary periodic billings to customers. In 2002,2003, no single customer represented more than 5% of Software Spectrum's revenues,revenue, and Software Spectrum's customer base included approximately 350325 of the calendar year 20022003 Fortune 500 companies and approximately 250275 of the Fortune Global 500500® companies. Software Spectrum does not believe that the loss of any single customer would have a material adverse effect on its revenues.revenue.
Software Spectrum's contact services business is currently concentrated among three key customers. Loss of any of these customers could have a material adverse effect on Software Spectrum's profitability, but will not have a material adverse effect on Level 3's consolidated revenues or profitability.
35
Vendors
Software Spectrum's software sales are derived from products purchased from publishers and distributors. The decision whether to buy products directly from publishers or through distributors is determined on a vendor-by-vendor basis based on publisher requirements, cost, availability, return privileges and demand for a particular product. For 2002,2003, approximately 89%86% of Software Spectrum's product sales, based on revenues,revenue, represented products purchased from its ten largest publishers. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, products from Microsoft and IBM/Lotus accounted for approximately 68%60% and 10% of net software sales,revenue, respectively.
Software Spectrum has contractual relationships with all its major vendors covering price, payment terms and return privileges. These contracts are non-exclusive and are generally terminable by either
36
party without cause upon 30 to 60 days notice. Software Spectrum's contracts with its major vendors are generally for one or two-year terms, and the majority contain no provision for automatic renewal.
Publisher contracts generally permit Software Spectrum to submit adjustment reports for licensing and maintenance transactions within a certain time period after the transaction is reported. Such contracts do not typically require Software Spectrum to ensure end-user compliance with its publishers' licensing and copyright or patent right protection provisions. Certain of Software Spectrum's contracts with vendors provide for early payment discounts. Under the terms of its vendor contracts, Software Spectrum is not generally required to meet any minimum purchase or sales requirements, except to the extent that Software Spectrum's level of purchases or sales may affect the amount or availability of financial incentives, advertising allowances and marketing funds. The reduction in amount, discontinuance of, or Software Spectrum's inability to meet requirements established by vendors for achieving financial incentives, advertising allowances and marketing funds could have an adverse effect on Software Spectrum's business and financial results, and may have an adverse effect on Level 3's consolidated financial results.
Competition
The software market is intensely competitive. With respect to its product services business, Software Spectrum faces competition from a wide variety of sources, including "software-only" resellers,software and hardware resellers, and manufacturers and large systems integrators. Current competitors from the software-only reseller category would include ASAP Software and Softwarehouse International. Software Spectrum believes that its global presence and capabilities, VLM expertise, services and systems that support Software Spectrum's business, including Internet services, and knowledgeable, industry-experienced personnel serve to distinguish it from its competitors.
Competitors also include hardware resellersmanufacturers and manufacturers.large systems integrators. These companies compete in the large and mid-size organization markets with marketing efforts to provide customers with software and hardware services.efforts. Such competitors include Dell Computer Corporation and Hewlett Packard Corporation, hardware manufacturers that also sell software, and systems integrators such as Compucom Systems, Inc. Many of these companies do have a global presence. Software Spectrum believes its VLM expertise and services, software-focused solutions, custom computing systems specifically designed to support Software Spectrum's business and knowledgeable industry-experienced personnel are differentiating factors in this group of competitors.
In the global contact services market, Software Spectrum competes with a variety of companies including Convergys Corporation, TeleTech Holdings, Inc., SITEL Corporation, Stream International, Inc. and Sykes Enterprises Incorporated. Software Spectrum competes in this market based primarily on the quality of services provided and cost. Many of Software Spectrum's competitors have significantly greater financial resources than Software Spectrum. However, Software Spectrum believes that its emphasis on training and quality programs, and its focus on high customer satisfaction at a reasonable cost, allow Software Spectrum to compete effectively in this highly competitive market. In order to compete effectively in the contact services business, it will be necessary to continue to
36
invest in new technologies that increase customer satisfaction and allow integrated telephone, self-help, chat and e-mail solutions. In addition, businesses wishing to outsource their customer contact and support operations are increasingly examining ways to reduce labor costs by outsourcing such services outside of the United States.
The manner in which software products are distributed and sold is continually changing and new methods of distribution may emerge or expand. Software publishers may intensify their efforts to sell their products directly to end-users, including current and potential customers of Software Spectrum, without utilizing services such as those provided by Software Spectrum. In the past, direct sales from software publishers to end-users have not been significant, although end-users have traditionally been able to purchase upgrades directly from publishers. From time to time, some publishers have instituted programs for the direct sale of large order quantities of software to major corporate accounts, and Software Spectrum anticipates that these types of transactions will continue to be used by various publishers in the future. Software Spectrum could be adversely affected if major software publishers successfully implement or expand programs for the direct sale of software through volume purchase agreements or other arrangements intended to exclude the resale channel. Software Spectrum believes that the total range of services it provides to its customers cannot be easily substituted by publishers, particularly because publishers do not offer the scope of services or product offerings required by most of Software Spectrum's customers. However, there can be no assurance that publishers will not increase their efforts to sell substantial quantities of software directly to end-users without engaging Software Spectrum to provide value-added services. In addition, the use of VLM agreements by organizations as a method to purchase software has become widely accepted. Should publishers permit others to sell VLM agreements, or should additional competitors develop the capabilities required to service and support large licensing programs, Software Spectrum's competitive advantage could be negatively impacted. If the resale channel's participation in VLM agreements is reduced or eliminated, or if other
37
methods of distribution of software become common, Software Spectrum's business and financial results could be materially adversely affected. Software Spectrum currently delivers a limited amount of software through electronic software distribution and intends to continue to participate in this method of software distribution as demand for this service by large organizations emerges and as communications technology improvements permit electronic software distribution to be made securely and efficiently. Software Spectrum's continuing investment in e-procurement reflects Software Spectrum's commitment to meeting the changing needs of its customers.
(i)Structure
Level 3 currently offers, through its subsidiary (i)Structure, Inc. (formerly PKS Information Services, Inc.),LLC, computer operations outsourcing to customers located primarily in the United States.
((i)i)Structure is an information technology, or IT, infrastructure outsourcing company that provides managed computer infrastructure services across OS/390, AS/400iSeries™ and NT/UNIXUNIX® platforms in its data centers located in Omaha, Nebraska and Tempe, Arizona. The company enables businesses to outsource costly IT operations and benefit from secure, cost-effective, managed services that scale to meet changing needs.
Services
The computer outsourcing services offered by the Company include networking and computing services necessary for older mainframe-based systems and newer client/server-based systems. The Company provides its outsourcing services to clients that want to focus their resources on core businesses, rather than expend capital and incur overhead costs to operate their own computing environments. (i)Structure believes that it is able to utilize its expertise and experience, as well as operating efficiencies, to provide its outsourcing customers with levels of service equal to or better than those achievable by the customers themselves, while at the same time reducing the customers' cost for
37
such services. This service is particularly useful for those customers moving from older computing platforms to more modern client/server platforms.
((i)i)Structure offers reengineering services that allow companies to convert older legacy software systems to modern networked computing systems, with a focus on reengineering software to enable older software application and data repositories to be accessed by web browsers over the Internet or over private or limited access Internet Protocol networks. (i)Structure also provides customers with a combination of workbench tools and methodologies that provide a complete strategy for converting mainframe-based application systems to client/server architecture.
(i)Structure management, along with Level 3 management, continue to review (i)Structure'sStructure management continues to review its existing lines of business to determine how those lines of business assist with the Company'sits focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching consolidated free cash flow breakeven.meeting its financial objectives. To the extent that certain lines of business are not considered to be compatible with the delivery of communicationcommunications and information services or with obtaining cash flowfinancial objectives, (i)Structure may exit those lines of businesses.business.
Sales and Marketing
((i)i)Structure's outsourcing sales are relationship orientedoriented. (i)Structure's selling and relationship management organization includes six Sales Directors and eight Account Managers. In addition, (i)Structure has a team of ten Sales Directors within the United States.senior management teams are directly involved in new and existing customer relationships. Sales activities are focused on new sales in geographic territories, major accounts, sales to existing customers and channel sales. To support outsourcing sales, (i)Structure partners with companies that provide integration and application services. The marketing activities of the company include: collateral, web marketing, industry conferences and direct marketing programs.
The information technology infrastructure outsourcing market is highly competitive. There are few barriers to entry for new entrants with access to capital. Companies compete on reliability of their data centers, knowledge and competency of technical staff, quality of service and price. Large competitors have many resources available to them including longer operating history, name recognition, greater financial resources, large installed customer base and established industry relationships. These competitors may also be able to provide services outside of the data center, which can be used in pricing negotiations. (i)Structure prices competitively, but larger companies may be able to more effectively compete on price to obtain the potential customer's business.
At present, (i)Structure's competitors in the information technology infrastructure outsourcing market include:
In addition, (i)Structure offers certain application software services to customers primarily in Europe. The market for these application services is highly competitive and there are few barriers to entry. Companies are competing on the usefulness of their intellectual property, knowledge and competency of technical staff, quality of service and price. Large competitors have many resources available to them including longer operating history, name recognition, greater financial resources, large installed customer base and established industry relationships. At present, (i)Structure's competitors in the application software services market include European software development businesses and IT service companies such as S1 Inc., Bottomline Technologies, Inc. and Eontec.
38
The Company's Other Businesses
The Company was incorporated as Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. in Delaware in 1941 to continue a construction business founded in Omaha, Nebraska in 1884. In subsequent years, the Company invested a portion of the cash flow generated by its construction activities in a variety of other businesses. The Company entered the coal mining business in 1943, the telecommunications business (consisting of MFS and, more recently, an investment in C-TEC Corporation and its successors RCN Corporation, Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. and Cable Michigan, Inc.) in 1988, the information services business in 1990 and the alternative energy business, through an investment in MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, in 1991. Level 3 also has made investments in several development-stage ventures.
In 1995, the Company distributed to the holders of Class D Stock all of its shares of MFS. In the seven years from 1988 to 1995, the Company invested approximately $500 million in MFS; at the time of the distribution to stockholders in 1995, the Company's holdings in MFS had a market value of approximately $1.75 billion. In December 1996, MFS was purchased by WorldCom in a transaction valued at $14.3 billion. In December 1997, the Company's stockholders ratified the decision of the Board to effect the split-off separating the Construction Group. As a result of the split-off, which was completed on March 31, 1998, the Company no longer owns any interest in the Construction Group. In conjunction with the split-off, the Company changed its name to "Level 3 Communications, Inc.," and the Construction Group changed its name to "Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc."
In January 1998, the Company completed the sale to MidAmerican of its energy investments, consisting primarily of a 24% equity interest in MidAmerican. The Company received proceeds of approximately $1.16 billion from this sale, and as a result recognized an after-tax gain of approximately $324 million in 1998. In November 1998, Avalon Cable of Michigan, Inc. acquired all the outstanding stock of Cable Michigan. Level 3 received approximately $129 million in cash for its interest in Cable Michigan and recognized a pre-tax gain of approximately $90 million.
The Company's other businesses include its investment in the C-TEC Companies (as defined), coal mining, the SR91 Tollroad (as defined) and certain other assets. In 1998, the Company completed the sale of its interests in United Infrastructure Company, MidAmerican and Kiewit Investment Management Corp.
C-TEC Companies
On September 30, 1997, C-TEC completed a tax-free restructuring, which divided C-TECRCN Corporation into three public companies (the "C-TEC Companies"("RCN"): C-TEC, which changed its name to, Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. ("Commonwealth Telephone"), RCN Corporation ("RCN")coal mining, and Cable Michigan, Inc. ("Cable Michigan"). The Company's interests in the C-TEC Companies are held through a holding company (the "C-TEC Holding Company"). The Company owns 100% of the capital stock of the C-TEC Holding Company. Prior to February 2002, a portion of the common stock of the C-TEC Holding Company, that is, 10%, was held by David C. McCourt, a director of the Company who was formerly the Chairman of C-TEC. In February 2002, Mr. McCourt sold his interest in the C-TEC Holding Company to a subsidiary of the Company for a total of $15 million.certain other assets.
Commonwealth Telephone. Commonwealth Telephone is a Pennsylvania public utility providing local telephone service to a 19-county, 5,191 square mile service territory in Pennsylvania.
39
Commonwealth Telephone also provides network access and long distance services to IXCs. Commonwealth Telephone's business customer base is diverse in size as well as industry, with very little concentration. A subsidiary, Commonwealth Communications Inc. provides telecommunications engineering and technical services to large corporate clients, hospitals and universities in the northeastern United States. Another subsidiary, Commonwealth Long Distance operates principally in
39
Pennsylvania, providing switched services and resale of several types of services, using the networks of several long distance providers on a wholesale basis.
During 2002, the Company sold all of its shares of common stock of Commonwealth Telephone in two underwritten public offerings. The Company has retained, however, approximately 1.0 million shares of Class B Common Stock of Commonwealth Telephone, which representswas converted into approximately 50%1.1 million shares of common stock during the outstanding Class B Common Stock, representingthird quarter 2003. In January 2004, the Company sold its remaining shares of common stock of Commonwealth Telephone in a private sale to an institutional investor. The Company received proceeds of approximately 29% of the total voting power.$41 million from this sale.
RCN. RCN's primary business is delivering bundled communications services to residential customers over its broadband network, which is predominantly owned by RCN, including through joint ventures and majority owned subsidiaries, to 7 of the 10 most densely populated areas of the country.subsidiaries. RCN is currently operating in Boston, including 18 surrounding communities, New York City, Philadelphia suburbs, Washington D.C., and certain suburbs, Chicago, San Francisco, and certain suburbs and certain communities in Los Angeles. RCN also serves the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania. RCN believes that it is the first company in many of its markets to offer one-stop shopping for Phone, Cable TV and High-Speed cable modem Internet services to residential customers. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the C-TEC Holding Company owned through indirect subsidiaries approximately 24%22% of the outstanding common stock of RCN.
Cable Michigan. Cable Michigan was a cable television operator in the State of Michigan. On June 4, 1998, Cable Michigan announced that it had agreed to be acquired by Avalon Cable. Level 3 received approximately $129 million in cash when the transaction closed on November 6, 1998.
Coal Mining
The Company is engaged in coal mining through its subsidiary, KCP, Inc. ("KCP"). KCP has a 50% interest in two mines, which are operated by a subsidiary of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. ("New PKS"). Decker Coal Company ("Decker") is a joint venture with Western Minerals, Inc., a subsidiary of The RTZ Corporation PLC. Black Butte Coal Company ("Black Butte") is a joint venture with Western Minerals, Inc.,Bitter Creek Coal Company, a subsidiary of The RTZ Corporation PLC.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. The Decker mine is located in southeastern Montana and the Black Butte mine is in southwestern Wyoming. The coal mines use the surface mining method.
In September 2000, the Company sold its entire 50% ownership interest in the Walnut Creek Mining Company to a subsidiary of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. for cash of $37 million.
The coal produced from the KCP mines is sold primarily to electric utilities, which burn coal in order to produce steam to generate electricity. Approximately 92%96% of sales arein 2003 were made under long-term contracts, and the remainder are made on the spot market. Approximately 59%, 62%, 60% and 75%60% of KCP's revenuesrevenue in 2003, 2002, 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively, were derived from long-term contracts with Commonwealth Edison Company (with Decker and Black Butte) and The Detroit Edison Company (with Decker). KCP also has other sales commitments, including those with Sierra Pacific, Idaho Power, Kennecott Utah Copper, Solvay Minerals, Pacific Power & Light and Minnesota Power, that provide for the delivery of approximately 1114.5 million tons through 2009. The level of cash flows generated in recent periods by the Company's coal operations will not continue after the year 2000 because the delivery requirements under the Company's current long-termlong- term contracts decline significantly. Under a mine management agreement, KCP pays a subsidiary of New PKS an annual fee equal to 30% of KCP's adjusted operating income. The fee for 20022003 was $7$5 million.
The coal industry is highly competitive. KCP competes not only with other domestic and foreign coal suppliers, some of whom are larger and have greater capital resources than KCP, but also with alternative methods of generating electricity and alternative energy sources. In 2002, the most recent year for which information is available, KCP's production represented 1.2%approximately 1% of total U.S. coal production. Demand for KCP's coal is affected by economic, political and regulatory factors. For example, recent "clean air" laws may stimulate demand for low sulfur coal. KCP's western coal reserves
40
generally have a low sulfur content (less than one percent) and are currently useful principally as fuel for coal-fired, steam-electric generating units.
KCP's sales of its western coal, like sales by other western coal producers, typically provide for delivery to customers at the mine. A significant portion of the customer's delivered cost of coal is attributable to transportation costs. Most of the coal sold from KCP's western mines is currently shipped by rail to utilities outside Montana and Wyoming. The Decker and Black Butte mines are each served by a single railroad. Many of their western coal competitors are served by two railroads and such competitors' customers often benefit from lower transportation costs because of competition between railroads for coal hauling business. Other western coal producers, particularly those in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming, have lower stripping ratios (that is, the amount of overburden that must be removed in proportion to the amount of minable coal) than the Black Butte and Decker mines, often resulting in lower comparative costs of production. As a result, KCP's production costs per ton of coal at the Black Butte and Decker mines can be as much as four and five times greater than production costs of certain competitors. KCP's production cost disadvantage has contributed to its agreement to amend its long-term contract with Commonwealth Edison Company to provide for delivery of coal from alternate source mines rather than from Black Butte. Because of these cost disadvantages, KCP does not expectthere is no assurance that itKCP will be able to enter into additional long-term coal purchase contracts for Black Butte and Decker production as the current long-term contracts expire.production. In addition, these cost disadvantages may adversely affect KCP's ability to compete for spot sales in the future.
The Company is required to comply with various federal, state and local laws and regulations concerning protection of the environment. KCP's share of land reclamation expenses for the year ended December 31, 20022003 was approximately $3 million.$4.5 million, excluding the prior period adjustment related to FASB 143 implementation. KCP's share of accrued estimated reclamation costs was $93$88 million at December 31, 2002.2003. The Company did not make significant capital expenditures for environmental compliance with respect to the coal business in 2002.2003. The Company believes its compliance with environmental protection and land restoration laws will not affect its competitive position since its competitors in the mining industry are similarly affected by such laws. However, failure to comply with environmental protection and land restoration laws, or actual reclamation costs in excess of the Company's accruals, could have an adverse effect on the Company's business, results of operations, and financial condition.
SR91 Tollroad
The Company has invested $13.3 million for a 65% equity interest and lent approximately $8.8 million to California Private Transportation Company L.P. ("CPTC"), which developed, financed, and currently operates the 91 Express Lanes, a ten mile, four-lane tollroad in Orange County, California (the "SR91 Tollroad"). The fully automated highway uses an electronic toll collection system and variable pricing to adjust tolls to demand.
Capital costs at completion were $130 million, $110 million of which was funded with debt that was not guaranteed by Level 3. Revenue collected over the 35-year franchise period is used for operating expenses, debt repayment, and profit distributions. The SR91 Tollroad opened in December 1995.
On January 3, 2003, Level 3 received approximately $46 million in cash from the sale of the SR 91 Tollroad. In addition, the Company's long-term debt was reduced by approximately $139 million. The Orange County Transportation Authority purchased the toll road from the CPTC, for $207.5 million in cash and assumed debt. Level 3 received proceeds from the sale because it is a 65 percent owner of CPTC.
41
Glossary of Terms
| access | Telecommunications services that permit long distance carriers to use local exchange facilities to originate and/or terminate long distance service. | |
access charges | The fees paid by long distance carriers to LECs for originating and terminating long distance calls on the LECs' local networks. | |
backbone | A high-speed network that interconnects smaller, independent networks. It is the through-portion of a transmission network, as opposed to spurs which branch off the through-portions. | |
CAP | Competitive Access Provider. A company that provides its customers with an alternative to the local exchange company for local transport of private line and special access telecommunications services. | |
capacity | The information carrying ability of a telecommunications facility. | |
Carrier | A provider of communications transmission services by fiber, wire or radio. | |
Central Office | Telephone company facility where subscribers' lines are joined to switching equipment for connecting other subscribers to each other, locally and long distance. | |
CLEC | Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. A company that competes with LECs in the local services market. | |
co-carrier | A relationship between a CLEC and an ILEC that affords each company the same access to and right on the other's network and provides access and services on an equal basis. | |
common carrier | A government-defined group of private companies offering telecommunications services or facilities to the general public on a non-discriminatory basis. | |
conduit | A pipe, usually made of metal, ceramic or plastic, that protects buried cables. | |
DS-3 | A data communications circuit capable of transmitting data at 45 Mbps. | |
dark fiber | Fiber optic strands that are not connected to transmission equipment. | |
dedicated lines | Telecommunications lines reserved for use by particular customers. | |
dialing parity | The ability of a competing local or toll service provider to provide telecommunications services in such a manner that customers have the ability to route automatically, without the use of any access code, their telecommunications to the service provider of the customers' designation. | |
42
equal access | The basis upon which customers of interexchange carriers are able to obtain access to their Primary Interexchange Carriers' (PIC) long distance telephone network by dialing "1", thus eliminating the need to dial additional digits and an authorization code to obtain such access. | |
facilities based carriers | Carriers that own and operate their own network and equipment. | |
42
fiber optics | A technology in which light is used to transport information from one point to another. Fiber optic cables are thin filaments of glass through which light beams are transmitted over long distances carrying enormous amounts of data. Modulating light on thin strands of glass produces major benefits including high bandwidth, relatively low cost, low power consumption, small space needs and total insensitivity to electromagnetic interference. | |
Gbps | Gigabits per second. A transmission rate. One gigabit equals 1.024 billion bits of information. | |
ILEC | Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier. A company historically providing local telephone service. Often refers to one of the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs). Often referred to as "LEC" (Local Exchange Carrier). | |
Interconnection | Interconnection of facilities between or among the networks of carriers, including potential physical colocation of one carrier's equipment in the other carrier's premises to facilitate such interconnection. | |
InterLATA | Telecommunications services originating in a LATA and terminating outside of that LATA. | |
Internet | A global collection of interconnected computer networks which use a specific communications protocol. | |
IntraLATA | Telecommunications services originating and terminating in the same LATA. | |
ISDN | Integrated Services Digital Network. An information transfer standard for transmitting digital voice and data over telephone lines at speeds up to 128 Kbps. | |
ISPs | Internet Service Providers. Companies formed to provide access to the Internet to consumers and business customers via local networks. | |
IXC | Interexchange Carrier. A telecommunications company that provides telecommunications services between local exchanges on an interstate or intrastate basis. | |
Kbps | Kilobits per second. A transmission rate. One kilobit equals 1,024 bits of information. | |
43
LATA | Local Access and Transport Area. A geographic area composed of contiguous local exchanges, usually but not always within a single state. There are approximately 200 LATAs in the United States. | |
leased line | An amount of telecommunications capacity dedicated to a particular customer along predetermined routes. | |
LEC | Local Exchange Carrier. A telecommunications company that provides telecommunications services in a | |
43
local exchange | A geographic area determined by the appropriate state regulatory authority in which calls generally are transmitted without toll charges to the calling or called party. | |
local loop | A circuit that connects an end user to the LEC central office within a LATA. | |
long distance carriers | Long distance carriers provide services between local exchanges on an interstate or intrastate basis. A long distance carrier may offer services over its own or another carrier's facilities. | |
Mbps | Megabits per second. A transmission rate. One megabit equals 1.024 million bits of information. | |
MPLS | MultiProtocol Label Switching. A standards-approved technology for speeding up network traffic flow and making it easier to manage. MPLS involves setting up a specific path for a given sequence of packets, identified by a label put in each packet, thus saving the time needed for a router or switch to look up the address to the next node to forward the packet to. | |
multiplexing | An electronic or optical process that combines a large number of lower speed transmission lines into one high speed line by splitting the total available bandwidth into narrower bands (frequency division), or by allotting a common channel to several different transmitting devices, one at a time in sequence (time division). | |
NAP | Network Access Point. A location at which ISPs exchange traffic with each other. | |
OC-3 | A data communications circuit capable of transmitting data at 155 Mbps. | |
OC-12 | A data communications circuit capable of transmitting data at 622 Mbps. | |
OC-48 | A data communications circuit capable of transmitting data at approximately 2.45 Gbps. | |
44
peering | The commercial practice under which ISPs exchange traffic with each other. Although ISPs are free to make a private commercial arrangement, there are generally two types of peering. With a settlement free peering arrangement the ISPs do not need to pay each other for the exchange of traffic. With paid peering, the larger ISP receives payment from the smaller ISP to carry the traffic of that smaller ISP. Peering occurs at both public and private exchange points. | |
POP | Point of Presence. Telecommunications facility where a communications provider locates network equipment used to connect customers to its network backbone. | |
private line | A dedicated telecommunications connection between end user locations. | |
44
PSTN | Public Switched Telephone Network. That portion of a local exchange company's network available to all users generally on a shared basis (i.e., not dedicated to a particular user). Traffic along the public switched network is generally switched at the local exchange company's central offices. | |
RBOCs | Regional Bell Operating Companies. Originally, the seven local telephone companies (formerly part of AT&T) established as a result of the AT&T Divestiture. Currently consists of four local telephone companies as a result of the mergers of Bell Atlantic with NYNEX and SBC with Pacific Telesis and Ameritech. | |
reciprocal compensation | The compensation of a CLEC for termination of a local call by the ILEC on the CLEC's network, which is the same as the compensation that the CLEC pays the ILEC for termination of local calls on the ILEC's network. | |
resale | Resale by a provider of telecommunications services (such as a LEC) of such services to other providers or carriers on a wholesale or a retail basis. | |
router | Equipment placed between networks that relays data to those networks based upon a destination address contained in the data packets being routed. | |
SONET | Synchronous Optical Network. An electronics and network architecture for variable bandwidth products which enables transmission of voice, data and video (multimedia) at very high speeds. SONET ring architecture provides for virtually instantaneous restoration of service in the event of a fiber cut or equipment failure by automatically rerouting traffic in the opposite direction around the ring. | |
45
special access services | The lease of private, dedicated telecommunications lines or "circuits" along the network of a local exchange company or a CAP, which lines or circuits run to or from the long distance carrier POPs. Examples of special access services are telecommunications lines running between POPs of a single long distance carrier, from one long distance carrier POP to the POP of another long distance carrier or from an end user to a long distance carrier POP. | |
switch | A device that selects the paths or circuits to be used for transmission of information and establishes a connection. Switching is the process of interconnecting circuits to form a transmission path between users and it also captures information for billing purposes. | |
Tbps | Terabits per second. A transmission rate. One terabit equals 1.024 trillion bits of information. | |
T-1 | A data communications circuit capable of transmitting data at 1.544 Mbps. | |
unbundled | Services, programs, software and training sold separately from the hardware. | |
45
unbundled access | Access to unbundled elements of a telecommunications services provider's network including network facilities, equipment, features, functions and capabilities, at any technically feasible point within such network. | |
web site | A server connected to the Internet from which Internet users can obtain information. | |
wireless | A communications system that operates without wires. Cellular service is an example. | |
world wide web or web | A collection of computer systems supporting a communications protocol that permits multimedia presentation of information over the Internet. | |
xDSL | A term referring to a variety of new Digital Subscriber Line technologies. Some of these new varieties are asymmetric with different data rates in the downstream and upstream directions. Others are symmetric. Downstream speeds range from 384 Kbps (or "SDSL") to 1.5 to 8 Mbps ("ADSL"). |
46
Directors and Executive Officers
Set forth below is information as of March 17, 2003,10, 2004, about each director and each executive officer of the Company. The executive officers of the Company have been determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC.
| Name | Age | Position | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Walter Scott, Jr.(1) | Chairman of the Board | |||
| James Q. | Chief Executive Officer and Director | |||
| Kevin J. O'Hara | President and Chief Operating Officer | |||
| Charles C. Miller, III | Vice Chairman of the Board and Executive Vice President | |||
| Group Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||||
| Thomas C. Stortz | ||||
| Mogens C. | Director | |||
| Richard R. | Director | |||
| Robert E. | Director | |||
| David C. McCourt | Director | |||
| Arun Netravali(3) | 57 | Director | ||
| John T. | ||||
| 60 | Director | |||
| Colin V.K. Williams | Director | |||
| Michael B. | Director |
Other Management
Set forth below is information as of March 17, 2003,10, 2004, about the following members of senior management of the Company.Level 3 Communications, LLC, except as otherwise noted.
| Name | Age | Position | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linda J. Adams | Group Vice President | |||
| Donald H. Gips | ||||
| Group Vice President | ||||
| John Neil Hobbs | Group Vice President | |||
| Joseph M. Howell, III | Group Vice President | |||
| Michael D. Jones | Chief Executive Officer | |||
| Group Vice President | ||||
| Group Vice President | ||||
| Group Vice President | ||||
| Group Vice President | ||||
| John F. Waters, Jr. | 38 | Executive Vice President, Chief Technology Officer |
Walter Scott, Jr. has been the Chairman of the Board of the Company since September 1979, and a director of the Company since April 1964. Mr. Scott has been Chairman Emeritus of Peter Kiewit
47
Sons', Inc. ("PKS") since the split-off. Mr. Scott is also a director of PKS, Berkshire Hathaway Inc., Burlington Resources Inc., MidAmerican, ConAgra Foods, Inc., Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. ("Commonwealth Telephone"), RCN Corporation ("RCN") and Valmont Industries, Inc. Mr. Scott is also the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors.
James Q. Crowe has been the Chief Executive Officer of the Company since August 1997, and a director of the Company since June 1993. Mr. Crowe was also President of the Company until
47
February 2000. Mr. Crowe was President and Chief Executive Officer of MFS Communications Company, Inc. ("MFS") from June 1993 to June 1997. Mr. Crowe also served as Chairman of the Board of WorldCom from January 1997 until July 1997, and as Chairman of the Board of MFS from 1992 through 1996. Mr. Crowe is presently a director of PKS, Commonwealth Telephone and RCN.
Kevin J. O'Hara has been President of the Company since July 2000 and Chief Operating Officer of the Company since March 1998. Mr. O'Hara was also Executive Vice President of the Company from August 1997 until July 2000. Prior to that, Mr. O'Hara served as President and Chief Executive Officer of MFS Global Network Services, Inc. from 1995 to 1997, and as Senior Vice President of MFS and President of MFS Development, Inc. from October 1992 to August 1995. From 1990 to 1992, he was a Vice President of MFS Telecom, Inc. ("MFS Telecom").
Charles C. Miller, III has been Vice Chairman of the Board (and a director) and Executive Vice President of the Company since February 15, 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Miller was President of Bellsouth International, a subsidiary of Bellsouth Corporation from 1995 until December 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Miller held various senior level officer and management position at BellSouth from 1987.
Sunit S. Patel has been Chief Financial Officer since May 2003 and a Group Vice President of the Company since March 13, 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Patel was Chief Financial Officer of Looking Glass Networks, Inc., a provider of metropolitan fiber optic networks, from April 2000 until March 2003. Mr. Patel was Treasurer of WorldCom Inc. and MCIWorldcom Inc., each long distance telephone services providers from 1997 to March 2000. From 1994 to 1997, Mr. Patel was Treasurer of MFS Communications Company Inc., a competitive local exchange carrier.
Thomas C. Stortz has been Executive Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary since February 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Stortz was Group Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the Company from February 2000 to February 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Stortz served as Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the Company from September 1998 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, he served as Vice President and General Counsel of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. and Kiewit Construction Group, Inc. from April 1991 to September 1998. He has served as a director of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc., RCN, C-TEC, Kiewit Diversified Group Inc. and CCL Industries, Inc.
Sureel A. Choksi has been Executive Vice President Softswitch Services since January 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Choksi was Group Vice President Transport and Infrastructure from May 2003 until January 2004. Mr. Choksi was a Group Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company sincefrom July 2000.2000 to May 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Choksi was Group Vice President Corporate Development and Treasurer of the Company from February 2000 until August 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Choksi served as Vice President and Treasurer of the Company from January 1999 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Choksi was a Director of Finance at the Company from 1997 to 1998, an Associate at TeleSoft Management, LLC in 1997 and an Analyst at Gleacher & Company from 1995 to 1997.
Thomas C. StortzKeith R. Coogan has been GroupChief Executive Officer of Software Spectrum since September 2002 and was named President in May 1998. Mr. Coogan has been Chief Operating Officer of Software Spectrum since April 1996. Mr. Coogan served as Executive Vice President General Counselof Software Spectrum from April 1996 to May 1998 and Secretary of the Company since February 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Stortz served as Seniorhad been a Vice President General Counsel and Secretary of the Company from September 1998 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, heSoftware Spectrum since October 1990. From May 1989 until joining Software Spectrum, Mr. Coogan served as Vice President and General Counsel of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. and Kiewit Construction Group, Inc. from April 1991 to September 1998. He has served as a director of Peter Kiewit Sons',Finance for
48
Leather Center Holdings, Inc., RCN, C-TEC, Kiewit Diversified Group Inc.a privately held manufacturer and CCL Industries, Inc.
John F. Waters, Jr. has been Group Vice President and Chief Technology Officerretailer of the Company since February 2000. Prior to that,leather furniture. Mr. Waters was Vice President, Engineering of the Company from November 1997 until February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Waters was an executive staff member of MCI Communications from 1994 to November 1997.
Howard Diamond has been Chairman of the Company's information services group since June 2002. Prior to that, Mr. Diamond was Chief Executive Officer of CorpSoft, Inc., which the Company acquired in March 2002. Mr. Diamond joined CorpSoft, Inc. in 1996.
R. Douglas Bradbury has been Vice Chairman of the Board since February 2000. Mr. Bradbury retired from his position of Executive Vice President at December 31, 2002, which position he had held since August 1997. Mr. Bradbury was also Chief Financial Officer of the Company from August 1997 until July 2000. Mr. Bradbury has beenCoogan is a director of the Company since March 1998. Mr. Bradbury served as Chief Financial Officer of MFS from 1992 to 1996, Senior Vice President of MFS from 1992 to 1995, and Executive Vice President of MFS from 1995 to 1996. Mr. Bradbury is also a director of LodgeNet Entertainment Corporation.Certified Public Accountant.
Mogens C. Bay has been a director of the Company since November 2000. Since January 1997, Mr. Bay has been the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Valmont Industries, Inc., a company engaged in the infrastructure and irrigation businesses. Prior to that, Mr. Bay was President and Chief Executive Officer of Valmont Industries from August 1993 to December 1996 as well as a director of Valmont since October 1993. Mr. Bay is also a director of PKS and ConAgra Foods, Inc.
Richard R. Jaros has been a director of the Company since June 1993 and served as President of the Company from 1996 to 1997. Mr. Jaros served as Executive Vice President of the Company from
48
1993 to 1996 and Chief Financial Officer of the Company from 1995 to 1996. He also served as President and Chief Operating Officer of CalEnergy from 1992 to 1993, and is presently a director of MidAmerican, Commonwealth Telephone and RCN.
Robert E. Julian has been a director of the Company since March 31, 1998. Mr. Julian was also Chairman of the Board of (i)Structure from 1995 until 2000. From 1992 to 1995 Mr. Julian served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company. Mr. Julian is the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.
David C. McCourt has been a director of the Company since March 31, 1998. Mr. McCourt has also served as Chairman of Commonwealth Telephone and RCN since October 1997. In addition, Mr. McCourt has been the Chief Executive Officer of RCN since 1997 and Chief Executive Officer of Commonwealth Telephone from October 1997 until November 1998. From 1993 to 1997 Mr. McCourt served as Chairman
Arun Netravali has been a director of the BoardCompany since April 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Netravali was Chief Scientist for Lucent Technologies, working with academic and investment communities to identify and implement important new networking technologies from January 2002 to April 2003. Prior to that position, Mr. Netravali was President of Bell Labs as well as Lucent's Chief Technology Officer and Chief Executive Officer of C-TEC.Network Architect from June 1999 to January 2002. Bell Labs serves as the research and development organization for Lucent Technologies.
John T. Reed has been a director of the Company since March 2003. Mr. Reed has been Chairman of HMG Properties, the real estate investment banking joint venture of McCarthy Group, Inc. since 2000. Prior to that, he was Chairman of McCarthy & Co., the investment banking affiliate of McCarthy Group. Mr. Reed is also a director of McCarthy Group. Prior to joining McCarthy Group in 1997, Mr. Reed spent 32 years with Arthur Andersen, LLP.
Kenneth E. Stinson has been a director of Mr. Reed is the Company since January 1987. Mr. Stinson has been Chairman of the BoardNominating and Chief Executive Officer of Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. since the Split-Off. Prior to the Split-Off, Mr. Stinson was Executive Vice PresidentGovernance Committee of the Company for more than the last five years. Mr. Stinson is also a directorBoard of ConAgra Foods, Inc. and Valmont Industries, Inc.Directors.
Colin V.K. Williams has been a director of the Company since August 2000. From July 1998 until December 31, 2000, Mr. Williams was Executive Vice President of the Company and President of Level 3 International, Inc. Prior to joining the company, Mr. Williams was Chairman of WorldCom International, Inc., where he was responsible for the international communications business and the development and operation of WorldCom's fiber networks overseas. In 1993 Mr. Williams initiated and built the international operations of MFS. Prior to joining MFS, Mr. Williams was Corporate Director, Business Development at British Telecom from 1988 until 1992. Mr. Williams is a director of Focal Communications Corporation and KeyTech Limited.
Michael B. Yanney has been a director of the Company since March 31, 1998. He has served as Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of America First Companies L.L.C. for more than the last five years. Mr. Yanney is also a director of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation RCN and Forest Oil Corporation.RCN. Mr. Yanney is the Chairman of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.
Linda J. Adams has been Group Vice President Human Resources of the Company since February 2000. Prior to that, Ms. Adams was Vice President, Human Resources of the Company from November 1998 to
49
February 2000. Prior to that, Ms. Adams was initially Vice President of Human Resources Rent-A-Center, a subsidiary of Thorn Americas, Inc., and then Senior Vice President of Human Resources for Thorn Americas, Inc. from August 1995 until August 1998. Prior to that, Ms. Adams was Vice President of Worldwide Compensation & Benefits for PepsiCo, Inc. from August 1994 to August 1995.
Keith R. Coogan has been Chief Executive Officer of Software Spectrum since September, 2002 and was named President in May 1998. Mr. Coogan has been Chief Operating Officer of Software Spectrum since April 1996. Mr. Coogan served as Executive Vice President of Software Spectrum from April 1996 to May 1998 and had been a Vice President of Software Spectrum since October 1990. From May 1989 until joining Software Spectrum, Mr. Coogan served as Vice President of Finance for Leather Center Holdings, Inc., a privately held manufacturer and retailer of leather furniture. Mr. Coogan is a Certified Public Accountant.
49
Donald H. Gips has been Group Vice President Corporate Strategy of the Company since January 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Gips was Group Vice President, Sales and Marketing of the Company from February 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Gips served as Senior Vice President, Corporate Development of the Company from November 1998 to February 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Gips served in the White House as Chief Domestic Policy Advisor to Vice President Gore from April 1997 to April 1998. Before working at the White House, Mr. Gips was at the Federal Communications Commission as the International Bureau Chief and Director of Strategic Policy from January 1994 to April 1997. Prior to his government service, Mr. Gips was a management consultant at McKinsey and Company.
James L. Freeze has been Group Vice President Marketing of the Company since February 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Freeze was Senior Vice President, Chief Marketing and Strategy Officer of Genuity from May 2001. Prior to that Mr. Freeze was Senior Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer of Genuity. From August 1999 to June 2000, Mr. Freeze served as Vice President of Business Development for Genuity. From July 1998 to August 1999, Mr. Freeze served as a senior telecommunications analyst at Forrester Research, Inc., an Internet research firm. From June 1997 to June 1998, Mr. Freeze served as Vice President of Sales and Marketing of Genuity Inc., an Internet service provider and Web hosting company that was acquired by Genuity in June 1998. In April 2000, Genuity had changed its name from GTE Internetworking Incorporated to Genuity Inc. Prior to 1997, Mr. Freeze held several positions with CompuServe Inc., a worldwide provider of network access hosting and Internet services to the business and consumer markets, including Director of Marketing and Business Development from January 1995 to May 1997 and Group Manager from June 1994 to December 1994.
John Neil Hobbs has been Group Vice President Global Sales Distribution and Marketing Operations since September 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Hobbs was President, Global Accounts for Concert, a joint venture between AT&T and British Telecom from July 1999 until September 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Hobbs was Director Transition and Implementation for the formation of Concert representing British Telecom from June 1998 until July 1999. From April 1997 until June 1998, Mr. Hobbs was British Telecom's General Manager for Global Sales & Service and from April 1994 until April 1997, Mr. Hobbs was British Telecom's General Manager for Corporate Clients.
Joseph M. Howell, III has been Group Vice President Corporate Marketing of the Company since February 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Howell served as Senior Vice President, Corporate Marketing of the Company from October 1997 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Howell was a Senior Vice President of MFS/WorldCom from 1993 to 1997.
Michael D. Jones has served Chief Executive Officer of (i)Structure, Inc.LLC since August 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Jones served as Group Vice President and Chief Information Officer of the Company from February 2000 to August 2000 and as Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer of the Company from December 1998 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Jones was Vice President and Chief Information Officer of Corporate Express, Inc. from May 1994 to May 1998.
Sunit S. PatelCharles Meyers has been a Group Vice President of the CompanyMarketing since March 13,December 2003. Prior to that, Mr. PatelMeyers was Chief Financial OfficerGroup Vice President IP and Data Services from Data Services from June 2003 to December 2003 and Senior Vice President Global Softswitch Services from August 2001 to June 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Meyers was a partner with Kinetic Ventures, an Atlanta-based venture capital firm from March 2000 to May 2001 and a Vice President at Internet Security Systems, a software company in Atlanta from January 1998 to February 2000.
Frank Mambuca has been Group Vice President, Global Operations since April 2003 and acting Group Vice President of Looking Glass Networks, Inc., a providerGlobal Processes and Systems since March 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Mambuca was Senior Vice President Global Field Services from January 2001 until April 2003. Mr. Mambuca was also Vice President of metropolitan fiber optic networks,North American Field Services from AprilMarch 1999 until December 2000 and Vice President of Eastern Field Operations from March 1998 until March 2003. Mr. Patel was Treasurer of WorldCom Inc. and MCIWorldcom Inc., each long distance telephone services providers from 1997 to March 2000. From 1994 to 1997, Mr. Patel was Treasurer of MFS Communications Company Inc., a competitive local exchange carrier. In a press release issued on March 13, 2003, Level 3 announced that it is anticipated that Mr. Patel will succeed Sureel Choksi as Chief Financial Officer of Level 3 in May 2003, following the 2003 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.1999.
Brady Rafuse has been Group Vice President of the Company and President of the Company's European operations since August 2001 and Senior Vice President of European Sales and Marketing since December 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Rafuse served as Head of Commercial Operations for Concert, a joint venture between AT&T and British Telecom, from September 1999 to December 2000, and in a
50
variety of positions with British Telecom from 1987 until December 2000. His last position was as General Manager, Global Energy Sector which he held from August 1998 to September 1999 and prior to that he was Deputy General Manager, Banking Sector from April 1997 to August 1998.
Edward Van Macatee has served as Group Vice President of Global Operations of the Company since January 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Macatee was Group Vice President of Global Customer Operations of the Company from September 1999 until January 2001. Prior to that Mr. Macatee was Vice President, Network Operations of the Company from April 1998 until September 1999 and Vice President of Managed Network Services for TCI Communications, Inc.50
Ronald J. VidalScott Schaefer has been Group Vice President Investor RelationsIP and Data Services since November 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Schaefer was Group Vice President responsible for metropolitan access from June 2003 to November 2003. From August 2002 until May 2003, Mr. Schaefer was an Executive Affiliate at Ryan Hankin Kent, providing strategic consulting services to large and small enterprises in the telecommunications industry. Prior to that, Mr. Schaefer was President and Chief Executive Officer of QuantumShift, a non-facilities based communications service provider to medium to large enterprises from February 2000 to May 2002. Mr. Schaefer was also Vice President of BellSouth Corporation, responsible for corporate strategy, network planning, marketing, human resources and operational support for its subsidiary, BellSouth International from November 1999 to February 2000.
John F. Waters, Jr. has been Executive Vice President, Chief Technology Officer since January 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Waters was Group Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of the Company sincefrom February 2000 to January 2004. Prior to that, Mr. Waters was Vice President, Engineering of the Company from November 1997 until February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Vidal served as Senior Vice President, New VenturesWaters was an executive staff member of the CompanyMCI Communications from October 19971994 to February 1, 2000. Prior to that, Mr. Vidal was a Vice President of MFS/WorldCom from September 1992 to OctoberNovember 1997. Mr. Vidal joined the Company in construction project management in July 1983.
The Board is divided into three classes, designated Class I, Class II and Class III, each class consisting, as nearly as may be possible, of one-third of the total number of directors constituting the Board. TheAs of December 31, 2003, the Class I Directors consist of Walter Scott, Jr., James Q. Crowe, Charles C. Miller, III and Colin V.K. Williams; the Class II Directors consist of Mogens C. Bay, Richard R. Jaros, Robert E. Julian and David C. McCourt; and the Class III Directors consist of R. Douglas Bradbury, Kevin J. O'Hara,Arun Netravali, John T. Reed Kenneth E. Stinson and Michael B. Yanney. The term of the Class I Directors will terminate on the date of the 2004 annual meeting of stockholders; the term of the Class II Directors will terminate on the date of the 2005 annual meeting of stockholders; and the term of the Class III Directors will terminate on the date of the 20032006 annual meeting of stockholders. At each annual meeting of stockholders, successors to the class of directors whose term expires at that annual meeting will be elected for three-year terms. The Company's officers are elected annually to serve until each successor is elected and qualified or until his death, resignation or removal. Two directors that are members of Class I, Charles C. Miller, III, currently Vice Chairman of the Board and Executive Vice President of the Company and Colin V.K. Williams, have informed the Company that each of them intends not to seek reelection to the Board after the expiration of their current term of office at the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Level 3 believes that the members of the Audit committee are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of The Nasdaq Stock Market. The Board has determined that Mr. Robert E. Julian, Chairman of the Audit Committee, qualifies as a "financial expert" as defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board considered Mr. Julian's credentials and financial background and found that he was qualified to serve as the "financial expert."
Code of Ethics
Level 3 has adopted a code of ethics that complies with the standards mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The complete code of ethics is available on the Company's website atwww.level3.com. At any time that the code of ethics is not available on the Company's website, the Company will provide a copy upon written request made to Investor Relations, Level 3 Communications, Inc., 1025 Eldorado Blvd., Broomfield, Colorado 80021. Any information that is included in the Level 3 website is not part of this report. If Level 3 amends the code of ethics, or grants any waiver from a provision of the code of ethics that applies to the Company's executive officers or directors, Level 3 will publicly disclose such amendment or waiver as required by applicable law, including by posting such amendment or waiver on its website atwww.level3.com or by filing a Current Report on Form 8-K.
51
SEC Filings
The Company's annual reports on Form 10-K, along with all other reports and amendments filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission are publicly available free of charge on the investor relations section of the Company's website as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company files such materials with, or furnishes them to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information on the Company's website is not part of this or any other report the Company files with, or furnishes to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Section 16(a)—Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our executive officers, directors and greater-than 10% stockholders to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Based solely upon a review of Forms 3 and 4 and amendments thereto furnished to Level 3 during 2003, Level 3 believes that all Section 16(a) filing requirements applicable to our executive officers, directors and greater-than-10% stockholders were fulfilled during 2003 in a timely manner. No Forms 5 were required to be filed with respect to fiscal year 2003.
Employees
As of December 31, 2002,2003, Level 3 had 2,725approximately 3,275 employees in the communications portion of its business and information services had approximately 3,5501,375 employees, for a total of 6,275approximately 4,650 employees. These numbers do not include the employees of Genuity, since this transaction closed on February 4, 2003. Level 3 has hired approximately 1,400 Genuity employees, who become part of the transitional organization that is assisting with the integration efforts. The Company expects to reduce communications headcount throughout 2003 as the Genuity integration efforts are concluded. The Company believes that its success depends in large part on its ability to attract and retain substantial numbers of qualified employees.
Forward Looking Statements
The Company, or its representatives, from time to time may make or may have made certain forward-looking statements, whether orally or in writing, including without limitation statements made or to be made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, information contained in other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases and other public documents or statements. In addition, representatives of the Company, from time to time, participate in speeches and calls with market analysts, conferences with investors or potential investors in the Company's securities and other meetings and conferences. Some of the information presented at such speeches, calls, meetings and conferences may include forward-looking statements. The Company uses words like "expects," "anticipates" or "believes" to identify forward-looking statements.
The Company wishes to ensure that all forward-looking statements are accompanied by meaningful cautionary statements, so as to ensure to the fullest extent possible the protections of the safe harbor established in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Accordingly, all forward-looking
51
statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, the following discussion of certain important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements. The Company cautions the reader that this list of important factors may not be exhaustive. The Company operates in rapidly changing businesses, and new risk factors emerge from time to time. Management cannot predict every risk factor, nor can it assess the impact, if any, of all such risk factors on the Company's business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statements. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a prediction of actual results. Further, the Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements after the date they are made to conform the statements to actual results or changes in the Company's expectations.
52
Communications Group
Continuing softness in the economy is having a disproportionate effect on the telecommunications industry
The downturn in general economic conditions, particularly in the telecommunications services industry, has forced severala number of the Company's competitors and customers to file for protection from creditors under existing bankruptcy laws and othersto take other extraordinary actions to reconfigure their capital structure. These companies had significant debt servicing requirements and were unable to generate sufficient cash from operations to both service their debt and maintainconduct their networks.businesses. Level 3 has changed its customer base in order to focus on global users of bandwidth capacity, which tend to be more financially viable than certain of the Company's Internet start-up customers, and Level 3 has implemented policies and procedures designed to enable the Companyit to make determinations regarding the financial condition of potential and existing customers. However, there can be no assurance regarding the financial viability of Level 3's customers or that these policies and procedures will be effective. If general economic conditions in the United States remain at current levels for an extended period of time or worsen, Level 3 could be materially adversely affected.
The Company's continued growth depends upon its successful integration of the recently acquired Genuity business
On February 4, 2003, Level 3 acquired substantially all the assets and operations of Genuity Inc.,3's communications revenue is concentrated in a Tier 1 Internet Protocol (IP) communications company based in Woburn, Massachusetts. The integration of Genuity involves alimited number of risks, including, but not limited to:
If Level 3 cannot successfully integrate Genuity's operations, Level 3 may experience material negative consequences to its business, financial condition or results of operations. Successful integration of Genuity's operations will depend on the Company's ability to manage these operations, realize opportunities for revenue growth presented by strengthened product offerings and expanded geographic market coverage and, to some degree, to eliminate redundant and excess costs. Because of difficulties
52
in combining geographically distant operations, Level 3 may not be able to achieve the benefits that the Company hopes to achieve as a result of the acquisition.
In addition, investors should not rely on the historical financial and operating performance of Genuity Inc. as a indication of the future performance of Level 3 as a result of the Genuity Transaction to Level 3.
Concentration of Revenue in a Limited Number of Customerscustomers
A significant portion of Level 3's communications services revenue is concentrated among a limited number of customers. If the Company lost one or more of these major customers, or if one or more major customers significantly decreased its orders offor the Company's products,services, Level 3's communications business would be materially and adversely affected. Revenue from the Company's two largest communications customer, America Online,customers, Time Warner, Inc. ("America Online")and its affiliates and Verizon Communications, Inc. and its affiliates, represented approximately 12%24% and 10% of the Company's communications revenuesrevenue for 2002 and approximately 4% of the Company's consolidated revenues.2003, respectively. Level 3's future communications operating results will depend on the success of these customers and other customers and ourits success in selling productsservices to them.
If Level 3 waswere to lose a significant portion of its communications services revenuesrevenue from America Online,either of these two customers, Level 3 would not be able to replace those revenuesthis revenue in the short term and its operating losses would increase, which increase may be significant.
Failure to complete development, testing and introduction of new services, including VoIP services, could affect our ability to compete in the industry
Level 3 continuously develops, tests and introduces new services that are delivered over Level 3's network. These new services are intended to allow Level 3 to address new segments of the communications marketplace and to compete for additional customers. In certain instances, the introduction of new services requires the successful development of new technology. To the extent that upgrades of existing technology are required for the introduction of new services, the success of these upgrades may be dependent on the conclusion of contract negotiations with vendors and vendors meeting their obligations in a timely manner. In addition, new service offerings may not be widely accepted by customers. If Level 3 is not able to successfully complete the development and introduction of new services, including VoIP services, in a timely manner, the Company's business could be materially adversely affected.
Level 3 needs to increase the volume of traffic on its network or its network will not generate profits
The Company must substantially increase the current volume of Internet, data, voice and video transmission on the Level 3 Network3's network in order to realize the anticipated cash flow, operating efficiencies and cost benefits of itsthe Level 3 network. If Level 3 does not develop new large-volume customers and maintain its relationship with current customers, Level 3 may not be able to significantlysubstantially increase traffic on the Level 3 Network,network, which would adversely affect the Company's profitability.
During its limited operating history, Level 3 has generated substantial losses, which the Company expects to continue
The development of Level 3's communications business required, and may continue to require, significant expenditures. These expenditures could result in substantial negative operating cash flow from operating activities and substantial net losses for the near future. For 2002,2003, Level 3 incurred a net loss from continuing operations of approximately $1.1 billion.$721 million. The Company expects to continue to experience losses through 2003,2004, and may not be able to achieve or sustain operating profitability in the future. Continued operating losses could limit the Company's ability to obtain the cash needed to expand its network, make interest and principal payments on its debt or fund other business needs.
The prices that Level 3 charges for its services have been decreasing, and the Company expects that they will continue to decrease over time and the Company may be unable to compensate for thesethis lost revenues.revenue
Level 3 expects to continue to experience decreasing prices for its services as the Company and its competitors increase transmission capacity on existing and new networks, as a result of its current agreements with customers, through technological advances or otherwise, and as volume-based pricing becomes more prevalent. Accordingly, the Company's historical revenues arerevenue is not indicative of future revenuesrevenue based on comparable traffic volumes. IfAs the prices for its services decrease for whatever reason, andif Level 3 is unable to offer additional services from which it can derive additional revenuesrevenue or otherwise reduce its operating expenses, the Company's operating results will decline and its business and financial results will suffer.
53
Level 3 maywill need to continue to expand and adapt its network in order to remain competitive, which may require significant additional funding
Future expansion and adaptations of the Level 3 Network'snetwork's electronic and software components will be necessary in order to respond to:
Future expansion or adaptation of the Company's network will require substantial additional financial, operational and managerial resources, which may not be available at the time. If the Company is unable to expand or adapt its network to respond to these developments on a timely basis and at a commercially reasonable cost, its business will be materially adversely affected.
Level 3's need to obtain additional capacity for its network from other providers increases its costs
The Company leases telecommunications capacity and obtainobtains rights to use dark fiber from both long distance and local telecommunications carriers in order to extend the scope of theLevel 3's network. Any failure by these companies leasing capacity to Level 3 to provide timely service to Level 3 would adversely affect itsLevel 3's ability to serve its customers or increase the costs of doing so. Some of the Company's agreements with other providers require the payment of amounts for services whether or not those services are used. The Company enters into interconnection agreements with many domestic and foreign local telephone companies' but the Company is not always able to do so on favorable terms.
54
Costs of obtaining local service from other carriers comprise a significant proportion of the operating expenses of long distance carriers. Similarly, a large proportion of the costs of providing international service consists of payments to other carriers. Changes in regulation, particularly the regulation of local and international telecommunication carriers, could indirectly, but significantly, affect the Company's competitive position. These changes could increase or decrease the costs of providing Level 3's services.
The Company's growth may depend upon its successful integration of recently acquired businesses
The integration of acquired businesses involves a number of risks, including, but not limited to:
If Level 3 cannot successfully integrate acquired businesses or operations, Level 3 may experience material negative consequences to its business, financial condition or results of operations. Successful integration of these acquired businesses or operations will depend on the Company's ability to manage these operations, realize opportunities for revenue growth presented by strengthened service offerings and expanded geographic market coverage and, to some degree, to eliminate redundant and excess costs. Because of difficulties in combining geographically distant operations, Level 3 may not be able to achieve the benefits that the Company hopes to achieve as a result of the acquisition.
In addition, investors should not rely on the historical financial and operating performance of Genuity, Inc. as a indication of the future performance of Level 3 as a result of the Genuity transaction.
Level 3's business requires the continued development of effective business support systems to implement customer orders and to provide and bill for services
Level 3's business depends on its ability to continue to develop effective business support systems.systems and in particular the development of these systems for use by third party distributors. This is a complicated undertaking requiring significant resources and expertise and support from third-partythird party vendors. Business support systems are needed for:
Because Level 3's business provides for continued rapid growth in the number and volume of products and services offered, there is a need to continue to develop these business support systems on a schedule sufficient to meet proposed service rollout dates. In addition, Level 3 requires these business support systems to expand and adapt to its rapid growth.growth and alternate distribution channel strategy. The failure to continue to develop effective business support systems could materially adversely affect the Company's ability to implement the Business Plan.its business plans.
5455
The Company may be unable to hire and retain sufficient qualified personnel; the loss of any of its key executive officers could adversely affect the Company
Level 3 believes that its future success will depend in large part on its ability to attract and retain highly skilled, knowledgeable, sophisticated and qualified managerial, professional and technical personnel. The Company has experienced significant competition in attracting and retaining personnel who possess the skills that it is seeking. As a result of this significant competition, Level 3 may experience a shortage of qualified personnel. Level 3's businesses are managed by a small number of key executive officers, particularly James Q. Crowe, Chief Executive Officer, Charles C. Miller, III, Vice Chairman of the Board, and Kevin J. O'Hara, Chief Operating Officer. The loss of any of these key executive officers could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
Level 3 must obtain and maintain permits and rights-of-way to operate the Level 3 Network3's network
If Level 3 is unable, on acceptable terms and on a timely basis, to obtain and maintain the franchises, permits and rights needed to expand and operate the Level 3 Network,3's network, its business could be materially adversely affected. In addition, the cancellation or nonrenewal of the franchises, permits or rights that are obtained could materially adversely affect the Company. Level 3 is a defendant in several lawsuits that the plaintiffs have sought to have certified as class actions that, among other things, challenge its use of rights of way. It is likely that additional suits challenging use of its rights of way will occur and that those plaintiffs also will seek class certification. ThisThe outcome of this litigation may increase Level 3's costs and adversely affect its profitability.
Termination of relationships with key suppliers could cause delay and costs
Level 3 is dependent on third-party suppliers for fiber, computers, software, optronics, transmission electronics and related components that are integrated into the Level 3 Network.3's network. If any of these relationships is terminated or a supplier fails to provide reliable services or equipment and the Company is unable to reach suitable alternative arrangements quickly, Level 3 may experience significant additional costs. If that happens, Level 3 could be materially adversely affected.
The communications and information services industries are highly competitive with participants that have greater resources and a greater number of existing customers
The communications and information services industry isindustries are highly competitive. Many of the Company's existing and potential competitors have financial, personnel, marketing and other resources significantly greater than Level 3. Many of these competitors have the added competitive advantage of a larger existing customer base. In addition, significant new competitors could arise as a result of:
If the Company is unable to compete successfully, its business could be materially adversely affected.
Rapid technological changes can lead to further competition
The communications industry is subject to rapid and significant changes in technology. In addition, the introduction of new products or technologies, as well as the further development of existing products and technologies may reduce the cost or increase the supply of certain services similar to those that Level 3 provides. As a result, Level 3's most significant competitors in the future may be new entrants to the communications and information services industry.industries. These new entrants may not be
5556
be burdened by an installed base of outdated equipment. Future success depends, in part, on the ability to anticipate and adapt in a timely manner to technological changes. Technological changes and the resulting competition could have a material adverse effect on Level 3.
Increased industry capacity and other factors could lead to lower prices for the Company's products and services
There are currently three U.S. long distance fiber optic networks that are owned by each of AT&T, WorldCom and Sprint, as well as numerous local networks. Others, including Qwest Communications and WilTel Communications, are deploying or expanding additional networks that use advanced technology similar to that ofAdditional network capacity available from the Level 3 Network. These networks offer significantly more capacity than is currently available in the marketplace. This additional capacityCompany's competitors may cause significant decreases in the prices for services. Prices may also decline due to capacity increases resulting from technological advances and strategic alliances, such as long distance capacity purchasing alliances among regional Bell operating companies. Increased competition has already led to a decline in rates charged for various telecommunications services.
If Level 3 does not maintain or increase its market share and therefore is no longer considered a Tier 1 Internet backbone provider, it may lose customers and the Company's free peering relationships with other Tier 1 Internet backbone providers. If this occurs, the Company's revenues and operating results may decline significantly.
Level 3 relies significantly on its status as a Tier 1 Internet backbone provider to maintain and grow its market share and compete with other Tier 1 Internet backbone providers, several of which have a larger market share than the Company. Any significant loss of market share for the Company's services could cause the loss of its status as a Tier 1 Internet backbone provider, which would make Level 3's services significantly less attractive to existing and potential customers and would likely result in a significant loss of revenues. In addition, the loss of market share or its status as a Tier 1 Internet backbone provider would adversely affect the Company's ability to maintain its free private peering relationships with other Tier 1 Internet backbone providers. These relationships permit the Company to have direct, cost-free exchange of traffic with other Tier 1 Internet backbone providers and allow Level 3 to avoid congestion of public peering points when directing traffic to users connected to those other Internet backbones. If Level 3 is unable to maintain these free peering relationships, its operating costs will increase and cash flow from operations will suffer.
Level 3 is subject to significant regulation that could change in an adverse manner
Communications services are subject to significant regulation at the federal, state, local and international levels. These regulations affect Level 3 and its existing and potential competitors. Delays in receiving required regulatory approvals, completing interconnection agreements with incumbent local exchange carriers or the enactment of new and adverse regulations or regulatory requirements may have a material adverse effect on Level 3. In addition, future legislative, judicial, and regulatory agency actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
Recent federal legislation provides for a significant deregulation of the U.S. telecommunications industry, including the local exchange, long distance and cable television industries. This legislation remains subject to judicial review and additional FCC rulemaking. As a result, Level 3 can not predict the legislation's effect on its future operations. Many regulatory actions are under way or are being contemplated by federal and state authorities regarding important items. These actions could have a material adverse effect on Level 3's business.
56
Canadian law currently does not permit Level 3 to offer services in Canada
Ownership of facilities that originate or terminate traffic in Canada is currently limited to Canadian carriers. This restriction hinders the Company's entry into the Canadian market unless appropriate arrangements can be made to address it.
Potential regulation of Internet service providers in the United States could adversely affect Level 3's operations
The FCC has to date treated Internet service providers as enhanced service providers. Enhanced service providers are currently exempt from federal and state regulations governing common carriers, including the obligation to pay access charges and contribute to the universal service fund. The FCC is currently examining the status of Internet service providers and the services they provide. If the FCC were to determine that Internet service providers, or the services they provide, are subject to FCC regulation, including the payment of access charges and contribution to the universal service funds, it could have a material adverse effect on Level 3's business.business and the profitability of its services.
The Company may lose customers if it experiences system failures that significantly disrupt the availability and quality of the services that it provides.provides
Level 3's operations depend on its ability to avoid and mitigate any interruptions in service or reduced capacity for customers. Interruptions in service or performance problems, for whatever reason, could undermine confidence in Level 3's services and cause the Company to lose customers or make it more difficult to attract new ones. In addition, because many of the Company's services are critical to the businesses of many of its customers, any significant interruption in service could result in lost profits or other loss to customers. Although the Company attempts to disclaim liability in its service
57
agreements, a court might not enforce a limitation on liability, which could expose the Company to financial loss. In addition, Level 3 often provides its customers with guaranteed service level commitments. If Level 3 is unable to meet these guaranteed service level commitments as a result of service interruptions, the Company may be obligated to provide credits, generally in the form of free service for a short period of time, to its customers, which could negatively effect its operating results.
The failure of any equipment or facility on the Level 3 Network,3's network, including the Operations Controlnetwork operations control center and network data storage locations, could result in the interruption of customer service until necessary repairs are effected or replacement equipment is installed. Network failures, delays and errors could also result from natural disasters, terrorist acts, power losses, security breaches and computer viruses. These failures, faults or errors could cause delays, service interruptions, expose the Company to customer liability or require expensive modifications that could have a material adverse effect on Level 3's business.
Intellectual property and proprietary rights of others could prevent Level 3 from using necessary technology to provide Internet protocol voice services
While Level 3 does not know of any technologies that are patented by others that it believes are necessary for Level 3 to provide its services, this necessary technology may in fact be patented by other parties either now or in the future. If thisnecessary technology were held under patent by another person, Level 3 would have to negotiate a license for the use of that technology. The Company may not be able to negotiate such a license at a price that is acceptable. The existence of such a patent,patents, or the Company's inability to negotiate a license for any such technology on acceptable terms, could force Level 3 to cease using the technology and offering products and services incorporating the technology.
57
Level 3 may be unable to successfully identify, manage and assimilate future acquisitions, investments and strategic alliances, which could adversely affect the CompanyCompany's results of operations
Level 3 continually evaluates potential investments and strategic opportunities to expand the Level 3 Network,3's network, enhance connectivity and add traffic to the network. In the future, the Company may seek additional investments, strategic alliances or similar arrangements, which may expose the Company to risks such as:
There can be no assurance that the Company would successfully overcome these risks or any other problems encountered with these investments, strategic alliances or similar arrangements.
58
Information Services
Software Spectrum relies on financial incentives, volume discounts and marketing funds from software publishers
As part of Software Spectrum's supply agreements with certain publishers and distributors, Software Spectrum receives substantial incentives in the form of rebates, volume purchase discounts, cooperative advertising funds and market development funds. Under the new licensing model announcedincreasingly used by Microsoft, thatwhich became effective in October 2001, Software Spectrum no longer receives these forms of financial incentives on new enterprise-wide licensing agreements, but instead Software Spectrum is paid fees for services performed under those agreements. Other publishers have based their financial incentives on specific market segments and products. If the Software Spectrum business model does not continue to align with the objectives established for these incentives or if software publishers further change, reduce or discontinue these incentives, discounts or advertising allowances, Software Spectrum's business and Level 3's consolidated financial results could be materially adversely affected.
Software Spectrum is very dependent on a small number of vendors
A large percentage of Software Spectrum's sales are represented by popular business software products from a small number of vendors. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, approximately 72%70% of Software Spectrum's net software sales were derived from products published by Microsoft and IBM/Lotus. Most of Software Spectrum's contracts with vendors are terminable by either party, without cause, upon 30 to 60 days notice. The loss or significant change in Software Spectrum's relationship with these vendors could have a material adverse effect on Software Spectrum's business and Level 3's consolidated financial results. Although Software Spectrum believes the software products would be available from other parties, the Company may have to obtain such products on terms that would likely adversely affect its financial results.
58
Software Spectrum's sales through volume licensing and maintenance agreements could cause increased downward press on margins
Software Spectrum serves as a designated services provider for VLM agreements between many of its customers and major publishers of software. VLM agreements are typically used by customers seeking to standardize desktop software applications and, consequently, typically involve significant quantities of unit sales for each customer. Although unit volume sales are increased by the use of VLM agreements, generally lower gross margins are realized on such sales as compared to sales of full-packaged software products. Approximately 57% of Software Spectrum's product sales are made pursuant to VLM agreements. Software Spectrum continues to experience an increase in the percentage of sales made under enterprise-wide licensing agreements, which typically have lower gross margins and administrative costs than other VLM programs. Software Spectrum may continue to experience margin pressures due to these factors.
Software Spectrum's business is sensitive to general economic conditions and its success at expanding its business geographically
Software Spectrum's business is sensitive to the spending patterns of its customers, which in turn are subject to prevailing economic and business conditions. Due to current economic conditions, there has been a decrease in spending for information technology by both existing and potential customers over the several past years. If customers and potential customers continue to decrease their spending in this area, the Level 3 consolidated financial results couldwould be adversely affected. Further, sales to large corporations have been important to Software Spectrum's results, and its future results are dependent on its continued success with such customers. Sales outside of the United States accounted for approximately 29%33% of Software Spectrum's revenuesrevenue for the year ended December 31, 2002.2003. Software Spectrum's future growth and success depend on continued growth and success in international markets. The success and profitability of Software Spectrum's international operations are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including local economic and labor conditions, unexpected changes in the regulatory environment, trade protection measures and tax laws, currency exchange risks, political instability and other risks of conducting business abroad.
Software Spectrum's business is subject to seasonal changes in demand and resulting sales activities
Software Spectrum's software distribution business is subject to seasonal influences. In particular, net sales and profits in the United States, Canada and Europe are typically lower in the first and third quarters due to lower levels of information technology purchases during those times. As a result, Software Spectrum's quarterly results may be materially affected during those quarters. Therefore, the operating results for any three month period are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be
59
achieved for any subsequent fiscal quarter or for a full fiscal year. In addition, periods of higher sales activities during certain quarters may require a greater use of working capital to fund the Software Spectrum business in the quarter that follows the higher levels of sales activities.
Software Spectrum operates in a highly competitive business environment and it is subject to significant pricing competition
The desktop technology marketplace is intensely competitive. Software Spectrum faces competition from a wide variety of sources, including other software resellers, hardware manufacturers and resellers, large system integrators, software publishers, contact services providers, software suppliers, retail stores (including superstores), mail order, Internet and other discount business suppliers. Many of the Company's competitors, particularly software publishers, have substantially greater financial resources than Software Spectrum. Because of the intense competition within the software channel, companies that compete in this market, including Software Spectrum, are characterized by low gross and operating
59
margins. Consequently, Software Spectrum's profitability is highly dependent upon effective cost and management controls.
The market for Software Spectrum's products and services is characterized by rapidly changing technology
The market for Software Spectrum's products and services is characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards and frequent introductions of new products and services. Software Spectrum's future success will depend in part on its ability to enhance existing services, to continue to invest in rapidly changing technology and to offer new services on a timely basis. Additionally, the Company's business results can be adversely affected by disruptions in customer ordering patterns, the effect of new product releases and changes in licensing programs.
Software Spectrum's business is subject to significant changes in the methods of software distribution
In late 2001, Microsoft announced a change to its licensing programs, whereby new enterprise-wide licensing arrangements are priced, billed and collected directly by Microsoft. Software Spectrum continues to provide sales and support services related to these transactions and will earn a service fee directly from Microsoft for these activities. Enterprise-wide licensing agreements in effect prior to October 1, 2001, which generally have terms of three years from the date such agreements are signed, and Microsoft's other licensing programs were not affected by this change. The licensing program changes have resulted in significantly lower revenuesrevenue for the Software Spectrum on the affected transactions. For the year ended December 31, 2002,2003, approximately 29%25% of Software Spectrum's product sales were under Microsoft enterprise-wide licensing agreements. Software Spectrum's continued ability to adjust to and compete under this new model are important factors in its future success.
The manner in which software products are distributed and sold is continually changing, and new methods of distribution may continue to emerge or expand. Software publishers may intensify their efforts to sell their products directly to end-users, including current and potential customers of Software Spectrum. Other products and methodologies for distributing software to users may be introduced by publishers, present competitors or other third parties. If software suppliers' participation in these programs is reduced or eliminated, or if other methods of distribution of software, which exclude the software resale channel, become common, Software Spectrum's business and Level 3's consolidated financial results could be materially adversely affected.
60
Other Operations
Environmental liabilities from the Company's historical operations could be material
Level 3's operations and properties are subject to a wide variety of laws and regulations relating to environmental protection, human health and safety. These laws and regulations include those concerning the use and management of hazardous and non-hazardous substances and wastes. The Company has made and will continue to have to make significant expenditures relating to its environmental compliance obligations. The Company may not at all times be in compliance with all these requirements.
In connection with certain historical operations, Level 3 is a party to, or otherwise involved in, legal proceedings under state and federal law involving investigation and remediation activities at approximately 65110 contaminated properties. Level 3 could be held liable, jointly and severally, and without regard to fault, for such investigation and remediation. The discovery of significant otheradditional environmental liabilities related to historical operations or changes in existing environmental requirements could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
60
Potential liabilities and claims arising from coal operations could be significant
Level 3's coal operations are subject to extensive laws and regulations that impose stringent operational, maintenance, financial assurance, environmental compliance, reclamation, restoration and closure requirements. These requirements include those governing air and water emissions, waste disposal, worker health and safety, benefits for current and retired coal miners, and other general permitting and licensing requirements. Level 3 may not at all times be in compliance with all of these requirements. Liabilities or claims associated with this non-compliance could require the Company to incur material costs or suspend production. Mine reclamation costs that exceed reserves for these matters also could require the Company to incur material costs.
General
Increased scrutiny of financial disclosure, particularly in the telecommunications industry in which Level 3 operates, could adversely affect investor confidence, and any restatement of earnings could increase litigation risks and limit the Company's ability to access the capital markets
Congress, the SEC, other regulatory authorities and the media are intensely scrutinizing a number of financial reporting issues and practices. Although all businesses face uncertainty with respect to how the U.S. financial disclosure regime may be impacted by this process, particular attention has been focused recently on the telecommunications industry and companies' interpretations of generally accepted accounting principles.
If the Company is required to restate its financial statements as a result of a determination hat it had incorrectly applied generally accepted accounting principles, that restatement could adversely affect its ability to access the capital markets or the trading price of its securities. The recent scrutiny regarding financial reporting has also resulted in an increase in litigation in the telecommunications industry. There can be no assurance that any such litigation against Level 3 would not materially adverse affect the Company's business or the trading price of Company's securities.
If Level 3 is unable to comply with the restrictions and covenants in its debt agreements, there would be a default under the terms of these agreements, and this could result in an acceleration of payment of funds that have been borrowed
If Level 3 waswere unable to comply with the restrictions and covenants in any of its debt agreements, there would be a default under the terms of thesethose agreements. Some of the debt agreements also require Level 3 and certain of its subsidiaries to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy financial tests. Beginning in June 2004, one of these tests measures Level 3's ratio of total leverage. The Company's ability to meet these financial ratios and tests may be affected by events beyond the Company's control, including, without limitation, sales levels, the number of customer disconnects and cancellations and potential acquisitions. As a result, there can be no assurance that Level 3 will be able to meet these tests. In the event of a default under these agreements, the lenders could:
Borrowingsborrowings under other debt instruments that contain cross-acceleration or cross-default provisions may also be accelerated and become due and payable. If any of these events occur, there can be no assurance that Level 3 would be able to make necessary payments to the lenders or that it would be able to find alternative financing. Even if the Company waswere able to obtain alternative financing, there can be no assurance that it would be on terms that are acceptable.
61
The Company has substantial debt, which may hinder its growth and put it at a competitive disadvantage.disadvantage
Level 33's substantial debt may have important consequences, including the following:
61
Level 3 had substantial deficiencies of earnings to cover fixed charges of $1.180 billion, $5.453 billion$706 million, $926 million, and $1.506$4.378 billion for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively.
Level 3 may not be able to repay its existing debt; failure to do so or refinance the debt could prevent the Company from implementing the Business Plansits strategy and realizing anticipated profits.profits
If Level 3 waswere unable to refinance its debt or to raise additional capital on acceptable terms, its ability to operate its business would be impaired. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had approximately $6.1$5.4 billion of long-term debt, including current maturities, and approximately negative $240$181 million of stockholders' equity. The Company's ability to make interest and principal payments on the Company's debt and borrow additional funds on favorable terms depends on the future performance of the business. If the Company does not have enough cash flow in the future to make interest or principal payments on its debt, the Company may be required to refinance all or a part of its debt or to raise additional capital. Level 3 cannot assure that it will be able to refinance its debt or raise additional capital on acceptable terms.
Restrictions and covenants in the Company's debt agreements limit its ability to conduct its business and could prevent the Company from obtaining needed funds in the future.future
Level 3's debt and financing arrangements contain a number of significant limitations that restrict the Company's ability to, among other things:
62
In addition,Increased scrutiny of financial disclosure, particularly in the telecommunications industry in which Level 3 Senior Secured Credit Facility currently requires the maintenanceoperates, could adversely affect investor confidence, and any restatement of specified financial ratios as defined therein. These restrictions mayearnings could increase litigation risks and limit the CompanyCompany's ability to obtain future financing, fund neededaccess the capital expendituresmarkets
Congress, the SEC, other regulatory authorities and the media are intensely scrutinizing a number of financial reporting issues and practices. Although all businesses face uncertainty with respect to how the U.S. financial disclosure regime may be impacted by this process, particular attention has been focused recently on the telecommunications industry and companies' interpretations of generally accepted accounting principles.
If the Company were required to restate its financial statements as a result of a determination that it had incorrectly applied generally accepted accounting principles, that restatement could adversely affect its ability to access the capital markets or withstand a future downturnthe trading price of its securities. The recent scrutiny regarding financial reporting has also resulted in an increase in litigation in the telecommunications
62
industry. There can be no assurance that any such litigation against Level 3 would not materially adverse affect the Company's business or the economy.trading price of Company's securities.
Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war may adversely affect the financial markets and Level 3's business
As a result of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and subsequent events, there has been considerable uncertainty in world financial markets. The full effect on the financial markets of these events, as well as concerns about future terrorist attacks, is not yet known. They could, however, adversely affect Level 3's ability to obtain financing on terms acceptable to the Company, or at all.
There can be no assurance that there will not be further terrorist attacks against the United States or U.S. businesses. These attacks or armed conflicts may directly affect Level 3's physical facilities or those of its customers. These events could cause consumer confidence and spending to decrease or result in increased volatility in the U.S. and world financial markets and economy. Any of these occurrences could materially adversely affect Level 3's business.
Level 3's international operations and investments expose the Company to risks that could materially adversely affect the business
Level 3 has operations and investments outside of the United States, as well as rights to undersea cable capacity extending to other countries, that expose the Company to risks inherent in international operations. These include:
Inability to manage effectively strategic investments, acquisitions or joint ventures could adversely affect the Company's operations
If Level 3 makes additional strategic investments, acquisitions or joint ventures, its resources and management time could be diverted and the Company may be unable to integrate them successfully with its businesses.
63
Anti-takeover provisions in Level 3's charter and by-laws could limit the share price and delay a change of management
Level 3's certificate of incorporation and by-laws contain provisions that could make it more difficult or even prevent a third party from acquiring the Company without the approval of the Company's incumbent board of directors. These provisions, among other things:
63
These provisions could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of Level 3's common stock and significantly impede the ability of the holders of Level 3's common stock to change management. In addition, Level 3 has adopted a poison pill rights plan, which has anti-takeover effects. The rights plan, if triggered, will cause substantial dilution to a person or group that attempts to acquire the Company on terms not approved by the board of directors. Provisions and agreements that inhibit or discourage takeover attempts could reduce the market value of Level 3's common stock.
These risk factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the results anticipated in forward-looking statements
The reports that Level 3 files with the SEC and the Company's other communications may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Level 3 considers forward-looking statements to be those statements that describe intentions, beliefs, and current expectations with respect to future operating performance. The Company's actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the Company's forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors.
64
The Company's headquarters are located on 46 acres in the Northwest corner of the Interlocken Advanced Technology Environment within the City of Broomfield, Colorado, and within Broomfield County, Colorado. The campus facility, which is owned by the Company, encompasses over 850,000800,000 square feet of office space. In addition, the Company has leased approximately 71,000 square feet of temporary office space in the Broomfield, Colorado area. The lease, which provides for monthly rental payments of approximately $100,000, will expire in May 2003 and will not be renewed. In Europe, the Company has approximately 211,000 square feet of office space in the United Kingdom, approximately 12,00059,000 square feet of office space in Germany, and approximately 14,000 square feet of office space in France. In addition, the Company is in the process of selling 340,000 square feet of owned, excess office space located in the City of Broomfield, Colorado.
Properties relating to the Company's coal mining segment are described under "ITEM 1. BUSINESS—The Company's Other Businesses" above. In connection with certain existing and historical operations, the Company is subject to environmental risks.
The Company's Gateway facilities are designed to house local sales staff, operational staff, the Company's transmission and IP routing/switching facilities and technical space to accommodate
64
colocation of equipment by high-volume Level 3 customers. The Company has approximately 5.0 million square feet of space for its Gateway and transmission facilities and has completed construction on approximately 3.23.3 million square feet of this space. This Gateway space is either owned by the Company or is held pursuant to long-term lease agreements. The Company also leases approximately 83,000 square feet of office space throughout the country for sales offices, with an aggregate annual rental expense of approximately $325,000. The remaining term on these leases generally range from one to six years.
The Company has announced that it is evaluatingentered into various agreements regarding its requirements for office and technical space and may seek to dispose of excessunused office and technical space in the future.order to reduce its ongoing operating expenses regarding such space.
Software Spectrum currently leases approximately 184,000 square feet of space in Garland, Texas (a suburb in the Dallas/Forth Worth metroplex) which houses its operational headquarters, along with call centers for contact and product services.headquarters. The Garland leases have aggregate current monthly payments of approximately $105,000$110,000 and remaining terms of fourone to sixthree years. Software Spectrum leases approximately 108,000 square feet of office space in Spokane, Washington with current aggregate monthly payments of approximately $97,000.$105,000. As of April 30, 2001,December 31, 2003, the Spokane leases had remaining terms of four years. Software Spectrum also has a contact services center in Tampa, Florida. This facility consists of approximately 98,500 square feet of space which is leased for approximately $134,000 per month. The remaining term of the lease is approximately three years.fifteen months. Software Spectrum leases approximately 73,000 square feet of space for an additional contact services center in North Richland Hills, Texas (a suburb in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex), which is currently unoccupied. The lease provides for monthly rental payments of approximately $69,000$84,000 and has a remaining term of approximately sixfour years.
Software Spectrum leases approximately 98,000 square feet of spacehas a lease commitment in Norwood, Massachusetts. The leaseThis commitment provides for monthly payments of approximately $195,000$157,000 and has a remaining term of approximately 32.5 years.
With respect to its European-based operations, Software Spectrum currently leases space for its major operations center in Munich, Germany; Paris, France; and Dublin, Ireland. In addition, Software Spectrum has offices in The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Sweden Belgium and Spain. Software Spectrum's Asia/Pacific headquarters is located in Sydney, Australia. Software Spectrum also has offices in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Hong Kong. Dublin, Ireland and its sales headquarters in The Hague, The Netherlands. In Asia/Pacific, Software Spectrum leases space for its Asia/Pacific headquarters in Sydney, Australia and maintains sales offices in six other markets.
(i(i))Structure also maintains its corporate headquarters in approximately 25,000 square feet of office space in the Broomfield, Colorado area. The computer outsourcing business of (i)Structure is located at an 89,000area, approximately 33,000 square foot office spaceand computer center in Omaha, Nebraska, and at aan approximately 60,000 square foot computer center in Tempe, Arizona. (i)Structure maintains additional office space in Bangalore, India (approximately 18,000 square feet) and several locations in the United Kingdom (approximately 21,000 square feet) for its systems integration business.
In May 2001, a subsidiary of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (the "Company") wasand two of its subsidiaries were named as a defendantdefendants inBauer, et. al. v. Level 3 Communications, LLC, et al., a purported multi-state class action, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois andIllinois. In April 2002, the same plaintiffs filed a second nearly identical purported multi-state class action in state court in Madison County, Illinois. In
65
July 2001, the Company was named as a defendant inKoyle, et. al. v. Level 3 Communications, Inc., et. al., a purported multi-state class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. BothIn September 2002, Level 3 Communications, LLC was named as a defendant inSmith et al v. Sprint Communications Company, L.P., et al, a purported nationwide class action filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of theseIllinois. These actions involve the Company's right to install its fiber optic cable network in easements and right-of-ways crossing the plaintiffs' land. In general, the Company obtained the rights to construct its network from railroads,
65
utilities, and others, and is installing its network along the rights-of-way so granted. Plaintiffs in the purported class actions assert that they are the owners of lands over which the Company's fiber optic cable network passes, and that the railroads, utilities, and others who granted the Company the right to construct and maintain its network did not have the legal ability to do so. The plaintiff's efforts to seek class action status for this action have been denied. The complaint seeks damages on theories of trespass, unjust enrichment and slander of title and property, as well as punitive damages. The Company has also received, and may in the future receive, claims and demands related to rights-of-way issues similar to the issues in the these cases that may be based on similar or different legal theories. To date, all attempts to have class action status granted on complaints filed against the Company or any of its subsidiaries involving claims and demands related to rights-of-way issues have been denied. Although itOn July 25, 2003, the Smith Court entered an Order preliminarily approving a settlement agreement which will resolve all claims against the Company arising out of the Company's location of fiber optic cable and related telecommunications facilities that the Company owns within railroad rights-of-way throughout the United States. In connection with the Court's Order preliminarily approving the settlement, the Court entered an Order enjoining the parties in all pending federal and state railroad rights-of-way class action litigation involving the Company from further pursuing those pending actions at this time.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, landowners who own property adjacent to the railroad rights- of-way in which the Company placed its fiber optic cable and related facilities may submit claims and receive specified compensation. The Company is unable to quantify the ultimate amount of payments to be made pursuant to the settlement until if and when (1) the settlement receives final approval and all appeals have been exhausted; and (2) the claims process has been completed.
In September 2003, a petition for appeal was granted which seeks a reversal of the Smith Court's decision to preliminarily approve the settlement and certify a nationwide class for settlement purposes. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held oral argument on the appeal in January 2004, and a decision is pending. It is still too early for the Company to reach a conclusion as to the ultimate outcome of these actions,actions. However, management believes that the Company and its subsidiaries have substantial defenses to the claims asserted in all of these actions (and any similar claims which may be named in the future), and intends to defend them vigorously.vigorously if the settlement is not approved.
On November 19, 2002, Gary Haegle commenced a shareholder's derivative suit on behalf of the Company in the District Court of Colorado for the City and County of Broomfield entitledHaegle v. Scott, et.et al.,, (Index No. 02-CV-0196). The action is brought against the Company as a nominal defendant and against the directors of the Company, a former director of the Company and Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. ("PKS"). The Complaint alleges that the director defendants, aided and abetted by PKS, breached their fiduciary duties to the Company in connection with several transactions between the Company and PKS including contracts under which PKS constructed the Company's fiber optic cable network and manages the Company's mine properties. The Complaint also alleges that in building the fiber optic cable network, the defendants caused the Company to violate the property rights of landowners, thereby subjecting the Company to substantial potential liability. In addition, the Complaint alleges that Company assets were transferred to its officers and directors in the form of personal loans, excessive salaries and the payment of personal expenses. The action seeks both equitable and legal relief, including restitution, compensatory and punitive damages of an unspecified
66
amount, imposition of a constructive trust, disgorgement and injunctive relief. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied by the court in early October. Subsequently, the Board of Directors of the Company appointed a Special Litigation Committee comprised of an independent director with the exclusive power to conduct or cause to be conducted an impartial and independent investigation of all matters alleged by the Plaintiff and to determine whether the litigation should be maintained, terminated, or otherwise disposed, in accordance with its findings as to whether the litigation is in the best interests of the Company. In addition, the Company filed a motion to stay all proceedings in the case, including all discovery, for a period of six months to enable the Special Litigation Committee to complete its evaluation. This motion was granted by the Court. As a result, all proceedings in this case have not yet responded to the Complaint.been stayed until June 17, 2004. Although it is too early for the Company to reach a conclusion as to the ultimate outcome of these actions, management believes that there are substantial defenses to the claims asserted in this action, and intends to defend them vigorously.
The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to many other legal proceedings. Management believes that any resulting liabilities for these legal proceedings, beyond amounts reserved, will not materially affect the Company's financial condition, future results of operations, or future cash flows.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No matters were submitted during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report to a vote of security holders, through the solicitation of proxies or otherwise.
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
Market Information. The Company's common stock is traded on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol "LVLT." As of March 14, 2003,10, 2004, there were approximately 6,9337,640 holders of record of the Company's common stock, par value $.01 per share. The table below sets forth, for the calendar
66
quarters indicated, the high and low per share closing sale prices of the common stock as reported by the Nasdaq National Market.
| | High | Low | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2003 | High | Low | ||||||||||
| First Quarter | $ | 5.85 | $ | 2.22 | $ | 5.33 | $ | 4.61 | ||||
| Second Quarter | 5.49 | 2.95 | 7.46 | 5.22 | ||||||||
| Third Quarter | 7.06 | 2.57 | 6.15 | 4.45 | ||||||||
| Fourth Quarter | 6.10 | 4.04 | 5.78 | 5.00 | ||||||||
Year Ended December 31, 2001 | ||||||||||||
| First Quarter | $ | 49.69 | $ | 15.50 | ||||||||
| Second Quarter | 18.44 | 4.53 | ||||||||||
| Third Quarter | 5.48 | 3.14 | ||||||||||
| Fourth Quarter | 7.32 | 1.98 | ||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2002 | High | Low | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Quarter | $ | 5.85 | $ | 2.22 | ||
| Second Quarter | 5.49 | 2.95 | ||||
| Third Quarter | 7.06 | 2.57 | ||||
| Fourth Quarter | 6.10 | 4.04 | ||||
Equity Compensation Plan Information. Level 3 has only one equity compensation plan—The 1995 Stock Plan (Amended and Restated as of July 24, 2002)—under which Level 3 may issue shares of Common Stock to employees, officers, directors and consultants. This plan has been approved by the Company's stockholders. The following table provides information about the shares of Level 3's common stock that may be issued upon exercise of awards under the 1995 Stock Plan as of December 31, 2002.2003.
| Plan Category | Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights† | Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights† ‡ | Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders | 64,645,785 | $ | 15.22 | 22,327,536 | |||
Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders | — | — | — | ||||
67
| Plan Category | Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights | Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders | 42,100,272 | † | $ | 11.59 | †‡ | 43,663,723 | |
| Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders | 275,335 | $ | 0.00 | 0 | |||
In connection with the Company's acquisition of Telverse Communications, Inc., the Company granted to a total of 32 employees of Telverse the right to receive an aggregate of 275,335 shares of Level 3 Common Stock. The shares of Level 3 Common Stock will be issued to these employees, without those employees required to pay any further consideration, upon the satisfaction of certain performance conditions. For a total of 11 employees ("Performance Based Employees"), these performance conditions relate to the employee continuing his or her employment with the Company or a subsidiary of the Company and the Company obtaining specified numbers of (3)ToneSM Business service subscribers over a specified period of time. For the remaining 21 employees ("Non-Performance Based Employees"), the performance conditions are limited to continued employment with the Company or a subsidiary of the Company. As the issuance of these rights were made as an inducement for these Telverse employees to become employees of the Company, stockholder approval of this arrangement was not required.
Vesting of these awards for the Performance Based Employees occurs in two parts. Vesting dates for the number of awards based on subscriber growth are October 21, 2003; January 21, 2004; April 21, 2004; July 21, 2004; October 21, 2004; January 21, 2005; April 21, 2005; and July 21, 2005. As of each vesting date, the number of awards that vest is based upon the number of installed, billed and cash collected subscribers to the (3)ToneSM Business service divided by 175,000. Vesting of the portion of the awards for Performance Based Employees that are not related to subscriber growth is 50% on January 21, 2004, and 50% on July 21, 2004. For Non-Performance Based Employees, their awards vest 50% on January 21, 2004, and 50% on July 21, 2004.
Dividend Policy. The Company's current dividend policy, in effect since April 1, 1998, is to retain future earnings for use in the Company's business. As a result, management does not anticipate paying any cash dividends on shares of Common Stock in the foreseeable future. In addition, the Company is effectively restricted under certain debt covenants from paying cash dividends on shares of its Common Stock.
6768
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The Selected Financial Data of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and its Subsidiariessubsidiaries appears below.
| | | Fiscal Year Ended(1) | | Fiscal Year Ended(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | (dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | | (dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Results of Operations: | Results of Operations: | Results of Operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue | $ | 3,148 | $ | 1,533 | $ | 1,184 | $ | 515 | $ | 392 | Revenue | $ | 4,026 | $ | 3,111 | $ | 1,533 | $ | 1,184 | $ | 515 | |||||||||||||
| Net loss from continuing operations(2) | (1,113 | ) | (5,448 | ) | (1,407 | ) | (482 | ) | (128 | ) | Net loss from continuing operations(2) | (721 | ) | (860 | ) | (4,373 | ) | (1,407 | ) | (482 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Net earnings (loss)(3) | (858 | ) | (4,978 | ) | (1,455 | ) | (487 | ) | 804 | Net loss(3) | (711 | ) | (858 | ) | (4,978 | ) | (1,455 | ) | (487 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Per Common Share: | Per Common Share: | Per Common Share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Earnings (loss) from continuing operations(2) | (2.74 | ) | (14.58 | ) | (3.88 | ) | (1.44 | ) | (0.43 | ) | Net loss from continuing operations(2) | (1.28 | ) | (2.11 | ) | (11.70 | ) | (3.88 | ) | (1.44 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Net earnings (loss)(3) | (2.11 | ) | (13.32 | ) | (4.01 | ) | (1.46 | ) | 2.66 | Net loss(3) | (1.26 | ) | (2.11 | ) | (13.32 | ) | (4.01 | ) | (1.46 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Dividends(4) | — | — | — | — | — | Dividends(4) | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Financial Position: | Financial Position: | Financial Position: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | 8,963 | 9,316 | 14,919 | 8,906 | 5,522 | Total assets | 8,293 | 8,963 | 9,316 | 14,919 | 8,906 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current portion of long-term debt | 4 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 5 | Current portion of long-term debt | 125 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt, less current portion(5) | 6,102 | 6,209 | 7,318 | 3,989 | 2,641 | Long-term debt, less current portion(5) | 5,250 | 6,102 | 6,209 | 7,318 | 3,989 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stockholders' equity (deficit)(6) | (240 | ) | (65 | ) | 4,549 | 3,405 | 2,165 | Stockholders' equity (deficit)(6) | 181 | (240 | ) | (65 | ) | 4,549 | 3,405 | |||||||||||||||||||
The Company purchased software resellers CorpSoft, IncInc. and Software Spectrum, Inc. in March and June of 2002, respectively. The Company recorded approximately $1.8 billion of revenue attributable to these two businesses in 2002.
The Company purchased substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity, Inc. in February 2003. The Company also purchased Telverse Communications, Inc. in July 2003.
In 2000 1999 and 1998,1999, RCN Corporation issued stock in public offerings and for certain transactions. These transactions reduced the Company's ownership in RCN to 31%, and 35% and 41% at December 31, 2000 1999 and 1998,1999, respectively, and resulted in pre-tax gains to the Company of $95 million $117 million and $62$117 million in 2000 and 1999, and 1998, respectively.
In 1998, Level 3 acquired XCOM Technologies, Inc. and its developing telephone-to-IP network bridge technology. Level 3 recorded a $30 million nondeductible charge against earnings for the write-off of in-process research and development acquired in the transaction.
In 1998, Cable Michigan, Inc. was acquired by Avalon Cable of Michigan, Inc. Level 3 received approximately $129 million for its shares of Cable Michigan, Inc. in the disposition and recognized a pre-tax gain of approximately $90 million.
In 2001, Level 3 recorded a $3.2 billion impairment charge to reflect the reduction in the carrying amount of certain of its communications assets in accordance with SFAS No. 144 "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets". Also in 2001, Level 3 recognized a gain of $1.1 billion as a result of the early extinguishment of long-term debt.
In 2002, the Company recognized approximately $181 million of impairment and restructuring charges, a gain of approximately $191 million from the sale of Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. common stock, $88 million of induced conversion expenses attributable to the repurchaseexchange of the Company's convertible debt securities, and $120 million of Federal tax benefits due to legislation enacted in 2002.2002 and a gain of $255 million as a result of the early extinguishment of long-term debt.
6869
In 1998, Level 32003, the Company recognized approximately $45 million of impairment and restructuring charges, a gain of approximately $70 million from the sale of "91 Express Lanes" toll road assets, $200 million of induced conversion expenses attributable to the exchange of the Company's convertible debt securities, and recognized a gain of $608$41 million equal to the difference between the carrying value of its former construction group operations and its fair value. No taxes were provided on this gain due to the tax-free natureas a result of the split-offearly extinguishment of these operations to Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. Level 3 also recognized in 1998 an after-tax gain of $324 million on the sale of its energy segment to MidAmerican Energy Holding Company, Inc.
long-term debt.
In 2001, Level 3 also recognized an extraordinary gain of $1.1 billion as a result of the early extinguishment of long-term debt.
In 2002, the Company recognized an extraordinary gain of $255 million as a result of the early extinguishment of long-term debt.
In 2000, Level 3 received net proceeds of approximately $3.2 billion from the offering of $863 million in convertible subordinated notes, $1.4 billion in three tranches of U.S. dollar denominated senior debt securities, $780 million from two tranches of Euro denominated senior debt securities and $233 million from mortgage financings.
In 2001, the Company negotiated an increase in the total amount available under its senior secured credit facility to $1.775 billion and borrowed $650 million under the facility. Also in 2001, a subsidiary of the Company and Level 3 repurchased, using cash and common stock, approximately $1.9 billion face amount of the Company's long-term debt and recognized an extraordinarya gain of approximately $1.1 billion as a result of the early extinguishment of debt.
In 2002, the Company received net proceeds of $488 million from the issuance of $500 million of 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2012. Also in 2002, the Company repurchased, using cash and common stock, approximately $705 million face amount of its long-term debt and recognized an extraordinarya gain of approximately $255 million as a result of the early extinguishment of debt.
In 2003, the Company received net proceeds of $848 million from the issuance of $374 million of 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2010 and the issuance of $500 million of 10.75% Senior Notes due 2011. The Company completed a debt exchange whereby the Company issued $295 million (face amount) of 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013 and common stock in exchange for $352 million (book value) of long-term debt. In addition, Level 3 using cash on hand, restricted cash and the proceeds from the issuance of the 10.75% Senior Notes due 2011, repaid in full, the $1.125 billion purchase money indebtedness outstanding under the Senior Secured Credit Facility. Also in 2003, the Company repurchased, using common stock, approximately $1.007 billion face amount of its long-term debt and recognized a gain of approximately $41 million as a result of the early extinguishment of debt.
In 2000, the Company received approximately $2.4 billion of net proceeds from the sale of 23 million shares of its common stock.
In 2001, the Company issued approximately 15.9 million shares of common stock, valued at approximately $72 million, to repurchasein exchange for long-term debt.
In 2002, the Company issued approximately 47 million shares of common stock, valued at approximately $466 million, to repurchasein exchange for long-term debt. Included in the value of common stock issued, are induced conversion premiums of $88 million for convertible debt securities.
In 2003, the Company issued approximately 216 million shares of common stock, valued at approximately $953 million, in exchange for long-term debt. Included in the value of common stock issued, are induced conversion premiums of $200 million for convertible debt securities.
6970
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONSOPERATION
This document contains forward looking statements and information that are based on the beliefs of management as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to Level 3 Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("Level 3" or the "Company"). When used in this document, the words "anticipate", "believe", "plans", "estimate" and "expect" and similar expressions, as they relate to the Company or its management, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such statements reflect the current views of the Company with respect to future events and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described in this document. See "Cautionary Factors That May Affect Future Results."
Level 3 Communications, Inc. is primarily engaged in the communications and information services businesses, with additional operations in coal mining. The Company is a facility based provider of a broad range of integrated communications services including voice, private line, wavelengths, colocation, Internet access, managed modem, data and dark fiber. Revenue is recognized on a monthly basis as these services are provided. For contracts involving private line, wavelengths and dark fiber services, Level 3 may receive up-front payments for services to be delivered for a period of up to 20 years. In these situations, Level 3 will defer the revenue and amortize it on a straight-line basis to earnings over the term of the contract.
Management of Level 3 believes that growth in recurring revenue is critical to the long-term success of the communications business. The Company must continue to increase revenue from its existing services in the Transport & Infrastructure, Softswitch and IP & Data business units, as well as develop new services using Level 3's IP-based network and technologies including those acquired in the Telverse transaction. These new services include Voice-over-IP, local transport services, and IP-VPNs.
Growth in Transport and Infrastructure revenue is largely dependent on increased demand for bandwidth services and available capital of companies requiring communications capacity for their own use or in providing capacity as a service provider to their customers. These expenditures may be in the form of up-front payments or monthly payments for private line, wavelength or dark fiber services. An increase in demand will likely be partially offset by declines in unit pricing. The Company continues to experience pricing pressures on its Transport and Infrastructure services. The emergence of several companies from bankruptcy protection and additional competition from other distressed carriers has resulted in a difficult and competitive operating environment. The Company does not expect this environment to change significantly until either the industry consolidates or available capacity is used by the marketplace.
For the Softswitch business unit, the Company and some of its customers are seeing an acceleration of the trend to higher speed broadband services as the narrow band market matures. This trend is expected to result in declines in managed modem and reciprocal compensation revenue in the future. These declines may be mitigated by growth in IP & Data services offered by the Company that address the market shift to higher speed broadband services. Level 3 believes that the low cost structure of its network will enable it to aggressively compete for new business in this market.
The Company is developing new voice services that in addition to its existing voice services target large and existing markets. The Company believes that the efficiencies of Level 3's IP and optical based network, including its Softswitch technology, will provide customers a lower cost alternative than the existing circuit-switched networks of its competitors. Several other competitors with IP technologies have recently announced that they will be entering this market as well. In order to expedite the penetration of this market, Level 3 has expanded its sales force to specifically target voice service providers, value-added resellers and other channels that reach both the consumer and enterprise markets for voice services. While the new voice services being launched by Level 3 target a large
71
addressable market, the Company must quickly develop both its capability to market and sell through various channels in the voice market and develop the internal systems and processes necessary to support the new products being launched. The market for voice services is large, however it is expected to continue to decline over time as a result of the new low cost IP and optical based technologies. In addition, the market for voice services is being targeted by many competitors, several of which are larger and have more financial resources than the Company.
As described above under the caption "—Regulation," the regulatory scheme for the provision of VoIP services has yet to be finalized by the regulatory authorities in the United States and Europe. To the extent that regulators require providers of VoIP services such as Level 3 to pay additional fees or charges for the delivery of VoIP services, the profitability of these services could be materially and adversely affected.
The conversion from narrow band dial-up services to higher speed broadband services is expected to increase demand for the Company's IP and Data services. Growth in this area is dependent on increased usage by both enterprises and consumers. An increase in the reliability of information transmitted over the Internet and declines in the cost to transmit data have resulted in increased utilization of e-commerce or web based services by businesses. The abundance of available capacity and the numerous companies competing in this market, have resulted in a very competitive pricing environment.
The Company believes that its strong financial position and suite of existing services and new service offerings, which target a larger addressable market for communications services, will enable it to grow regardless of whether the operating environment in the communication industry improves from current conditions.
Management focuses on Adjusted OIBDA, cash flows from operating activities and capital expenditures to assess the operating performance of the businesses. Management believes that Adjusted OIBDA, when viewed over time, reflects the operating trend and performance of its communications business. Adjusted OIBDA, or similar measures, also is a measure of performance used by Level 3's competitors and is used by management in evaluating relative performance. Management believes that cash flows from operating activities, also is a measure of operating performance, but in addition measures the generation of cash from or use of cash for working capital purposes which is important as the Company monitors and maintains its liquidity (particularly accounts receivable, accounts payable and deferred revenue). The Company is focusing its attention growing revenue through existing services and new service development efforts, continuing to show improvements in Adjusted OIBDA as a percentage of revenue, managing working capital and making certain its capital expenditures are made primarily for activities that directly generate revenue. The Company was able to repay in full amounts borrowed under the Senior Secured Credit Facility in 2003. As a result, the Company does not have any significant principal amounts due on its outstanding debt (excluding capitalized leases and mortgages) until 2008 and can focus its efforts and resources on growing communications revenue.
The Company's information services business is comprised of two operating units:(i)Structure, LLC and Software Spectrum, Inc.(i)Structure provides computer outsourcing services primarily to small and medium-sized businesses that want to concentrate their resources on their core business rather than expend capital and incur overhead costs to operate their own computing environments. Efforts to grow this business are largely dependent on(i)Structure's ability to effectively market itself to businesses while competing against other outsourcing providers with greater financial resources and name recognition.(i)Structure recognizes revenue in the period the service is provided.
Software Spectrum is a global reseller of business software, primarily to large and medium sized businesses. Software Spectrum recognizes revenue at the time the product is shipped or in accordance with the terms of the licensing contracts. Sales under certain licensing programs permit Software Spectrum to recognize only a service fee paid by the software publisher as revenue. Software Spectrum
72
has experienced an increase in sales under this form of licensing program and management expects further adoption of agency licensing programs in the future. The Company's ability to resell software is influenced by the general economic environment, specifically in North America and Western Europe, as well as the level of IT spending for business software by large and medium sized companies.
The software distribution and resale business is very competitive with profitability largely dependent upon rebates received from the software publishers. The amount of rebates received from the publisher is tied directly to the value of software sold for that publisher. These programs vary from publisher to publisher, but typically contain sales targets that are tiered so that Software Spectrum can earn higher rebates on incremental sales above certain sales targets. Alternatively, Software Spectrum may forfeit publisher rebates if certain minimum sales targets are not achieved. As such, it is not uncommon for software resellers, including Software Spectrum, to price software at or below their cost in order to attain the next sales target and thus earn higher rebates from software publishers.
Microsoft is the primary provider of business software to the Company's Software Spectrum business. If Microsoft should successfully implement programs for the direct sale of software through volume purchase agreements or other arrangements intended to exclude the distribution or resale channel, Software Spectrum's results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.
In order to achieve a desired return on invested capital, Management of the information services business focuses on the Adjusted OIBDA metric and cash flow from operating activities to assess the overall operating performance of the information services business. Specifically, for the (i)Structure business, Adjusted OIBDA reflects the operating results of the business and, viewed in conjunction with net capital expenditures required to support existing and new customer contracts, provides management with visibility to the financial condition and operating performance of the business. For the Software Spectrum business, Management focuses on Adjusted OIBDA and cash flow from operating activities, including changes in working capital accounts, to assess the financial condition and operating performance of the business. Software Spectrum's working capital requirements are determined primarily by changes in its accounts receivable and accounts payable balances. Management is focusing its attention on minimizing working capital requirements by lowering its days sales outstanding through consistent collection procedures. Management expects working capital requirements for the Software Spectrum business to decline in the future as software publishers continue to adopt the agency licensing model described in the Critical Accounting Policies section below.
Level 3, through its two 50% owned joint venture surface mines in Montana and Wyoming, sells coal primarily through long-term contracts with public utilities. The long-term contracts for the delivery of coal establish the price, volume, and quality requirements of the coal to be delivered. Revenue under these and other contracts is recognized when coal is shipped to the customer.
The following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes beginning on page F-1 of this annual report.
Critical Accounting Policies
The Company has identified the policies below as critical to its business operations and the understanding of its results of operations. The effect and any associated risks related to these policies on the Company's business operations is discussed throughout this Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations where these policies affect the Company's reported and expected financial results.
73
Revenue
Revenue for communications services, including voice, private line, wavelengths, colocation, Internet access, managed modem, data services and dark fiber revenue from contracts entered into after June 30, 1999, is recognized monthly as the services are provided. Communications services are provided basedeither on contractual amounts expecteda usage basis, which can vary period to be collected.period, or on a contractually committed amount. Reciprocal compensation revenue is recognized only when an interconnection agreement is in place with another carrier, and the relevant regulatory authorities have approved the terms of the agreement. Periodically, the Company will receive payment for reciprocal compensation services before the regulatory authorities approve the agreement. These amounts are included in Other Current Liabilitiesother current liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheetconsolidated balance sheet until the Company receives the necessary regulatory approvals.
Revenue attributable to leases of dark fiber pursuant to indefeasible rights-of-use agreements ("IRUs") that qualify for sales-type lease accounting, and were entered into prior to June 30, 1999, werewas recognized at the time of delivery and acceptance of the fiber by the customer. Certain sale and long-term IRU agreements of dark fiber and capacity entered into after June 30, 1999, are required to be accounted for in the same manner as sales of real estate with property improvements or integral equipment whichequipment. This accounting treatment results in the deferral of the cash that has been received and the recognition of revenue recognitionratably over the term of the agreement (currently up to 20 years).
It is the Company's policy to recognize revenue relating to the termination revenueof customer agreements and the settlement of customer disputes when certain conditions have been met. These conditions include: 1) the customer has accepted all or partial delivery of the asset or service; 2) Level 3 has received consideration for the asset or service provided; and 3) Level 3 is not legally obligated to provide additional product or services to the customer or their successor under the original contract. TerminationTermination/settlement revenue is typically recognized in situations where a customer and Level 3 mutually agree to terminate all or a portion of the service provided, or the customer and/or its assets fail to emerge from bankruptcy and, therefore, Level 3 is not obligated to provide additional serviceservices to the customer or its successor. If the conditions described above are met, the Company will recognize terminationtermination/settlement revenue equal to the fair value of consideration received, less any amounts previously recognized.
70
Specifically, termination revenue is recognized when a customer disconnects service prior to the end of the contract period, for which Level 3 entered into joint build arrangements duringhad previously received consideration and for which revenue recognition was deferred. In addition, termination revenue is recognized when customers make termination penalty payments to Level 3 to settle contractually committed purchase amounts that the construction of its North Americancustomer no longer expects to meet. Settlement revenue is recognized when a customer and European networks in which it was the sponsoring partner. These arrangements are generally characterized as fixed fee or cost sharing arrangements. For fixed-fee joint build arrangements inLevel 3 renegotiate a contract under which Level 3 is the sponsor, the Company assumes the cost risk of completing the workno longer obligated to provide leased facilities or services for a fixed price agreed upon at the inception of the arrangement between the parties. Level 3 recognizesconsideration previously received and for which revenue equal to the value of the contract when constructionrecognition has been deferred. Termination/settlement revenue is complete and payment is received from the joint build partner. For cost sharing arrangements each of the joint build parties shares the cost risk of completing the work. These contracts typically include provisions in which the sponsoring partner receives a management fee for construction services provided. Level 3 recognizes this management fee as revenuereported in the period whensame manner as the contractoriginal product or service provided, and is completed and payment is received from the joint build partner.not indicative of future revenue growth.
Software Spectrum is a reseller of business software. Accounting literature provides guidance to enable companies to determine whether revenuerevenues from the reselling of goods and services should be recorded on a "gross" or "net" basis. The Company believes that the facts and circumstances of the Software Spectrum business, particularly those involving pricing and credit risk, indicate that the majority of Software Spectrum's sales should be recorded on a "gross" basis. The latitude and ability of Software Spectrum to establish the selling price to the customer is a clearone significant indication of "gross" revenue reporting. The assumption of credit risk is another important factor in determining "gross" versus "net" reporting. Software Spectrum has the responsibility to pay suppliers for all products ordered, regardless of when, or if, it collects from its customers. Software Spectrum is also solely responsible for determining the creditworthiness of its customers.
Microsoft Corporation, a significant supplier of software to the Company, hasSoftware Spectrum, changed certain licensing programs in 2001 whereby new enterprise-wide licensing arrangements will be priced, billed and collected directly by Microsoft. The CompanyIn 2003, several other software publishers began adopting this type of licensing program. Software Spectrum will continue to provide sales and support services related to these transactions and will earn a service fee directly from Microsoftthe software publishers for these activities. The CompanyUnder this licensing program, Software Spectrum only recognizes the service fee it receives from the software publisher as revenue and not the entire valuesales price of the software forsoftware. The Company continues to sell products under various licensing programs but has recently experienced an increase in the level of sales under this program.these new programs. If Microsoft isand other software publishers are able to successfully implement and sell a significant amount of software under this program, or it is determined that the accounting for reselling of the software should be recorded on a "net" basis, the Company may experience a significant decline in information services revenue. This potential decrease in revenue is not expected to affect the Company's earnings, as it shouldbut will also experience a correspondingcomparable decline in cost of revenue for these transactions.given the high cost of revenue associated with the software reseller business.
MicrosoftRevenue is recognized from software sales at the primary providertime of business softwareproduct shipment, or in accordance with terms of licensing contracts, when the price to the Company's informationcustomer is fixed, and collectibility is reasonably assured. Revenue from maintenance contracts is recognized when invoiced, the license period has commenced, when the price to the customer is fixed, and collectibility is reasonably assured, as Software Spectrum has no future obligations associated with future performance under these maintenance contracts. Advance billings are recorded as deferred revenue until services business. If Microsoft should successfully implement programs for the direct sale of software through volume purchase agreements or other arrangements intended to exclude the distribution or resale channel, the Company's results of operation would be materially affected.are provided.
Accounting practice and guidance with respect to the accounting treatment of the above transactions is evolving.revenue continues to evolve. Any changes in the accounting treatment could affect the manner in which the Company accounts for revenue within its communications, information services and expenses associated with these agreements in the future.coal businesses.
Non-Cash Compensation
The Company applies the expense recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123, "Accounting for Stock BasedStock-Based Compensation" ("SFAS No. 123"). Most companies do not follow the expense recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123:123; rather, they disclose the information only on a pro-forma basis. As a result, these pro-forma disclosures must be considered when comparing the Company's results of operations to thatthose reported by other companies. Under SFAS No. 123, the fair value of an option or other stock-based compensation (as computed in accordance with accepted option valuation models) on the date of grant is amortized over the vesting periods of the options in accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 28 "Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans" ("FIN 28"). Although the recognition of the value of the instruments results in
71
compensation or professional expenses in an entity's financial statements, the expense differs from other compensation and professional expenses in that these charges, though permitted to be settled in cash, are generally settled through the issuance of common stock, which would have a dilutive impacteffect upon earnings per share, net income or loss, if and when such sharesoptions are exercised.
Long-Lived Assets
Property and equipment is stated at cost, reduced by provisions to recognize economic impairment in value when management determines that events have occurred that require an analysis of potential impairment. Costs associated directly with the uncompleted network and the development of business support systems, primarily employee related costs, and interest expense incurred during the construction period, are capitalized. The Company capitalized $61 million, $66 million and $150 million of operating expenses,cost, primarily direct labor and related employee benefits, in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively, and $58 million of interest expense in 2001. Intercity network segments, gateway facilities, local networks and operating equipment that have been placed in service are being depreciated over their estimated useful lives, primarily ranging from 3-25 years. The total cost of a business support system is amortized
75
over a useful life of three years. WhenThe useful lives of the Company's assets are sold, retired or otherwise disposed of, the costestimates and related accumulated depreciation are eliminatedactual in-service periods for specific assets could differ significantly from the accounts and the gain or loss is recognized.these estimates.
The Company evaluates the carrying value of long-lived assets, including property and equipment, whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. An impairment loss exists when estimated undiscounted cash flows attributable to the assets are less than their carrying amount. If an asset is deemed to be impaired, the amount of the impairment loss recognized represents the excess of the asset's carrying value as compared to its estimated fair value, based on management's assumptions and projections. The Company assessed its long-lived assets for impairment at December 31, 2003, and determined that an impairment charge was not required. Level 3 recorded impairment charges of $182 million and $3.2 billion in 2002 and 2001, respectively, to write down the carrying amount of its North American and European conduits, its colocation assets and its transoceanic cable systems to their estimated fair value as these telecommunications assets were identified as being excess, obsolete or carried at values that may not be recoverable due to an adverse change in the extent in which these assets were being utilized in the business, which was caused by the unfavorable business climate within the telecommunications industry.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2001,Level 3 also assesses the FASB also issuedcarrying value of goodwill on an annual basis in accordance to SFAS No. 142 "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets" ("SFAS No. 142"). SFAS No. 142The carrying value of each reporting unit, including goodwill assigned to that reporting unit, is effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2002. SFAS No. 142 requires companiescompared to segregate identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination from goodwill. The remaining goodwill is no longer subject to amortization over its estimated useful life. However,fair value. If the fair value of the reporting unit does not exceed the carrying amountvalue of the reporting unit, including goodwill, mustan analysis is performed to determine if an impairment charge should be assessed at least annuallyrecorded. The Company did not record charges for goodwill impairment using ain 2003, 2002 or 2001.
Management's estimate of the future cash flows attributable to its long-lived assets and the fair value of its businesses involve significant uncertainty. Those estimates are based test. Goodwill attributableon management's assumptions of future results, growth trends and industry conditions. If those estimates are not met, the Company could have additional impairment charges in the future, and the amounts may be material.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Recently issued accounting pronouncements are described in Note 1 to equity method investments is no longer amortized but is still subject to impairment analysis using existing guidance for equity method investments. For the goodwill and intangible assets in place as of December 31, 2001,consolidated financial statements. The following are the adoption of SFAS No. 142 did notrecently issued pronouncements that the Company believes have, a material effectsignificant affect on the Company's results of operations or itsand financial position. The effect of SFAS No. 142 on the Company's financial statements in the future will be dependent upon the fair value of the net assets acquired in a transaction versus the total purchase price.
In June 2001, the FASB also approved SFAS No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations" ("SFAS No. 143"). SFAS No. 143 establishes accounting standards for recognition and measurement of a liability for an asset retirement obligation and the associated asset retirement cost. The fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation is to be recognized in the period in which it is incurred if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The associated retirement costs are capitalized and included as part of the carrying value of the long-lived asset and amortized over the useful life of the asset. SFAS No. 143 will bewas effective for the Company beginning on January 1, 2003.
72
The Company expects that itsCompany's coal mining business will be affected by this standard as the Company accrues,had previously accrued, as a component of cost of revenue, an estimate of future reclamation liability. The reclamation liability will be adjusted and a corresponding asset established to comply with this new standard. The net effect of the adoption of SFAS No. 143 to the CompanyCompany's coal mining business as of January 1, 2003 was a decrease in noncurrent liabilities of approximately $6$5 million (which will be amortized to expense in future years) and will bewas reflected as a cumulative-effect adjustment in the Consolidated Statementconsolidated condensed statement of Operations.operations. The communications business has entered in to certain colocation leases whereby it is required upon termination of the lease, to remove the leasehold improvements and return the leased space to its original condition. The Company has also entered in to right-of-way agreements for its intercity and metropolitan networks whichthat may require the removal of the conduit or fiber upon termination of the agreement. TheUpon adoption of this standard on January 1, 2003, the Company also recorded obligations and corresponding assets of approximately $31 million upon adoption of SFAS No. 143 related tofor these lease and right of way agreements. Accretion of asset retirement obligation
76
expense of $12 million was recorded during the year ended December 31, 2003; resulting in total asset retirement obligations, including reclamation costs for the coal business, of $127 million at December 31, 2003.
The value of the Company's communications asset retirement obligations have been discounted to reflect the assumption that Level 3 will use the underlying assets over the entire lease term. If Level 3 should elect to abandon these assets before the end of the lease term, it may be required to remediate the leased property to its original condition at the time of abandonment and possibly at amounts higher than the obligation recorded on the consolidated balance sheet. In addition, the asset retirement obligations are calculated based on the several assumptions which could change over time. If actual results differ from the assumptions used, the amounts required to remediate the properties may differ significantly from the amounts reflected in the consolidated financial statements.
In April 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 145, "Rescission of FASB Statements No. 4, 44, and 64, Amendment of FASB Statement No. 13, and Technical Corrections" ("SFAS No. 145"). SFAS No. 145 is effective for fiscal years beginning and certain transactions entered into after May 15, 2002. SFAS No. 145 requires gains and losses from the extinguishment of debt be classified as extraordinary items only if they meet the criteria in APB Opinion No. 30. Previously, FASB Statement No. 4 generally required all gains and losses from debt extinguished prior to maturity to be classified as an extraordinary item in the statement of operations. APB Opinion No. 30 requires that to qualify as an extraordinary item, the underlying event or transaction should possess a high degree of abnormality and be of a type clearly unrelated to, or only incidentally related to, the ordinary activities of the Company, and would not reasonably be expected to recur in the foreseeable future. Any gain or loss on extinguishment of debt classified as an extraordinary item in prior periods presented that does not meet the criteria in APB Opinion No. 30 shall be reclassified. The Company believes thatUpon adoption of SFAS No. 145, due to the recurring nature of its debt repurchases and exchanges, the adoptionCompany reclassified the related gains previously classified as extraordinary gains during the year ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 of SFAS No. 145 in 2003 will result$255 million and $1.075 billion, respectively, in the reclassification of the related extraordinary gains and losses in theconsolidated statement of operations to other non-operating income.
SFAS No. 145 also addresses other issues including amending certain provisions of SFAS No. 13, "Accounting for Leases" ("SFAS No. 13"). SFAS No. 145 requires that capital leases that are modified so that the resulting lease agreement is classified as an operating lease be accounted for under sales-leaseback provisions. This amendment and the other issues addressed in SFAS No. 145 are not expected to have a material effect on the financial position or results of operations of the Company.
In June 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 146, "Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities", ("SFAS No. 146"). SFAS No. 146 addresses financial accounting and reporting for costs associated with exit or disposal activities (excluding an entity newly acquired in a business combination), often referred to as "restructuringas"restructuring costs", and nullifies prior accounting guidance with respect to such costs. This StatementSFAS No. 146 will spread out the reporting of expenses related to restructurings initiated after 2002, because commitment to a plan to exit an activity or dispose of long-lived assets will no longer be enough to record a liability for the anticipated costs. Under previous guidance, a liability for an exit cost was recognized at the date of an entity's commitment to an exit plan. Instead, exit and disposal costs will be recorded when a liability has beenthey are incurred and can be measured at fair value, and related liabilities will be subsequently adjusted for changes in estimated cash flows. The provisions of SFAS No. 146 shall beare effective for exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002, with no retroactive restatement allowed. Early application is permitted. Level 3's management continues to review portionsThe Company announced in 2003, that it was consolidating the Genuity operations into those of itsthe existing communications business, as well as combining certain facilities and other businesses to determine how those businesses will assist with the Company's focus on deliveryoperations of communicationsSoftware Spectrum. The Company incurred costs for workforce reductions and information services and reaching free cash flow breakeven. If the Company elects to exit these businesses, the costs required to exit or disposelease terminations as a result of these businesses will not be recorded until they are actually incurred. Level 3 is
73
unable to determine at this time whether these costs will be incurred or whether they will be material to its resultsdecisions of operations or financial position.
In December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure". SFAS No. 148 amends SFAS No. 123 "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation" to provide alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. In addition, SFAS No. 148 amends the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123 to require prominent disclosures$45 million in both annual and interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. The Company adopted the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 148 in 2002.2003.
In September 2002, the Emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") addressed the accounting for convertible debt for equity exchanges in Issue 02-15: "Determining Whether Certain Conversions of Convertible Debt to Equity Securities Are within the Scope of FASB Statement No. 84" ("EITF 02-15"). The EITF concluded in EITF 02-15 that these types of transactions should be accounted for as induced conversions in accordance with FASB No. 84, "Induced Conversions of Convertible Debt" ("SFAS No. 84"). SFAS No. 84 requires a non-cash charge to earnings for the implied value of an inducement to convert from convertible debt to common equity securities of the
77
issuer. The accounting is to be applied prospectively for those convertible debt for equity exchanges completed after September 11, 2002, the date of the EITF's consensus. The Company applied the provisions of SFAS No. 84 to all convertible debt for equity exchange transactions completed after June 30, 2002.
In November 2002, the EITF addressed the accounting for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables in Issue 00-21: "Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables" ("EITF 00-21"). EITF 00-21 provides guidance on how the arrangement consideration should be measured, whether the arrangement should be divided into separate units of accounting, and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting. EITF 00-21 shall be effective for revenue arrangements entered into in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2003. The Company does not expect the potential effectrecognized induced conversion expenses of EITF 00-21 will be significant to its results of operations$200 million and financial position.
In November 2002, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others". FASB Interpretation No. 45 elaborates on the disclosures to be made by a guarantor$88 million in its interim and annual financial statements about its obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. It also clarifies that a guarantor is required to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair value of the obligation undertaken in issuing the guarantee. The initial recognition and initial measurement provisions of the interpretation are applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees issued or modified after December 31, 2002. The disclosure requirements are effective for financial statements of interim or annual periods ending after December 15, 2002. The Company has not entered in to arrangements or guarantees that meet the criteria of this interpretation and does not expect the adoption of this interpretation will have a material effect on its results of operations and financial position.
In January 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities an interpretation of ARB No. 51" ("FIN 46"). FIN 46 addresses consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities. A variable interest entity is defined as an entity in which the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties or as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack any one of the following three characteristics of a controlling financial interest: The direct or indirect ability to make decisions about an entity's activities through voting rights or similar rights, the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity if they occur and, lastly, the
74
right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity if they occur. FIN 46 applies immediately to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003 and to variable interest entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. It applies in the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003, to variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. The Company does not expect FIN 46 to have a material effect on its results of operations or financial position.2002, respectively.
Results of Operations 2003 vs. 2002
The operating results attributable to the McLeod and Genuity transactions and Telverse acquisition are included in the consolidated results from their acquisition dates of January 24, 2002, vs. 2001February 4, 2003 and July 21, 2003, respectively. The results of operations of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum are in included in the consolidated results from their acquisition dates of March 13, 2002 and June 18, 2002.
The operating results of the Company's Midwest Fiber Optic Network, ("MFON") business acquired from Genuity and sold in 2003, the Company's Asian communications operations sold in 2002, as well as Software Spectrum's contact service business sold in 2003 are included in discontinued operations for all periods presented due to their sale to Reach Ltd. in January 2002.for which Level 3 owned these businesses. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation.
Revenuefor 20022003 and 20012002 is summarized as follows:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| Communications | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | $ | 1,947 | $ | 1,101 | ||||
| Information Services | 1,933 | 123 | 1,999 | 1,896 | ||||||||
| Coal Mining | 84 | 87 | 80 | 84 | ||||||||
| Other | 30 | 25 | — | 30 | ||||||||
| $ | 3,148 | $ | 1,533 | $ | 4,026 | $ | 3,111 | |||||
Communications revenue of $1.101 billion in 2002 was comprised of $979 million ofis classified into two categories, services revenue which includes private line, wavelengths, colocation, Internet access, managed modem, joint build management fees, voice and amortized dark fiber revenue, and $122 million attributable to reciprocal compensation. Communications revenue for 2001 was comprised of $876 million of services revenue, $288 million of non-recurring revenue from dark fiber contracts entered into before June 30, 1999 for which sales-type lease accounting was applied, and $134 million of reciprocal compensation. The Company further segregates services revenue into three strategic business units: 1) Transport & Infrastructure services (including private line, wavelength, transoceanic, dark fiber and colocation services), 2) Softswitch services (including managed modem and voice services), and 3) IP & Data services (including Internet Protocol, data, DSL aggregation and security services). Revenue attributable to these strategic business units are identified in the following table:
| | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||
| Services: | ||||||||
| Transport & Infrastructure | $ | 779 | $ | 509 | ||||
| Softswitch | 644 | 332 | ||||||
| IP & Data | 397 | 138 | ||||||
| Total Services Revenue | 1,820 | 979 | ||||||
| Reciprocal Compensation | 127 | 122 | ||||||
| Total Communications Revenue | $ | 1,947 | $ | 1,101 | ||||
Transport & Infrastructure revenue in 2003 increased 53% from 2002. The increase is primarily attributable to additional settlement and termination revenue recognized in 2003. As described in Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2003 Level 3 and XO Communications amended an IRU agreement entered into in a prior year. The amended agreement resulted in Level 3 recognizing $294 million of revenue that had previously been deferred, but did not result in any additional cash
78
payment to the Company. Included within Transport and Infrastructure revenue is a total of $344 million of settlement and termination revenue in 2003 versus $76 million in 2002. Level 3 expects to recognize termination and settlement revenue in the future as customers desire to renegotiate contracts or are required to terminate service. However, the Company is not able to estimate the affect on its financial results caused by these types of transactions until they occur. Additionally, the Company's private line revenue increased in 2003 primarily as a result of the Genuity transaction and wavelength revenue increased from sales to new and existing customers. These were partially offset by declines in amortized revenue, due to the XO settlement noted above, and revenue provided by joint build activities.
Level 3 significantly expanded its sales efforts towards the U.S. Federal government in 2003 and was successful in securing contracts in 2003. Cash received for a significant portion of this work will be deferred and amortized to revenue over the term of the contracts. In addition to the government opportunities, Level 3 has announced new private line and metropolitan wavelength services that leverage its existing network assets. The Company expects to continue to see pricing pressure in 2004 from distressed carriers that also offer Transport and Infrastructure services, specifically private line and wavelength services.
Softswitch revenue increased 94% in 2003 compared to 2002. An increase in servicesmanaged modem dial-up revenue from 2001customers obtained in the Genuity transaction accounted for a significant majority of the increase in revenue, while sales to new and existing customers accounted for the remaining incremental Softswitch services revenue. For the year ended December 31, 2003, the Company provided customers approximately 123 billion minutes of use compared to 55 billion minutes in 2002. This increase in usage was primarily attributable to an increase from customers obtained in the Genuity transaction.
Level 3's largest managed modem customer, America Online, is expected to reduce overall purchases of fixed service ports for its U.S. dial-up network and to reduce proportionately the number of ports it purchases from Level 3 in the future. The Company believes that this reduction and other factors could result in a year-over-year decline in managed modem related revenue of $100 to $150 million in 2004. In addition to the port cancellation provisions, the contract with America Online contains pricing provisions whereby Level 3 is obligated to provide America Online a reduced price per port rate if Level 3 offers a third party better pricing for comparable services. The Company also expects managed modem related revenue to continue to decline in the future primarily due to growth from existing customers and new customer contracts, and a $19 million increase in termination revenue. Due to the turmoil in the telecommunications industry, the Company experienced a significantan increase in the number of customers disconnecting or terminating servicesubscribers migrating to broadband services. These declines are expected to be more gradual, as compared to reductions expected with AOL, and believed thatgenerally in line with overall market declines. Level 3 expects to mitigate this decline by increasing traffic on its network and gaining market share in the managed modem business.
Level 3 developed and announced several new voice services in the latter half of 2003. These services will leverage Level 3's existing IP network and technologies including those acquired in the Telverse transaction. The Company expects to see an increase in voice revenue in 2004 as much as 25%a result of its recurring revenue base asthese new services; however, due to the development of December 31, 2001 consisted of financially weaker, or "at-risk" customers. As of December 31, 2002,new sales distribution channels and process and systems development work necessary to scale these new products, the Company believes thatdoes not expect to see a meaningful increase in voice revenue until the credit qualitylatter part of its customer base has improved2004.
IP & Data revenue increased 188% in 2003 primarily as a result of the Genuity transaction as well as growth in sales to new and stabilized at, a level where recurring revenue from at-risk customers now comprises less than 15% of total recurring revenue. For some of these at-risk customers,existing customers. Level 3 is ablecontinues to negotiatesee increased IP and collect termination penalties. Level 3 recognized $76 million and $57 millionData usage, however the continued competitive environment for these types of services revenuehas resulted in 2002reduced pricing that partially offset the incremental usage in 2003. Increases in DSL aggregation, Internet access and 2001, respectively, for fees or penalties associated with early termination of services. Level 3 recorded assecurity services revenue $14 millionall contributed to the increase in IP and $35 million of revenueData revenue.
Reciprocal compensation increased slightly in 20022003 and 2001, respectively, for joint build management services provided to other communications companies. The Company also recognized approximately $20 million of revenue from one-time or non-recurring items in 2002. This revenue is primarily attributable to contract settlements and metropolitan network conduit salesan increase in which title was transferred. The decrease in dark fiber revenue reflects the completion of the intercity network in 2001. The Company did not recognize dark fiber revenue under sales-type lease accounting in 2002 as the last remaining segments sold prior to June 30, 1999 were delivered to and acceptedbillable minutes partially offset by customers in the fourth quarter of 2001.
The decreasea decline in reciprocal compensation revenue in 2002 is attributable to the Company receiving regulatory approval from several states regarding its agreements with SBC Communications Inc. and BellSouth during the first half of 2001. These agreements established a rate structure for transmission and switching services provided by one carrier to complete or carry traffic originating on anotherrates. Certain interconnection
7579
carrier's network. It is the Company's policy not to recognize revenue from these agreements until the relevant regulatory authorities approve the agreements. The Company reached an agreement with a major carrier in the fourth quarter of 2002 which resulted in the recognition of approximately $12 million of reciprocal compensation revenue for services provided in prior periods. Certain interconnection agreements with carriers either expired in the second half of 2002 or are scheduled to expire inand 2003. In situations where interconnection agreements are not renewed, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") has stated that the parties involved must follow FCC rules with respect to reciprocal compensation for traffic destined for Internet Service Providers ("ISPs").ISPs. These rules may limit the amount of, and growth in, annual billable minutes, and may also require the usageuse of FCC rates with respect to ISP-bound traffic. The amount of billable minutes allowed by the FCC have historically been below those billed by the Company, and the rates and compensation structure adopted by the FCC may result in reduced per-minute-of-use compensation. To the extent that the Company is unable to sign new interconnection agreements or signs new agreements containing lower rates, or there is a significant decline in the Company's managed modem dial-up business, or FCC or state regulations change such that carriers are not required to compensate other carriers for terminating this type of call, reciprocal compensation revenue may decline significantly over time. In addition, if the Company is subject to the FCC guidelines with respect to billable minutes, Level 3 expects reciprocal compensation revenue will decline in the second half of 2004 as limits on annual billable minutes are reached.
Level 3 wasreceives reciprocal compensation from a partylimited number of carriers and is currently negotiating a new interconnection agreement with one of its primary reciprocal compensation customers. During these negotiations, Level 3 continues to seven non-monetary exchange transactionsbill the customer at the previously contracted amount, but is recognizing revenue at the FCC mandated rates. If the terms of the final contract result in 2001 whereby it sold indefeasible rights of use or IRUs,an interconnection rate higher than the FCC rate, Level 3 will recognize, the incremental reciprocal compensation revenue at that time. Level 3 is also negotiating interconnection agreements with several other capacity, or othercarriers. As a result, reciprocal compensation revenue may fluctuate from period to period as these negotiations are completed.
Information services revenue increased from 2002 to 2003 and is attributable to a companyfull year of results in 2003 from which Level 3 received communications assets orthe acquisitions of CorpSoft in March of 2002 and Software Spectrum in June of 2002 (CorpSoft was merged into Software Spectrum on December 31, 2002), and increased spending on business software as part of increased information technology spending broadly in the United States that the Company and the IT industry began to experience in the fourth quarter of 2003. Partially offsetting the increase was an increase in the proportion of sales under Microsoft and other software publishers' new licensing programs that result in only a service fee being recognized as revenue. The software reseller industry is highly seasonal, with sales activity and profits typically being higher in the second and fourth quarters of the Company's fiscal year. Revenue from the Software Spectrum business increased from $1.800 billion in 2002 to $1.920 billion in 2003. Software Spectrum has experienced an increase in sales under Microsoft's 6.0 licensing program and similar programs offered by other software publishers in 2003. Under these programs, new enterprise-wide licensing arrangements will be priced, billed and collected directly by the software publishers. Software Spectrum will continue to provide sales and support services related to these transactions and will earn a service fee directly from publishers for these activities. The Company will recognize the service fee it receives as revenue and not the entire value of the software under this program. Software Spectrum recorded approximately $35 million and $14 million of revenue attributable to these types of contracts in 2003 and 2002 (acquisition date to December 31, 2002), respectively. The selling price of the software sold under these agreements was $634 million and $237 million for the corresponding periods.
If Microsoft and the other publishers are successful in implementing these licensing programs, it will result in a contemporaneous transaction. In total these exchanges accounted for $24 million or less than 2%significant decline in the amount of total communicationsinformation services revenue ($2 million of additionalrecognized by the Company. The decline in revenue was recognized within the loss from discontinued operationsis not expected to have a meaningful affect on operating income (loss), as the transaction was completed byCompany should experience a corresponding decline in cost of revenue.
Revenue attributable to (i)Structure's business declined from $96 million in 2002 to $79 million, primarily as a result of the Company's discontinued Asian operations)decision to wind down the systems integration business. In the second quarter of 2003, the Company notified its systems integration customers and employees that it would honor its existing contracts. However, once these contracts expire, the Company will no longer be
80
providing systems integration services. The existing contracts expired primarily in 2001the second and third quarters of 2003. Revenue attributable to the outsourcing business declined from $80 million in each case, provided network capacity or redundancy2002 to $77 million in 2003 and is attributable to the renewal of customer contracts at lower prices, which is a trend that is being experienced throughout this industry.
Coal mining revenue declined 5% in 2003 versus 2002. Certain contracts do not require the customer to take delivery of its contracted tonnage if the customer pays the Company the profit it would have earned on unprotected transmission routes that Level 3's engineers determined was required. The fair value of these non-monetary transactions was determined using similar transactions for which cash consideration was received.the mined coal. In 2003, Level 3 recognized noapproximately $4 million of fees and revenue from non-monetary exchange transactions priorthese provisions, as compared to 2001. The Cash Revenue (a non-GAAP metric defined later) fromless than $1 million in 2002. In 2003, the difference between the fees received and the contract price resulted in a $7 million decline in coal revenue. This decline was partially offset by increased sales under new long-term contracts. Coal provided to customers is generally sold under long-term contracts. Sales under these exchanges was $81 million which was 4%long-term contracts represent over 90% of total Cash Revenue of $2.097 billion reportedrelated revenue in 2001. No Cash Revenue was reported for these transactions in 2002.2003 and 2002, respectively.
Level 3 recognized $6 million of amortizedOther revenue in 2002 pursuantwas attributable to California Private Transportation Company, L.P, ("CPTC") the owner-operator of the "91 Express Lanes" toll road in southern California, which was sold in January 2003.
Cost of Revenue for the communications business in 2003 was $370 million versus $209 million in 2002. Increased network costs attributable primarily to the above-described seven non-monetary exchange transactions completed in 2001. No additional non-monetary exchange transactions were executed in 2002.
In August 2002,Genuity transaction are responsible for this increase. Overall, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") indicated that the SEC staff had concluded that all non-monetary exchange transactions for telecommunications capacity should be accounted for as an exchange of assets, irrespective of whether the transaction involved the lease of assets. The conclusion was based on the SEC staff's view that the right to use an asset (that is, a lease) is in fact an asset and not a service contract, irrespective of whether such asset is characterized as an asset on the balance sheet. This conclusion would require that non-monetary exchange transactions for telecommunications capacity involving the exchange of one or more operating leases be recognized based on the carrying value of the assets exchanged, rather than at fair value, resulting in no recognitioncost of revenue for the transactions. Priorcommunications business, as a percentage of communications revenue, remained at 19% for 2002 and 2003. Excluding the effects of $346 million and $76 million of termination and settlement revenue in 2003 and 2002, respectively, which typically does not have a corresponding cost of revenue, the cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue, would have increased from 21% during 2002 to 23% during 2003. This increase is attributable to the SEC's communication on this issue, Level 3's accounting for these transactions, which resultedadditional network costs incurred with the acquisition of Genuity assets and operations in the first quarter of 2003. The Company expects cost of revenue to decline slightly from 2003 levels in 2004, as it realizes a full year benefit from the migration of the business acquired from Genuity to the Level 3 recognizingNetwork.
The cost of revenue had beenfor the information services business increased 5% to $1.836 billion. The cost of revenue for the information services businesses, as a percentage of its revenue, was 92% for 2003 and consistent with industry guidancethat of 2002. Software Spectrum is very reliant on rebates received from software publishers to improve its operating results. In 2003 and 2002, Software Spectrum earned approximately $42 million and $49 million, respectively, in rebates which reduced cost of revenue.
The cost of revenue, as a percentage of revenue, was flat for these typesboth the outsourcing and software reselling businesses of transactions.the information services segment. The cost of revenue for the coal mining business, as a percentage of revenue, was 73% for 2003 and 68% for the 2002. The lower rate in 2002 is attributable to the release of $4 million in accruals due to favorable resolution of certain royalty issues. In addition,2003, new lower margin coal sales and increased labor costs at one of the revenue recognition approach for these transactions thatCompany's mines were partially offset by contract termination revenue.
Depreciation and Amortization expense increased by 3% in 2003 to $827 million. The increase is primarily attributable to the Company followed was an acceptable practicetangible and intangible assets acquired in not only the Genuity transaction in 2003 and the Software Spectrum and Corpsoft acquisitions in 2002, partially offset by shorter lived communications industry but other industries as well. The SEC has indicated that it expected affected companies to retroactively apply this guidance to historical non-monetary exchange capacity transactions that occurredassets placed in service in prior years becoming fully depreciated. Due to decreased capital expenditure levels and if appropriate, restate their financial statements.
Of the seven non-monetary transactions described above,communications assets with three of the transactions involved the use of operating leases for capacity. The revenue recognized in 2001 from these transactions was $21 million and $2 million has been recognized in the first six months of 2002 from these transactions. The Cash Revenue from these transactions was $62 million, or 3% of total Cash Revenue of $2.097 billion reported in 2001. No Cash Revenue was reported for these transactions in 2002.
76
Taking into account the SEC's guidance,five-year estimated useful lives becoming fully depreciated, Level 3 does not believe that it is appropriateexpects depreciation to restate its previously issued financial statements for this issue involving non-monetary transactions, as the amount of revenue recognized was not significant to Level 3's reported revenue, and Level 3 has previously disclosed the nature and amount of these transactionsdecline in its previous periodic filings with the SEC and in a press release issued on February 13, 2002. However, Level 3 has ceased recognizing communications revenue from the three transactions involving operating leases as of June 30, 2002.2004.
The accounting guidance for non-monetary exchange transactions continuesSelling, General and Administrative expenses increased 12% to be subject to review and modification. The Company continues to follow these developments. While the Company is not aware of any specific information related to this issue, the Company believes there is some risk that regulators or accounting standards setting bodies, such as the SEC or Financial Accounting Standards Board, may, at a later date, interpret accounting guidance$1.046 billion in a way that concludes that one or more of the remaining four non-monetary exchange transactions completed by Level 3 do not qualify for revenue recognition. In any event, the Company does not believe that any accounting change related to non-monetary exchange transactions would have a material effect on Level 3's historical financial statements.
The communications business generated Cash Revenue of $1,200 million during 2002. The Company defines Cash Revenue as communications GAAP revenue plus changes in cash deferred revenue during the respective period. Communications Cash Revenue reflects upfront cash received for dark fiber and other capacity sales that are recognized over the term of the contract under GAAP, but it is not intended to represent revenue or cash flows as defined by GAAP. Communications Cash Revenue was $2,097 million for 2001.2003. This decrease in Cash Revenueincrease is a result of the substantialadditional employees and other expenses associated with the Genuity transaction. The Company's global workforce initially increased by approximately 1,400 employees as a result of this transaction. The additional employees resulted in higher compensation, travel, training
81
and facilities expenses. The Company also experienced an increase in insurance and professional expenses in 2003 as well as selling, general and administrative expenses attributable to the Software Spectrum businesses acquired in 2002. These increases were partially offset by declines in bad debt expense, CPTC's operating expenses, non-cash compensation and property tax expenses. During 2003, the Company received final property valuations and assessments from several jurisdictions for property taxes accrued in 2002 and 2003. These assessments were lower than the Company had previously estimated and, therefore, it reduced the property tax accrual by approximately $8 million during 2003 for 2002 property taxes.
Level 3 recorded bad debt expense of $7 million in 2003, which was consistent with that of 2002. In 2003, the Company was able to collect approximately $4 million of receivables that had been written off in prior periods, which was recorded as a reduction of bad debt expense. The Company's allowance for bad debts has decreased over the last few years. This is a result of eliminating the receivables and related allowance for amounts that were deemed uncollectible, and improvements in the overall creditworthiness of the Company's customer base.
Included in operating expenses for 2003 and 2002, were $86 million and $181 million, respectively, of non-cash compensation and professional expenses recognized under SFAS No. 123 related to grants of stock options, warrants and other stock-based compensation programs. The decrease in non-cash compensation expense is attributable to a decline in the value of grants distributed to eligible employees. Level 3 is currently evaluating its non-cash compensation programs and any changes to these programs, may have an affect on the amount of non-cash compensation recorded in the consolidated statement of operations.
The Company expects selling, general and administrative expenses to decline slightly in 2004 versus 2003, as the Company realizes the cost savings derived from the Genuity transaction.
Restructuring and Impairment Charges were $45 million in 2003 and $181 million in 2002. During the first quarter of 2003, Level 3 announced workforce reductions that ultimately will affect approximately 1,200 employees in the communications business by the end of the first quarter of 2004. During 2003, primarily as part of the integration of the business acquired from Genuity, the communications business terminated approximately 1,100 employees and recorded restructuring expenses of $26 million.
In 2003, the information services business recognized $19 million of restructuring charges related to the ongoing integration and restructuring of Software Spectrum, as well as the closure of (i)Structure's system integration operations in Ireland. These actions resulted in the termination of approximately 580 employees in 2003. The restructuring charges include $6 million for lease termination costs for facilities the Company has ceased using.
In 2002, the Company's communications business recorded impairment charges of $101 million related to a colocation facility in Boston, as well as certain corporate facilities in Colorado and excess communications inventory, which are classified as held for sale in other non-current assets. As a result of the completion of additional colocation space in Boston by other providers, the soft demand for office space in the metropolitan Denver area and the continued overabundance of communications equipment in the secondary markets, the Company believed that these assets were obsolete and that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to these assets were insufficient to recover their carrying value. The new carrying values of these assets were based on offers received from third parties for the real estate properties or actual sales of similar communication assets.
In December 2002, Level 3 entered in to a sale leaseback transaction for one of its New York colocation facilities and sold the colocation facility near Boston. The Company recognized a loss on these transactions of approximately $81 million, which is included in restructuring and impairment charges on the consolidated statements of operations.
82
The Company recorded a benefit of $13 million for the year ending December 31, 2002, due to the termination of leases for less than had originally been estimated in 2001 and included the benefit as a reduction in restructuring and impairment charges in the consolidated statements of operations in 2002.
The Company expects to incur additional costs for workforce reductions for both the communications and information services businesses in 2004; however, the Company does not expect these costs to be significant.
Level 3 conducted a comprehensive review of its communications assets, specifically assets deployed in and along its intercity network, metropolitan networks, in its gateway facilities and its colocation facilities and obligations as of December 31, 2003. The Company determined based upon its projections, that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to the communications assets exceeded the carrying value of those assets, and therefore, an adjustment to the carrying value of those assets was not necessary. However, future impairment adjustments could be necessary if the Company's actual results and expectations about the communications business should change.
Adjusted OIBDA is defined by the Company, as operating income/(loss) from the consolidated statements of operations, less depreciation and amortization expense, less non-cash compensation expense included within selling, general and administration expense on the consolidated statements of operations, and less the non-cash portion of restructuring and impairment charges. Adjusted OIBDA is not a measurement under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and may not be used by other companies. Management believes that Adjusted OIBDA is an important part of the Company's internal reporting and is an indicator of profitability and operating performance used by the chief operating decision maker or decision making group, especially in a capital-intensive industry such as telecommunications. Adjusted OIBDA excludes interest expense and income tax expense and other gains/losses not included in operating income. Excluding these items eliminates the expenses associated with the Company's capitalization and tax structures. Note 17 of the consolidated financial statements provides a reconciliation of Adjusted OIBDA for each of the Company's operating segments.
Adjusted OIBDA for the communications business was $735 million and $281 million for 2003 and 2002, respectively. The increase in 2003 is primarily attributable to the $346 million of termination and settlement revenue recognized by the Company in 2003 versus $76 million in 2002. The level of termination and settlement revenue recognized in 2003 is not expected to continue in 2004. Also contributing to the increase in 2003 were lower network and selling, general and administrative expenses, and earnings attributable to the Genuity transaction. Adjusted OIBDA for the information services business declined from $40 million in 2002, to $10 million for 2003 and is primarily attributable to $19 million of cash restructuring charges recorded in 2003. In addition, the timing of the acquisition of Software Spectrum late in the second quarter of 2002 resulted in higher Adjusted OIBDA levels. A significant portion of the revenue and gross profit for the software business occurs late in the quarter. As a result, the Company was able to record sales and profits while incurring a disproportionately low amount of operating expenses in the second quarter of 2002. In 2003, profits earned by Software Spectrum on the additional sales were more than offset by the additional operating expenses incurred during the period. Adjusted OIBDA for the mining business declined to $17 million in 2003, from $20 million in 2002. The decrease is due to lower revenues, increases in labor costs at one of the Company's mines in 2003 and the reversal of a royalty accrual in 2002. Adjusted OIBDA for the Company's other businesses decreased from a positive $10 million in 2002, to a negative $5 million in 2003. The decline is attributable to the absence of earnings from the 91 Express Lanes toll road, which was sold in January 2003 and increases in legal and other professional fees.
The Company expects Adjusted OIBDA to decline in 2004 primarily as a result of lower termination revenue from the communications business partially offset by an increase in Adjusted OIBDA from the information services business due to lower restructuring and impairment charges.
Interest Income was $18 million for 2003 compared to $29 million in 2002. The decrease is primarily attributable to a reduction in the weighted average interest rate earned on cash balances. The Company's average return on its cash and cash equivalents decreased from 1.6% in 2002 to 1.0% in 2003. Pending utilization of cash and cash equivalents, the Company invests the funds primarily in government and government agency securities and money market funds. The investment strategy generally provides lower yields on the funds than on alternative investments, but reduces the risk to principal in the short term prior to these funds being used in the Company's business.
Interest Expense, net increased by $7 million from 2002 to $567 million in 2003. Interest expense increased in 2003 primarily as a result of a 50 basis point rate increase on borrowings under the amended Senior Secured Credit Facility that was effective in late 2002, the issuance of the 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2010 in the second quarter of 2003, the issuance of the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013 and 10.75% Senior Notes due 2011 in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the $24 million charge for unamortized deferred debt issuance costs attributable to the termination of the Senior Secured Credit Facility that was charged to interest expense in the third quarter of 2003. The increase in interest expense was partially offset by reduced interest expense due to the repayment of the Senior Secured Credit Facility in October 2003 and the debt for equity transactions that occurred throughout 2003.
Level 3 expects interest expense to decline in 2004 as a result of the termination of the Senior Secured Credit Facility and the debt for equity transactions completed through the end of 2003.
Gain on Extinguishment of Debt for 2003 was $41 million and $255 million for 2002. In 2002, the Company had classified gains on the extinguishment of debt as an extraordinary item in the statement of operations. Pursuant to SFAS No. 145, which became effective January 1, 2003, Level 3 reclassified these gains to gains on extinguishment of debt on the consolidated statements of operations for all periods presented.
In the fourth quarter of 2003, the Company exchanged $61 million aggregate principal amount of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008, $53 million aggregate principal amount of its 11% Senior Notes due 2008, $26 million aggregate principal amount of its 11.25% Senior Notes due 2010, and $212 million face value ($210 million carrying value) of its 10.5% Senior Discount Notes due 2008. The Company issued approximately 20 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $105 million in exchange for these senior notes. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including unamortized debt issuance costs, was $37 million for these transactions.
In the third quarter 2003, the Company exchanged $18 million aggregate principal amount of its 11% Senior Notes due 2008, $23 million of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008 and $2 million aggregate principal amount of its 11.25% Senior Notes due 2010. The Company issued approximately 7 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $41 million. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including unamortized debt issuance costs, was $2 million for these transactions.
In the second quarter of 2003, the Company exchanged $100 million aggregate principal amount of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008. The Company issued approximately 13 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $96 million. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $2 million.
For the year ended December 31, 2002, the Company exchanged $12 million of its senior notes and $175 million face value ($141 million carrying value) of its senior discount notes. The Company issued approximately 15 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $70 million in
84
exchange for these notes. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt. The net gain on the early extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $82 million.
In the first and second quarters of 2002, the Company exchanged $171 million aggregate principal amount of its convertible debt in exchange for the issuance of approximately 12 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $52 million. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26. The net gain on the early extinguishments of the debt, including transactions costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $114 million.
In February 2002, the Company purchased $89 million aggregate principal amount of debt for cash of $31 million. The net gain on the extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs, realized foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $59 million.
Other, net decreased to a loss of $107 million in 2003 from a gain of $108 million in 2002. In 2003, the Company realized a gain of $70 million from the sale of "91 Express Lanes" toll road, $200 million of induced conversion expense resulting from the Company's conversion of convertible debt securities and $3 million of equity earnings from the Company's investment in Commonwealth Telephone. In 2002, the Company realized a gain of $191 million on the sale of approximately 9.6 million shares of Commonwealth Telephone common stock, $88 million of induced conversion expenses resulting from the Company's conversion of convertible debt securities, realized losses of $14 million resulting from the sale of foreign denominated currency and $14 million of equity earnings attributable to Commonwealth Telephone.
Income Tax Benefit for 2002 was $121 million compared to $50 million for 2003. In 2003, the Internal Revenue Service completed the audit of the Company's 1996 and 1997 Federal tax returns. The resolution of these Federal tax audits and other state tax issues primarily related to its coal mining operations resulted in the Company reducing its deferred tax liabilities and recording an income tax benefit of approximately $50 million in 2003.
Federal legislation enacted in the first quarter of 2002 enabled the Company to carryback its 2001 Federal income net operating losses to 1996. In accordance with SFAS No. 109 "Accounting for Income Taxes", the Company recorded the benefit in the period in which the legislation was enacted. The Company, as it is unable to determine when the tax benefits attributable to the remaining net operating losses will be realizable, has recorded a valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets.
Income from Discontinued Operations was $5 million for 2003. During 2003 the Company sold its MFON business and recorded as discontinued operations, operating income of $12 million (from acquisition in February 2003 through its sale in December 2003). Level 3 did not recognize a gain or loss on this transaction, as it occurred within the one year "allocation period" provided under SFAS No. 141.
The Company also exited Software Spectrum's contact services business and recorded a loss from discontinued operations of $7 million, including a loss of $9 million on the sale of the business. As a result of its decision to exit the contact services business in 2003, the Company has reflected $2 million of operating income attributable to the contact service business in 2002, within discontinued operations.
Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle of $5 million resulted from the adoption of SFAS No. 143 as of January 1, 2003. The $5 million reflects the net change in accrued reclamation liability attributable to the Company's coal operations.
85
Results of Operations 2002 vs. 2001
Revenue for 2002 and 2001 is summarized as follows:
| | 2002 | 2001 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||
| Communications | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | ||
| Information Services | 1,896 | 123 | ||||
| Coal Mining | 84 | 87 | ||||
| Other | 30 | 25 | ||||
| $ | 3,111 | $ | 1,533 | |||
Communications Revenue:
| | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||
| Services: | ||||||||
| Transport & Infrastructure | $ | 509 | $ | 557 | ||||
| Softswitch | 332 | 210 | ||||||
| IP & Data | 138 | 109 | ||||||
| Total Services Revenue | 979 | 876 | ||||||
| Reciprocal Compensation | 122 | 134 | ||||||
| Upfront Dark Fiber | — | 288 | ||||||
| Total Communications Revenue | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | ||||
Transport and infrastructure revenue declined 9% in 2002 from 2001 levels. The decline was primarily due to reductions in joint build revenue and transoceanic revenue. Level 3 earned $14 million and $35 million of revenue in 2002 and 2001, respectively, for joint build management services provided to other communications companies. Joint build revenue declined as a result of Level 3 substantially completing the construction of its terrestrial fiber optic network in 2001. Level 3 also recognized $68 million of revenue from the partial sale of its transatlantic submarine system to Viatel in 2001. Partially offsetting these declines was an increase in settlement and termination revenue. For some customers, Level 3 is able to negotiate and collect termination penalties. Level 3 recognized $76 million and $57 million of services revenue in 2002 and 2001, respectively, for fees or penalties associated with early termination of services. The Company also recognized approximately $20 million of revenue in 2002 primarily attributable to contract settlements and metropolitan network conduit sales in which title was transferred.
Softswitch service revenue improved significantly in 2002 primarily due to increased demand for managed modem services. The Company's softswitch technology enables it to have a lower cost structure than most of its competitors and therefore is able to be very competitive in this particular market. Overall, Level 3 provided 55 billion minutes of use in 2002 versus 35 billion in 2001. The increase in minutes and revenue was primarily attributable to services provided to existing ISP customers. Slight declines in voice revenue partially offset the improved managed modem revenue figures.
IP and Data revenue increased 27% in 2002 compared to 2001. The increase is due to higher usage levels by new and existing customers.
The decrease in reciprocal compensation revenue in 2002 is attributable to the Company receiving regulatory approval from several states regarding its agreements with SBC Communications Inc. and BellSouth during the first half of 2001. These agreements established a rate structure for transmission
86
and switching services provided by one carrier to complete or carry traffic originating on another carrier's network. It is the Company's policy not to recognize revenue from these agreements until the relevant regulatory authorities approve the agreements. The Company reached an agreement with a major carrier in the fourth quarter of 2002 which resulted in the recognition of approximately $12 million of reciprocal compensation revenue for services provided in prior periods.
The decrease in dark fiber revenue reflects the completion of the intercity network in 2001. DarkThe Company did not recognize dark fiber revenue forunder sales-type lease accounting in 2002 was less than 2001 as the last remaining segments sold prior to June 30, 1999 were delivered to and accepted by customers in the fourth quarter of 2001. In addition, the Company experienced a decline in dark fiber and capacity indefeasible rights of use or IRU sales, particularly during the second and third quarters of 2002.
| | 2002 | 2001 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||
| Communications Revenue | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | |||
| Increase (Decrease) in Communications Deferred Revenue | 5 | 739 | |||||
| Decrease (Increase) in Deferred Revenue not Collected | 94 | 60 | |||||
| Communications Cash Revenue | $ | 1,200 | $ | 2,097 | |||
In February 2003, Level 3 and XO Communications ("XO") completed the amendment of their 1998 cost sharing and IRU agreement. As part of the 1998 agreement, XO purchased 24 fibers and one empty conduit along Level 3's North American intercity network. The amendment, among other things, requires XO to return six fibers and the empty conduit to Level 3. In return Level 3 will 1) reduce the annual operations and maintenance ("O&M") charges XO was required to pay under the original agreement, 2) provide XO an option, expiring in July 2007, to acquire a 20 year IRU for a single conduit within or along Level 3's intercity network and 3) provide XO an option to purchase up to 25% of the fiber installed in the next conduit within or along each segment of the intercity network.
As individual segments were delivered, Level 3 deferred and amortized the revenue attributable to the conduit over the term of the original agreement. As result of the amended agreement, Level 3 will have no further obligation with respect to the original conduit, and thus expects to recognize as revenue during the first quarter of 2003, the remaining unamortized deferred revenue, less the fair values of the other separable elements that meet the relevant accounting criteria. An independent valuation firm has been engaged by Level 3 to determine the fair value of these obligations. The valuation firm has not completed its assessment at the time of this filing; however, Level 3 expects to
77
recognize a significant amount of revenue and income in the first quarter of 2003 as a result of this transaction. This transaction will not result in additional Cash Revenue for the Company.
Also in February 2003, the Company completed the acquisition of substantially all the assets and operations of Genuity, Inc ("Genuity"). The Company expects communications revenue to increase by $600 million to $700 million in 2003 as a result of this acquisition and modest growth in its existing communications business. The majority of this incremental revenue is expected to be attributable to contracts with Verizon and America Online. Communications services provided to America Online comprised approximately 13% of the Company's total communications revenue for the year ended December 31, 2002. With the acquisition of Genuity's contract with America Online and additional contracts executed in the second half of 2002, the Company expects communications services revenue attributable to America Online will range from approximately 23% to 25% of total communications revenue in 2003.
Information services revenue, which is comprised of the businesses of (i)Structure, and Software Spectrum (including CorpSoft), increased from $123 million in 2001 to $1,933$1,896 million for 2002. This increase is primarily attributable to the inclusion of $1,837$1,800 million of revenue in 2002 reflecting activity subsequent to the acquisitions of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum, which occurred late in the first and second quarterquarters of this year,2002, respectively. The software reseller industry is highly seasonal, with revenue and profits typically being higher in the second and fourth quarters of the Company's fiscal year. However, due to Microsoft's special upgrade promotions that accelerated sales into the third quarter of 2002, that likely would have occurred during the fourth quarter, the Company did not see the pronounced effects of the usual seasonality during the fourth quarter of 2002. (i)Structure's revenue declined in 2002 primarily as a result of lower systems integration revenue. Revenue attributable to the systems integration business of $18$16 million was below last year's level2001 levels of $38 million, due to certain contracts expiring and (i)Structure continuing to focus on its outsourcing business. Information services revenue is expected to increase in 2003 primarily as a result of the inclusion of a full year of operations of Software Spectrum and Corpsoft, partially offset by an anticipated increase in sales under Microsoft's new licensing program.
Coal mining revenue was $84 million for 2002 compared to $87 million for 2001. The decline in revenue is attributable to scheduled reductions in contracted tonnage for a number of customers in 2002 partially offset by an increase in spot coal sales.
Other revenue for the 2002 periodsperiod was comparable to 2001 and is primarily attributable to California Private Transportation Company, L.P ("CPTC"), the owner-operator of the SR91 tollroad in southern California. Other revenue is expected to decline in 2003 as the Company completed the sale of the SR91 tollroad in January 2003.CPTC.
Cost of Revenue for 2002 for the communications business was $209 million, representing a 65% decrease over 2001 cost of revenue of $593 million. This decrease is a result of the lack of costs in 2002 associated with pre-June 30, 1999 dark fiber sales, recognized as up front revenue, and the migration of customer traffic from a leased network to the Company's own operational network. Overall, the cost of revenue for the communications business, as a percentage of communications revenue, decreased significantly from 46% in 2001 to 19% duringin 2002. Level 3 expects that for its existing communications business, cost of revenue, as a percentage of communications revenue, will remain at approximately 20% in 2003. As a result of the Genuity acquisition, this ratio is expected to increase to 30-35% in the first quarter of 2003 but then trend towards 25-30% by the end of the year. Overall, the cost of revenue for the information services businesses, as a percentage of its revenue, was 91%92% for 2002 up from 73%71% in 2001. The marginscost of revenue, as a percentage of revenue, of the information services' outsourcing and systems integration businesses in 2001 and 2002 were comparable at 29%71%. Margins,Cost of revenue, as a percentage of revenue werewas approximately 8%93% for Software Spectrum in 2002, which management believes is typical of the software reseller industry. The cost of revenue for the coal mining business, as a percentage of revenue, was 68% for 2002 and 2001,
78
respectively. The release of $4 million in certain royalty accruals for a matter which the matter was favorably resolved in 2002 werewas partially offset by thean increase in lower marginhigher cost spot coal sales.
The Company expects cost of revenue for the communications business to increase in 2003 as a result of the Genuity acquisition and information services cost of revenue to increase as a result of including a full year of results for Software Spectrum and Corpsoft. This increase in costs for the information services business may be partially offset by a decline in costs due to increased sales under the Microsoft licensing program under which the Company only recognizes a service fee as revenue.
Depreciation and Amortization expenses for 2002 were $802$801 million, a 29% decrease from depreciation and amortization expenses of $1,122 million$1.122 billion recorded in 2001. This decrease is primarily attributable to the reduced basis of the Company's communications assets resulting from the $3.2 billion impairment charge recorded in the fourth quarter of 2001 and a $35 million charge recorded in the second quarter of 2001 for the write down of certain corporate facilities. The Company also amortized $22 million of goodwill attributable to the 1998 acquisition of XCOM Technologies, Inc. in 2001. Goodwill attributable to this investment has not been amortized in 2002 as a result of the adoption of SFAS No. 142. In addition, certain assets with two and three-year depreciable lives became fully depreciated in late 2001 and during 2002. Partially offsetting these declines was $25 million of
87
amortization expense attributable to the intangible assets acquired in the McLeod, CorpSoft and Software Spectrum transactions completed in 2002.
Selling, General and Administrative expenses decreased from $1,297 million$1.297 billion in 2001 to $944$934 million in 2002. Excluding non-cash compensation, selling, general and administrative expenses were $763 million in 2002, a 22% decrease over 2001. This decrease reflects the Company's efforts to reduce and tightly control operating expenses. The Company has reduced its global communications workforce by approximately 2,700 employees since the beginning of 2001. Reductions in employee related costs, including compensation, facilities costs, recruiting and training, as well as lower professional, travel and bad debt expenses contributed to the decline in selling, general and administrative costs. The Company was also able to settle certain matters for amounts less than previously recorded and release compensation and other accruals for whichas the original purpose no longer exists.issues were resolved at amounts less than originally estimated. These items resulted in a decrease in operating expenses of $28 million in 2002. These reductions were partially offset by $107$97 million of selling, general and administrative expenses attributable to Software Spectrum. Included in operating expenses for 2002 and 2001, were $181 million and $314 million, respectively, of non-cash compensation expenses recognized under SFAS No. 123 related to grants of stock options, warrants and other stock-based compensation programs. The decline in non-cash compensation iswas a result of decreased headcount and a decline in the value of equity based compensation awards distributed to employee-owners and consultants.
The Company expects selling, general and administrative expenses to increase in 2003 primarily as a result of the additional employees hired and costs incurred in conjunction with the acquisition and integration of the Genuity operations.
Restructuring and Impairment Charges of $181 million and $3.35 billion were recorded in 2002 and 2001, respectively. In 2002, Level 3 recorded restructuring charges of $8 million for costs associated with workforce reductions. In the second quarter of 2002, a $3 million restructuring charge was recorded for costs associated with a workforce reduction of approximately 200 employees in the communications business in North America and Europe. In the third quarter the Company recorded a restructuring charge of $5 million primarily for severance and employee related costs associated with the integration of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum. Approximately 100 employees, primarily in Boston, were affected by the workforce reduction. The Company was able to record benefitsa benefit of $13 million for the year ending December 31, 2002, due to the successful termination of leases for less than had originally been estimated in 2001 and included it as a reduction in Restructuringrestructuring and Impairment Chargesimpairment charges in the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operationsoperations in 2002.
79
The Company recorded impairment charges of $101 million related to a colocation facility in Boston, as well as certain corporate facilities in Colorado and excess communications inventory, which are classified as held for sale in other non-current assets. As a result of the completion of additional colocation space in Boston by other providers, the soft demand for office space in the metropolitan Denver area and the continued overabundance of communications equipment in the secondary markets, the Company believesbelieved that these assets arewere obsolete and that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to these assets arewere insufficient to recover their current carrying value. The new carrying values of these assets are based on offers received from third parties for the real estate properties or actual sales of similar communications assets.
In December 2002, Level 3 entered in to a sale leaseback transaction for one of its New York colocation facilities and sold the colocation facility near Boston. The Company recognized a loss on these transactions of approximately $81 million, which is included in Restructuringrestructuring and Impairment Chargesimpairment charges on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operations.operations.
In addition to the New York sale leaseback transaction, the Company also entered into a sale leaseback transaction for a colocation facility in London.London in 2002. These two transactions will initially increase annual rent expense by approximately $8 million; however, the Company will only be obligated to pay for its share of the maintenance costs which is expected to result in annual savings of approximately $9 million.
In 2001, the Company announced that due to the duration and severity of the slowdown in the economy and the telecommunications industry, it would be necessary to reduce operating expenses as
88
well as reduce and reprioritize capital expenditures in an effort to be in a position to benefit when the economy recovers. As a result of these actions, the Company reduced its global work force, primarily in the communications business in the United States and Europe by approximately 2,700 employees. Restructuring charges of approximately $10 million, $40 million and $58 million were recorded in the first, second and fourth quarters of 2001, respectively, of which $66 million related to staff reduction and related costs and $42 million to real estate lease termination costs.
In the fourth quarter of 2001, in light of the continued economic uncertainty, continued customer disconnections at higher rates than expected, increased difficulty in obtaining new revenue, and the overall slow down in the communications industry, the Company again reviewed the carrying value of its long-lived assets for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The Company determined based upon its projections, giving effect to the continuing economic slowdown and continued over-capacity in certain areas of the telecommunications industry, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to certain assets or assets groups would not exceed the current carrying value of the assets. The Company, therefore, recorded an impairment charge of $3.2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2001 to reflect the difference between the estimated fair value of the assets on a discounted cash flow basis and their current carrying value as further described below.
The impairments primarily related to colocation assets, excess conduits in North America and European intercity and metropolitan networks, and certain transoceanic assets. Geographically, approximately 74% of the charges were attributable to North America, 17% were attributable to Europe and 9% attributable to transatlantic assets.
The financial problems of many of the "dot-coms", emerging carriers and competitors, a weakening economy, and changing customer focus, led to an over-capacity of colocation space in several U.S. and European markets. Level 3 attempted to sell or sublease its excess colocation space; however, market rates at the time for much of the space were below itsthe carrying values.values of the assets or the rental rates originally projected by the Company. As a result, the 2001 impairment charge included approximately $1.6 billion related to its colocation assets, which included owned facilities, leasehold improvements and related equipment.
80
Level 3 constructed its networks in North America and Europe in such a way that they could be continuously upgraded to the most current technology without affecting its existing customers. Level 3 also installed additional conduits with the intention of selling them to other carriers. As of December 31, 2001, the Company had sold one conduit in its North American network and, due to the economic environment and decreasing capital expenditure budgets of potential buyers, did not expect additional sales in the foreseeable future. For this reason the impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2001 included approximately $1.2 billion for the conduits that were previously determined to be available for sale to third parties based on estimated cash flows from the disposition of the conduits.
The completion of several transoceanic cable systems in the second half of 2001 and the expected completion of additional systems in 2002, resulted in an over abundance of transoceanic capacity. This excess capacity, combined with limited demand, adversely affected the transoceanic capacity markets. At current pricing levels at December 31, 2001, the Company did not believe it would recover its investment in transoceanic capacity from the future cash flows of these assets. As a result, the impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2001 included approximately $320 million for its transatlantic submarine assets.assets based on the discounted estimated cash flows in future periods.
The Company's 2001 impairment charges also included approximately $126 million for spare equipment write-downs and abandoned lateral fiber builds.
As a result of the continued weakness in the communications industry, the Company again reviewed the carrying value of its network assets at December 31, 2002 for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The Company determined based upon its projections, which assumes significant increases in revenue over current levels, that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to the network assets would exceed the carrying value of those assets, and therefore, an adjustment to the carrying value of those assets was not necessary. However, there is no assurance that this could not happen in the future if these projections are not realized.
EBITDA, as defined by the Company, consists of earnings (losses) before interest, income taxes, depreciation, amortization, non-cash operating expenses (including stock-based compensation and impairments) and other non-operating income or expenses. The Company excludes non-cash compensation due to its adoption of the expense recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123. EBITDA improved to positive $354 million in 2002 from losses of $300 million in 2001. A restructuring benefit of $1 million in 2002 (due to the reversal of lease termination charges that were settled for less than originally recorded) and restructuring charges of $108 million in 2001 are included in EBITDA. This improvement was predominantly due to the higher margins earned by the communications business, reductions in selling, general and administrative expenses and the results of Software Spectrum.
Adjusted EBITDA, as defined by the Company, is EBITDA as defined above plus the change in cash deferred revenue and excluding the non-cash cost of goods sold associated with certain capacity sales and dark fiber contracts. For 2002, Adjusted EBITDA was $457 million compared to $659 million for 2001. The decrease in Adjusted EBITDA can be attributed to the decline in Cash Communications Revenue, partially offset by the significant improvement in communications operating earnings and the earnings attributable to Software Spectrum.
| | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||
| EBITDA | $ | 354 | $ | (300 | ) | |||
| Increase (Decrease) in Communications Deferred Revenue | 5 | 739 | ||||||
| Decrease (Increase) in Deferred Revenue not Collected | 94 | 60 | ||||||
| Non-cash Cost of Goods Sold | 4 | 160 | ||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA | $ | 457 | $ | 659 | ||||
81
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are not intended to represent operating cash flow or profitability for the periods indicated and are not defined under GAAP. See Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
Interest Income was $29 million for 2002 compared to $161 million in 2001. The decrease is primarily attributable to the decline in the average cash and marketable security portfolio balance and
89
a reduction in the weighted average interest rate earned on the portfolio. The Company's average return on its portfolio decreased from 4.6% in 2001 to 1.6% in 2002. Pending utilization of the cash and cash equivalents, the Company invests the funds primarily in government and government agency securities and money market funds. The investment strategy generally provides lower yields on the funds than on alternative investments, but reduces the risk to principal in the short term prior to using the funds in the Company's business.
Interest Expense, net decreased from 2001 by $86 million to $560 million in 2002. Interest expense declined as a result of the debt repurchased during the second half of 2001 and during 2002, and lower interest rates on the Senior Secured Credit Facility and commercial mortgages during 2002. The declines were partially offset by the interest attributable to the additional borrowings under the Senior Secured Credit Facility in the first quarter of 2001, the issuance of the 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2012 in the third quarter of 2002, and a decline in the amount of capitalized interest. The Company substantially completed the construction of its network in 2001, therefore reducing the amount of interest capitalization. Capitalized interest was $58 million for 2001 and zero in 2002. Excluding fluctuations
Gain on Debt Extinguishment for 2002 was $255 million. In the first and second quarters of 2002, the Company exchanged $171 million aggregate principal amount of its convertible debt for approximately 12 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $52 million. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in interest rates and debt outstanding, interest expense is expected to increase as a resultaccordance with APB No. 26 "Early Extinguishment of Debt." The net gain on the early extinguishments of the 50 basis point rate increase on borrowings under the amended Senior Secured Credit Facility thatdebt, including transactions costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was effective in August 2002.$114 million.
EquityFor the year ended December 31, 2002, the Company exchanged $12 million of its senior notes and $175 million face value ($141 million carrying value) of its senior discount notes. The Company issued approximately 15 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $70 million in Earningsexchange for these notes. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of Unconsolidated Subsidiaries is primarily attributable todebt. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $82 million.
In February 2002, the Company purchased $89 million aggregate principal amount of debt for cash of $31 million. The net gain on the extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs, realized foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $59 million.
The gain on debt extinguishments was $1.075 billion for 2001. In 2001, the Company conducted a "Modified Dutch Auction" tender offer for a portion of the Company's investmentsenior debt and convertible debt securities. Under the "Modified Dutch Auction" procedure, the Company purchased debt with a face value of approximately $1.7 billion, plus accrued interest, for a total purchase price of approximately $731 million in Commonwealth Telephone.cash. The declinenet gain on the purchase, including transaction costs, foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $967 million.
The Company exchanged $194 million of its convertible subordinated notes in equity earnings in 2002 is a result2001 for approximately 15.9 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $72 million. The net gain on the extinguishment of the saledebt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $117 million.
Offsetting these gains in 2001 were $9 million of Commonwealth Telephone shares by the Company in the secondprepayment expenses CPTC incurred to refinance its development and fourth quarters of 2002. The Company's proportionate share of Commonwealth Telephone's earnings declined from 45% at December 31, 2001 to 4% at December 31, 2002.construction debt.
Other, net increased to $94$108 million in 2002 from $2$18 million in 2001. In 2002, the Company realized a gain of $191 million on the sale of the Commonwealth Telephone shares and equity earnings attributable to Commonwealth Telephone of $14 million, partially offset by $88 million of induced conversion expenses resulting from the Company's repurchaseexchange of convertible debt securities and realized losses of $14 million resulting from the sale of foreign denominated currency. In 2001, Other,other, net includesincluded a $37 million charge for an other than temporary decline in the value of investments, $27 million of income recognized when Level 3 settled and was released from an obligation to provide services to an investee, a $17 million gain on the sale of foreign denominated securities, and $19 million of
90
losses associated with the disposal of certain fixed assets.assets and $16 million of equity earnings attributable to Commonwealth Telephone.
Income Tax Benefit for 2002 was $121 million compared to zero in 2001. This benefit was primarily a result of Federal legislation enacted in the first quarter of 2002 which enabled the Company to carryback its 2001 Federal income tax net operating losses to 1996. In accordance with SFAS No. 109 "Accounting for Income Taxes", the Company recorded the benefit in the period in which the legislation was enacted. The Company does not expect to recognize additional benefits in 2003, as it is unable to conclude that it is more likely than not that the tax benefits attributable to the net operating losses will be realizable. The income tax benefit was zero in 2001 as a result of the Company exhausting the taxable income in the carryback period (as previously defined) in 2000.
Extraordinary Gain on Debt Extinguishment for 2002 was $255 million. In the first and second quarters of 2002, the Company purchased $171 million aggregate principal amount of its convertible debt in exchange for the issuance of approximately 12 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $52 million. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26 "Early Extinguishment of Debt." The net gain on the early
82
extinguishments of the debt, including transactions costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $114 million.
For the year ended December 31, 2002, the Company purchased $12 million of its senior notes and $175 million face value ($141 million carrying value) of its senior discount notes. The Company issued approximately 15 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $70 million in exchange for these notes. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt. The net gain on the early extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $82 million.
In February 2002, the Company repurchased $89 million aggregate principal amount of debt for cash of $31 million. The net gain on the extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs, realized foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $59 million.
In August 2002, the SEC staff notified certain public companies and accounting firms that it was reviewing the accounting treatment for certain transactions involving the conversion of convertible debt pursuant to inducements made to prompt conversion of the debt to equity securities of the issuer. The SEC staff acknowledged that there was diversity in accounting practice and asked the Emerging Issues Task Force of the Financial Accounting Standards Board to address the issue as part of its September 2002 agenda.
In September 2002, the EITF published Issue 02-15 which addressed the accounting for convertible debt for equity exchanges. The EITF concluded that these types of transactions should be accounted for as induced conversions in accordance with SFAS No. 84. SFAS No. 84 requires a non-cash charge to earnings for the implied value of an inducement to convert from convertible debt to common equity securities of the issuer. In addition, under SFAS No. 84, an extraordinary gain or loss, as applicable, is not recorded upon the conversion of convertible debt. The accounting is to be applied prospectively for those convertible debt for equity exchanges completed after September 11, 2002, the date of the EITF's consensus. The Company has applied the provisions of SFAS No. 84 to all convertible debt for equity exchange transactions completed subsequent to June 30, 2002.
In the third and fourth quarters of 2002, the Company purchased $258 million aggregate principal amount of convertible debt in exchange for the issuance of approximately 20 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $102 million. The value of securities issuable pursuant to original conversion privileges was approximately $14 million. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of SFAS No. 84, a debt conversion expense of $88 million was recorded and included in Other, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
The extraordinary gain on debt extinguishments was $1.075 billion for 2001. The Company purchased $194 million of its convertible subordinated notes in 2001 by issuing approximately 15.9 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $72 million in exchange for the debt. The net gain on the extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $117 million.
Also in 2001, the Company commenced a "Modified Dutch Auction" tender offer for a portion of the Company's senior debt and convertible debt securities. Under the "Modified Dutch Auction" procedure, the Company accepted tendered notes in each offer in the order of the lowest to the highest tender prices specified by the tendering holders within the applicable price range for the applicable series of notes. The Company purchased debt with a face value of approximately $1.7 billion, plus accrued interest, for a total purchase price of approximately $731 million. The net gain on the repurchase, including transaction costs, foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $967 million and was recorded as an extraordinary item in the consolidated statements of operation.
83
Offsetting these gains in 2001 were $9 million of prepayment expenses CPTC incurred to refinance its development and construction debt.
Results of Operations 2001 vs. 2000
Revenue for 2001 and 2000 is summarized as follows (in millions):
| | 2001 | 2000 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Communications | $ | 1,298 | $ | 857 | ||
| Information Services | 123 | 115 | ||||
| Coal Mining | 87 | 190 | ||||
| Other | 25 | 22 | ||||
| $ | 1,533 | $ | 1,184 | |||
Communications revenue increased in 2001 by 51% compared to 2000. Included in total communications revenue of $1.298 billion for 2001 was $876 million of services revenue which included private line, wavelengths, colocation, managed modem and amortized dark fiber revenue, $288 million of non-recurring revenue from dark fiber contracts entered into before June 30, 1999 for which sales-type lease accounting was used and $134 million attributable to reciprocal compensation. Communications revenue for 2000 was comprised of $593 million of services revenue, $209 million of non-recurring revenue from dark fiber and $55 million of reciprocal compensation. The increase in services revenue from 2000 was primarily due to growth in both existing customers as well as new customer contracts. Services revenue in 2000 included revenue of $105 million related to submarine systems, primarily from the completion of the Company's transatlantic submarine cable and subsequent sale to Viatel Inc. in November of 2000. Due to the current economic conditions of the telecommunications industry, the Company had experienced a significant increase in the number of customers disconnecting or terminating service and believed that as much as 25% of its recurring revenue base as of December 31, 2001, consisted of financially weaker customers. Approximately 80% of these customers were expected to disconnect services during the first six months of 2002. These terminations, if they occurred, would have resulted in slower growth of services revenue for 2002. For some of these customers, Level 3 was able to negotiate and collect termination penalties. Level 3 recognized $57 million of revenue in 2001 for early termination of services. Level 3 recorded in services revenue in 2001, $35 million of revenue for construction management services provided to other communications companies. The dark fiber revenue reflected the substantial completion of the intercity network. The increase in reciprocal compensation in 2001 was a result of increased managed modem usage and the Company receiving regulatory approval from several states regarding its agreements with SBC Communications Inc. and BellSouth.
The communications business generated Cash Revenue of $2.097 billion during 2001 compared to $1.261 billion in 2000. This increase was a result of growth in services revenue provided to existing customers, new customer contracts and cash collections from those customers. At December 31, 2001, deferred revenue increased by approximately 103% to $1.459 billion from $720 million at December 31, 2000. The amount of deferred revenue billed, but not collected as of the end of the year decreased from $205 million in 2000 to $145 million in 2001. For fiscal 2000, deferred revenue increased by
84
$585 million and the amount not collected increased by $181 million. Communications Cash Revenue is not intended to represent revenue under GAAP.
| | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Communications Revenue | $ | 1,298 | $ | 857 | ||||
| Change in Deferred Revenue | 739 | 585 | ||||||
| Change in Deferred Revenue Billed but not Collected | 60 | (181 | ) | |||||
| Communications Cash Revenue | $ | 2,097 | $ | 1,261 | ||||
Information services revenue, which was comprised of systems integration and outsourcing businesses, increased from $115 million in 2000 to $123 million in 2001. The increase was primarily attributable to outsourcing revenue which increased to $85 million for the year ended December 31, 2001 compared to $65 million for the same period in 2000. The increase in outsourcing revenue is primarily due to new long-term contracts signed in the second half of 2000. Revenue attributable to the systems integration business declined due to the expiration of certain contracts.
Coal mining revenue decreased $103 million in 2001 compared to 2000. The decrease in revenue was primarily attributable to the expiration of long-term coal contracts with Commonwealth Edison Company ("Commonwealth Edison") and the sale of the Company's interest in Walnut Creek Mining Company in September 2000.
Other revenue for 2001 was comparable to 2000 and is primarily attributable to California Private Transportation Company, L.P.
Cost of Revenue for 2001 was $742 million, representing a 6% decrease over 2000 cost of revenue of $792 million. This decrease as a result of the continued migration of customers off of leased capacity to the Company's network and a decrease in the costs associated with transoceanic sales, specifically costs attributable to the Viatel transaction in 2000. Cost of revenue included costs attributable to dark fiber and transoceanic sales and leased capacity, right-of-way costs, access charges and other third party costs directly attributable to the network. Overall the cost of revenue for the communications business, as a percentage of revenue, decreased significantly from 73% during 2000 to 46% during 2001. The decrease can again be attributed to the migration of customer traffic from a leased network to the Company's owned network and increased margins resulting from recent sales efforts focused on "on-net" services.
The cost of revenue for the information services businesses, as a percentage of its revenue, in 2001 was 73% and approximated the 2000 figure of 77%. The cost of revenue for the coal mining business, as a percentage of revenue, was 68% for 2001 up from 40% in 2000. The increase related to coal mining is attributable to the expiration of high margin long-term coal contracts in 2000.
Depreciation and Amortization expenses were $1.122 billion in 2001, a 94% increase from 2000 depreciation and amortization expenses of $579 million. The majority of the increase was a direct result of the communications assets placed in service in the latter part of 2000 and 2001, including gateways, local networks and intercity segments. In addition, included in 2001 depreciation expense was $45 million for the impairment charge on a corporate facility the Company designated as held-for-sale in June of 2001.
Selling, General and Administrative expenses were $1.297 billion in 2001, a 17% increase over 2000. Excluding non-cash compensation expenses of $314 million and $236 million for 2001 and 2000, respectively, operating expenses increased 12% from the prior year. This increase was attributable to higher payroll expenses, professional fees, facilities related costs, and systems maintenance expenses, partially offset by declines in travel, mine management services and recruiting expenses. The increase in
85
non-cash compensation was predominantly due to the convertible outperform stock options granted in 2000 and 2001.
Restructuring and Impairment Charges were $3.35 billion in 2001. The Company announced that due to the duration and severity of the economic slowdown for the telecommunications industry, it would be necessary to reduce operating expenses as well as reduce and reprioritize capital expenditures in an effort to be in a position to benefit when the economy recovers. As a result of these actions, the Company reduced its global work force by approximately 2,350 employees in 2001, primarily in the communications business in the United States and Europe. Restructuring charges of approximately $10 million, $40 million and $58 million were recorded in the first, second and fourth quarters of 2001, respectively, of which $66 million related to staff reduction and related costs and $42 million to real estate lease termination costs. In total, the Company has paid $49 million in severance and related fringe benefit costs and $1 million in lease termination costs as of December 31, 2001 for these actions. The remaining $17 million of expenditures for workforce reductions primarily relate to approximately 350 European employees terminated in the first quarter of 2002.
The economic slowdown and the related capital reprioritization discussed above resulted in certain telecommunications assets being identified as excess, obsolete or carried at values that may not be recoverable due to an adverse change in the extent in which the telecommunication assets were being utilized caused by the unfavorable business climate within the telecommunications industry. As a result, in the second quarter of 2001 the Company recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $61 million, representing the excess of the carrying value over the fair value of these assets. The fair value of the spare equipment was based on recent cash sales of similar equipment. The impaired assets were written-off, as the Company does not expect to utilize them to generate future cash flows.
In the fourth quarter of 2001, in light of the continued economic uncertainty, continued customer disconnections at higher rates than expected, increased difficulty in obtaining new revenue, and the overall slow down in the communications industry, the Company again reviewed the carrying value of its long-lived assets for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The Company determined based upon its projections, giving effect to the continuing economic slowdown and continued over-capacity in certain areas of the telecommunications industry, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to certain assets or assets groups would not exceed the current carrying value of the assets. The Company, therefore, recorded an impairment charge of $3.2 billion to reflect the difference between the estimated fair value of the assets on a discounted cash flow basis and their current carrying value as further described below. The impairments primarily related to colocation assets ($1.6 billion), conduits in North America and European intercity and metropolitan networks ($1.2 billion), and certain transoceanic assets ($320 million).
The Company also recorded an impairment charge of approximately $65 million for spare equipment write-downs and abandoned lateral builds in the fourth quarter of 2001.
EBITDA improved to a loss of $300 million in 2001 from a loss of $482 million in 2000. Excluding the $108 million of restructuring charges recorded in 2001, EBITDA would have been a loss of $192 million for 2001. The improvement in EBITDA was predominantly due to revenue growth and higher margins earned by the communications business.
86
Adjusted EBITDA was $659 million compared to $118 million for 2000. The increase, in addition to the higher margins noted above, was attributed to up-front cash payments received from customers for contracts that required revenue to be recognized over the term of the contract.
| | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EBITDA | $ | (300 | ) | $ | (482 | ) | ||
| Change in Deferred Revenue | 739 | 585 | ||||||
| Change in Deferred Revenue Billed but not Collected | 60 | (181 | ) | |||||
| Non-cash Cost of Goods Sold | 160 | 196 | ||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA | $ | 659 | $ | 118 | ||||
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are not intended to represent operating cash flow or profitability for the periods indicated and are not calculated in accordance with GAAP. See Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
Interest Income declined from $328 million in 2000 to $161 million in 2001. The decrease was primarily attributable to the average cash and marketable securities balance declining from $5.7 billion during 2000 to $3.1 billion for 2001. In February 2000, the Company raised approximately $5.5 billion in cash through debt and equity offerings. The Company subsequently utilized these proceeds to fund its business plan and repurchase outstanding debt. In addition, the weighted average interest rate earned on the portfolio decreased by approximately 120 basis points for 2001 versus 2000.
Interest Expense, net increased to $646 million from $282 million in 2001 compared to 2000. The interest expense and amortization of debt issuance costs associated with the debt raised in late February 2000, the commercial mortgages entered into during the latter half of 2000, and the increase in the size of the Senior Secured Credit Facility in the first quarter of 2001 all contributed to the increase in interest expense. Additionally, the increase can be attributed to a decrease in the amount of interest capitalized in 2001 as compared to 2000. The Company completed a significant portion of the network and other communications related facilities during 2001, therefore reducing the amount of interest capitalized. Capitalized interest was $58 million in 2001 versus $353 million in 2000. Partially offsetting these increases was the retirement of approximately $1.9 billion face amount of debt in the third and fourth quarters of 2001 and lower variable interest rates attributable to the senior secured credit facility and GMAC mortgage.
Equity in Earnings (Losses) of Unconsolidated Subsidiaries was earnings of $16 million in 2001, compared to a loss of $284 million in 2000. The equity losses in 2000 were predominantly attributable to RCN Corporation ("RCN"). RCN is a facilities-based provider of communications services to the residential markets primarily on the East and West coasts as well as in Chicago. RCN is also the largest regional Internet service provider in the Northeast. RCN was incurring significant costs in developing its business plan. The Company's proportionate share of RCN's losses exceeded the remaining carrying value of Level 3's investment in RCN during the fourth quarter of 2000. Level 3 does not have additional financial commitments to RCN; therefore it only recognized equity losses equal to its investment in RCN. The Company will not record any equity in RCN's future profits, until unrecorded equity losses have been offset. The Company did not recognize $249 million and $20 million of equity losses attributable to RCN in 2001 and 2000, respectively. Level 3 recorded equity losses attributable to RCN of $260 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2000.
Equity in earnings/losses of Commonwealth Telephone Commonwealth Telephone were earnings of $16 million in 2001 and losses of $24 million in 2000. In 2000, Commonwealth Telephone recognized losses primarily due to a charge for the restructuring of its CTCI subsidiary. As a result, Level 3 recorded a $27 million charge, in equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries, for its proportionate share of this charge. In 2001, Commonwealth Telephone, in addition to improved
87
operating results, was also able to recognize a one-time benefit related to the settlement of certain restructuring liabilities recorded in 2000.
Gain on Equity Investee Stock Transactions was $100 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2000. Specifically, RCN issued stock for certain transactions, which diluted the Company's ownership interest. The pre-tax gains resulted from the increase in the Company's proportionate share of RCN's net assets related to these transactions. The Company did not record any gains on equity investee stock transactions during 2001 due to the suspended equity losses attributable to RCN.
Other, net increased from a loss of $21 million for 2000 to a gain of $2 million for 2001. In 2001, Other, net includes a charge for an other-than temporary decline in the value of investments of $37 million and $27 million of gains when divine, inc. agreed to release Level 3 from a deferred revenue obligation. Additionally, the Company recorded losses of $19 million in 2001 related to losses on certain fixed asset disposals and $31 million of other items, primarily $17 million of realized gains from the sale of Euro denominated marketable securities. In 2000, Other, net is primarily comprised of a $22 million gain from the sale of the Company's 50% ownership interest in the Walnut Creek Mining Company and a loss of $37 million from the other-than temporary decline in the value of investments.
Income Tax Benefit for 2001 was zero as a result of the Company exhausting the taxable income in the carryback period in 2000. As of December 31, 2001, Level 3 had approximately $1.8 billion of net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future taxable income. At December 31, 2001, the Company was unable to determine when it would have taxable income to offset the loss carryforwards. The tax benefit for 2000 differs from the statutory rate due to the limited availability of taxable income in the carryback period for which current year losses can be offset.
Discontinued Operations includesincluded the results of operations and the estimated loss on the disposal of Level 3's Asian assets. On December 19, 2001, Level 3 announced that it had agreed to sell its Asian telecommunications business to Reach Ltd. for no cash consideration. The agreement covers subsidiaries that include the Asian network operations, assets, liabilities and future financial obligations. This included Level 3's share of the Northern Asian cable system, capacity on the Japan-US cable system, capital and operational expenses related to these two systems, gateways in Hong Kong and Tokyo, and existing customers on Level 3's Asian network. Level 3 estimated that this transaction would reduce its future funding requirements by approximately $300 million through a combination of reductions in capital expenditures, network and operating expenses, taxes and working capital.
The transaction closed on January 18, 2002. As of December 31, 2001, the net carrying value of Level 3's Asian assets was approximately $465 million. In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Level 3 recorded an impairment loss, within discontinued operations, equal to the difference between the carrying value of the assets and their fair value. Based upon the terms of the sale agreement, the Company also paid $49 million in certain remaining capital obligations it assumed for the two submarine systems to be sold to Reach, and transaction costs. The losses from the discontinued Asian operating activities in 2001 and 2000 were $89 million and $48 million, respectively. The higher losses were primarily attributable to increasesmillion.
Discontinued operations in depreciation expense and selling, general and administrative expenses.
Extraordinary Gain on Debt Extinguishment was $1.1 billion for2002 included the twelve months ended December 31, 2001.operations of Software Spectrum's contact service business. The Company recognized gains of approximately $117 million, after transaction and debt issuance costs, when it exchanged approximately 15.9 million shares of common stock, valued at approximately $72 million, for $194 million of its convertible subordinated notes in several private transactions. The Company also recognized gains of approximately $967 million when it repurchased approximately $1.7 billion of debt for approximately $731 million in cash, including accrued interest, through the Modified Dutch Auction completed in October of 2001. Offsetting these gains were losses
88
of $9 million from the write-off of debt issuance costs and prepayment expenses CPTC incurred to refinance its long-term debt.
Financial Condition—December 31, 2002
The Company's working capital decreased from $642 million at December 31, 2001 to $581 million at December 31, 2002 due primarily to the increase in noncurrent restricted securities, the use of available funds for operating expenses and interest payments, and the net liabilities assumed in the acquisitions of CorpSoft, Software Spectrum and McLeod's wholesale dial-up access business. These uses of working capital were partially offset by the proceeds received from the sale of the 9% Junior Convertible Notesbusiness in the third quarter.second quarter of 2003.
Financial Condition — December 31, 2003
Cash provided by operations decreasedoperating activities improved from a $431 million use of cash for 2002 to $24 million source of $141 millioncash in 2002 to a use of $427 million in 2002.2003. Changes in components of working capital including accounts payable and other current liabilities, primarily deferred revenue,in the information services business and improvements in the operating results of the communications business were responsible for the fluctuationimprovement. The improved results were partially offset by an increase in accounts receivable of $61 million in 2003 for the communications business. The Company's contractual terms and conditions permit Level 3 to bill the customer at the beginning of the service period. The vast majority of customer contracts acquired in the Genuity transaction require billings to be made at the end of the service period, or in arrears. As a result, the receivables for the communications business increased significantly at December 31, 2003 as compared to the receivable balance at December 31, 2002. Overall, cash provided by operations. In addition,flows from operating activities in 2003 were ($3) million for the Company made acommunications business (includes interest income and interest expense of $376 million, net), $21 million payment in full settlement of an outstanding litigation matter that did not relate tofor the Company's coreinformation services business and $6 million for remaining businesses.
Investing activities primarily include the acquisitionsGenuity transaction for $109 million, including transaction costs, and gross capital expenditures, primarily communications equipment, of CorpSoft for $93 million, net of cash received, Software Spectrum for $94 million, net of cash received, the purchase of McLeod's wholesale dial-up business for approximately $51$191 million and capital expendituresa decrease in restricted cash of $218 million before the release of capital accruals. In 2002, Level 3 was able to finalize negotiations and claims on several of its large multi-year network construction projects. As a result, the Company was able to release approximately $215 million of capital accruals previously reported as property, plant and equipment which were accrued as property, plant and equipment based upon contractors' estimates of final completion costs. The Company continues to resolve outstanding claims for other network construction projects. If these claims are settled favorably, additional capital expenditure accruals could be released in the future. In the ordinary course of business, as construction projects come to a close, the Company reviews the final amounts due and settles any outstanding amounts related to these contracts. In the context of the multi-billion cost incurred in constructing the Level 3 network, the construction cost accruals are normal and not significant to the financial statements.$9 million. The Company received $200$46 million of proceeds from the sale of marketable securities, $326 million fromits share of the sale of Commonwealth Telephone shares91 Express Lanes toll road operations and $130$58 million from the sale of property, plant and equipment and other assets. The Company entered into two sale leaseback transactions whereby it received approximately $91investments in 2003.
Financing sources in 2003 consisted of $361 million inand $487 million of proceeds from the saleissuance of communications facilities in Europe2.875% Convertible Senior Notes and North America.the 10.75% Senior Notes, respectively. The Company was also requiredused the proceeds from the 10.75% Senior Notes and cash on hand to pledge $400repay long-term debt of $772 million, as restricted cash to the lenders ofprimarily the Senior Secured Credit Facility and capital leases acquired in the third quarter as partGenuity transaction. In addition to the cash used to repay the Senior Secured Credit Facility, Level 3 also used $400 million of amendingrestricted securities to fully repay purchase money indebtedness borrowed under the credit facility. In 2003, Level 3 converted $500 million of 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes to equity and repurchased approximately $500 million of other long-term debt by issuing approximately $950 million
Financing activities in 2002 consisted primarily91
of common stock and $208 million of newly issued 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013. The Company was also able to reduce its long-term debt by approximately $139 million due to the sale of the repurchase for"91 Express Lanes" in January 2003. In addition to cash proceeds, the buyer also assumed the obligations of the toll road at the time of closing.
The Company's long-term debt for $31 million by Level 3 Finance, LLC, a reduction in the iStar mortgage of $112 million and the payment of $12discontinued contact services business provided approximately $9 million of capitalized leases. Level 3 received $488cash in 2003, including $4 million of net proceeds from the issuancesale of the 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notesbusiness. In addition, MFON provided approximately $12 million of cash from operating activities in 2003 and $16 million of proceeds from the third quartersale of 2002.MFON in December 2003.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The Company provides a broad range of integrated communications services as a facilities-based provider (that is, a provider that owns or leases a substantial portion of the property, plant and equipment necessary to provide its services.) The Company has created, through a combination of construction, purchase and, to a lesser extent, leasing of facilities and other assets, an advanced, international, end-to-end, facilities-based communications network. The Company has designed its network based on optical and Internet Protocol technologies in order to leverage the efficiencies of these technologies to provide lower cost communications services.
89
The further development of the communications business will continue to require significant expenditures.expenditures, including new service development costs. These expenditures may result in negative cash flows from operating cash flowactivities and net operating losses for the Company in the near future. The Company's expenditures will be primarily attributable to operating expenses, capital expenditures integration costs associated with the Genuity acquisition and interest payments. The Company's capital expenditures declined by approximately $2.3 billion for the twelve months of 2002 versus the same period in 2001 primarily due to the completion of initial construction related to the North American and European networks in 2001. The Company expects base capital expenditures (capital required to keep the network operating efficiently,)efficiently) to be approximately $100 million in 2003.2004. The majority of the Company's remainingongoing capital expenditures are expected to be success-based, orwhich are tied to incremental revenue. The Company expects success-based capital expenditures to increase in 2004 as a result of new government contracts awarded in 2003. The Company expects to pay in cash in 2004, based on debt levels at December 31, 2003, $422 million of interest expense.
Level 3 has approximately $1.14$1.129 billion of cash and marketable securities on hand at December 31, 2002, excluding $400 million of cash that was pledged to the banks participating in the Company's amended Senior Secured Credit Facility. This cash is reflected as Restricted Cash within the noncurrent portion of the balance sheet.2003. Based on information available at this time, management of the Company believes that the Company's current liquidity and anticipated future cash flows from operations will be sufficient to fund its business plan through free cash flow breakeven, which is expected to occur during the second quarter of 2004. The Company defines free cash flow as Adjusted EBITDA minus capital expenditures, working capital requirements and net cash interest expense. In addition, the Company has undrawn commitments of approximately $150 million under its amended Senior Secured Credit Facility. There are certain restrictions on the availability of these undrawn amounts.business.
The Company currently estimates that its operationscurrent liquidity and cash flows provided by operating activities will reach free cash flow breakeven without a requirement forbe sufficient to operate the business and will not require additional sources of financing. The actual timing of free cash flow breakevenCash flows from operating activities will fluctuate in 2004 and will be a function of revenue growth from existing and new services, the Company's management of network, selling, general and administrative, and capital expenditures and expected improvements in the integrationoperating performance of Genuity's operations.Software Spectrum due to the restructuring efforts made in 2003. The Company's previous debt and equity offerings have given the Company the ability to implement the business plan.develop its business. However, if additional investment opportunities should present themselves, the Company may be required to secure additional financing in the future. In order to pursue these possible opportunities and provide additional flexibility to fund its business plan the Company, in January 2001, filed a "universal" shelf registration statement for an additional $3 billion of common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants, stock purchase agreements and depository shares. In July 2002, the Company sold $500 million of its 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due in July 2012 under this shelf registration statement. In 2003, the Company sold approximately $374 million of its 2.875% Senior Convertible Notes under this shelf registration statement. The remaining availability under this registration statement and under a previously existing registration statement would allow Level 3 to offer an aggregate of up to $2.7$2.3 billion of additional securities to fund its business, plan.although there can be no assurance that the Company could raise such amounts on acceptable terms or at the time the funding is necessary.
92
In addition to raising capital through the debt and equity markets, the Company may sell or dispose of existing businesses, investments or other non-core assets to fund portions of the business plan. In 2002,2003, the Company completed the sale of approximately 9.6 million shares of Commonwealth Telephone for net proceeds of approximately $326 million. The Company also announced in January 2003 that it had received approximately $46 million of proceeds for its interest in CPTC.the "91 Express Lanes", $16 million from the sale of the MFON business acquired in the Genuity transaction and $4 million from the sale of Software Spectrum's contact service business. The Company also announced in January 2004 that it had sold its remaining equity position in Commonwealth Telephone for approximately $41 million. In addition, the Company has announced that it will seek to sell or sublease excess real estate and may enter into sale leaseback transactions for required communications facilities. In 2002,2003, Level 3 was able to generate approximately $97$35 million of proceedscash from these types of transactions. With the sale of Commonwealth Telephone shares, CPTCMFON and certain real estate transactions in 2002,2003, management believes that the Company has now sold the substantial majority of its valuable non-core assets.
The Company may not be successful in producing sufficient cash flow, raising sufficient debt or equity capital on terms that it will consider acceptable, or selling or leasing fiber optic capacity or access to its conduits. In addition, proceeds from dispositions of the Company's assets may not reflect the assets' intrinsic values. Further, expenses may exceed the Company's estimates and the financing needed may be higher than estimated. Failure to generate sufficient funds may require the Company to
90
delay or abandon some of its future expansion or expenditures, which could have a material adverse effect on the implementation of the business plan and could result in additional impairment charges on networkcommunications assets.
In connection with the implementation of the Company's business, plan, management continues to review the existing businesses to determine how those businesses will assist with the Company's focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching free cash flow breakeven.financial objectives. To the extent that certain businesses are not considered to be compatible with the delivery of communication and information services or with obtaining cash flowthese financial objectives, the Company may exit those businesses. It is possible that the decision to exit these businesses could result in the Company not recovering its investment in the businesses and, in those cases, a significant charge to earnings could result. For example, the Company sold its Asian operations to Reach Ltd. in January 2002 and incurred a loss of $516 million.
In July 2001, Level 3 announced that it had amended its Senior Secured Credit Facility to permit the Company to acquire certain of its outstanding indebtedness in exchange for shares of common stock. In 2001 and 2002 various issuances of Level 3's outstanding senior notes, senior discount notes and convertible subordinated notes traded at discounts to their respective face or accreted amounts. Through December 31, 2002, the Company had exchanged, in private transactions, approximately $776 million (carrying value) of its debt for shares of its common stock valued at approximately $538 million.
In October 2001, the Company completed through its first tier, wholly owned subsidiary, Level 3 Finance, LLC, a "Modified Dutch Auction" tender offer for a portion of the Company's senior notes and convertible subordinate notes. Level 3 Finance repurchased debt with a face value of approximately $1.7 billion, plus accrued interest, if applicable, for a total cash purchase price of approximately $731 million. Level 3 retired an additional $89 million face amount of debt securities using approximately $31 million of cash during the second quarter of 2002.
Level 3 is aware that the various issuances of its outstanding senior notes, senior discount notes and convertible subordinated notes continuemay to trade at discounts to their respective face or accreted amounts. In order to continue to reduce future cash interest payments, as well as future amounts due at maturity, Level 3 or its affiliates may, from time to time, purchase these outstanding debt securities for cash or exchange shares of Level 3 common stock for these outstanding debt securities pursuant to the exemption provided by Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in open market or privately negotiated transactions. Level 3 will evaluate any such transactions in light of then existing market conditions.conditions and the possible dilutive effect to shareholders. The amounts involved in any such transactions, individually or in the aggregate, may be material.
The Company has a $1.275 billion Senior Secured Credit Facility. As of December 30, 2002, $1.125 billion of the $1.275 billion Senior Secured Credit Facility was drawn. The balance represents the approximately $150 million revolving credit facility, which contains certain limitations on availability.
In August 2002, Level 3 amended the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility. The most significant modifications to the Credit Facility include the following:
91
The remaining financial covenants contained in the credit agreement will now be calculated on a consolidated basis, but those calculations will exclude the Company's toll road operations which were sold in January 2003. Certain modifications were also made to the Total Leverage Ratio covenant (which is defined in the agreement as the ratio of Total Debt to Adjusted EBITDA) in accordance with the Company's current business plan. In addition, this covenant will now be tested on a trailing twelve-month basis beginning on June 30, 2004, with a maximum allowable level of 11.5x, versus the original maximum allowable level of 6.0x beginning on December 31, 2004. Certain other covenants have also been modified.
The Company is required to maintain a minimum cash balance, generally equal to $525 million. No default under the Senior Secured Credit Facility shall be deemed to have occurred with respect to the minimum cash balance test if, within a six month period following the date on which the cash balance falls below $525 million, the Company again attains a cash balance greater than or equal to $525 million. Additionally, the Company pledged to the lenders under the Senior Secured Credit Facility $400 million of the minimum cash balance, which is reflected as restricted cash within the noncurrent section of the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The Company shall be deemed to be in default under the Senior Secured Credit Facility if the cash balance falls below $450 million, including the $400 million pledged to lenders.
Interest varies with the one month, two month, three month, or six month LIBOR, at the Company's election, plus 325 basis points for the revolving credit facility and tranche A term loan facility, 425 basis points for the tranche B term loan facility and 450 basis points for the tranche C term loan facility. The Company may also elect, with lender approval, the nine month or twelve month LIBOR.
The Senior Secured Credit Facility, as amended, has customary covenants, or requirements, that the Company and certain of its subsidiaries must meet to remain in compliance with the contract. If the Company does not remain in compliance with the covenants, it could be in default under the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility. In this event, the lenders could take actions to require repayment.
In the amendment, the Company agreed to reduce the amount of the undrawn senior secured revolving credit facility portion from $650 million to $150 million. Of the $150 million, $50 million is available immediately for letters of credit and the full $150 million becomes available after August 30, 2003 provided that the Company has satisfied an incurrence test that is related to a pro forma fixed charge coverage ratio. As of December 31, 2002, the Company had $8 million in letters of credit outstanding under this agreement.
As of December 31, 2002, Level 3 had not borrowed any funds under the $150 million revolving credit facility other than the letters of credit outlined above. The availability of funds and any requirement to repay previously borrowed funds is contingent upon the continued compliance with the relevant debt covenants. The Company believes, based upon management's review of the amended covenants and other provisions of the Senior Secured Credit Facility, that it is in full compliance with all the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility as of December 31, 2002 and will be for at least the next twelve months.
Current economic conditions of the telecommunications and information services industry, combined with Level 3's financial position and significant liquidity, have created potential opportunities for Level 3 to acquire companies or portions of companies at attractive prices. Level 3 in addition to the Genuity acquisition described below, continues to evaluate these opportunities and could make additional acquisitions in 2003.2004.
92Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
On February 4, 2003, Level 3 announced the acquisitionhas not entered into off-balance sheet arrangements that have had, or are likely to have, a current or future material effect to its results of substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity, Inc., a Massachusetts-based provider of communications services. Under the agreement, Level 3 paid $60 million in net cash consideration to Genuity and assumed certain long-term operating agreements. As part of the transaction, the Company also paid $77 million in cash for assumed network obligations to be used by Level 3 during 2003. The Company also expects to incur one-time integration costs of approximately $75 to $100 million during 2003. As part of the transaction, Level 3 assumed most of Genuity's existing customer contracts and in addition, has signed new multi-year customer contracts that together represent expected revenue in excess of $1 billion over the remaining life of the agreements. The majority of Genuity's future revenue is expected to be attributable to contracts with Verizon and America Online. The Company believes that the transaction will significantly improve Level 3'sor its financial position through the addition of substantial new revenue from high-quality customers and the potential for significant network and operating cost synergies, and reduced capital expenditures for the combined communications business.position.
As of the acquisition date, Level 3 had remaining $76 million of unamortized deferred revenue attributable to cash received from Genuity for IRU and dark fiber transactions completed in prior periods. Due to the acquisition of Genuity, Level 3 will not be able to recognize this deferred revenue in future periods. As a result, the $76 million of deferred revenue will be included as an offset in computing the net purchase price used to determine the fair value of assets acquired.
The following tables summarize the contractual obligations and commercial commitments of the Company at December 31, 2002,2003, as further described in the notes to the financial statements.
| Payments Due by Period | Payments Due by Period | Total | Less than 1 Year | 1-3 Years | 4-5 Years | After 5 Years | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contractual Obligations | Contractual Obligations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | Payments Due by Period | Long-Term Debt, including current portion | $ | 5,102 | $ | 2 | $ | 117 | $ | 2,377 | $ | 2,606 | |||||||||||||||||||
| | Total | Less than 1 Year | 1 - 3 Years | 4 - 5 Years | After 5 Years | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Contractual Obligations | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-Term Debt, including current portion | $ | 6,106 | $ | 4 | $ | 288 | $ | 805 | $ | 5,009 | Capitalized Leases | 273 | 123 | 150 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Reclamation | 94 | 2 | 5 | 9 | 78 | Asset Retirement Obligations | 127 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 117 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating Leases | 754 | 76 | 147 | 142 | 389 | Operating Leases | 810 | 84 | 157 | 151 | 418 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchase Orders | 76 | 76 | — | — | — | Purchase Obligations | 43 | 43 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Commercial Commitments | Other Commercial Commitments | Other Commercial Commitments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Letters of Credit | 47 | 45 | — | 1 | 1 | Letters of Credit | 28 | 8 | — | 2 | 18 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The Company's debt instruments contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates. If the Company should fail to comply with these covenants, amounts due under the instruments may be accelerated at the note holder's discretion.
The value of the Company's communications asset retirement obligations have been discounted to reflect the assumption that Level 3 will use the underlying assets over the entire lease term. If Level 3 should elect to abandon these assets before the end of the lease term, it may be required to remediate the leased property to its original condition at the time of abandonment and possibly at amounts higher than the obligation recorded on the consolidated balance sheet. The asset retirement obligations for the coal business are based on the estimated total cost to restore the mined properties to meet compliance with laws governing surface mining. These estimated costs are calculated based on the expected future risk adjusted cash flows to remediate such properties discounted at a risk-free rate.
The asset retirement obligations are calculated based on the several assumptions which could change over time. If actual results differ from the assumptions used, the amounts required to remediate the properties may differ significantly from the amounts reflected in the consolidated financial statements.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Level 3 is subject to market risks arising from changes in interest rates, equity prices and foreign exchange rates. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had borrowed $1.125 billion under the Senior Secured Credit Facility and $120$119 million under a commercial mortgage. Amounts drawn on the debt instrumentsinstrument bear interest at the alternate base rate or LIBOR rate plus an applicable margins.margin. As the alternate base rate and LIBOR rate fluctuate, so too will the interest expense on amounts borrowed under the credit facility and mortgages.mortgage. The weighted average interest rate based on outstanding amounts under thesethe remaining variable rate instrumentsinstrument of $1.245 billion$119 million at December 31, 2002,2003, was approximately 5.3%3.67%. A hypothetical increase in the variable portion of the weighted average rate by 1% (i.e. a weighted average rate of 6.3%4.67%) would increase annual interest expense of the Company by approximately $12.5$1.2 million. At December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had $4.86$5.26 billion of fixed rate debt bearing a weighted average interest rate of 9.3%9.4%. A decline in interest rates in the future will not benefit the Company due to the terms and conditions of the loan agreements that require the Company to repurchase the debt at specified premiums. The Company has been able to reduce its exposure to interest rate risk by acquiring certain outstanding indebtedness in exchange for shares of common stock and cash. The Company continues to evaluate other alternatives to limit interest rate risk.
93
Level 3 continuescontinued to hold positions in certain publicly traded entities, primarily Commonwealth Telephone and RCN.RCN as of December 31, 2003. The Company accounts for these two investmentsthe investment in RCN using the equity method. In 2002, the Company sold approximately 90% of its holdingsThe investment in Commonwealth Telephone is accounted for net proceedsusing the cost method and due to its status as available for sale, it is recorded at its fair value of approximately $326 million.$42 million on the
94
consolidated balance sheet. The market value of the Company's holdings in RCN and Commonwealth Telephone was approximately $51$18 million at December 31, 2002,2003, which is higher than theirits carrying value of $16 million. The Company may seek to sell all or a portion ofzero. Level 3 announced that it had sold its sharesremaining stake in RCN and Commonwealth Telephone over time. The value receivedin January 2004 for the remaining investments$41 million. In February 2004, RCN indicated that it would be affected bylikely file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. As a result, the market value of the underlying stock at the timeCompany's investment in RCN declined to $9 million as of any such transaction. A 20% decrease in the price of Commonwealth Telephone and RCN stock would result in approximately a $10 million decrease in fair value of these investments.March 5, 2004. The Company does not currently utilize financial instruments to minimize its exposure to price fluctuations in equity securities.
The Company's business plan includes developing and operating a telecommunications network and information services business in Europe. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had invested significant amounts of capital in that region.the region for its communications business. The Company issued €800 million (€425 million outstanding at December 31, 2002)2003) in Senior Euro Notes in February 2000 as an economic hedge against its net investment in its European subsidiaries at the time. Due to the historically low exchange rates involving the U.S. Dollar and the Euro, during the fourth quarter of 2000, Level 3 elected to set aside the remaining Euros received from the debt offerings. During the third quarter of 2001, Level 3 elected to start funding its current European investing and operating activities with the Euros that had previously been set aside. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company held only enough Euroforeign denominated cash and cash equivalentscurrency to fund its immediate working capital obligations. Other than the issuance of the Euro denominated debt and the holding of the Euros, theThe Company has not made significant use of financial instruments to minimize its exposure to foreign currency fluctuations. Foreign exchange rate fluctuations in 20022003 did not have a material effect on Level 3's results of operations and financial position. The Company continues to analyze risk management strategies to reduce foreign currency exchange risk.
The change in interest rates and equity security prices is based on hypothetical movements and are not necessarily indicative of the actual results that may occur. Future earnings and losses will be affected by actual fluctuations in interest rates equity prices and foreign currency rates.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Financial statements and supplementary financial information for Level 3 Communications, Inc. and Subsidiaries begin on page F-1.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
Effective June 14, 2002, Level 3 Communications, Inc. (the "Registrant") determined not to renew the engagement of its independent accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") and appointed KPMG LLP ("KPMG") as its new independent accountants, effective immediately. This determination followed the Registrant's decision to seek proposals from independent accountants to audit its financial statements for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. The decision not to renew the engagement of Andersen and to retain KPMG was approved by the Audit Committee of the Registrant's Board of Directors.
Andersen's report dated January 29, 2002, (except with respect to matters discussed in Note 17 to the financial statements, as to which the date is March 13, 2002) on the Registrant's 2001 financial statements was issued on March 13, 2002, in conjunction with the filing of the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.
94
During Level 3's two most recent fiscal years ended December 31, 2001, and the subsequent interim period through June 14, 2002, there were no disagreements between the Registrant and Andersen on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements if not resolved to Andersen's satisfaction would have caused them to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreement in connection with their reports. None of the reportable events described under Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K occurred within the Registrant's two most recent fiscal years and the subsequent interim period through June 14, 2002. The audit reports of Andersen on the consolidated financial statements of the Registrant and subsidiaries as of and for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 do not contain any adverse opinion or
95
disclaimer of opinion, nor were they qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope, or accounting principles.
The Registrant provided Andersen with a copy of the foregoing disclosures. Andersen provided a letter, dated June 19, 2002, to the Registrant stating that it has found no basis for disagreement with such statements.
During the Registrant's two most recent fiscal years ended December 31, 2001, and the subsequent interim period through June 14, 2002, the Registrant did not consult with KPMG regarding any of the matters or events set forth in Item 304(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of Regulation S-K.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The information required by this Item 10 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2002 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, however certain information is included in Item 1. Business above under the caption "Directors and Executive Officers."
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required by this Item 11 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2003 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
The information required by this Item 12 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2003 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
The information required by this Item 13 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2003 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
ITEM 14.9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Disclosure controls and procedures. The Company's Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures within the 90 days prior to the dateas of filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.December 31, 2003. Based upon such review, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the Company has in place appropriateCompany's controls and procedures are effective and are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the rules there under, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the
95
time periods specified in the Commission's rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by an issuer in reports it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the Company's management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
(b) Internal controls. SinceThere was no change in Level 3's internal controls over financial reporting that have occurred during the datefourth quarter 2003 that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Level 3's internal controls over financial reporting.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
The information required by this Item 10 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, however certain information is included in Item 1. Business above under the caption "Directors and Executive Officers."
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required by this Item 11 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
The information required by this Item 12 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
The information required by this Item 13 is incorporated by reference to the Company's definitive proxy statement for the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
96
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
KPMG LLP serves as the Company's independent auditors. The following table presents fees (excluding expenses) for professional audit services rendered by KPMG LLP for the audit of the evaluation described above, there have not beenLevel 3 annual financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2003, and 2002 and fees billed for other services rendered by KPMG LLP during those periods.
| | 2003 | 2002 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Audit Fees(1) | $ | 2,067,000 | $ | 1,306,000 | ||
| Audit-Related Fees(2) | $ | 151,000 | $ | 59,000 | ||
| Tax Fees(3) | $ | 58,000 | $ | 75,000 | ||
| All Other Fees | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Total Fees | $ | 2,276,000 | $ | 1,440,000 | ||
The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of Level 3 is responsible for appointing, setting compensation, and overseeing the work of the independent public accountants. As part of this responsibility, the Audit Committee is required to pre-approve the audit and non-audit services performed by the independent public accountants in order to assure the public accountant's independence. The Audit Committee has adopted a pre-approval process with respect to the provision of audit and non-audit services to be performed by KPMG LLP. This pre-approval process requires the Audit Committee to review and approve all audit services and permitted non-audit services to be performed by KPMG LLP. Pre-approval fee levels for all services to be provided by KPMG LLP are established annually by the Audit Committee. Audit services are subject to specific pre-approval while audit-related services, tax services and all other services may be granted pre-approvals within specified categories. Any proposed services exceeding these levels require specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee. Additionally, the Audit Committee may delegate either type of pre-approval authority to one or more if its members. A report, for informational purposes only, of any significant changes in our internal controls or in other factorspre-approval decisions made by a single member of the Audit Committee is made to the full Audit Committee on at least a quarterly basis. One hundred percent of the services that could significantly affect those controls.required pre-approval by the Audit Committee received that approval.
97
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES, AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
(a) Financial statements and financial statement schedules required to be filed for the registrant under Items 8 or 1415 are set forth following the index page at page F-l. Exhibits filed as a part of this report are listed below. Exhibits incorporated by reference are indicated in parentheses.
| 3.1 | Restated Certificate of Incorporation dated March 31, 1998 (Exhibit 1 to Registrant's Form 8-A filed on April 1,1998). | |
3.2 | Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 3, 1999). | |
3.3 | Specimen Stock Certificate of Common Stock, par value $.01 per share (Exhibit 3 to the Registrant's Form 8-A filed on March 31, 1998). | |
3.4 | Amended and Restated By-laws as of May 23, 2001 (Exhibit 3 to Registrant's | |
3.5 | Rights Agreement, dated as of May 29, 1998, between the Registrant and Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, NA (f/k/a Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.), as Rights Agent, which includes the Form of Certificate of Designation, Preferences, and Rights of Series A. Junior Participating Preferred Stock of the Registrant, as Exhibit A, the Form of Rights Certificate as Exhibit B and the Summary of Rights to Purchase Preferred Stock, as Exhibit C (Exhibit 1 to the Registrant's Form 8-A Amendment No. 1 filed on June 10, 1998). | |
3.6 | Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement, dated July 5, 2002, between the Registrant and Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, NA, as Rights Agent (Exhibit 1.5 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 8, 2002). | |
3.7 | Form of Certificate of Designations, Number, Voting Powers, Preferences and Rights of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock (Exhibit 1.3 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 8, 2002). | |
4.1 | Indenture, dated as of April 28, 1998, between the Registrant and IBJ Schroder Bank & Trust Company as Trustee relating to the Registrant's | |
4.2 | Indenture, dated as of December 2, 1998, between the Registrant and IBJ Schroder Bank & Trust Company as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 101/2% Senior Discount Notes due 2008 (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 File No. 333-71687). | |
4.3.1 | Form of Senior Indenture (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Amendment 1 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-68887) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 3, 1999). | |
96
4.3.2 | First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of September 20,1999, between the Registrant and IBJ Whitehall Bank & Trust Company as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2009 (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 20, 1999). | |
4.3.3 | Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010 (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 29, 2000). | |
98
4.3.4 | Third Supplemental Indenture, dated as of July 8, 2002, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2012 (Exhibit 1.2 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 8, 2002). | |
4.4 | Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 11% Senior Notes due 2008 (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 File No. 333-37362). | |
4.5 | Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 111/4% Senior Notes due 2010 (Exhibit 4.2 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 File No. 333-37362). | |
4.6 | Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's | |
4.7 | Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 103/4% Senior Euro Notes due 2008 (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 File No. 333-37364). | |
4.8 | Indenture, dated as of February 29, 2000, between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 111/4% Senior Euro Notes due 2010 (Exhibit 4.2 to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 File No. 333-37364). | |
4.9 | Amended and Restated Indenture dated as of July 8, 2003, by and between the Company and The Bank of New York, as successor to IBJ Whitehall Bank & Trust Company, as trustee (amends and restates the Senior Debt Indenture, a Form of which was filed as an Exhibit to the Company's Registration Statement on Form S-3-File No. 333-68887) (Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 8, 2004). | |
4.10 | First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of July 8, 2003, by and between the Company and The Bank of New York, as successor to IBJ Whitehall Bank & Trust Company, as trustee (Exhibit 4.2 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 8, 2004). | |
4.11 | Indenture, dated as of October 1, 2003, by and between Level 3 Communications, Inc., as Guarantor, Level 3 Financing, Inc. as Issuer and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Level 3 Financing, Inc. 10.75% Senior Notes due 2011. | |
4.12 | Indenture, dated as of October 24, 2003, by and between the Registrant and The Bank of New York as Trustee relating to the Registrant's 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013. | |
10.1 | Separation Agreement, dated December 8, 1997, by and among Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc., Kiewit Diversified Group Inc., PKS Holdings, Inc. and Kiewit Construction Group Inc. (Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant's Form 10-K for 1997). | |
10.2 | Amendment No. 1 to Separation Agreement, dated March 18, 1997, by and among Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc., Kiewit Diversified Group Inc., PKS Holdings, Inc. and Kiewit Construction Group Inc. (Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant's Form 10-K for 1997). | |
10.3 | ||
97
Form of Aircraft Time-Share Agreement (Exhibit 10.7 to the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001). | ||
Asset Purchase Agreement by and among Level 3 Communications, Inc., Level 3 Communications, LLC, Genuity Inc., and the subsidiaries of Genuity Inc. listed on the signature page thereto, dated as of November 27, 2002 (Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 2, 2002). | ||
99
Amendment, Consent and Waiver to the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of December 30, 2002, effective as of November 27, 2002, by and among the Registrant, the Purchasers and the Sellers (Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant's current report on Form 8-K dated January 3, 2003). | ||
Second Amendment and Waiver to the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 24, 2003, by and among the Registrant, the Purchasers and the Sellers (Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2003). | ||
Third Amendment and Waiver to the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 31, 2003, by and among the Registrant, the Purchasers and the Sellers (Exhibit 10.3 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2003). | ||
Transition Services Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2003, by and among the Purchasers and the Sellers (Exhibit 10.4 to the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2003). | ||
Warrant Agreement, dated as of April 15, 2002, between the Registrant and Walter Scott, Jr. (Exhibit 10.9 to the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2002). | ||
21 | List of subsidiaries of the | |
23.1 | Consent of KPMG | |
23.2 | Information Regarding Consent of Arthur Andersen | |
31.1 | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer. | |
31.2 | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer. | |
32.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
32.2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
(b) Reports on Form 8-K filed by the Registrant during the fourth quarter of 2003.2003 include the following:
On October 4, 2002,November 7, 2003, the RegistrantCompany filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a Current Report on Form 8-K relatingregarding the amended and restated by-laws of the Company;
On October 24, 2003, the Company furnished to the identification of the members of the Registrant's Audit Committee of the Board of Directors
On November 8, 2002, the Registrant filedSecurities and Exchange Commission a Current Report on Form 8-K a press release relating to, the determination of the Registrant's Board of Directors to eliminate the Registrant's "pre-announcement" policyamong other things, third quarter 2003 financial results; and to clarify the number of shares of the Registrant's common stock, par value $.01 per share Colin V.K. Williams is able to purchase upon exercise of certain vested outperform stock options.
On December 2, 2002,October 1, 2003, the Registrant filedCompany furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission a Current Report on Form 8-K a press release relating to the executiontermination of the Asset Purchase Agreement by and among the Registrant, Level 3 Communications, LLC, Genuity Inc., and the subsidiaries of Genuity Inc. listed on the signature page thereto.
On January 1, 2003, the Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K relating to the execution of an amendment to the Asset Purchase Agreement by and among the Registrant, Level 3 Communications, LLC, Genuity Inc., and the subsidiaries of Genuity Inc. listed on the signature page thereto on December 30, 2002.senior secured credit facility.
On October 31, 2002, the Registrant furnished to the Commission pursuant to Item 9 of Form 8-K, a Current Report on Form 8-K relating to a press release announcing the Registrant's third quarter 2002 financial results.
98
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
| | Page | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Auditors' Report | F-2 | ||
| Report of Independent Public Accountants | F-3 | ||
| Financial Statements as of December 31, | |||
| Consolidated Statements of Operations | F-4 | ||
| Consolidated Balance Sheets | F-5 | ||
| Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows | F-6 | ||
| Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) | F-8 | ||
| Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss | F-9 | ||
| Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements | F-10 | ||
Schedules not indicated above have been omitted because of the absence of the conditions under which they are required or because the information called for is shown in the consolidated financial statements or in the notes thereto.
F-1
To theThe Stockholders and Board of DirectorsDirectors of Level 3 Communications, Inc.:
We have audited the consolidated balance sheetsheets of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and comprehensive loss for the yearyears then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.audits. The 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements of Level 3 Communications, Inc. as listed in the accompanying index, were audited by other auditors who have ceased operations. Those auditors expressed an unqualified opinion on thosethe consolidated financial statements in their report dated January 29, 2002.
We conducted our auditaudits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit providesaudits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the 2003 and 2002 financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for the yearyears then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
As discussed in Notenote 1 to the consolidated financial statements, Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets," effective January 1, 2002.2002, and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations," effective January 1, 2003.
As discussed above, the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries were audited by other auditors who have ceased operations. As described in Note 9,notes 1 and 11, these consolidated financial statements have been revised to include the transitional disclosures required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets," which was adopted by the Company as of January 1, 2002.2002, and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations," which was adopted by the Company as of January 1, 2003. In our opinion, the disclosures for 2001 in notes 1 and 2000 in Note 911 are appropriate. However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries other than with respect to such disclosures, and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
/s/ KPMG LLP | |||||
Denver, Colorado
March 1, 2004
F-2
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
To the Stockholders and Board of
Directors of Level 3 Communications, Inc.:
We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and comprehensive income (loss) for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
/s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP | |||||
Denver, Colorado
January 29, 2002, except with respect to the matters
discussed in Note 17, as to which the date is March 13, 2002.
This report is a copy of a previously issued Arthur Andersen LLP report included in the Company's 2001 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and has not been reissued by Arthur Andersen LLP.
F-3
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For each of the three years ended December 31, 20022003
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||||||
| Revenue: | |||||||||||||
| Communications | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | $ | 857 | |||||||
| Information Services | 1,933 | 123 | 115 | ||||||||||
| Coal Mining | 84 | 87 | 190 | ||||||||||
| Other | 30 | 25 | 22 | ||||||||||
| Total revenue | 3,148 | 1,533 | 1,184 | ||||||||||
Costs and Expenses: | |||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue: | |||||||||||||
| Communications | 209 | 593 | 628 | ||||||||||
| Information Services | 1,766 | 90 | 88 | ||||||||||
| Coal Mining | 57 | 59 | 76 | ||||||||||
| Total cost of revenue | 2,032 | 742 | 792 | ||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization. | 802 | 1,122 | 579 | ||||||||||
| Selling, general and administrative. | 944 | 1,297 | 1,110 | ||||||||||
| Restructuring and impairment charges | 181 | 3,353 | — | ||||||||||
| Total costs and expenses | 3,959 | 6,514 | 2,481 | ||||||||||
Loss from Operations | (811 | ) | (4,981 | ) | (1,297 | ) | |||||||
Other Income (Expense): | |||||||||||||
| Interest income | 29 | 161 | 328 | ||||||||||
| Interest expense, net | (560 | ) | (646 | ) | (282 | ) | |||||||
| Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries, net | 14 | 16 | (284 | ) | |||||||||
| Gain on equity investee stock transactions | — | — | 100 | ||||||||||
| Other, net | 94 | 2 | (21 | ) | |||||||||
| Total other income (expense) | (423 | ) | (467 | ) | (159 | ) | |||||||
Loss from Continuing Operations Before Income Tax | (1,234 | ) | (5,448 | ) | (1,456 | ) | |||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | 121 | — | 49 | ||||||||||
| Net Loss from Continuing Operations | (1,113 | ) | (5,448 | ) | (1,407 | ) | |||||||
Loss from Discontinued Operations | — | (605 | ) | (48 | ) | ||||||||
Extraordinary Gains on Debt Extinguishments, net | 255 | 1,075 | — | ||||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | $ | (1,455 | ) | ||||
Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Level 3 Common Stock (Basic and Diluted): | |||||||||||||
| Continuing operations | $ | (2.74 | ) | $ | (14.58 | ) | $ | (3.88 | ) | ||||
| Discontinued operations | $ | — | $ | (1.62 | ) | $ | (0.13 | ) | |||||
| Extraordinary gains on debt extinguishments, net | $ | 0.63 | $ | 2.88 | $ | — | |||||||
| Net loss | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (13.32 | ) | $ | (4.01 | ) | ||||
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||||||
| Revenue: | |||||||||||||
| Communications | $ | 1,947 | $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,298 | |||||||
| Information Services | 1,999 | 1,896 | 123 | ||||||||||
| Coal Mining | 80 | 84 | 87 | ||||||||||
| Other | — | 30 | 25 | ||||||||||
| Total revenue | 4,026 | 3,111 | 1,533 | ||||||||||
Costs and Expenses (exclusive of depreciation and amortization shown separately below): | |||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue: | |||||||||||||
| Communications | 370 | 209 | 593 | ||||||||||
| Information Services | 1,836 | 1,742 | 90 | ||||||||||
| Coal Mining | 58 | 57 | 59 | ||||||||||
| Total cost of revenue | 2,264 | 2,008 | 742 | ||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 827 | 801 | 1,122 | ||||||||||
| Selling, general and administrative | 1,046 | 934 | 1,297 | ||||||||||
| Restructuring and impairment charges | 45 | 181 | 3,353 | ||||||||||
| Total costs and expenses | 4,182 | 3,924 | 6,514 | ||||||||||
| Operating Loss | (156 | ) | (813 | ) | (4,981 | ) | |||||||
Other Income (Expense): | |||||||||||||
| Interest income | 18 | 29 | 161 | ||||||||||
| Interest expense, net | (567 | ) | (560 | ) | (646 | ) | |||||||
| Gains on early extinguishment of debt | 41 | 255 | 1,075 | ||||||||||
| Other, net | (107 | ) | 108 | 18 | |||||||||
| Total other income (expense) | (615 | ) | (168 | ) | 608 | ||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations Before Income Tax and Change in Accounting Principle | (771 | ) | (981 | ) | (4,373 | ) | |||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | 50 | 121 | — | ||||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | (721 | ) | (860 | ) | (4,373 | ) | |||||||
Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | 5 | 2 | (605 | ) | |||||||||
| Net Loss Before Change in Accounting Principle | (716 | ) | (858 | ) | (4,978 | ) | |||||||
Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | 5 | — | — | ||||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (711 | ) | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | ||||
| Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Level 3 Common Stock (Basic and Diluted): | |||||||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (1.28 | ) | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (11.70 | ) | ||||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | $ | .01 | $ | — | $ | (1.62 | ) | ||||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | $ | .01 | $ | — | $ | — | |||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (1.26 | ) | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (13.32 | ) | ||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
December 31, 20022003 and 20012002
| | | 2002 | 2001 | | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||
| Assets | Assets | Assets | ||||||||||||||||
| Current Assets: | Current Assets: | Current Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,297 | Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 1,129 | $ | 1,142 | |||||||||
| Marketable securities | — | 206 | Marketable securities | 42 | — | |||||||||||||
| Restricted cash | 99 | 155 | Restricted cash | 74 | 99 | |||||||||||||
| Receivables, less allowances for doubtful accounts of $29 and $46, respectively | 539 | 239 | Receivables, less allowances for doubtful accounts of $28 and $29, respectively | 561 | 527 | |||||||||||||
| Current assets of discontinued Asian operations | — | 74 | Other | 140 | 171 | |||||||||||||
| Other | 154 | 63 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total Current Assets | Total Current Assets | 1,934 | 2,034 | Total Current Assets | 1,946 | 1,939 | ||||||||||||
Net Property, Plant and Equipment | Net Property, Plant and Equipment | 6,010 | 6,890 | Net Property, Plant and Equipment | 5,727 | 6,005 | ||||||||||||
| Restricted cash | 467 | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Restricted Cash | Restricted Cash | 61 | 467 | |||||||||||||||
| Goodwill and Intangibles, net | Goodwill and Intangibles, net | 380 | 28 | Goodwill and Intangibles, net | 459 | 380 | ||||||||||||
| Other Assets, net | Other Assets, net | 172 | 364 | Other Assets, net | 100 | 172 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 8,963 | $ | 9,316 | $ | 8,293 | $ | 8,963 | |||||||||||
Liabilities and Stockholders' Deficit | ||||||||||||||||||
| Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) | Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) | |||||||||||||||||
| Current Liabilities: | Current Liabilities: | Current Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
| Accounts payable | $ | 691 | $ | 714 | ||||||||||||||
| Current portion of long-term debt | 4 | 7 | Accounts payable | $ | 651 | $ | 691 | |||||||||||
| Accrued payroll and employee benefits | 156 | 162 | Current portion of long-term debt | 125 | 4 | |||||||||||||
| Accrued interest | 92 | 86 | Accrued payroll and employee benefits | 135 | 147 | |||||||||||||
| Deferred revenue | 199 | 124 | Accrued interest | 100 | 92 | |||||||||||||
| Current liabilities of discontinued Asian operations | — | 74 | Deferred revenue | 189 | 199 | |||||||||||||
| Other | 211 | 225 | Other | 231 | 220 | |||||||||||||
| Total Current Liabilities | Total Current Liabilities | 1,353 | 1,392 | Total Current Liabilities | 1,431 | 1,353 | ||||||||||||
Long-Term Debt, less current portion | Long-Term Debt, less current portion | 6,102 | 6,209 | Long-Term Debt, less current portion | 5,250 | 6,102 | ||||||||||||
| Deferred Revenue | Deferred Revenue | 1,264 | 1,335 | Deferred Revenue | 954 | 1,264 | ||||||||||||
| Accrued Reclamation Costs | Accrued Reclamation Costs | 92 | 92 | Accrued Reclamation Costs | 90 | 92 | ||||||||||||
| Other Liabilities | Other Liabilities | 392 | 353 | Other Liabilities | 387 | 392 | ||||||||||||
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies | ||||||||||||||||
Stockholders' Deficit: | ||||||||||||||||||
Stockholders' Equity (Deficit): | Stockholders' Equity (Deficit): | |||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock, $.01 par value, authorized 10,000,000 shares: no shares outstanding | — | — | Preferred stock, $.01 par value, authorized 10,000,000 shares: no shares outstanding | — | — | |||||||||||||
| Common stock: | Common stock: | |||||||||||||||||
| Common stock, $.01 par value, authorized 1,500,000,000 shares: 443,556,864 outstanding in 2002 and 384,703,922 outstanding in 2001 | 4 | 4 | Common stock, $.01 par value, authorized 1,500,000,000 shares: 677,828,634 outstanding in 2003 and 443,556,864 outstanding in 2002 | 7 | 4 | |||||||||||||
| Class R, $.01 par value, authorized 8,500,000 shares: no shares outstanding | — | — | Class R, $.01 par value, authorized 8,500,000 shares: no shares outstanding | — | — | |||||||||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 6,273 | 5,602 | Additional paid-in capital | 7,360 | 6,273 | |||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (132 | ) | (144 | ) | Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (90 | ) | (132 | ) | |||||||||
| Accumulated deficit | (6,385 | ) | (5,527 | ) | Accumulated deficit | (7,096 | ) | (6,385 | ) | |||||||||
| Total Stockholders' Deficit | (240 | ) | (65 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Total Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) | Total Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) | 181 | (240 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| $ | 8,963 | $ | 9,316 | $ | 8,293 | $ | 8,963 | |||||||||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-5
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the three years ended December 31, 20022003
| | | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash Flows from Operating Activities: | Cash Flows from Operating Activities: | Cash Flows from Operating Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (711 | ) | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | $ | (1,455 | ) | (Income) loss from discontinued operations | (5 | ) | (2 | ) | 605 | |||||||||||||||
| Loss from discontinued operations | — | 605 | 48 | Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle | (5 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Extraordinary gain on debt extinguishments, net | (255 | ) | (1,075 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loss from continuing operations | (721 | ) | (860 | ) | (4,373 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loss from continuing operations | (1,113 | ) | (5,448 | ) | (1,407 | ) | Adjustments to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjustments to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations: | Equity earnings, net | (3 | ) | (14 | ) | (16 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Equity (earnings) losses, net | (14 | ) | (16 | ) | 284 | Depreciation and amortization | 827 | 801 | 1,122 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Depreciation and amortization | 802 | 1,122 | 579 | Induced conversion expense on convertible debt | 200 | 88 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Induced conversion expense on convertible debt | 88 | — | — | Gain on debt extinguishments, net | (41 | ) | (255 | ) | (1,075 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Gain on equity investee stock transactions | — | — | (100 | ) | Dark fiber and submarine cable non-cash cost of revenue | — | 4 | 160 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dark fiber and submarine cable non-cash cost of revenue | 4 | 160 | 196 | Loss on impairments and asset sales | — | 182 | 3,245 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loss on impairments and asset sales | 182 | 3,245 | — | (Gain) loss on sale of property, plant and equipment, Commonwealth shares and other assets | (74 | ) | (189 | ) | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of property, plant and equipment, Commonwealth shares and other assets | (189 | ) | 3 | (19 | ) | Non-cash compensation expense attributable to stock awards | 86 | 181 | 314 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-cash compensation expense attributable to stock awards | 181 | 314 | 236 | Deferred revenue | (267 | ) | 49 | 706 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Deferred revenue | 49 | 706 | 586 | Deferred income taxes | (57 | ) | 16 | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Amortization of debt issuance costs | 40 | 27 | 21 | Amortization of debt issuance costs | 42 | 40 | 27 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accreted interest on discount debt | 110 | 116 | 100 | Accreted interest on discount debt | 106 | 110 | 116 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accrued interest on long-term debt | 9 | (37 | ) | 76 | Accrued interest on long-term debt | 25 | 9 | (37 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Change in working capital items net of amounts acquired: | Change in working capital items net of amounts acquired: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Receivables | (26 | ) | 275 | (384 | ) | Receivables | (26 | ) | (26 | ) | 275 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Other current assets | (77 | ) | (4 | ) | (175 | ) | Other current assets | 41 | (77 | ) | (4 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Payables | (340 | ) | (666 | ) | 644 | Payables | (55 | ) | (340 | ) | (666 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other liabilities | (116 | ) | 115 | 157 | Other liabilities | (48 | ) | (117 | ) | 115 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Other | (17 | ) | 229 | 242 | Other | (11 | ) | (33 | ) | 221 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Continuing Operations | Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Continuing Operations | (427 | ) | 141 | 1,036 | Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Continuing Operations | 24 | (431 | ) | 141 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Cash Flows from Investing Activities: | Cash Flows from Investing Activities: | Cash Flows from Investing Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities | 200 | 3,670 | 7,822 | Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities | — | 200 | 3,670 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases of marketable securities | — | (1,162 | ) | (8,284 | ) | Purchases of marketable securities | — | — | (1,162 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Decrease (increase) in restricted securities | (410 | ) | 56 | (150 | ) | Decrease (increase) in restricted securities | 9 | (410 | ) | 56 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Capital expenditures | (218 | ) | (2,325 | ) | (5,576 | ) | Capital expenditures | (191 | ) | (218 | ) | (2,325 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Release of capital accruals | 215 | — | — | Release of capital expenditure accruals | 28 | 215 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchase of assets held for sale, net | — | (110 | ) | (52 | ) | Purchase of assets held for sale, net | — | — | (110 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Investments and acquisitions | (16 | ) | — | (34 | ) | Investments and acquisitions | (2 | ) | (16 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| McLeod acquisition | (51 | ) | — | — | Genuity acquisition | (109 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CorpSoft acquisition, net of cash acquired of $34 | (93 | ) | — | — | McLeod acquisition | — | (51 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Software Spectrum acquisition, net of cash acquired of $40 | (94 | ) | — | — | CorpSoft acquisition, net of cash acquired of $34 | — | (93 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Proceeds from sale of Commonwealth shares | 326 | — | — | Software Spectrum acquisition, net of cash acquired of $40 | — | (94 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment, and other investments | 130 | 67 | 99 | Proceeds from sale of toll road operations | 46 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proceeds from sale of Commonwealth shares | — | 326 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment, and other investments | 58 | 130 | 67 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities | Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities | $ | (11 | ) | $ | 196 | $ | (6,175 | ) | Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities | $ | (161 | ) | $ | (11 | ) | $ | 196 | ||||||||||||
(continued)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-6
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| Cash Flows from Financing Activities: | |||||||||||
| Long-term debt borrowings, net of issuance costs | $ | 490 | $ | 761 | $ | 3,195 | |||||
| Payments and repurchases of long-term debt, including current portion | (159 | ) | (812 | ) | (21 | ) | |||||
| Issuances of common stock, net of issuance costs | — | — | 2,406 | ||||||||
| Stock options exercised | 1 | 2 | 16 | ||||||||
| Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities | 332 | (49 | ) | 5,596 | |||||||
Net Cash Used in Discontinued Operations | (49 | ) | (226 | ) | (358 | ) | |||||
Effect of Exchange Rates on Cash and Cash Equivalents | — | (20 | ) | (56 | ) | ||||||
| Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents | (155 | ) | 42 | 43 | |||||||
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year | 1,297 | 1,255 | 1,212 | ||||||||
| Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,297 | $ | 1,255 | |||||
| Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information: | |||||||||||
| Income taxes paid | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 2 | |||||
| Interest paid | 414 | 598 | 461 | ||||||||
Noncash Investing and Financing Activities: | |||||||||||
| Common stock issued in exchange for long term debt | $ | 466 | $ | 72 | $ | — | |||||
| Long term debt principal retired by issuing common stock | 582 | 194 | — | ||||||||
| Warrants issued in exchange for construction services | — | 32 | — | ||||||||
| Equity securities received in exchange for services | — | — | 43 | ||||||||
| Issuances of stock for Businessnet acquisition | — | — | 3 | ||||||||
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS—(Continued)
For the three years ended December 31, 2003
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| Cash Flows from Financing Activities: | |||||||||||
| Long-term debt borrowings, net of issuance costs | $ | 848 | $ | 490 | $ | 761 | |||||
| Payments and repurchases of long-term debt, including current portion | (772 | ) | (159 | ) | (812 | ) | |||||
| Stock options exercised | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||
| Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities | 79 | 332 | (49 | ) | |||||||
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Discontinued Operations | 37 | (45 | ) | (226 | ) | ||||||
Effect of Exchange Rates on Cash and Cash Equivalents | 8 | — | (20 | ) | |||||||
| Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents | (13 | ) | (155 | ) | 42 | ||||||
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year | 1,142 | 1,297 | 1,255 | ||||||||
| Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year | $ | 1,129 | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,297 | |||||
| Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information: | |||||||||||
| Cash interest paid | $ | 394 | $ | 414 | $ | 598 | |||||
Noncash Investing and Financing Activities: | |||||||||||
| Common stock issued in exchange for long term debt | $ | 953 | $ | 466 | $ | 72 | |||||
| Long-term debt principal retired by issuing common stock | 1,007 | 582 | 194 | ||||||||
| Accrued interest paid with common stock | 10 | — | — | ||||||||
| Common stock issued for Telverse acquisition | 29 | — | — | ||||||||
| Long-term debt extinguished due to sale of toll road operations. | 139 | — | — | ||||||||
| Settlement of debt obligation and current liabilities with restricted securities | 410 | — | — | ||||||||
| Capital leases assumed in Genuity transaction | 309 | — | — | ||||||||
| Decrease in deferred revenue related to Genuity transaction | 76 | — | — | ||||||||
| Warrants issued (cancelled) in exchange for construction services | (2 | ) | — | 32 | |||||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-7
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
For the three years ended December 31, 20022003
| | | Common Stock | Additional Paid-in Capital | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | Retained Earnings (Accumulated Deficit) | Total | | Common Stock | Additional Paid-in Capital | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | Accumulated Deficit | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balances at December 31, 1999 | $ | 3 | $ | 2,501 | $ | (5 | ) | $ | 906 | $ | 3,405 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issuances, net of offering costs | 1 | 2,409 | — | — | 2,410 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised | — | 15 | — | — | 15 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock plan grants | — | 237 | — | — | 237 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shareworks plan | — | 5 | — | — | 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | — | — | — | (1,455 | ) | (1,455 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Loss | — | — | (68 | ) | — | (68 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balances at December 31, 2000 | Balances at December 31, 2000 | 4 | 5,167 | (73 | ) | (549 | ) | 4,549 | Balances at December 31, 2000 | $ | 4 | $ | 5,167 | $ | (73 | ) | $ | (549 | ) | $ | 4,549 | |||||||||||||
Common Stock: | Common Stock: | Common Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issued to extinguish long-term debt | — | 72 | — | — | 72 | Issued to extinguish long-term debt | — | 72 | — | — | 72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Warrants issued for capital assets | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | Warrants issued for capital assets | — | 32 | — | — | 32 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised | — | 2 | — | — | 2 | Stock options exercised | — | 2 | — | — | 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock plan grants | — | 312 | — | — | 312 | Stock plan grants | — | 312 | — | — | 312 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shareworks plan | — | 17 | — | — | 17 | Shareworks plan | — | 17 | — | — | 17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | Net Loss | — | — | — | (4,978 | ) | (4,978 | ) | Net Loss | — | — | — | (4,978 | ) | (4,978 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Loss | Other Comprehensive Loss | — | — | (71 | ) | — | (71 | ) | Other Comprehensive Loss | — | — | (71 | ) | — | (71 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Balances at December 31, 2001 | Balances at December 31, 2001 | 4 | 5,602 | (144 | ) | (5,527 | ) | (65 | ) | Balances at December 31, 2001 | 4 | 5,602 | (144 | ) | (5,527 | ) | (65 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Common Stock: | Common Stock: | Common Stock: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issued to extinguish long-term debt | — | 466 | — | — | 466 | Issued to extinguish long-term debt | — | 466 | — | — | 466 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised | — | 1 | — | — | 1 | Stock options exercised | — | 1 | — | — | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock plan grants | — | 168 | — | — | 168 | Stock plan grants | — | 168 | — | — | 168 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shareworks plan | — | 36 | — | — | 36 | Shareworks plan | — | 36 | — | — | 36 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | Net Loss | — | — | — | (858 | ) | (858 | ) | Net Loss | — | — | — | (858 | ) | (858 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Income | Other Comprehensive Income | — | — | 12 | — | 12 | Other Comprehensive Income | — | — | 12 | — | 12 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balances at December 31, 2002 | Balances at December 31, 2002 | $ | 4 | $ | 6,273 | $ | (132 | ) | $ | (6,385 | ) | $ | (240 | ) | Balances at December 31, 2002 | 4 | 6,273 | (132 | ) | (6,385 | ) | (240 | ) | |||||||||||
Common Stock: | Common Stock: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issued to extinguish long-term debt | 3 | 950 | — | — | 953 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised | — | 3 | — | — | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stock plan grants | — | 57 | — | — | 57 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shareworks plan | — | 36 | — | — | 36 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 401(k) plan | — | 14 | — | — | 14 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Warrants cancelled | — | (2 | ) | — | — | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Telverse acquisition | — | 29 | 29 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | Net Loss | — | — | — | (711 | ) | (711 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Income | Other Comprehensive Income | — | — | 42 | — | 42 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balances at December 31, 2003 | Balances at December 31, 2003 | $ | 7 | $ | 7,360 | $ | (90 | ) | $ | (7,096 | ) | $ | 181 | |||||||||||||||||||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-8
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
For the three years ended December 31, 20022003
| | | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | Net Loss | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | $ | (1,455 | ) | Net Loss | $ | (711 | ) | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | ||
| Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Before Tax: | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Before Tax: | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Before Tax: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Foreign currency translation adjustments | 24 | (21 | ) | (81 | ) | Foreign currency translation adjustments | 31 | 24 | (21 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Unrealized holding gains (losses) and other arising during period | (21 | ) | (4 | ) | 5 | Unrealized holding gains (losses) on marketable equity securities and other arising during period | 14 | (21 | ) | (4 | ) | |||||||||||
| Reclassification adjustment for (gains) losses included in net loss | 9 | (46 | ) | 8 | Reclassification adjustment for (gains) losses included in net loss | (3 | ) | 9 | (46 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Before Tax | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Before Tax | 12 | (71 | ) | (68 | ) | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Before Tax | 42 | 12 | (71 | ) | |||||||||||
Income Tax Benefit Related to Items of Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | Income Tax Benefit Related to Items of Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | — | — | — | Income Tax Benefit Related to Items of Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||
| Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Net of Taxes | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Net of Taxes | 12 | (71 | ) | (68 | ) | Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Net of Taxes | 42 | 12 | (71 | ) | |||||||||||
Comprehensive Loss | Comprehensive Loss | $ | (846 | ) | $ | (5,049 | ) | $ | (1,523 | ) | Comprehensive Loss | $ | (669 | ) | $ | (846 | ) | $ | (5,049 | ) | ||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-9
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company" or "Level 3") in which it has control, which are engaged in enterprises primarily related to communications, information services, and coal mining. Fifty-percent-owned mining joint ventures are consolidated on a pro rata basis. Investments in other companies in which the Company exercises significant influence over operating and financial policies or has significant equity ownership are accounted for by the equity method. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
In 2001,2003, Level 3 sold Software Spectrum Inc.'s contact service business and the Midwest Fiber Optic Network ("MFON") business acquired in the Genuity Inc. ("Genuity") transaction. In addition, the Company agreed to sell its Asian telecommunications business to Reach Ltd. ("Reach"). in 2001. Therefore, the assets, liabilities, results of operations and cash flows for this businessthese businesses have been classified as discontinued operations in the consolidated financial statements (See noteNote 3).
Communications
The Company's communications business provides a broad range of integrated communications services primarily in the United States and Europe as a facilities-based provider (that is, a provider that owns or leases a substantial portion of the property, plant and equipment necessary to provide its services). The Company has created, through a combination of construction, purchase and leasing of facilities and other assets, an advanced international, end-to-end, facilities-based communications network. The Company has built and continues to upgrade the network based on optical and Internet Protocol technologies in order to leverage the efficiencies of these technologies to provide lower cost communications services.
Revenue for communications services, including private line, wavelengths, colocation, Internet access, managed modem, voice and dark fiber revenue from contracts entered into after June 30, 1999, is recognized monthly as the services are provided based on contractual amounts expected to be collected. Reciprocal compensation revenue is recognized only when an interconnection agreement is in place with another carrier, and the relevant regulatory authorities have approved the terms of the agreement. Revenue attributable to leases of dark fiber pursuant to indefeasible rights-of-use agreements ("IRUs") that qualify for sales-type lease accounting, and were entered into prior to June 30, 1999, are recognized at the time of delivery and acceptance of the fiber by the customer.
It is the Company's policy to recognize terminationtermination/settlement revenue when certain conditions have been met. These conditions include: 1) the customer has accepted all or partial delivery of the asset or service; 2) Level 3 has received consideration for the asset or service provided; and 3) Level 3 is not legally obligated to provide additional product or services to the customer or their successor under the original contract. TerminationTermination/settlement revenue is typically recognized in situations where a customer and Level 3 mutually agree to terminate all or a portion of the service provided, or the customer and/or its assets fail to emerge from bankruptcy and, therefore, Level 3 is not obligated to provide additional serviceproduct or services to the customer or its successor. If the conditions described above are met, the Company will recognize terminationtermination/settlement revenue equal to the fair value of consideration received, less any amounts previously recognized.
F-10
Termination revenue is also recognized when a customer disconnects service prior to the end of the contract period, for which Level 3 had previously received consideration and for which revenue recognition was deferred. In addition, termination revenue is recognized when customers make termination penalty payments to Level 3 to settle contractually committed purchase amounts that the customer no longer expects to meet. Settlement revenue is recognized when a customer and Level 3 renegotiate a contract under which Level 3 is no longer obligated to provide leased facilities or services for consideration previously received and for which revenue recognition has been deferred. Termination/settlement revenue is reported in the same manner as the original product or service provided, and amounted to $346 million, $76 million, and $57 million in 2002.2003, 2002, and 2001, respectively (See Note 4).
Level 3 entered into joint build arrangements during the construction of its North American and European networks in which it was the sponsoring partner. These arrangements are generally
F-10
characterized as fixed fee or cost sharing arrangements. For fixed-fee joint build arrangements in which Level 3 is the sponsor, the Company assumes the cost risk of completing the work for a fixed price agreed upon at the inception of the arrangement between the parties. Level 3 recognizes revenue equal to the value of the contract when construction is complete and payment is received from the joint build partner. For cost sharing arrangements each of the joint build parties shares the cost risk of completing the work. These contracts typically include provisions in which the sponsoring partner receives a management fee for construction services provided. Level 3 recognizes this management fee as revenue in the period when the contract is completed and payment is received from the joint build partner. In 2003, 2002, most ofand 2001 the Company recognized $1 million, $14 million and $35 million, respectively, of revenue recognized from joint build arrangements, the majority of which resulted from management fees.
Level 3 was party to seven non-monetary exchange transactions in 2001 whereby it sold IRUs, other capacity, or other services to a company from which Level 3 received communications assets or services. In each case, the transaction provided Level 3 needed network capacity or redundancy on unprotected transmission routes. The fair value of these non-monetary transactions was determined using similar transactions for which cash consideration was received. Level 3 recognized no revenue from non-monetary exchange transactions prior to 2001.
In August 2002, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") indicated that the SEC staff had concluded that all non-monetary exchange transactions for telecommunications capacity should be accounted for as an exchange of assets, irrespective of whether the transaction involved the lease of assets. The conclusion was based on the SEC staff's view that the right to use an asset (that is, a lease), is in fact an asset and not a service contract, irrespective of whether such asset is characterized as an asset on the balance sheet. This conclusion requires that non-monetary exchange transactions for telecommunications capacity involving the exchange of one or more operating leases be recognized based on the carrying value of the assets exchanged, rather than at fair value, resulting in no recognition of revenue for the transactions. Prior to the SEC's communication on this issue, Level 3's accounting for these transactions, which resulted in Level 3 recognizing revenue, had been consistent with industry guidance for these types of transactions. In addition, the revenue recognition approach for these transactions that the Company followed was an acceptable practice in not only the communications industry but other industries as well. The SEC indicated that it expects affected companies to retroactively apply this guidance to historical non-monetary exchange capacity transactions that occurred in prior years and, if appropriate, restate their financial statements.
F-11
Level 3 was a party to three transactions that involved the use of operating leases for capacity. The revenue recognized in 2001 from these transactions was $21 million. For the first six months of 2002, $2 million was recognized from these transactions.
Taking into account the SEC's guidance, Level 3 does not believe that it is appropriate to restate its previously issued financial statements for this issue involving non-monetary transactions, as the amount of revenue recognized was not significant to Level 3's reported revenue, and Level 3 has previously disclosed the nature and amount of these transactions in its previous filings with the SEC and in a press release issued on February 13, 2002. However, Level 3 ceased recognizing communications revenue from the three transactions involving operating leases, estimated to be approximately $1 million per quarter, in the third quarter of 2002.
The Company is obligated under dark fiber IRUs and other capacity agreements to maintain its network in efficient working order and in accordance with industry standards. Customers are obligated for the term of the agreement to pay for their allocable share of the costs for operating and maintaining the network. The Company recognizes this revenue monthly as services are provided.
Level 3's customer contracts require the Company to provide certain service level commitments. If Level 3 does not meet the required service levels, it may be obligated to provide credits, usually in the
F-11
form of free service for a short period of time. Services provided under theseThe original services that resulted in the credits are not included in revenue and to date, have not been material.
Cost of revenue for the communications business includes leased capacity, right-of-way costs, access charges and other third party circuit costs directly attributable to the network, as well as costs of assets sold pursuant to sales-type leases.leases, but excludes depreciation and amortization and related impairment expenses. The cost of revenue associated with sales-type leases of dark fiber agreements entered into prior to June 30, 1999, was determined based on an allocation of the total estimated costs of the network to the dark fiber provided to the customers. The allocation takes into account the service capacity of the specific dark fiber provided to customers relative to the total expected capacity of the network. Changes to total estimated costs and network capacity are included in the allocation in the period in which they become known. Cost of revenue associated with the sale of transoceanic capacity that previously met the accounting requirements as sales-type leases, were also determined based on taking into account service capacity and costs incurred by Level 3 and its contractors to construct such assets.
Accounting practice and guidance with respect to the treatment of submarine dark fiber sales and terrestrial IRU agreements continue to evolve. Any changes in the accounting treatment could affect the way the Company accounts for revenue and expenses associated with these transactions in the future.
Liquidity and Capital ResourcesCompetition
The communications industry is highly competitive. Additionally, the communications industrycompetitive and is currently operating in a difficult economic environment. Many of the Company's existing and potential competitors in the communications industry have financial, personnel, marketing and other resources significantly greater than those of the Company, as well as other competitive advantages including larger customer bases. Increased consolidation and strategic alliances in the industry resulting from the Telecommunications
F-12
Act of 1996, the opening of the U.S. market to foreign carriers, technological advances and further deregulation could give rise to significant new competitors to the Company. Furthermore, as discussed in Note 11, the Company has certain covenants under its debt and senior secured credit facility agreements that could affect the future liquidity of the Company if such covenants are not met. Management believes it will be able to take appropriate actions to ensure that the Company will continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future, beyond one year.
Concentration of Credit Risk
The Company provides telecommunicationscommunications services to a wide range of customers, ranging from well capitalized national carriers to smaller, early stage companies. Beginning in 2001, Level 3 changed its customer focus to the top 300 global users of bandwidth capacity. These top 300 global users tend to be financially more viable than smaller, early stage companies. The Company has in place policies and procedures to review the financial condition of potential and existing customers and concludes that collectibility of revenue and other out-of-pocket expenses are probable prior to commencement of services. If the financial condition of an existing customer deteriorates to a point where payment for services is in doubt, the Company will not recognize revenue attributable to that customer until cash is received. Based on these policies and procedures,the change in its customer focus, the Company's customer base has decreased from approximately 3,000 during the first quarter of 2001 to approximately 1,350 during the fourth quarter of 2002 and it's exposure to credit risk within the communications business and the related effect on the financial statements has beenwas reduced overduring that period. In 2003, the past year.Company acquired substantially all the assets of Genuity (See Note 2), including several thousand additional customers that did not meet the profile of the customers described above. As a result of the Genuity transaction, the total number of customers grew to approximately 3,300 during 2003. The significant growth in non-profile customers resulted in increased credit risk, although the policies and procedures for reviewing the financial condition and recognizing revenues of these additional customers remained consistent with those described above. The Company is not immune from the affectseffects of the downturn in the economy and specifically the telecommunicationscommunications industry; however, management believes the concentration of credit risk with respect to receivables is mitigated due to the dispersion of the Company's customer base among different industries and geographic areas and remedies provided by terms of contracts and statutes.
F-12 A significant portion of Level 3's communications service revenue is concentrated among a limited number of customers. Revenue attributable to Time Warner Inc. and subsidiaries amounted to $446 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, representing approximately 11 percent of total revenue and is included within the Communications segment on the consolidated statement of operations. If Level 3 would lose one or more major customers, or if one or more major customers significantly decreased its orders of Level 3 services, the Company's communications business would be materially and adversely affected.
Level 3's largest managed modem customer, America Online, is expected to reduce overall purchases of fixed service ports for its U.S. dial-up network and to reduce proportionately the number of ports it purchases from Level 3 in the future. The Company believes that this reduction and other factors could result in a year-over-year decline in managed modem related revenue of $100 to $150 million in 2004.
Information Services
The Company's information services business is comprised of two operating units: (i)Structure, primarily a provider of computer outsourcing and systems integration services, and Software Spectrum, Inc. ("Software Spectrum"), a distributor, marketer and reseller of business software. The outsourcing services provided by (i)Structure providesare managed computer infrastructure services, primarily networking and computing
F-13
services for mainframe, midrange and UNIX/Windows servers located within (i)Structure's data centers. (i)Structure enables its customers to avoid expending capital and incurring redundant overhead costs to operate their own computing environments resulting in a lower cost of computing and improved levels of service. A majority of the outsourcing contracts between (i)Structure and its customers provide for a fixed fee for a base level of computing services typically through contracts ranging from 3-5 years,that are delivered each month throughout the three to firms that desire to focus their resources on their core businesses. Under these contracts,five year term of the contracts. (i)Structure recognizes revenue in the month the service is provided, generally equal to the contract value amortized on a straight-line basis. Additionally,Certain contracts allow for incremental or decremental services above or below the base level of services with the majority of these contracts determining charges based on actual hours utilized. The base monthly service fee that (i)Structure recognizes as revenue is increased or decreased in accordance with the terms of the contract. (i)Structure also provides customers with a combination of software tools and methodologies that provide a complete strategy for converting mainframe-based application systems to UNIX/Windows server architecture. The majority of (i)Structure's systems integration services are provided under time and materials contracts under which (i)Structure provides systems integration services that help customers define, develop and implement cost-effective information systems. Revenue from the existinga certain level of consulting hours for a specified period of time. For these contracts, is generally recognized on a straight-line basis and(i)Structure recognizes service revenue in the month the services are performed. For certain contracts, service is provided. Costfees are dependent on the successful completion of revenue includes costs of consultants' salaries and other direct costs forcertain project milestones outlined in the customer contract. For these contracts, (i)Structure's businesses.Structure recognizes service revenue upon the successful completion of the contract milestone.
Software Spectrum which includes the operations of CorpSoft, Inc. ("CorpSoft"), is a reseller of business software. Accounting literature provides guidance to enable companies to determine whether revenues from the reselling of goods and services should be recorded on a "gross" or "net" basis. The Company believes that the facts and circumstances, particularly those involving pricing and credit risk indicate that the majority of Software Spectrum's sales should be recorded on a "gross" basis. The latitude and ability of Software Spectrum to establish the selling price to the customer is a clear indication of "gross" revenue reporting. The assumption of credit risk is another important factor in determining "gross" versus "net" reporting. Software Spectrum has the responsibility to pay suppliers for all products ordered, regardless of when, or if, it collects from its customers. Software Spectrum is also solely responsible for determining the creditworthiness of its customers.
Microsoft Corporation, a significant supplier of software to the Company,Software Spectrum, changed certain licensing programs in 2001 whereby new enterprise-wide licensing arrangements will be priced, billed and collected directly by Microsoft. The CompanyIn 2003, several other software publishers, for whom Software Spectrum resells products and services, began adopting this type of licensing program. Software Spectrum will continue to provide sales and support services related to these transactions and will earn a service fee directly from Microsoftthe software publishers for these activities. The CompanyUnder this licensing program, Software Spectrum only recognizes the service fee it receives from the software publisher as revenue and not the entire value of the software for sales under this program.software. The Company continues to sell Microsoft products under various licensing programs but has recently experienced an increase in the old licensinglevel of sales under these new programs. If Microsoft isand other software publishers are able to successfully implement and sell a significant amount of software under this program, or it is determined that the accounting for reselling of the software should be recorded on a "net" basis, the Company may experience a significant decline in information services revenue, and the correspondingbut will also experience a comparable decline in cost of revenue.
Software Spectrum recognizes revenueRevenue is recognized from software sales at the time of product shipment, or in accordance with terms of licensing contracts, when the price to the customer is fixed, and collectibility is reasonably assured. Revenue from maintenance contracts is recognized when invoiced, the license period has
F-14
commenced, when the price to the customer is fixed, and collectibility is reasonably assured, as Software Spectrum has no future obligations associated with future performance under these maintenance contracts. Advance billings are recorded as deferred revenue until services are provided. Cost of revenuesrevenue includes direct costs of the licensing activity and costs to purchase and distribute software. The costs directly attributable to advance billings are deferred and included in Other Current Assets onother current assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet.consolidated balance sheet. Rebate income received from software publishers is recognized as a reduction of cost of revenue in the period in which the rebate is earned and reflected asbased on a reductionsystematic allocation of cost of revenue.the total rebate that is probable.
Competition
The information services industry is highly competitive. Many of the Company's competitors in the industry have financial, marketing and other resources significantly greater than those of the Company. In addition, the Company's software reselling business could be adversely affected if major software publishers successfully implement or expand programs for the direct sale of software through volume purchase agreements or other arrangements intended to exclude the distribution or resale channel.
F-13Concentration of Credit Risk
The Company's customer base consists of several thousand accounts including corporations, government agencies, educational institutions, non-profit organizations and other business entities. For the year ended December 31, 2003, no single customer represented more than 10 percent of information services revenue. The customer base is represented by a large number of Fortune 500 and Fortune Global 500 companies and the Company does not believe that the loss of any single customer would have a material adverse effect on its revenues.
Coal Mining
Historically, coal sold by Level 3 or its subsidiaries has been sold primarily under long-term contracts with electric utilities, which burn coal in order to generate steam to produce electricity. A substantial portion of Level 3's coal revenue was earned from long-term contracts during 2003, 2002, 2001, and 2000.2001. The remainder of Level 3's sales are made on the spot market where prices are substantially lower than those in the long-term contracts. Beginning in 2001, a higher proportion of Level 3's sales occurred on the spot market as long-term contracts began to expire. Costs of revenue related to coal sales include costs of mining and processing, estimated reclamation costs, royalties and production taxes.
The long-term contracts for the delivery of coal establish the price, volume, and quality requirements of the coal to be delivered. The contracts also contain provisions for periodic price adjustments through the use of indices for items such as materials, supplies and labor. Other portions of the price are adjusted for changes in production taxes, royalties and changes in cost due to new legislation or regulation. These contractual adjustments are recognized in revenue as the changes occur and become billable to the customers.
The terms and conditions of the long-term contracts generally require the customer to meet annual contractual commitments. Thus, the customer has the ability to defer or accelerate coal shipments during the year to meet its requirements. Revenue under these and other contracts is recognized when coal is actually shipped to the customer.
F-15
Competition
The coal industry is highly competitive. Level 3 competes with other domestic and foreign coal suppliers, some of whom are larger and have greater capital resources than Level 3, and with alternative methods of generating electricity and alternative energy sources. Many of Level 3's competitors are served by two railroads and, due to the competition, often benefit from lower transportation costs than Level 3, which is served by a single railroad. Additionally, many competitors have more favorable geological conditions than Level 3, often resulting in lower comparative costs of production.
Level 3 is also required to comply with various federal, state and local laws concerning protection of the environment. Level 3 believes its compliance with environmental protection and land restoration laws will not affect its competitive position since its competitors are similarly affected by these laws.
Concentration of Credit Risk
Level 3's coal sales contracts are concentrated with several electric utility and industrial companies. In the event that these customers do not fulfill contractual responsibilities, Level 3 could pursue the available legal remedies.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses include salaries, wages and related benefits (including charges primarily for stock based compensation), property taxes, travel, insurance, rent, contract maintenance, advertising and other administrative expenses.
Advertising Costs
Level 3 expenses the cost of advertising as incurred. Advertising expense is included as a component of selling, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. Advertising expense was $26 million, $20 million, and $12 million for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002, and 2001, respectively.
Stock-Based Employee Compensation
The Company has accounted for stock-based employee compensation using the fair value based method pursuant to SFAS No. 123 "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation" since 1998. The Company recognizes expense using the accelerated vesting methodology of FASB Interpretation No. 28 "Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans" ("FIN 28.28") (See Note 12)14).
F-14F-16
Depreciation and Amortization
Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation and amortization for the Company's property, plant and equipment are computed on straight-line and accelerated and straight-line(for certain coal assets) methods based on the following useful lives:
| Facility and Leasehold Improvements | ||
| Network Infrastructure (including fiber) | ||
| Operating Equipment | ||
| Network Construction Equipment | ||
| Furniture, Fixtures and Office Equipment |
Depletion ofon the mineral properties is provided using theon a units-of-extraction method based on the remaining tons ofbasis determined in relation to coal committed under sales contracts.
Investee Stock Activity
The Company recognizes gains and losses fromCompany's coal mining business does not use its coal reserve estimates for purposes of depletion, but rather, depletes the sale, issuance and repurchaseproperties over the estimated recoverable tons of stock by its equity method investees in the statements of operations, unless the Company has unrecorded equity losses attributablecoal that are required to the investee due to the lack of future financial commitments to the investee.be delivered under existing coal contracts.
Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share have been computed using the weighted average number of shares during each period. Diluted earnings per share is computed by including the dilutive effect of common stock that would be issued assuming conversion or exercise of outstanding convertible subordinated notes, stock options, stock based compensation awards and other dilutive securities.
Restricted Cash
The Company classifies any cash or other securities that collateralize the amended Senior Secured Credit Facility, outstanding letters of credit, long-term debt, or certain operating obligations of the Company as restricted cash. The Company also classifies cash or other securities restricted to fund certain reclamation liabilities or purchase noncurrent assets as restricted cash. The classification of restricted cash on the consolidated balance sheet as current or noncurrent is dependent on the duration of the restriction and the purpose for which the restriction exists.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
The Company segregates identifiable intangible assets acquired in an acquisition from goodwill. As of January 1, 2002, (uponupon adoption of SFAS No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets" ("SFAS No. 142"), the remaining goodwill is no longer amortized, but is evaluated for impairment at least annually (beginning with the first anniversary of the acquisition date) based on the fair value of the reporting unit to which the goodwill relates.
Intangible assets primarily include customer contracts and customer relationships acquired in business combinations. These assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over the expected period of benefit which ranges from 30 months to 10 years.
F-17
Long-Lived Assets
The Company reviews the carrying amount of long-lived assets or groups of assets, excluding goodwill, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. The determination of any impairment includes a comparison of the estimated future undiscounted future operating cash flows anticipated to be generated during the remaining life of the asset to the net carrying value of the asset.
F-15
ReservesAccounting for Coal ReclamationAsset Retirement Obligations
The Company follows the policy of providing an accrual for reclamation of mined properties in accordance with SFAS No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations" ("SFAS No. 143"), based on the estimated total cost of restoration of such properties to meet compliance with laws governing strip mining, by applying per-ton reclamation ratessurface mining. These estimated costs are calculated based on the expected future risk adjusted cash flows to coal mined.remediate such properties discounted at a risk-free rate. The Company also provides an accrual for obligations related to certain collocation leases and right-of-way agreements in accordance with SFAS No. 143, based on the estimated total cost of restoration of such properties to their original condition. These reclamation ratesestimated obligations are determinedcalculated based on the expected future discounted cash flows using the remainingCompany's estimated reclamation costsweighted average cost of capital at the time the obligation is incurred and tonsapplying a probability factor for conditional restoration obligations. Changes in expected future cash flows are discounted at interest rates that were in effect at the time of coal committed under sales contracts. The Company reviews its reclamation cost estimates annuallythe original estimate for downward revision to such cash flows, and revisesat interest rates in effect at the reclamation rates on a prospective basis, as necessary.time of the change for upward revisions in the expected future cash flows.
Income Taxes
Deferred income taxes are provided for the temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of the Company's assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Net operating losses not utilized can be carried forward for 20 years to offset future taxable income. A valuation allowance has been recorded against deferred tax assets, as the Company is unable to conclude under relevant accounting standards that it is more likely than not that deferred tax assets will be realizable. Federal legislation enacted in 2002 permitted the Company to apply unutilized net operating losses incurred in 2001 against 1996 taxable income. As a result, the Company recognized a federal income tax benefit and received a refund of $120 million in 2002.
Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Comprehensive income (loss) includes net earningsincome (loss) and other non-owner related changes in equity not included in net earningsincome (loss), such as unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities classified as available for sale, foreign currency translation adjustments related to foreign subsidiaries, and other adjustments.
Foreign Currencies
Generally, local currencies of foreign subsidiaries are the functional currencies for financial reporting purposes. Assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars at year-end exchange rates. Revenue, expenses and cash flows are translated using average exchange rates prevailing during the
F-18
year. Gains or losses resulting from currency translation are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders' equity (deficit) and in the statements of comprehensive income (loss).loss.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The most critical estimates include accounts receivable reserves, impairment charges, useful lives of fixed assets, accruals for estimated liabilities that are probable and reclamation reserves.estimatable, and asset retirement obligations. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Derivatives
In June 1998, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities" ("SFAS No. 133"). SFAS No. 133 as amended by SFAS Nos. 137 and 138, is effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2001. SFAS No. 133 requires that all derivative instruments be recorded on the balance sheet at fair value. Changes in the fair value of derivatives are recorded each period in current earnings or other comprehensive income, depending on whether a derivative is designated as part of a hedge transaction, the type of hedge, and the extent of hedge ineffectiveness. The Company currently does not use derivative instruments as defined by
F-16
SFAS No. 133, so the adoption of SFAS No. 133 in 2001 did not have a material effect on the Company's results of operations or its financial position.
In April 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 149, "Amendment of Statement 133 on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities" ("SFAS No. 149"). SFAS No. 149 amends and clarifies the accounting and reporting for derivative instruments, including embedded derivatives, and for hedging activities under SFAS No. 133. SFAS No. 149 is effective for contracts entered into or modified after June 30, 2003, and for hedging relationships designated after June 30, 2003. The Company currently does not use derivative instruments as defined by SFAS No. 149 and therefore the adoption of this standard did not have any effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2001, the FASB also issued SFAS No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets" ("SFAS No. 142").142. SFAS No. 142 is effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2002. SFAS No. 142 requires companies to segregate identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination from goodwill. The remaining goodwill is no longer subject to amortization over its estimated useful life. However, the carrying amount of the goodwill must be assessed at least annually for impairment using a fair value based test. Goodwill attributable to equity method investments is no longer amortized but is still subject to impairment analysis using existing guidance for equity method investments. For the goodwill and intangible assets in place as of December 31, 2001, the adoption of SFAS No. 142 did not have a material impact on the Company's results of operations or its financial position.
In June 2001, the FASB also approved SFAS No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations" ("SFAS No. 143").143. SFAS No. 143 establishes accounting standards for recognition and measurement of a liability for an asset retirement obligation and the associated
F-19
asset retirement cost. The fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation is to be recognized in the period in which it is incurred if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The associated retirement costs are capitalized and included as part of the carrying value of the long-lived asset and amortized over the useful life of the asset. SFAS No. 143 will bewas effective for the Company beginning on January 1, 2003. The Company expects that itsCompany's coal mining business will be affected by this standard as the Company accrues,had previously accrued, as a component of cost of revenue, an estimate of future reclamation liability. The reclamation liability will be adjusted and a corresponding asset established to comply with this new standard. The net effect of the adoption of SFAS No. 143 to the CompanyCompany's coal mining business as of January 1, 2003 was a decrease in noncurrent liabilities of approximately $6$5 million (which will be amortized to expense in future years) and will bewas reflected as a cumulative-effect adjustment in the Consolidated Statement2003 consolidated statement of Operations.operations. The communications business has entered in to certain colocation leases whereby it is required upon termination of the lease, to remove the leasehold improvements and return the leased space to its original condition. The Company has also entered in to right-of-way agreements for its intercity and metropolitan networks whichthat may require the removal of the conduit upon termination of the agreement. TheUpon adoption of this standard on January 1, 2003, the Company also recorded obligations and corresponding assets of approximately $31 million upon adoption of SFAS No. 143 related tofor these lease and right of way agreements. Accretion of asset retirement obligation expense of $12 million was recorded during the year ended December 31, 2003; resulting in total asset retirement obligations, including reclamation costs for the coal business, of $127 million at December 31, 2003. Accretion expense of $8 million related to the communications business was recorded in selling, general and administrative expenses on the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003. Accretion expense of $4 million related to the Company's coal mining business was recorded in cost of revenue on the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003. This was partially offset by $1 million of gains recognized on settlement of obligations attributable to the use of internal resources rather than third parties to perform reclamation work. In addition, the coal mining business incurred $3 million of additional reclamation liabilities and incurred costs for work performed on asset retirement obligations of $2 million. The Company has noncurrent restricted cash of approximately $45 million set aside to fund the reclamation liabilities. The following is pro-forma financial information of the Company assuming SFAS No. 143 had been in effect as of January 1, 2001:
| | Pro-Forma Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | |||||||
| | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | |||||||||
| Asset Retirement Obligations, end of year | $ | 127 | $ | 115 | $ | 108 | ||||
| Pro-Forma SFAS 143 Expense | — | (8 | ) | (6 | ) | |||||
| Pro-Forma Net Loss | (711 | ) | (866 | ) | (4,984 | ) | ||||
| Pro-Forma Loss Per Share | (1.26 | ) | (2.13 | ) | (13.34 | ) | ||||
F-20
In April 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 145, "Rescission of FASB Statements No. 4, 44, and 64, Amendment of FASB Statement No. 13, and Technical Corrections" ("SFAS No. 145"). SFAS No. 145 is effective for fiscal years beginning and certain transactions entered into after May 15, 2002. SFAS No. 145 requires gains and losses from the extinguishment of debt be classified as extraordinary items only if they meet the criteria in APB Opinion No. 30. Previously, FASB Statement No. 4 generally required all gains and losses from debt extinguished prior to maturity to be classified as an extraordinary item in the statement of operations. APB Opinion No. 30 requires that to qualify as an extraordinary item, the underlying event or transaction should possess a high degree of abnormality and be of a type clearly unrelated to, or only incidentally related to, the ordinary activities of the Company, and would not reasonably be expected to recur in the foreseeable future. Any gain or loss on extinguishment of debt classified as an extraordinary item in prior periods presented that does not meet the criteria in APB Opinion No. 30 shall be reclassified. The Company believes thatUpon adoption of SFAS No. 145, due to the recurring nature of its debt repurchases and exchanges, the adoption of SFAS No. 145 in 2003 will result in the reclassification ofCompany reclassified the related gains previously classified as extraordinary gains during the year ended December 31, 2002 and losses2001 of $255 million and $1.075 billion, respectively, in the statement of operations to other non-operating income.
SFAS No. 145 also addresses other issues including amending certain provisions of SFAS No. 13, "Accounting for Leases". SFAS No. 145 requires that capital leases that are modified so that the
F-17
resulting lease agreement is classified as an operating lease be accounted for under sale-leaseback provisions. This amendment and the other issues addressed in SFAS No. 145 are not expected to have a material effect on the financial position or results of operations of the Company.
In June 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 146, "Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities", ("SFAS No. 146"). SFAS No. 146 addresses financial accounting and reporting for costs associated with exit or disposal activities (excluding an entity newly acquired in a business combination), often referred to as"restructuringas "restructuring costs", and nullifies prior accounting guidance with respect to such costs. SFAS No. 146 will spread out the reporting of expenses related to restructurings initiated after 2002, because commitment to a plan to exit an activity or dispose of long-lived assets will no longer be enough to record a liability for the anticipated costs. Under previous guidance, a liability for an exit cost was recognized at the date of an entity's commitment to an exit plan. Instead, exit and disposal costs will be recorded when they are incurred and can be measured at fair value, and related liabilities will be subsequently adjusted for changes in estimated cash flows. The provisions of SFAS No. 146 shall beare effective for exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002, with no retroactive restatement allowed. Early application is permitted. Level 3's management continues to review portions of its communications business and other businesses to determine how those businesses will assist with the Company's focus on delivery of communications and information services and reaching free cash flow breakeven. IfOn January 1, 2003, the Company electsadopted SFAS No. 146 for all restructuring activities that occurred after that date. Under SFAS No. 146, the Company can no longer record estimated losses upon the decision to exit these businesses, the costs required to exit or dispose of these businesses will not be recorded until they are actually incurred. Level 3 is unable to determine at this time whether these costs will be incurred or whether they will be material to its results of operations or financial position.a business.
In December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure." ("SFAS No. 148"). SFAS No. 148 amends SFAS No. 123 "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation" to provide alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. In addition, SFAS No. 148 amends the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123 to require prominent disclosures in both annual and interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. The Company adopted the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 148 in 2002.
In September 2002, the Emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") addressed the accounting for convertible debt for equity exchanges in Issue 02-15: "Determining Whether Certain Conversions of Convertible Debt to Equity Securities Are within the Scope of FASB Statement No. 84" ("EITF 02-15"). The EITF concluded in EITF 02-15 that these types of transactions should be accounted for as induced conversions in accordance with FASB No. 84, "Induced Conversions of Convertible Debt" ("SFAS No. 84"). SFAS No. 84 requires a non-cash charge to earnings for the
F-21
implied value of an inducement to convert from convertible debt to common equity securities of the issuer. The accounting is to be applied prospectively for those convertible debt for equity exchanges completed after September 11, 2002, the date of the EITF's consensus. The Company applied the provisions of SFAS No. 84 to all convertible debt for equity exchange transactions completed after June 30, 2002.
In November 2002, the EITF addressed the accounting for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables in Issue 00-21: "Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables" ("EITF 00-21"). EITF 00-21 provides guidance on how the arrangement consideration should be measured, whether the arrangement should be divided into separate units of accounting, and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting. EITF 00-21 shall be effective for revenue arrangements entered into in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2003. The Company does not expect the potential effect of EITF 00-21 will be significant to its results of operations and financial position.
F-18
In November 2002, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others" ("FIN 45"). FASB Interpretation No.FIN 45 elaborates on the disclosures to be made by a guarantor in its interim and annual financial statements about its obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. It also clarifies that a guarantor is required to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair value of the obligation undertaken in issuing the guarantee. The initial recognition and initial measurement provisions of the interpretation are applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees issued or modified after December 31, 2002. The disclosure requirements are effective for financial statements of interim or annual periods ending after December 15, 2002. The Company has not entered in to arrangements or guarantees that meet the criteria of this interpretation and does not expect the adoption of this interpretation willdid not have a material effect on its results of operations andconsolidated financial position.statements.
In January 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities an interpretation of ARB No. 51" ("FIN 46")., which was subsequently amended in December 2003. FIN 46, as amended, addresses consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities. A variable interest entity is defined as an entity in which the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties or as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack any one of the following three characteristics of a controlling financial interest: The direct or indirect ability to make decisions about an entity's activities through voting rights or similar rights, the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity if they occur and, lastly, the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity if they occur. FIN 46 applies immediately to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and to variable interest entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. It applies in the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003, to variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. The adoption of FIN 46 by the Company did not have a material effect on its financial results for the year ended December 31, 2003 and is not expected to have a material effect on its future results of operations or financial position as the Company does not have investments in variable interest entities as described in FIN 46.
In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 150, "Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity" ("SFAS No. 150"). SFAS No. 150 provides guidance on how an entity classifies and measures certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity. SFAS No. 150 is effective for financial instruments entered into, or modified after, May 31, 2003, and otherwise is effective at the beginning of the first interim period beginning after June 15, 2003. The Company has not entered into any material financial instruments meeting the liability recognition requirements of SFAS No. 150. Therefore, the Company's adoption of SFAS No. 150 did not have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements.
In January 2003, the EITF addressed the accounting for subsequent investments in equity method investees after the suspension of equity method loss recognition in Issue No. 02-18: "Accounting for Subsequent Investments in an Investee after Suspension of Equity Method Loss Recognition"
F-22
("EITF 02-18"). The EITF reached a consensus that if the additional investment, in whole or in part, represents, in substance, the funding of prior losses, the investor should recognize previously suspended losses only up to the amount of the additional investment determined to represent the funding of prior losses. EITF 02-18 should be applied to additional investments in equity-method investees made subsequent to February 5, 2003, and previously suspended cumulative losses existing at the time of that investment. The Company has not made any additional investments in investees where equity method loss recognition has been suspended and does not expect FIN 46EITF 02-18 to have a material effect on its results of operations or financial position.
In May 2003, the EITF addressed how to determine whether an arrangement contains a lease that is within the scope of SFAS No. 13, "Accounting for Leases" ("SFAS No. 13") in Issue No. 01-8: "Determining Whether an Arrangement Contains a Lease" ("EITF 01-8"). The guidance in EITF 01-8 requires both parties to an arrangement to determine whether a service contract or similar arrangement is or includes a lease within the scope of SFAS No. 13. An arrangement is a lease or contains an embedded lease if it conveys the right to control the use of property, plant or equipment. If an arrangement is determined to be a lease pursuant to SFAS No. 13, revenues formerly reported from sales of products or services may need to be treated as rental or leasing income. EITF 01-8 should be applied to new or modified arrangements beginning after May 28, 2003. The adoption of EITF 01-8 by the Company did not have a material effect on its results of operations or financial position.
In December 2003, the SEC released Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, "Revenue Recognition" ("SAB No. 104"). SAB No. 104 consolidates guidance on revenue recognition previously contained in Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, "Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements" and related interpretations. However, SAB No. 104 requires companies to identify separate units of accounting based on EITF 00-21, "Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables" ("EITF 00-21") before applying SAB No. 104 guidance. If the deliverables in a sales arrangement constitute separate units of accounting according to the separation criteria in EITF 00-21, the revenue-recognition policy must be determined for each identified unit. If the arrangement is a single unit of accounting under the separation criteria, the revenue-recognition policy must be determined for the entire arrangement. The guidance in SAB No. 104 did not have a material effect on its results of operations or financial position.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts may have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
(2) Acquisitions
Level 3 completed the acquisition of Telverse Communications, Inc. ("Telverse") on July 21, 2003 for approximately $29 million in Level 3 common stock (approximately 4.2 million shares) and $2 million in cash consideration. Telverse, a provider of IP-based voice and data services, has developed certain technologies that will enable Level 3 to expand its presence in the voice-over-IP market. Telverse's revenues and results of operations are included in the consolidated statements of operations from the date of acquisition. The financial results of Telverse prior to acquisition were immaterial to Level 3. Management's preliminary allocation of the purchase price resulted in the consideration, including transaction costs, plus assumed liabilities exceeding the fair value of the identifiable tangible assets acquired by approximately $32 million, which was initially recorded as goodwill. The Company
F-23
completed its assessment of the assets and liabilities acquired in the Telverse transaction in the fourth quarter of 2003, which resulted in the allocation primarily to developed technology acquired with an insignificant amount allocated to customer contracts.
The approximately 4.2 million shares of common stock issued in the acquisition contain restrictions on transfer imposed by U.S. securities laws. The Company anticipates filing a registration statement relating to the possible sale of these securities by the former Telverse stockholders during the first half of 2004.
On February 4, 2003, Level 3 completed the acquisition of substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity, a Tier 1 Internet Protocol (IP) communications company. The total cash consideration, including transaction costs, was approximately $144 million including approximately $60 million in cash consideration to the Genuity bankruptcy estate plus approximately $77 million in cash to reimburse the estate for payments on assumed capital lease obligations related to network operating equipment. In addition, Level 3 assumed certain of Genuity's long term operating agreements. Level 3 entered into certain transactions with Genuity prior to the acquisition of the assets and operations of Genuity by Level 3, whereby it received cash for communications services to be provided in the future. As a result of the acquisition, Level 3 can no longer amortize this deferred revenue into earnings and accordingly, reduced the purchase price applied to the net assets acquired in the Genuity transaction by $76 million, the amount of the unamortized deferred revenue balance on February 4, 2003. The preliminary fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed was subsequently adjusted during the year ended December 31, 2003 based upon actual settlements between the Genuity Bankruptcy Estate and Level 3 which reduced the purchase price paid by Level 3 by $35 million, as well as increased liabilities by $4 million. This resulted primarily in a decrease in the value assigned to property, plant and equipment and identifiable intangible assets. The results of operations attributable to the Genuity assets acquired and liabilities assumed are included in the 2003 consolidated financial statements from the date of acquisition.
The terms of the transaction provided for post-closing purchase price adjustments related to the amount of (a) annualized recurring revenue, (b) various prepaid items and deposits, (c) property taxes payable on purchased property, (d) severance payments to certain of Genuity's former employees and (e) an adjustment based on the aggregate dollar value of rejection claims in the Genuity Bankruptcy Estate. Level 3 and the Genuity Bankruptcy Estate agreed that these adjustments would result in a net refund to Level 3 of $35 million, which was subject to the execution of a definitive settlement agreement and approval of the judge administering Genuity's bankruptcy. The Genuity Bankruptcy Estate paid the $35 million refund to Level 3, in cash, during December 2003.
On January 24, 2002, Level 3 completed the acquisition of the wholesale dial-up access business of McLeodUSA Incorporated for approximately $51 million in cash consideration and the assumption of certain operating liabilities related to that business. The acquisition included customer contracts, approximately 350 POPs (Points of Presence) and related facilities across the U.S., equipment, underlying circuits and certain employees. The acquisition enabled Level 3 to provide managed modem services in all 50 states with a coverage area that, includesat the time, included approximately 80 percent of the United States population, up from 37 states, and approximately 57 percent of the United States population. The allocation of the purchase price resulted in the cash consideration plus assumed liabilities exceeding the fair value of the identifiable tangible and intangible assets acquired by approximately $34 million, which was recorded as goodwill. Subsequent to the acquisition, the Company
F-24
reevaluated excess equipment acquired in this acquisition and as a result decreased property, plant and equipment by $7 million to reflect the current carrying value of the assets. As a result, goodwill was increased to $41 million. In accordance with SFAS No. 142, the goodwill will be assessed annually for impairment based on the reporting unit to which it was assigned and will not be amortized. The results of operations attributable to the McLeod assets and liabilities are included in the consolidated financial statements from the date of acquisition.
On March 13, 2002, the Company acquired privately held CorpSoft, Inc., a global provider, marketer and reseller of business software. Level 3 agreed to pay approximately $89 million in cash and retire approximately $37 million in debt to acquire CorpSoft. The transaction was valued at
F-19
approximately $95 million, adjusted for CorpSoft's $34 million cash position on the acquisition date. The $129 million cash purchase price, including transaction costs, exceeded the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets by approximately $131 million based on an independent formal valuation of the value of the assets, and the Company's estimate of liabilities acquired. Subsequent to the initial valuation, the Company has made immaterial changes to the purchase price allocation.
On June 18, 2002, the Company completed the acquisition of Software Spectrum, Inc., a global provider, marketer and reseller of business software. Software Spectrum shareholders received $37 in cash from Level 3 for each share of Software Spectrum common stock. The total cash consideration, including outstanding options and expected transaction costs, was approximately $135 million. The transaction was valued at approximately $95 million, adjusted for Software Spectrum's $40 million cash position on the acquisition date. The $135 million purchase price, including transaction costs, exceeded the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets by approximately $79 million based on an independent formala valuation of the assets acquired and an estimate of liabilities assumed. Subsequent to the initial valuation, the Company has made immaterial changes to the purchase price allocation.
On March 13, 2002, the Company acquired privately held CorpSoft, Inc., a global provider, marketer and reseller of business software. Level 3 agreed to pay approximately $89 million in cash and retire approximately $37 million in debt to acquire CorpSoft. The transaction was valued at approximately $95 million, adjusted for CorpSoft's $34 million cash position on the acquisition date. The $129 million cash purchase price, including transaction costs, exceeded the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets by approximately $131 million based on a valuation of the assets acquired and the Company'san estimate of liabilities acquired.assumed. Subsequent to the initial valuation, the Company has made immaterial changes to the purchase price allocation.
The results of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum's operations are included in the consolidated statements from the dates of acquisition. Level 3 expects these acquisitions will enable its information services business to leverage CorpSoft and Software Spectrum's customer base, worldwide presence and relationships to expand its portfolio of services. The Company believes that companies will, over time seek to gain information technology operating efficiency by acquiring software functionality and data storage capability as commercial services purchased and then delivered over broadband networks such as the Level 3 network. As a result, Level 3 expects to utilize its network infrastructure to facilitate the deployment of software to CorpSoft and Software Spectrum's customers.
Effective on December 31, 2002, CorpSoft was merged with and into Software Spectrum, with Software Spectrum being the surviving company.
F-25
The following is unaudited pro-forma financial information of the Company assuming the acquisitions of McLeod, CorpSoft, and Software Spectrum, and Telverse as well as the McLeod and Genuity transactions had occurred at the beginning of 2001:the periods presented:
| | Pro-Forma Years ended December 31, | Pro-Forma Years ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||
| | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | (dollars in millions, except per share data) | |||||||||||||||
| Revenue | $ | 3,770 | $ | 4,015 | $ | 4,094 | $ | 4,652 | $ | 5,157 | |||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | (1,119 | ) | (5,579 | ) | (724 | ) | (2,689 | ) | (8,059 | ) | |||||||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | 6 | 10 | (596 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | 5 | — | — | ||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | (864 | ) | (5,109 | ) | (713 | ) | (2,679 | ) | (8,655 | ) | |||||||
| Net Loss per Share | (2.12 | ) | (13.67 | ) | (1.26 | ) | (6.58 | ) | (23.15 | ) | |||||||
Included in the actual results and pro-forma financial information for the year ended December 31, 2003 are certain amounts which affect the comparability of the results, including $294 million of revenue related to a contract settlement for which the revenue had been in the process of being recognized over the contract term, a $70 million gain on the sale of the Company's interest in its toll road operations, $200 million of induced conversion expense as a result of the issuance of shares of Level 3 common stock in exchange for a portion of the Company's convertible debt, $45 million of restructuring charges, a $41 million gain resulting from the early extinguishment of debt and $50 million of income tax benefits.
The distressed financial condition of Genuity resulted in the deterioration of its recurring revenue base. Level 3 has recognized revenue significantly below historical results reported by Genuity as a result of customers disconnecting service. The Company has also rejected certain customer contracts that resulted in a decrease in revenue.
Included in the actual results and unaudited pro-forma financial information for the year ended December 31, 2002, are $181 million impairment and restructuring charges, a gain of approximately $191 million from the sale of Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. common stock ("Commonwealth Telephone"), $88 million of induced conversion expenses attributable to the repurchase of a portion of the Company's convertible debt securities, extraordinary gains of $255 million as a result of the early extinguishments of certain long-term debt, and $120 million of Federal tax benefits due to legislation enacted in 2002. In addition, the pro-forma financial information includes $1.4 billion of impairment and restructuring charges related to deployed assets, assets held for sale, goodwill and intangibles, workforce reductions and lease termination charges for abandoned facilities attributable to Genuity's pre-acquisition operations.
Included in the actual result and unaudited pro-forma financial information for the year ended December 31, 2001, are a $3.2 billion impairment charge to reflect the reduction in the carrying value amount of certain of its communications assets, an impairment charge of $516 million related to the
F-20
discontinued Asian operations sold in January 2002, and extraordinary gains of $1.1 billion as a result of the early extinguishments of certain long-term debt. The 2001 pro-forma results also include $2.7 billion of impairment and restructuring charges related to Genuity's operations.
F-26
The following are the estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the McLeod, CorpSoft, Software Spectrum, Genuity and Telverse transactions as of their respective acquisition dates.
| | McLeod | CorpSoft | Software Spectrum | Genuity | Telverse | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | — | $ | 34 | $ | 40 | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||
| Accounts receivable | — | 134 | 130 | — | — | |||||||||||
| Other current assets | — | 18 | 3 | 50 | — | |||||||||||
| Property, plant and equipment, net | 12 | 6 | 13 | 246 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Identifiable intangibles | 49 | 26 | 49 | 107 | 32 | |||||||||||
| Goodwill | 41 | 128 | 79 | — | — | |||||||||||
| Other assets | — | 11 | 1 | 22 | — | |||||||||||
| Total Assets | 102 | 357 | 315 | 425 | 33 | |||||||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
| Accounts payable | — | 181 | 138 | — | 2 | |||||||||||
| Accrued payroll | — | 19 | 19 | — | — | |||||||||||
| Other current liabilities | 43 | 7 | 23 | 56 | — | |||||||||||
| Current portion of long-term debt | 8 | — | — | 121 | — | |||||||||||
| Long-term debt | — | — | — | 188 | — | |||||||||||
| Deferred revenue—Genuity | — | — | — | 6 | — | |||||||||||
| Deferred revenue—Level 3 | — | — | — | (76 | ) | — | ||||||||||
| Other liabilities | — | 21 | — | 21 | — | |||||||||||
| Total Liabilities | 51 | 228 | 180 | 316 | 2 | |||||||||||
| Purchase Price | $ | 51 | $ | 129 | $ | 135 | $ | 109 | $ | 31 | ||||||
The fair market value of the assets and liabilities acquired in the McLeod, CorpSoftGenuity transaction were determined based on a valuation completed in May 2003. Subsequently in 2003, Level 3 changed the purchase price allocation by increasing the preliminary fair value of the assets to be sold to CenturyTel, Inc. ("CenturyTel") (See Note 3) to $16 million to reflect the actual proceeds received from CenturyTel. A corresponding decrease in property, plant and Software Spectrum transactionsequipment and identifiable intangibles was recorded in conjunction with this adjustment.
In July 2003, the Company sold the former Genuity headquarters building for approximately $20 million in cash. Level 3 did not recognize a gain or loss on this transaction as the fair value assigned in purchase accounting approximated the sale price. The Company continued leasing the facility through 2003.
During the second quarter of their respective2003, the Company exited the managed hosting portion of the business it acquired through the Genuity transaction. The Company's hosting customers and operations are being served by Computer Sciences Corporation ("CSC"). Due to the decision to exit the managed hosting portion of the business, which had been contemplated at the time of acquisition, dates:the net operating results of the business have not been consolidated in the consolidated statement of operations. Level 3 did not realize any proceeds from the sale of the hosting business to CSC. Level 3
| | McLeod | CorpSoft | Software Spectrum | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | — | $ | 34 | $ | 40 | ||||
| Accounts receivable | — | 134 | 130 | |||||||
| Other current assets | — | 18 | 3 | |||||||
| Property, plant and equipment, net | 12 | 6 | 13 | |||||||
| Identifiable intangibles | 49 | 26 | 49 | |||||||
| Goodwill | 41 | 131 | 79 | |||||||
| Other assets | — | 6 | 1 | |||||||
| Total Assets | 102 | 355 | 315 | |||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||
| Accounts payable | — | 183 | 138 | |||||||
| Accrued payroll | — | 19 | 19 | |||||||
| Other current liabilities | 43 | 7 | 23 | |||||||
| Current portion of long-term debt | 8 | — | — | |||||||
| Other liabilities | — | 17 | — | |||||||
| Total Liabilities | 51 | 226 | 180 | |||||||
| Purchase Price | $ | 51 | $ | 129 | $ | 135 | ||||
F-27
continues to review the operations acquired in the Genuity transaction to see how they will assist in providing communications and information services and may dispose of these operations in the future.
The following is the summarized results of operations of the managed hosting business for the period ended May 24, 2003 (since acquisition on February 4, 2003).
| Revenue | $ | 14 | ||
| Operating Loss | (1 | ) |
(3) Discontinued Asian Operations
On December 31, 2003, Level 3 sold MFON to CenturyTel for approximately $16 million. MFON is a regional communications system located in the midwestern United States and was acquired by Level 3 as part of the Genuity transaction in February 2003. Level 3 has adjusted the value of MFON assets from its original estimated value, pursuant to the one-year "allocation period" provisions of SFAS No. 141, to match the proceeds from this transaction. As a result, the Company did not recognize a gain or loss on the disposition of MFON.
The following is the summarized results of operations of the MFON business for the period ended December 31, 2003 (since acquisition on February 4, 2003).
| Revenue | $ | 16 | |||
| Costs and Expenses: | |||||
| Cost of revenue | 2 | ||||
| Selling, general and administrative | 2 | ||||
| Total costs and expenses | 4 | ||||
| Income from Operations | 12 | ||||
| Loss from Sale of Discontinued Operations | — | ||||
| Income from Discontinued Operations | $ | 12 | |||
In June 2003, Software Spectrum announced that it was exiting the contact services business in order to concentrate on the software reseller business. In conjunction with this decision, Software Spectrum sold substantially all of the contact services business to H.I.G. Capital for approximately $4 million in cash. Software Spectrum recorded a loss within discontinued operations of approximately $9 million on the sale.
F-28
The following is the summarized results of operations of the contact services business for the period through June 18, 2003 and the period from acquisition (June 18, 2002) through December 31, 2002.
| | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||
| Revenue | $ | 38 | $ | 37 | ||||
| Costs and Expenses: | ||||||||
| Cost of revenue | 25 | 24 | ||||||
| Depreciation and amortization | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Selling, general and administrative | 10 | 10 | ||||||
| Total costs and expenses | 36 | 35 | ||||||
| Income from Operations | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Loss from Sale of Discontinued Operations | (9 | ) | — | |||||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 2 | |||
In December 2001, Level 3 announced that it had agreed to sell its Asian telecommunications business to Reach Ltd. for no cash consideration. The agreement covered subsidiaries that included the Asian network operations, assets, liabilities and future financial obligations. This included Level 3's share of the Northern Asian cable system, capacity on the Japan-US cable system, capital and operational expenses related to these two systems, gateways in Hong Kong and Tokyo, and existing customers on Level 3's Asian network.
The transaction closed on January 18, 2002. As of December 31, 2001, the net carrying value of Level 3's Asian assets was approximately $465 million. In accordance with SFAS No. 144, in the fourth quarter of 2001, Level 3 recorded an impairment loss on these assets held for sale within discontinued operations, equal to the difference between the carrying value of the assets and their fair value. Based upon the terms of the agreement, the Company was required to pay approximately $49 million for certain capital obligations for the two submarine systems to be sold to Reach, and estimated transaction costs. The $49 million was included in Current Liabilities of Discontinued Asian Operations in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2001.
F-21F-29
TheOperating results in 2002 operating results through the transaction date were not significant. The following is the summarized results of operations for the two yearsyear ended December 31, 2001 for the discontinued Asian operations:
| | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2001 | 2000 | |||||||||||||
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||
| Revenue | Revenue | $ | 13 | $ | 1 | Revenue | $ | 13 | |||||||
| Costs and Expenses: | Costs and Expenses: | Costs and Expenses: | |||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue | (17 | ) | (2 | ) | Cost of revenue | (17 | ) | ||||||||
| Depreciation and amortization | (27 | ) | (5 | ) | Depreciation and amortization | (27 | ) | ||||||||
| Selling, general and administrative | (58 | ) | (42 | ) | Selling, general and administrative | (58 | ) | ||||||||
| Total costs and expenses | (102 | ) | (49 | ) | Total costs and expenses | (102 | ) | ||||||||
| Loss from Operations | Loss from Operations | $ | (89 | ) | $ | (48 | ) | Loss from Operations | $ | (89 | ) | ||||
| Loss on Impairment of Asian Assets | Loss on Impairment of Asian Assets | (516 | ) | — | Loss on Impairment of Asian Assets | (516 | ) | ||||||||
| Loss from Discontinued Operations | Loss from Discontinued Operations | $ | (605 | ) | $ | (48 | ) | Loss from Discontinued Operations | $ | (605 | ) | ||||
SFAS No. 144 requires that long-lived assets that have met relevant criteria should be classified as "held(4) Settlement Revenue
In February 2003, Level 3 and XO Communications ("XO") amended their 1998 cost sharing and IRU agreement. As part of the 1998 agreement, XO purchased 24 fibers and one empty conduit along Level 3's North American intercity network. The amended agreement, among other things, required XO to return six fibers and the empty conduit to Level 3. In return Level 3, 1) will reduce the annual operations and maintenance ("O&M") charges XO was required to pay under the original agreement, 2) provided XO an option, expiring July 2007, to acquire a 20 year IRU for sale"a single conduit within or along Level 3's intercity network and shall be identified separately3) provided XO an option to purchase up to 25% of the fiber installed in the asset and liability sectionsnext conduit within or along each segment of the balance sheet. The assetsintercity network.
As individual segments were delivered to XO, Level 3 deferred and liabilitiesamortized the revenue attributable to the conduit over the term of the Asian operations met these criteria asoriginal agreement. As a result of December 31, 2001the amended agreement, Level 3 has no further obligation with respect to the original conduit, and were classified as current duethus recognized $294 million of communications revenue related to their sale to Reach in Januarythe remaining unamortized deferred revenue, less the fair values of 2002.the other separable elements of the amended agreement. The value of the other elements was determined based on the fair value of similar assets.
The following is summarized financial information for the discontinued Asian operations as of December 31, 2001 (dollars in millions):
| Financial Position | ||||
Current Assets: | ||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 34 | ||
| Restricted securities | 17 | |||
| Receivables | 21 | |||
| Other | 2 | |||
| Total Current Assets | $ | 74 | ||
| Current Liabilities: | ||||
| Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | $ | 58 | ||
| Current portion of long-term debt | 8 | |||
| Deferred revenue | 6 | |||
| Other | 2 | |||
| Total Current Liabilities | 74 | |||
| Net Assets | $ | — | ||
(4)(5) Restructuring and Impairment Charges
In 2001, the Company announced that due to the duration and severity of the slowdown in the economy and the telecommunications industry, it would be necessary to reduce operating expenses as well as reduce and reprioritize capital expenditures in an effort to be in a position to benefit when the economy recovers. As a result of these actions, the Company reduced its global work force, primarily in the communications business in the United States and Europe by approximately 2,700 employees.
F-22
Restructuring charges of $108 million were recorded in 2001 of which $66 million related to staff reduction and related costs and $42 million to real estate lease termination costs. The Company was able to record benefits of $13 million for the year ending December 31, 2002, due to the successful termination of leases for less than had originally been estimated and included the reduction of expense in Restructuring and Impairment Charges in the 2002 Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statement of Operations.operations.
F-30
In the second and third quarters of 2002, Level 3 in two separate actions recorded restructuring charges of $3 million and $5 million for costs associated with workforce reductions. The $3 million restructuring charge in the second quarter was attributable to the costs associated with a workforce reduction of approximately 200 employees in the communications business in North America and Europe. In the third quarter of 2002, the Company recorded a restructuring charge of $5 million primarily for severance and employee related costs associated with the integration of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum. Approximately 100 employees, primarily in Boston, were affected by the workforce reduction. As of December 31, 2002, the Company had paid $5 million in costs associated with these workforce reductions.
In the first quarter of 2003, Level 3 announced workforce reductions that are ultimately expected to affect approximately 1,200 employees in the communications business. These actions were primarily a result of the integration of acquired operations from the Genuity transaction into Level 3's operations and the Company matching its European cost structure with expected revenues. As of December 31, 2003, the Company had notified approximately 1,100 employees that they would be affected by these actions. The Company recorded restructuring charges of approximately $26 million related to these actions during the year ended December 31, 2003. As of December 31, 2003, the Company had paid $22 million in costs associated with the 2003 workforce reductions. Level 3 expects to incur additional expenses of less than $1 million for these actions in 2004.
The information services business recognized for the year ended December 31, 2003, approximately $19 million of restructuring charges related to the ongoing integration and restructuring of Software Spectrum, as well as the closure of (i)Structure's systems integration operations in Europe. These actions are expected to affect approximately 600 employees and result in the closure of certain facilities. As of December 31, 2003, the Company had notified approximately 580 employees that they would be affected by these actions and had paid approximately $13 million in costs associated with these workforce reductions. Included in the $19 million of restructuring charges, were $6 million of accrued lease termination costs for facilities it has ceased using. Software Spectrum currently expects to incur approximately $1 million of additional expenses in 2004 for restructuring related activities.
A summary of the restructuring charges and related activity follows:
| | Severance and Related | | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Severance and Related | Facilities Related | Facilities Related Amount (in millions) | |||||||||||||||
| | Number of Employees | Amount (in millions) | Amount (in millions) | Number of Employees | Amount (in millions) | |||||||||||||
| 2001 Charges | 2,700 | $ | 66 | $ | 42 | 2,700 | $ | 66 | $ | 42 | ||||||||
| 2001 Payments | (2,346 | ) | (49 | ) | (1 | ) | (2,346 | ) | (49 | ) | (1 | ) | ||||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 354 | 17 | 41 | 354 | 17 | 41 | ||||||||||||
| 2002 Charges | 300 | 8 | — | 300 | 8 | — | ||||||||||||
| 2002 Reductions of 2001 Charges | — | — | (13 | ) | — | — | (13 | ) | ||||||||||
| 2002 Payments | (599 | ) | (22 | ) | (18 | ) | (599 | ) | (22 | ) | (18 | ) | ||||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 55 | $ | 3 | $ | 10 | 55 | 3 | 10 | ||||||||||
| 2003 Charges | 1,717 | 39 | 6 | |||||||||||||||
| 2003 Payments | (1,663 | ) | (35 | ) | (4 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Balance December 31, 2003 | 109 | $ | 7 | $ | 12 | |||||||||||||
F-31
Lease termination obligations of $10$12 million are expected to be paid over the terms of the impaired leases, which extend to 2015, if the Company is unable to negotiate a buyout of the leases.
Impairments
The Company recorded impairment charges of $44 million and $57 million in the second and fourth quarters of 2002 related to a colocation facility in Boston, as well as abandoned lateral fiber builds, certain corporate facilities in Colorado and excess communications inventory, which are classified as held for sale in other non-current assets.assets on the consolidated balance sheet. As a result of the completion of additional colocation space in Boston by other providers, the continued overabundance of communications equipment in the secondary markets, and the soft demand for office space in the metropolitan Denver area, the Company believes that these assets are obsolete and that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to these assets will be insufficient to recover their current carrying value. The new carrying values of these assets are based on offers received from third parties for the real estate properties or actual sales of similar communications assets.
In December 2002, Level 3 sold one of its New York colocation facilities and the colocation facility near Boston. The Company leased back 3 of 10 floors of the New York colocation facility. The Company recognized a loss on these transactions of approximately $81 million, which is included in Restructuring and Impairment Charges on the Consolidated Statements2002 consolidated statement of Operations.operations.
In the fourth quarter of 2001, in light of the continued economic uncertainty, continued customer disconnections at higher rates than expected, increased difficulty in obtaining new revenue, and the overall slow down in the communications industry, the Company again reviewed the carrying value of its long-lived assets for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The Company
F-23
determined based upon its projections, giving effect to the continuing economic slowdown and continued over-capacity in certain areas of the telecommunications industry, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to certain assets or assets groups would not exceed the current carrying value of the assets. The Company, therefore, recorded an impairment charge of $3.2 billion, in the fourth quarter of 2001, to reflect the difference between the estimated fair value of the assets on a discounted cash flow basis and their current carrying value as further described below.
The 2001 impairments primarily related to colocation assets, excess conduits in North America and European intercity and metropolitan networks, and certain transoceanic assets. Geographically, approximately 74% of the charges were attributable to North America, 17% were attributable to Europe and 9% attributable to transatlantic assets.
The financial problems of many of the "dot-coms", emerging carriers and competitors, a weakening economy, and changing customer focus, led to an over-capacity of colocation space in several U.S. and European markets. Level 3 attempted to sell or sublease its excess colocation space; however, market rates at the time, for much of the space were below its carrying values. As a result, the 2001 impairment charge included approximately $1.6 billion, in 2001, related to its colocation assets, which included owned facilities, leasehold improvements and related equipment.
Level 3 constructed its networks in North America and Europe in such a way that they could be continuously upgraded to the most current technology without affecting its existing customers. The upgrade ability of the network is based on multiple conduits available to the Company to install new generations of fiber. Level 3 also installed additional conduits with the intention of selling them to
F-32
other carriers. As of December 31, 2001, the Company has sold one conduit in its North American network and, due to the economic environment and decreasing capital expenditure budgets of potential buyers, did not expect additional sales in the foreseeable future. For this reason, the Company's 2001 impairment charge included approximately $1.2 billion for the conduits that were previously determined to be and remain available for sale to third parties based on estimated cash flows from the disposition of the conduits.
The completion of several transoceanic cable systems in the second half of 2001 and the expected completion of additional systems in 2002, resulted in an over abundance of transoceanic capacity. This excess capacity, combined with limited demand, adversely affected the transoceanic capacity markets. At current pricing levels at December 31, 2001, the Company did not believe it would recover its investment in transoceanic capacity from the future cash flows of these assets. As a result, the Company's 2001 impairment charge included approximately $320 million for its transatlantic submarine assets.
The Company's 2001 impairment charge also included approximately $126 million for spare equipment write-downs and abandoned lateral builds in 2001.
Level 3 continues to conduct a comprehensive review of its communications assets, specifically assets deployed along its intercity network and in its gateway facilities. It is possible that additional communications equipmentassets may be identified as obsolete or excessimpaired and additional impairment charges may be recorded to reflect the realizable value of these assets in future periods.
(5)(6) Sale of Toll Road Operations
On January 3, 2003, California Private Transportation Company ("CPTC"), a majority owned subsidiary of the Company, sold the "91 Express Lanes" toll road assets in Orange County, California to the Orange County Transportation Authority. The Company received net proceeds from the sale of $46 million and recorded a gain of approximately $70 million in other, net in the consolidated statement of operations. The Company's total long-term debt was reduced by approximately $139 million as a result of the sale as the debt incurred to finance the construction of the toll road had been consolidated due to the Company's 65% equity interest in CPTC.
(7) Loss Per Share
The Company had a loss from continuing operations for the three years ended December 31, 2002.2003. Therefore, the dilutive effect of the approximately 64 million, 156 million 15 million and 1915 million shares issuable pursuant to the three series of convertible subordinated notes at December 31, 2003, 2002, 2001, and 20002001 respectively, have not been included in the computation of diluted loss per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive to the computation. In addition, the dilutive effect of the approximately 52 million, 54 million 53 million and 2153 million options and warrants outstanding at December 31,
F-24
2003, 2002 2001 and 20002001 respectively, have not been included in the computation of diluted loss per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive to the computation.
F-33
The following details the earnings (loss)loss per share calculations for the Level 3 Common Stock.Stock:
| | Year Ended | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations (in millions) | $ | (1,113 | ) | $ | (5,448 | ) | $ | (1,407 | ) | ||
| Discontinued Operations | — | (605 | ) | (48 | ) | ||||||
| Extraordinary Gain on Debt Extinguishment, net | 255 | 1,075 | — | ||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | $ | (1,455 | ) | ||
| Total Number of Weighted Average Shares Outstanding used to Compute Basic and Dilutive Earnings Per Share (in thousands) | 407,317 | 373,792 | 362,539 | ||||||||
| Earnings (Loss) per Share (Basic and Diluted): | |||||||||||
| Continuing operations | $ | (2.74 | ) | $ | (14.58 | ) | $ | (3.88 | ) | ||
| Discontinued operations | $ | — | $ | (1.62 | ) | $ | (0.13 | ) | |||
| Extraordinary gain on debt extinguishment, net | $ | 0.63 | $ | 2.88 | $ | — | |||||
| Net loss | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (13.32 | ) | $ | (4.01 | ) | ||
| | Year Ended | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (721 | ) | $ | (860 | ) | $ | (4,373 | ) | ||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | 5 | 2 | (605 | ) | |||||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | 5 | — | — | ||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (711 | ) | $ | (858 | ) | $ | (4,978 | ) | ||
| Total Number of Weighted Average Shares Outstanding used to Compute Basic and Dilutive Earnings Per Share (in thousands) | 565,931 | 407,317 | 373,792 | ||||||||
| Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Level 3 Common Stock (Basic and Diluted): | |||||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (1.28 | ) | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (11.70 | ) | ||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | $ | .01 | $ | — | $ | (1.62 | ) | ||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | $ | .01 | $ | — | $ | — | |||||
| Net Loss | $ | (1.26 | ) | $ | (2.11 | ) | $ | (13.32 | ) | ||
(6)(8) Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The following methods and assumptions were used to determine classification and fair values of financial instruments:
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash equivalents generally consist of funds invested in highly liquid instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less. The securities are stated at cost, which approximates fair value.
Marketable and Restricted Securities
Level 3 has classified allits marketable securities as available-for-sale. Restricted Securities—Current primarily includes cash investments that serve to collateralize outstanding letters of credit and certain operating obligations of the Company. As discussed further in Note 12, the investment in the common stock of Commonwealth Telephone was reclassified to a marketable equity security in 2003 as a result of the decrease in the voting interest below 20 percent. The cost of the securities used in computing unrealized and realized gains and losses is determined by specific identification. Fair values are estimated based on quoted market prices for the securities on hand or for similar investments.securities. Net unrealized holding gains and losses are included in accumulated other comprehensive lossincome (loss) within stockholders' deficit.equity (deficit). At December 31, 2002, the Company did not hold any marketable securities.
F-25F-34
At December 31, 2002,2003 the company did not hold any marketable securities. At December 31, 2001, the cost, unrealized holding gains on the marketable equity security were as follows:
| | Cost | Unrealized Holding Gains | Unrealized Holding Losses | Fair Value | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
| 2003 | |||||||||||||
| Marketable equity securities: | |||||||||||||
| Commonwealth Telephone common stock | $ | 18 | $ | 24 | $ | — | $ | 42 | |||||
The Company did not recognize any realized gains and losses and estimated fair valueson sales of marketable and restrictedequity securities were as follows:
| | Cost | Unrealized Holding Gains | Unrealized Holding Losses | Fair Value | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||
| 2001 | ||||||||||||||
| Marketable Securities: | ||||||||||||||
| U.S. Treasury securities | $ | 206 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 206 | ||||||
| Restricted Securities: | ||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 128 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 128 | ||||||
| Wilmington Trust: | ||||||||||||||
| Intermediate term bond fund | 15 | — | — | 15 | ||||||||||
| Equity fund | 11 | 1 | — | 12 | ||||||||||
| $ | 154 | $ | 1 | $ | — | $ | 155 | |||||||
For debt securities, costs do not vary significantly from principal amounts.in 2003. The Company recognized $14 million of losses in 2002 and $17 million of gains in 2001 from the sale of marketable securities; all of which were attributable to foreign currency gains and losses on securities denominated in Euros. The Company did not recognize any realized gains and losses on sales of marketable and equity securities in 2000.
Maturities for the restricted securities have not been presented, as the types of securities are either cash or money market mutual funds which do not have a single maturity date.
Long-Term Debt
The fair value of long-term debt was estimated using the December 31, 20022003 and 20012002 average of the bid and ask price as provided by a major financial institution, for the publicly traded debt instruments. The fair value of the 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes at December 31, 2002, was determined based on convertible bond valuation techniques whichthat incorporate the use of the Black-Scholes model. The GMAC Commercial Mortgage is not traded in an organized public manner. The fair value of this instrument is assumed to approximate its carrying value at December 31, 20022003 as it is secured by underlying assets and is at variable interest rates thus minimizing credit and interest rate risks.
The carrying amount and estimated fair values of Level 3's financial instruments are as follows:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | ||||||||||||||||
| | (dollars in millions) | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and Cash Equivalents | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,297 | $ | 1,297 | $ | 1,129 | $ | 1,129 | $ | 1,142 | $ | 1,142 | ||||||||
| Marketable Securities | — | — | 206 | 206 | 42 | 42 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Restricted Securities—Current | 99 | 99 | 154 | 155 | 74 | 74 | 99 | 99 | ||||||||||||||||
| Restricted Securities—Noncurrent | 467 | 467 | — | — | 61 | 61 | 467 | 467 | ||||||||||||||||
| Investments (Note 10) | 21 | 62 | 127 | 569 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term Debt, including current portion (Note 11) | 6,106 | 4,243 | 6,216 | 3,024 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Investments (Note 12) | 6 | 22 | 21 | 62 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term Debt, including current portion (Note 13) | 5,375 | 4,798 | 6,106 | 4,243 | ||||||||||||||||||||
F-26F-35
(7)(9) Receivables
Receivables at December 31, 20022003 and 20012002 were as follows:
| | | Communications | Information Services | Coal | Other | Total | | Communications | Information Services | Coal | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2003 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accounts Receivable—Trade: | Accounts Receivable—Trade: | Accounts Receivable—Trade: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Services and Software Sales | $ | 58 | $ | 489 | $ | 10 | $ | 1 | $ | 558 | Services and Software Sales | $ | 119 | $ | 453 | $ | 11 | $ | — | $ | 583 | |||||||||||||
| Joint Build Costs | 1 | — | — | — | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Receivables | Other Receivables | 9 | — | — | — | 9 | Other Receivables | 6 | — | — | — | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | (24 | ) | (5 | ) | — | — | (29 | ) | Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | (20 | ) | (8 | ) | — | — | (28 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | Total | $ | 44 | $ | 484 | $ | 10 | $ | 1 | $ | 539 | Total | $ | 105 | $ | 445 | $ | 11 | $ | — | $ | 561 | ||||||||||||
| 2001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accounts Receivable—Trade: | Accounts Receivable—Trade: | Accounts Receivable—Trade: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Services | $ | 171 | $ | 21 | $ | 11 | $ | 1 | $ | 204 | Services and Software Sales | $ | 58 | $ | 477 | $ | 10 | $ | 1 | $ | 546 | |||||||||||||
| Upfront Dark Fiber | 23 | — | — | — | 23 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Build Costs | 33 | — | — | — | 33 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Receivables | Other Receivables | 25 | — | — | — | 25 | Other Receivables | 10 | — | — | — | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | (43 | ) | (3 | ) | — | — | (46 | ) | Allowance for Doubtful Accounts | (24 | ) | (5 | ) | — | — | (29 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total | Total | $ | 209 | $ | 18 | $ | 11 | $ | 1 | $ | 239 | Total | $ | 44 | $ | 472 | $ | 10 | $ | 1 | $ | 527 | ||||||||||||
Joint build receivables primarily relateAccounts receivable of $12 million attributable to costs incurred by the Company for construction of networkinformation services' contact services business at December 31, 2002, have been reclassified to other current assets in which Level 3 is partnering with other companies. Generally, under these types of agreements,on the sponsoring partner will incur 100%consolidated balance sheet as a result of the construction costs and billsale of the other party as certain construction milestones are accomplished.contact services business during the second quarter of 2003.
Other receivables primarily include non-service related receivables including European VAT (Value Added Taxes), sales tax refunds, equipment sales and other miscellaneous items.
The Company recognized bad debt expense in selling, general and administrative expenses of $6$7 million, $42$7 million and $31$43 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. Level 3 received $4 million, $1 million and 2000,$1 million of proceeds for amounts previously deemed uncollectible in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. The Company decreased accounts receivable and allowance for doubtful accounts by approximately $8 million, $23 million and $29 million in 2003, 2002 and $7 million in 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively, for previously reserved for amounts the Company deemed as uncollectible.
(8)(10) Property, Plant and Equipment
The Company has substantially completed the construction of its communications network. Costs associated directly with expansions and improvements to the uncompleted network and customer installations, including employee related costs, have been capitalized, and interest expensecosts incurred during construction was capitalized based on the weighted average accumulated construction expenditures and the interest rates related to borrowings associated with the construction (Note 11)(See Note 13). The Company generally capitalizes operating expensescosts associated with network construction, provisioning of services and software development. Capitalized labor and related expensescosts associated with employees and contract labor working on capital projects were approximately $61 million, $66 million, $150 million, and $162$150 million, for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively. Included in capitalized labor and related expensescosts was $4 million, $7 million $49 million and $12$49 million of capitalized non-cash compensation expensecosts related to options and warrants for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively. Intercity segments,
F-36
gateway facilities, local networks and operating equipment that have been placed in service are being depreciated over their estimated useful lives, primarily ranging from 3-25 years.
F-27
The Company continues to develop business support systems required for its business plan. The external direct costs of software, materials and services, payroll and payroll related expenses for employees directly associated with the project, and interest costs incurred when developing the business support systems are capitalized. Upon completion of a project, the total cost of the business support system is amortized over aan estimated useful life of three years.
In 2002, Level 3 either sold or entered into sale leaseback transactions for colocation facilities in London, Boston and New York City. The carrying value of these assets at the time of these transactions was approximately $167 million and the Company received approximately $91 million in gross proceeds. The Company repaid mortgage debt, including accrued interest, totaling $60 million associated withproceeds, and recorded related losses within loss from operations in the saleconsolidated statement of the New York City facility.operations.
During 2002 and 2003, Level 3 was able to finalize negotiations and claims on several of its large multi-year network construction projects. As a result, the Company was able to release approximately $28 million and $215 million of capital expenditure accruals for the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively that had previously been reported as property, plant and equipment. In the ordinary course of business, as construction projects come to a close, the Company reviews the final amounts due and settles any outstanding amounts related to these contracts which can result in changes to estimated costs of the construction projects.
Included in Land and Mineral Properties are mineral properties related to the coal business with a cost basis of approximately $5 million and $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The remaining Land and Mineral Properties balance of approximately $179 million and $173 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively, represent owned assets of the communications and information services businesses, including land improvements. The coal mineral properties include owned and leased assets. The various coal lease agreements require minimum lease payments and provide for royalty or overriding royalty payments based on the tons of coal mined or sold from the properties. Depletion on the mineral properties is provided on a units-of extraction basis determined in relation to coal committed under sales contracts.
The Genuity transaction completed in February 2003, resulted in an increase to property, plant and equipment of approximately $246 million.
In 2001, the Company recorded a charge on the statement of operations for impairment of certain assets. The impairments primarily related to colocation assets ($1.6 billion), conduits in North America and European intercity and metropolitan networks ($1.2 billion), and certain transoceanic assets ($320 million).
F-28F-37
Capitalized business support systems and network construction costs that have not been placed in service have been classified as construction-in-progress within Property, Plant & Equipment below.
| | Cost | Accumulated Depreciation | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2002 | ||||||||||
| Land and Mineral Properties | $ | 178 | $ | (13 | ) | $ | 165 | |||
| Facility and Leasehold Improvements | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,260 | (125 | ) | 1,135 | ||||||
| Information Services | 28 | (5 | ) | 23 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 65 | (63 | ) | 2 | ||||||
| CPTC | 92 | (17 | ) | 75 | ||||||
| Network Infrastructure | 4,106 | (444 | ) | 3,662 | ||||||
| Operating Equipment | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,386 | (619 | ) | 767 | ||||||
| Information Services | 81 | (55 | ) | 26 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 78 | (70 | ) | 8 | ||||||
| CPTC | 19 | (13 | ) | 6 | ||||||
| Network Construction Equipment | 34 | (12 | ) | 22 | ||||||
| Furniture, Fixtures and Office Equipment | 133 | (87 | ) | 46 | ||||||
| Construction-in-Progress | 73 | — | 73 | |||||||
| $ | 7,533 | $ | (1,523 | ) | $ | 6,010 | ||||
| | Cost | Accumulated Depreciation | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2003 | ||||||||||
| Land and Mineral Properties | $ | 184 | $ | (19 | ) | $ | 165 | |||
| Facility and Leasehold Improvements | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,351 | (200 | ) | 1,151 | ||||||
| Information Services | 27 | (5 | ) | 22 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 149 | (144 | ) | 5 | ||||||
| CPTC | — | — | — | |||||||
| Network Infrastructure | 4,364 | (740 | ) | 3,624 | ||||||
| Operating Equipment | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,617 | (959 | ) | 658 | ||||||
| Information Services | 93 | (63 | ) | 30 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 73 | (67 | ) | 6 | ||||||
| CPTC | — | — | — | |||||||
| Furniture, Fixtures and Office Equipment | 120 | (87 | ) | 33 | ||||||
| Other | 33 | (16 | ) | 17 | ||||||
| Construction-in-Progress | 16 | — | 16 | |||||||
| $ | 8,027 | $ | (2,300 | ) | $ | 5,727 | ||||
| | Cost | Accumulated Depreciation | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2002 | ||||||||||
| Land and Mineral Properties | $ | 178 | $ | (13 | ) | $ | 165 | |||
| Facility and Leasehold Improvements | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,260 | (125 | ) | 1,135 | ||||||
| Information Services | 28 | (5 | ) | 23 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 65 | (63 | ) | 2 | ||||||
| CPTC | 92 | (17 | ) | 75 | ||||||
| Network Infrastructure | 4,212 | (448 | ) | 3,764 | ||||||
| Operating Equipment | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,280 | (615 | ) | 665 | ||||||
| Information Services | 81 | (55 | ) | 26 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 78 | (70 | ) | 8 | ||||||
| CPTC | 19 | (13 | ) | 6 | ||||||
| Furniture, Fixtures and Office Equipment | 126 | (85 | ) | 41 | ||||||
| Other | 34 | (12 | ) | 22 | ||||||
| Construction-in-Progress | 73 | — | 73 | |||||||
| $ | 7,526 | $ | (1,521 | ) | $ | 6,005 | ||||
F-38
| | Cost | Accumulated Depreciation | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2001 | ||||||||||
| Land and Mineral Properties | $ | 203 | $ | (16 | ) | $ | 187 | |||
| Facility and Leasehold Improvements | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,423 | (22 | ) | 1,401 | ||||||
| Information Services | 26 | (5 | ) | 21 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 65 | (62 | ) | 3 | ||||||
| CPTC | 92 | (14 | ) | 78 | ||||||
| Network Infrastructure | 4,111 | (107 | ) | 4,004 | ||||||
| Operating Equipment | ||||||||||
| Communications | 1,159 | (390 | ) | 769 | ||||||
| Information Services | 69 | (41 | ) | 28 | ||||||
| Coal Mining | 82 | (72 | ) | 10 | ||||||
| CPTC | 18 | (11 | ) | 7 | ||||||
| Network Construction Equipment | 67 | (17 | ) | 50 | ||||||
| Furniture, Fixtures and Office Equipment | 173 | (81 | ) | 92 | ||||||
| Construction-in-Progress | 240 | — | 240 | |||||||
| $ | 7,728 | $ | (838 | ) | $ | 6,890 | ||||
Depreciation expense was $777$766 million in 2003, $776 million in 2002 and $1,082 million in 2001 and $529 million2001. In 2003, a significant portion of 3 to 5 year assets placed in 2000.service in prior years became fully depreciated.
F-29
(9)(11) Goodwill and Intangibles, Net
As of December 31, 2003, $29 million, $79 million, $52 million, $148 million, and $121 million of goodwill and intangibles, net of amortization of intangibles, are attributable to the Telverse, Genuity, McLeod, CorpSoft, and Software Spectrum acquisitions, respectively.
As of December 31, 2002, $72 million, $155 million and $125 million of goodwill and intangibles, net of amortization of intangibles, are attributable to the McLeod, CorpSoft and Software Spectrum acquisitions, respectively.
In addition, as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, the Company had $30 million of goodwill attributable to the acquisition of XCOM in 1998.
The Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 142 in January 2002. SFAS No. 142 requires companies to segregate identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination from goodwill. The remaining goodwill is no longer subject to amortization over its estimated useful life. However, the carrying amount of the goodwill must be assessed at least annually for impairment using a fair value based test. Level 3 has acquired several businesses since the adoption of SFAS No. 142 that resulted in goodwill.
In July 2003, Level 3 purchased Telverse Communications, Inc. for approximately $31 million in Level 3 common stock, cash consideration and transaction costs. This acquisition resulted in identifiable intangible assets of $32 million primarily related to developed technology acquired with an insignificant amount allocated to customer contracts.
Level 3 purchased substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity in February 2003. The initial fair value of the assets, adjusted for subsequent purchase price adjustments, indicated that the assets acquired net of the Company's estimate of obligations assumed was in excess of the purchase price paid by $86 million. As a result, the Company did not recognize goodwill in this transaction and reallocated the negative goodwill against the long-lived asset values in accordance with SFAS No. 141. The Company has attributed approximately $107 million of the Genuity purchase price to identifiable intangible assets, including $79 million to specific customer contracts and $28 million to the existing customer base. Level 3 is amortizing these intangibles over periods ranging from 3 to 5 years, with a weighted average remaining life of 4.2 years at December 31, 2003. The intangibles acquired as part of the Genuity transaction have been adjusted during the fourth quarter of 2003 from their previously allocated values to reflect changes in the purchase price allocation and the settlement with the Genuity Bankruptcy Estate described in Note 2.
Level 3 completed the acquisition of McLeod's wholesale dial-up business on January 24, 2002. The Company has attributed approximately $49 million of the purchase price to customer contracts with an amortization period equal to the remaining term of the primary contract orof approximately 30 months.months at the date of acquisition. The purchase price in excess of the fair value allocated to identifiable tangible and intangible assets resulted in goodwill of $41 million.
F-39
The acquisition of CorpSoft was completed on March 13, 2002. The $129 million cash purchase price, including transaction costs, exceeded the fair value of the net assets by approximately $131 million based on a third party formal valuation of the assets acquired and the Company's estimateestimates of the liabilities acquired.assumed. The Company has attributed approximately $26 million of the purchase price to a customer relationship intangible asset with an amortization period equal to ten years.
On June 18, 2002, the Company completed the acquisition of Software Spectrum, Inc. The $135 million purchase price, including transaction costs, exceeded the estimated fair value of the net assets by approximately $79 million based on a third party formal valuation of the assets acquired and the Company's estimateestimates of the liabilities acquired.assumed. The Company has attributed approximately $49 million of the purchase price to a customer relationship intangible asset with an amortization period equal to ten years.
At December 31, 2003 and 2002 identifiable intangible assets were as follows:
| | Cost | Accumulated Amortization | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2003 | ||||||||||
| Customer Contracts: | ||||||||||
| Genuity | $ | 28 | $ | (6 | ) | $ | 22 | |||
| McLeod | 49 | (38 | ) | 11 | ||||||
| Customer Relationships: | ||||||||||
| Genuity | 79 | (22 | ) | 57 | ||||||
| Software Spectrum (including CorpSoft) | 75 | (13 | ) | 62 | ||||||
| Technology: | ||||||||||
| Telverse | 32 | (3 | ) | 29 | ||||||
| $ | 263 | $ | (82 | ) | $ | 181 | ||||
| | Cost | Accumulated Amortization | Book Value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| 2002 | ||||||||||
| Customer Contracts: | ||||||||||
| McLeod | $ | 49 | $ | (18 | ) | $ | 31 | |||
| Customer Relationships: | ||||||||||
| Software Spectrum (including CorpSoft) | 75 | (5 | ) | 70 | ||||||
| $ | 124 | $ | (23 | ) | $ | 101 | ||||
Goodwill attributable to these acquisitions has been or will be assessed at least annually for impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 142, beginning with the first anniversary of the acquisition and December 31 of each year thereafter.
Goodwill and intangible asset amortization expense, including amortization expense attributable to equity method investees, was $25 million, $41$61 million and $52$25 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Goodwill amortization expense for the year ended December 31, 2001 and 2000, respectively.was $41 million.
The following is a reconciliation ofpro-forma financial information of the Company assuming that SFAS No. 142 had been in effect in 2001 and 2000 and goodwill amortization expense had not been recorded:
| | As Reported | Goodwill Amortization | Adjusted Net Income | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2001 | ||||||||||||
Net Loss Before Extraordinary Items | $ | (6,053 | ) | $ | 41 | $ | (6,012 | ) | ||||
| Net Loss. | (4,978 | ) | 41 | (4,937 | ) | |||||||
Per Share: | ||||||||||||
| Net Loss Before Extraordinary Items | (16.20 | ) | (16.09 | ) | ||||||||
| Net Loss. | (13.32 | ) | (13.21 | ) | ||||||||
Year Ended December 31, 2000 | ||||||||||||
Net Loss Before Extraordinary Items. | $ | (1,455 | ) | $ | 52 | $ | (1,403 | ) | ||||
| Net Loss. | (1,455 | ) | 52 | (1,403 | ) | |||||||
Per Share: | ||||||||||||
| Net Loss Before Extraordinary Items | (4.01 | ) | (3.87 | ) | ||||||||
| Net Loss | (4.01 | ) | (3.87 | ) | ||||||||
F-30
| | As Reported | Goodwill Amortization | Adjusted Net Loss | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||
| Year Ended December 31, 2001 | ||||||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (4,373 | ) | $ | 41 | $ | (4,332 | ) | ||||
| Net Loss. | (4,978 | ) | 41 | (4,937 | ) | |||||||
| Per Share: | ||||||||||||
| Loss from Continuing Operations | (11.70 | ) | (11.59 | ) | ||||||||
| Net Loss. | (13.32 | ) | (13.21 | ) | ||||||||
The amortization expense related to intangible assets currently recorded on the Company's books for each of the five succeeding years is estimated to be the following for the years ended December 31: 2003—$27 million; 2004—$1950 million; 2005—$838 million; 2006—$838 million; 2007—$18 million and 2007—2008—$811 million.
(10)(12) Other Assets, Net
At December 31, 20022003 and 20012002 other assets consisted of the following:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| Investments | $ | 21 | $ | 127 | $ | 6 | $ | 21 | ||||
| Debt Issuance Costs, net | 93 | 113 | 64 | 93 | ||||||||
| Prepaid Network Assets | 11 | 21 | 2 | 11 | ||||||||
| CPTC Deferred Development and Financing Costs | 19 | 20 | — | 19 | ||||||||
| Assets Held for Sale | 10 | 62 | 1 | 10 | ||||||||
| Employee and Officer Notes Receivable | 3 | 10 | — | 3 | ||||||||
| Prepaid Operating and Maintenance Costs | 18 | — | ||||||||||
| Other | 15 | 11 | 9 | 15 | ||||||||
| $ | 172 | $ | 364 | $ | 100 | $ | 172 | |||||
The Company holds equity positions in two publicly traded companies: RCN Corporation ("RCN") and Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises, Inc. RCN is a facilities-based provider of bundled local and long distance phone, cable television and Internet services to residential markets primarily on the East and West coasts as well as Chicago. Commonwealth Telephone owns Commonwealth Telephone Company, an incumbent local exchange carrier operating in various rural Pennsylvania markets, and CTSI, Inc. a competitive local exchange carrier.
On December 31, 2003, Level 3 owned approximately 27 million shares of RCN common stock and approximately one million of Commonwealth Telephone common shares, representing approximately 22% and 4.6% of the outstanding shares of RCN and Commonwealth Telephone, respectively. The Company accounts for its investment in RCN using the equity method. Due to the recapitalization of Commonwealth Telephone shares in September 2003, that reduced the Company's voting interest from 29% to 4.6%, the Company accounts for its investment in Commonwealth
F-41
Telephone using the cost method (See Note 8). The market value of the Company's investment in RCN was $18 million at December 31, 2003 (See Note 20).
On February 22, 2002, Level 3 Holdings, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, agreed to acquire from Mr. David C. McCourt, a director of the Company, his 10% interest in Level 3 Telecom Holdings, Inc., the Company's subsidiary that indirectly holds the Company's ownership interests in RCN and Commonwealth Telephone. The total cash consideration paid to Mr. McCourt in this transaction was $15 million and was accounted for as goodwill attributable toan increase in the carrying value of the RCN and Commonwealth Telephone investments.
On December 31, 2002, Level 3 owned approximately 24% and 4% of the outstanding shares of RCN and Commonwealth Telephone, respectively, and accounts for it's investment in each entity using the equity method. The market value of the Company's investment in RCN and Commonwealth Telephone was $14 million and $37 million, respectively, on December 31, 2002.
On April 2,In, 2002, Eldorado Equity Holdings, Inc., an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Level 3, completed the sale of 4,898,000 shares of common stock of Commonwealth Telephonesold in an underwritten public offering. The 4,898,000 shares representedtwo separate transactions, approximately 46% of Level 3's economic ownership of Commonwealth Telephone. Eldorado Equity Holdings received net proceeds of approximately $1669.6 million and recognized a gain on the sale of approximately $102 million in the second quarter of 2002, which is included in Other, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
On December 12, 2002, Eldorado Equity Holdings sold 4,741,326 shares of common stock of Commonwealth Telephone. GrossThe Company received approximately $362 million of proceeds for this sale were approximately $166 million,from these transactions and net proceeds were approximately $159 million. The 4,741,326 shares represented approximately 82% of Level 3's economic ownership of Commonwealth Telephone at the time. Arecorded a gain of $89 million was recognized on the sale,disposition of $191 million, which is included in Other,other, net on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statement of Operations.operations.
As a result of these transactions, the Company ownsowned approximately 4% of the total Commonwealth Telephone shares outstanding as of December 31, 2002 through its ownership of
F-31
1,017,061 shares of Class B common stock as of December 31, 2002.stock. Class B common shareholders are entitled to 15 votes for every share held. Therefore, the Company held a 29% voting interest in Commonwealth Telephone at December 31, 2002. Due primarily to the Company's significant voting interest in Commonwealth Telephone, the Company will continue to accountaccounted for the investment using the equity method.method prior to the recapitalization discussed below.
The Company's investment inOn April 25, 2003, it was announced that the Company and Commonwealth Telephone including goodwill, was $15 millionhad entered into a recapitalization agreement that provided for the reclassification and $121 millionconversion of each outstanding share of Commonwealth Telephone Class B common stock into 1.09 shares of Commonwealth Telephone common stock. Commonwealth Telephone's shareholders approved the plan on September 3, 2003. This recapitalization reduced Level 3's equity and voting interest to approximately 4.6% at December 31, 20022003, and 2001, respectively.as a result, the Company accounted for its investment using the cost method effective in September 2003. At December 31, 2003, Level 3 reflected the Commonwealth Telephone shares as available for sale marketable equity securities, and therefore increased the carrying value to reflect the current fair value of the shares (See Note 8).
During 2000, Level 3's proportionate share of RCN's losses exceeded the remaining carrying value of Level 3's investment in RCN. Level 3 does not have additional financial commitments to RCN; therefore it recognized equity losses only to the extent of its investment in RCN. If RCN becomes profitable, Level 3 will not record its equity in RCN's profits until unrecorded equity in losses hashave been offset. The Company's investment in RCN, including goodwill, was zero at December 31, 20022003 and 2001.2002. The Company did not recognize approximately $394 million $249 million and $20$249 million of suspended equity losses attributable to RCN for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, and 2000, respectively,respectively. As of the date of this report, RCN had not released fourth quarter results. As such, the Company did not recognize approximately $50 of suspended equity losses attributable to RCN for the nine months ended September 30, 2003, bringing the total amount of suspended equity losses to approximately $663$713 million at December 31, 2002. The Company recorded equity losses attributable to RCN of $260 million for the year ended December 31, 2000.September 30, 2003.
The Company recognizes gains from the sale, issuance and repurchase of stock by its equity method investees in its statements of operations. During 2000, RCN issued stock for the acquisition of 21st Century Telecom Group, Inc., completed in April, 2000, and for certain transactions which diluted the Company's ownership of RCN from 35% at December 31, 1999 to 31% at December 31, 2000. The increase in the Company's proportionate share of RCN's net assets as a result of these transactions resulted in a pre-tax gain of $95 million for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2000. The Company did not recognize any gains for the years ended December 31, 2002 or 2001 and does not expect to recognize future gains on RCN stock activity until the suspended equity losses are recognized by the Company.
F-32
The following is summarized financial information of RCN for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, and as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 (dollars in millions).
| | Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||
| Operations: | |||||||||||
| RCN Corporation: | |||||||||||
| Revenue | $ | 457 | $ | 406 | $ | 333 | |||||
| Net loss available to common shareholders | (1,570 | ) | (836 | ) | (891 | ) | |||||
| Level 3's Share: | |||||||||||
| Net loss | $ | — | $ | — | $ | (260 | ) | ||||
| Goodwill amortization | — | — | (1 | ) | |||||||
| $ | — | $ | — | $ | (261 | ) | |||||
| | December 31, | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 2002 | 2001 | |||||||
| Financial Position: | |||||||||
| Current Assets | $ | 403 | $ | 956 | |||||
| Other Assets | 1,587 | 2,647 | |||||||
| Total assets | 1,990 | 3,603 | |||||||
Current Liabilities | 318 | 358 | |||||||
| Other Liabilities | 1,711 | 1,884 | |||||||
| Minority Interest | 1 | 51 | |||||||
| Preferred Stock | 2,304 | 2,142 | |||||||
| Total liabilities and preferred stock | 4,334 | 4,435 | |||||||
| Common shareholders' deficit | $ | (2,344 | ) | $ | (832 | ) | |||
The Company previously made investments in certain public and private companies in connection with some of those entities agreeing to purchase various services from the Company.Company, and has no
F-42
obligation to fund or guarantee any of these entities. The Company originally recorded these transactions as investments and deferred revenue on the balance sheet. The value of the investment and deferred revenue is equal to the estimated fair value of these securities at the time of the transaction or the value of the services to be provided, whichever was more readily determinable. Level 3 closely monitors the success of these investees in executing their business plans. For those companies that are publicly traded, Level 3 also monitors current and historical market values of the investee as it compares to the carrying value of the investment. The Company recorded a charge of $37 million during 2001, for an other-than temporary decline in the value of such investments, which is included in Other,other, net on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operations.operations. Future appreciation will be recognized only upon sale or other disposition of these securities. The carrying amount of the investments was zero at December 31, 20022003 and 2001.2002. The Company recognized revenue of approximately $1 million, $3 million $13 million and less than $1$13 million for actual services provided to other entities involved in the program for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively. As of December 31, 2003 and 2002, the Company had deferred revenue obligations of $3 million and $4 million with respect to these transactions.
In August 2001, The Company and divine, inc., a company included in those described above, entered into an agreement whereby divine would repurchase shares of common stock issued to Level 3 and absolve Level 3 of any further obligations with respect to the deferred revenue recorded at the time of the original transaction. As a result, Level 3 recorded a $27 million gain in Other,other, net on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operationsoperations in 2001.
F-33
Assets held for sale primarily includes As of the date of completion of the Genuity transaction, Level 3 was obligated as part of certain telecommunications equipment identified as excess and which management expectscapital lease agreements, to sell due topurchase approximately $30 million of O&M services from suppliers over the Company's decision in June 2001 to reprioritize its capital expenditures. Thenext four years. As of December 31, 2003, the Company recorded impairment charges of $101 million in 2002 to reflecthas reflected the current market value($9 million) and remaining noncurrent ($15 million) portions of the O&M payments due under these assets as well as certain corporate facilities that were previously classified as held for sale and impaired.arrangements.
Loans outstanding from certain employees andexecutive officers of the Company were paid in full during the year ended December 31, 2003. These loans totaled $3 million at December 31, 2002. The loans were taken out in 2001 and arewere secured by Level 3 common stock or other personal assets of the borrower and bearbearing interest at 4.75%.
F-43
(11)(13) Long-Term Debt
At December 31, 20022003 and 2001,2002, long-term debt was as follows:
| | | 2002 | 2001 | | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||
| Senior Secured Credit Facility: | Senior Secured Credit Facility: | Senior Secured Credit Facility: | ||||||||||||||||
| Term Loan Facility | Term Loan Facility | |||||||||||||||||
| Tranche A (4.65% due 2007) | $ | 450 | $ | 450 | Tranche A | $ | — | $ | 450 | |||||||||
| Tranche B (5.65% due 2008) | 275 | 275 | Tranche B | — | 275 | |||||||||||||
| Tranche C (6.26% due 2008) | 400 | 400 | Tranche C | — | 400 | |||||||||||||
| Convertible Senior Discount Notes (9% due 2013) | Convertible Senior Discount Notes (9% due 2013) | 211 | — | |||||||||||||||
| Senior Notes (10.750% due 2011) | Senior Notes (10.750% due 2011) | 500 | — | |||||||||||||||
| Convertible Senior Notes (2.875% due 2010) | Convertible Senior Notes (2.875% due 2010) | 374 | — | |||||||||||||||
| Senior Notes (9.125% due 2008) | Senior Notes (9.125% due 2008) | 1,388 | 1,430 | Senior Notes (9.125% due 2008) | 1,204 | 1,388 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Notes (11% due 2008) | Senior Notes (11% due 2008) | 433 | 442 | Senior Notes (11% due 2008) | 362 | 433 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Discount Notes (10.5% due 2008) | Senior Discount Notes (10.5% due 2008) | 566 | 583 | Senior Discount Notes (10.5% due 2008) | 409 | 566 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Euro Notes (10.75% due 2008) | Senior Euro Notes (10.75% due 2008) | 335 | 307 | Senior Euro Notes (10.75% due 2008) | 400 | 335 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Discount Notes (12.875% due 2010) | Senior Discount Notes (12.875% due 2010) | 371 | 386 | Senior Discount Notes (12.875% due 2010) | 420 | 371 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Euro Notes (11.25% due 2010) | Senior Euro Notes (11.25% due 2010) | 109 | 93 | Senior Euro Notes (11.25% due 2010) | 130 | 109 | ||||||||||||
| Senior Notes (11.25% due 2010) | Senior Notes (11.25% due 2010) | 124 | 129 | Senior Notes (11.25% due 2010) | 96 | 124 | ||||||||||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2009) | Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2009) | 364 | 612 | Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2009) | 362 | 364 | ||||||||||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2010) | Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2010) | 525 | 728 | Convertible Subordinated Notes (6.0% due 2010) | 514 | 525 | ||||||||||||
| Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes (9% due 2012) | 500 | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes | Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes | — | 500 | |||||||||||||||
| Commercial Mortgages: | Commercial Mortgages: | Commercial Mortgages: | ||||||||||||||||
| GMAC (3.84% due 2003-2005) | 120 | 120 | GMAC (3.67% due 2003-2005) | 119 | 120 | |||||||||||||
| iStar | — | 112 | ||||||||||||||||
| CPTC Long-term Debt (with recourse only to CPTC): | ||||||||||||||||||
| (7.63% due 2004-2028) | 139 | 140 | ||||||||||||||||
| CPTC Long-term Debt (with recourse only to CPTC) | CPTC Long-term Debt (with recourse only to CPTC) | — | 139 | |||||||||||||||
| Capital leases assumed in Genuity transaction | Capital leases assumed in Genuity transaction | 268 | — | |||||||||||||||
| Other | Other | 7 | 9 | Other | 6 | 7 | ||||||||||||
| 6,106 | 6,216 | 5,375 | 6,106 | |||||||||||||||
| Less current portion | (4 | ) | (7 | ) | Less current portion | (125 | ) | (4 | ) | |||||||||
| $ | 6,102 | $ | 6,209 | $ | 5,250 | $ | 6,102 | |||||||||||
Debt Exchanges and Repurchases
In JulyBeginning in 2001, Level 3 amendedbegan repurchasing several series of it public debt, including its Senior Secured Credit Facility to permit the Company to acquire certaintwo series of its outstanding indebtednessconvertible debt, in exchange for shares ofLevel 3 common stock. Various issuances of Level 3's outstanding senior notes, senior discount notes and convertible subordinated notes have traded at discounts to their respective face or accreted amounts.
In August 2002, the SEC staff notified certain public companies and accounting firms that it was reviewing the accounting treatment for certain transactions involving the conversion of convertible debt pursuant to inducements made to prompt conversion of the debt to equity securities of the issuer. The SEC staff acknowledged that there was diversity in accounting practice and asked the Emerging Issues
F-34
Task Force of the Financial Accounting Standards Board to address the issue as part of its September 2002 agenda.
In September 2002, the EITF issued 02-15, "Determining Whether Certain Conversions of Convertible Debt to Equity Securities Are within the Scope of FASB Statement No. 84".EITF 02-15. The EITF concluded that these types of transactions should be accounted for as induced conversions in accordance with SFAS No. 84. SFAS No. 84 requires a non-cash charge to earnings for the implied value of an inducement to convert from convertible debt to common equity securities of the issuer. In addition, under SFAS No. 84, an extraordinarya gain or
F-44
loss on early extinguishment of debt, as applicable, is not recorded upon the conversion of convertible debt. The accounting is to be applied prospectively for those convertible debt for equity exchanges completed after September 11, 2002, the date of the EITF's consensus. The Company applied the provisions of SFAS No. 84 to all convertible debt for equity exchange transactions completed subsequent to the second quarter of 2002. The gains on early extinguishment of debt for debt exchanges or repurchases, and the SFAS No. 84 induced conversion expense for convertible debt for equity exchanges subsequent to June 30, 2002, are both included in other income (expense) in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations in the periods indicated below.
In the fourth quarter of 2003, the Company exchanged $61 million aggregate principal amount of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008, $53 million aggregate principal amount of its 11% Senior Notes due 2008, $26 million aggregate principal amount of its 11.25% Senior Notes due 2010, and $212 million face value ($210 million carrying value) of its 10.5% Senior Discount Notes due 2008. The Company issued approximately 20 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $105 million and $208 million of a new issue of 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013, ("9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes") in exchange for these senior notes. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26 "Early Extinguishment of Debt", ("APB No. 26"). The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including unamortized debt issuance costs, was $37 million for these transactions.
In the third quarter 2003, the Company exchanged $2 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2009 and $12 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010. The Company issued approximately two million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $10 million. The value of securities issuable pursuant to original conversion terms was approximately $1 million. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of SFAS No. 84, a debt conversion expense of $9 million was recorded and included in other income (expense) in the consolidated statement of operations. The Company also exchanged $18 million aggregate principal amount of its 11% Senior Notes due 2008, $23 million of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008 and $2 million aggregate principal amount of its 11.25% Senior Notes due 2010. The Company issued approximately 7 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $41 million. The transaction was accounted for as an extinguishment of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including unamortized debt issuance costs, was $2 million for these transactions.
In the second quarter of 2003, the Company exchanged $100 million aggregate principal amount of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008. The Company issued approximately 13 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $96 million. The transaction was accounted for as an extinguishment of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $2 million. In addition, the Company issued approximately 184,000 shares of its common stock in payment of approximately $2 million of accrued interest.
In the third and fourth quarter of 2002, the Company purchasedexchanged $99 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2009 and $159 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010 in exchange for the issuance of approximately 20 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $102 million. The value of securities issuable pursuant to original conversion privileges was
F-45
approximately $14 million. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of SFAS No. 84, a debt conversion expense of $88 million was recorded and is included in Other income (expense) in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.recorded.
In the first and second quarter of 2002, the Company purchasedexchanged $136 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2009 and $35 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010. The Company issued approximately 12 million shares of its common stock with a market value of approximately $52 million. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26 "Early Extinguishmentsince they were completed prior to the issuance of Debt".EITF 02-15. The net gain on the early extinguishmentsextinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $114 million and was recorded as an extraordinary item in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.for these transactions.
ForDuring the year ended December 31, 2002, the Company purchasedexchanged $12 million aggregate principal amount of its 9.125% Senior Notes due 2008, $87 million face value ($62 million carrying value) of its 12.875% Senior Discount Notes due 2010, and $88 million face value ($79 million carrying value) of its 10.5% Senior Discount Notes due 2008. The Company issued approximately 15 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $70 million in exchange for these senior notes. The transactions were accounted for as extinguishments of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26, "Early Extinguishment of Debt".26. The net gain on the early extinguishment of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $82 million and was recorded as an extraordinary item in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.for these transactions.
In February 2002, the Company's first-tier, wholly owned subsidiary, Level 3 Finance, LLC purchased $89 million aggregate principal amount of Company debt for cash of $31 million. The net gain on the extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs, realized foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $59 million and was recordedaccounted for as an extraordinary itemextinguishment of debt, in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
F-35
The following information summarizes the cash repurchases of long-term debt:
| | Principal Amount at Maturity Repurchased | Actual Weighted Average Purchase Price/$1,000 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | ($ millions) | | |||||
| Senior Notes (9.125%) | $ | 30 | $ | 381 | |||
| Senior Notes (11%) | 8 | 423 | |||||
| Senior Euro Notes (10.75%) | 23 | 422 | |||||
| Senior Euro Notes (11.25%) | 1 | 405 | |||||
| Senior Notes (11.25%) | 5 | 415 | |||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes (due 2010) | 8 | 184 | |||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes (due 2009) | 14 | 195 | |||||
| $ | 89 | ||||||
| Assumes 1€ = .87 USD | |||||||
Level 3 will continue to evaluate these transactions in the future. The amounts involved in any such transactions, individually or in the aggregate, may be material.accordance with APB No. 26.
In 2001, the Company purchasedexchanged $130 million of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due in 2009 and $64 million of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due in 2010. The Company issued approximately 15.9 million shares of its common stock worth approximately $72 million in exchange for the debt. The net gain on the early extinguishments of the debt, including transaction costs and unamortized debt issuance costs, was $117 million and is classifiedwas accounted for as an extraordinary itemearly extinguishment of debt, in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.accordance with APB No. 26.
In 2001, the Company's first-tier, wholly owned subsidiary, Level 3 Finance, LLC commenced a "Modified Dutch Auction" tender offer for a portion of the Company's senior debt and convertible debt securities. Under the "Modified Dutch Auction" procedure, Level 3 Finance accepted tendered notes in each offer in the order of the lowest to the highest tender prices specified by the tendering holders within the applicable price range for the applicable series of notes. Level 3 Finance purchased debt with a face value of approximately $1.7 billion, plus accrued interest, for a total purchase price of approximately $731 million.million in cash. The net gain on the repurchase, including transaction costs, foreign currency gains and unamortized debt issuance costs, was approximately $967 million and was recordedaccounted for as anextinguishment of debt, in accordance with APB No. 26.
Pursuant to SFAS No. 145, the Company reclassified $255 million and $1.075 billion of extraordinary itemgains on extinguishment of debt recognized in 2002 and 2001, respectively, to other income (expense) on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operation.operations.
F-46
Senior Secured Credit Facility
In September 1999,On October 1, 2003, Level 3 and certain Level 3 subsidiaries entered into a $1.375 billion secured credit facility ("used the $486 million proceeds from the issuance of the 10.75% Senior Secured Credit Facility"), which was amendedNotes due in March 2001 to increase the borrowing capacity by2011 described below, $400 million noncurrent restricted cash and cash on hand to $1.775 billion.
In August 2002, Level 3repay in full all outstanding purchase money indebtedness and the Lenders amended the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility. The most significant modifications to the Credit Facility include the following:
F-36
The remaining financial covenants contained in the credit agreement will now be calculated on a consolidated basis, but those calculations will exclude the Company's toll road operations. Certain modifications were also made to the Total Leverage Ratio covenant (which is defined in the agreement as the ratio of Total Debt to Adjusted EBITDA) in accordance with the Company's current business plan. In addition, this covenant will now be tested on a trailing twelve-month basis beginning on June 30, 2004, with a maximum allowable level of 11.5x, versus the original maximum allowable level of 6.0x beginning on December 31, 2004. Certain other covenants have also been modified.
The Company is required to maintain a minimum cash balance, generally equal to $525 million. No defaultrelated expenses under the Senior Secured Credit Facility shall be deemed to have occurred with respectand terminated the agreement. Level 3 recorded as interest expense, approximately $24 million for unamortized deferred debt issuance costs attributable to the minimum cash balance test if, within a six month period followingSenior Secured Credit Facility for which amortization was accelerated due to the date on which the cash balance falls below $525repayment. The Company also paid $4 million the Company again attains a cash balance greater than or equal to $525 million. Additionally, the Company pledgedin fees to the lenders during the fourth quarter of 2003 as part of the termination of the agreement which is included in other income (expense) on the consolidated statement of operations.
9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes due 2013
In October 2003, Level 3 completed the exchange of approximately $352 million (book value) of debt and accrued interest outstanding, as of October 24, 2003, for approximately 20 million shares of Level 3 common stock and $208 million (book value) of a new issue of 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes.
Level 3 Communications, Inc. issued $295 million aggregate principal amount at maturity of 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes. Interest on the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes accretes at a rate of 9% per annum, compounded semiannually, to an aggregate principal amount of $295 million by October 15, 2007. Cash interest will not accrue on the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes prior to October 15, 2007; however, Level 3 Communications, Inc. may elect to commence the accrual of cash interest on all outstanding 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes on or after October 15, 2004, in which case the outstanding principal amount at maturity of each 9% Convertible Senior Discount Note will, on the elected commencement date, be reduced to the accreted value of the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Note as of that date and cash interest shall be payable on that Note on April 15 and October 15 thereafter. Commencing October 15, 2007, interest on the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes will accrue at the rate of 9% per annum and will be payable in cash semiannually in arrears. Accrued interest expense through December 31, 2003 on the 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes of $3 million was added to the long-term debt balance.
The 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes are convertible into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion rate of $9.99 per share, subject to certain adjustments. The total number of shares issuable upon conversion will range from approximately 22 million to 30 million shares depending upon the total accretion prior to conversion. On or after October 15, 2008, Level 3, at its option, may redeem for cash all or a portion of the notes. Level 3 may exercise this option only if the current market price for at least 20 trading days within any 30 consecutive trading day period exceeds 140% of the conversion price on October 15, 2008. This amount will be decreased to 130% and 120% on October 15, 2008 and 2009, respectively, if the initial holders sell greater than 33.33% of the notes. Level 3 is also obligated to pay the holders of the redeemed notes a cash amount equal to the present value of all remaining scheduled interest payments.
The 9% Convertible Senior Discount Notes will be subject to conversion into common stock at the option of the holder, in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time after 180 days after the
F-47
issue date at the following conversion prices (expressed as percentages of accreted value) plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the conversion date, of the time periods indicated below:
| Year | Conversion Price | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| April 15, 2004 - October 14, 2004 | 73.549 | % | |
| October 15, 2004 - April 14, 2005 | 76.859 | % | |
| April 15, 2005 - October 14, 2005 | 80.317 | % | |
| October 15, 2005 - April 14, 2006 | 83.932 | % | |
| April 15, 2006 - October 14, 2006 | 87.709 | % | |
| October 15, 2006 - April 14, 2007 | 91.656 | % | |
| April 15, 2007 - October 14, 2007 | 95.780 | % | |
| October 15, 2007 and thereafter | 100.090 | % |
These notes are senior unsecured obligations of Level 3 Communications, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of Level 3 Communications, Inc.
10.75% Senior Notes due 2011
In October 2003, Level 3 Financing, Inc., a wholly owned, direct subsidiary of Level 3 Communications, Inc., received $486 million of net proceeds from a private placement offering of $500 million aggregate principal amount of its 10.75% Senior Notes due 2011 ("10.75% Senior Notes"). Interest on the notes accrues at 10.75% per year and is payable on April 15 and November 15 each year in cash.
The 10.75% Senior Notes are subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Financing, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after October 15, 2007, plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the redemption date, if redeemed during the twelve months beginning October 15, of the years indicated below:
| Year | Redemption Price | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 105.375 | % | |
| 2008 | 102.688 | % | |
| 2009 and thereafter | 100.000 | % |
The 10.75% Senior Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of Level 3 Financing, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of Level 3 Financing, Inc. The notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit consolidated debt, dividend payments, and transactions with affiliates. The net proceeds of the offering were used to repay amounts outstanding under the Senior Secured Credit Facility $400Facility.
Debt issuance costs of $14 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized to interest expense over the term of the minimum cash balance, which is shown as noncurrent restricted cash inSenior Notes. As a result of amortization, the December 31, 2002 Consolidated Balance Sheet. The Company shall be deemed to be in default under the Senior Secured Credit Facility if the cash balance falls below $450 million, including the $400 million pledged to the lenders.
Due to the reduced borrowing capacity of the revolving credit facility, existingcapitalized debt issuance costs were written offhave been reduced to $13 million at December 31, 2003.
2.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2010
On July 8, 2003, the Company completed the offering of $373.75 million aggregate principal amount of its 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2010 ("2.875% Convertible Senior Notes") in proportionan
F-48
underwritten public offering pursuant to the decreaseCompany's shelf registration statement. Interest on the notes accrues at 2.875% per year and is payable semi-annually in the borrowing capacity. Approximately $6 millionarrears in cash on January 15 and July 15, beginning January 15, 2004. The 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of Level 3 Communications, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior unsecured debt. The 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional liens on assets of the total $7Company.
The 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes are convertible into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion rate of $7.18 per share, subject to certain adjustments. On or after July 15, 2007, Level 3, at its option, may redeem for cash all or a portion of the notes. Level 3 may exercise this option only if the current market price for the Level 3 common stock for at least 20 trading days within any 30 consecutive trading day period exceeds prices ranging from 170% of the conversion price on July 15, 2007 decreasing to 150% of the conversion price on or after July 15, 2009. Level 3 would also be obligated to pay the holders of the redeemed notes a cash amount equal to the present value of all remaining scheduled interest payments.
Level 3 intends to use the net proceeds of $361 million, after transaction costs, for working capital, capital expenditures and other general corporate purposes, including new product development, debt repurchases and acquisitions.
Debt issuance costs of unamortized existing$13 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized to interest expense over the term of the 2.875% Convertible Senior Notes. As a result of amortization, the capitalized debt issuance costs related to the revolving credit facility, were included in interest expense during the third quarter 2002. In addition, approximately $5 million of direct costs and bank fees incurred to amend the Senior Secured Credit Facility were included in interest expense during the third quarter 2002. Approximately $7 million of costs incurred to amend the Senior Secured Credit Facility were capitalized and will be amortized over the remaining life of the Senior Secured Credit Facility.
The Senior Secured Credit Facility, as amended, is comprised of a senior secured revolving credit facility in the amount of $150 million and a three-tranche senior secured term loan facility aggregating $1.125 billion. The secured term loan facility consisted of a $450 million tranche A, a $275 million tranche B and a $400 million tranche C term loan facility, all of which have been fully drawn and are outstanding as ofreduced to $11 million at December 31, 2002 and 2001. In the amendment, the Company agreed to reduce the amount of the undrawn senior secured revolving credit facility portion from $650 million to $150 million. Of the $150 million, $50 million is available immediately for letters of credit and the full $150 million becomes available after August 30, 2003; provided that the Company has satisfied an incurrence test that is related to a pro forma fixed charge coverage ratio. As of December 31, 2002, the Company had approximately $8 million in letters of credit outstanding under this agreement.
Interest varies with the one month, two month, three month, or six month LIBOR, at the Company's election, plus 325 basis points for the revolving credit facility and tranche A term loan facility, 425 basis points for the tranche B term loan facility and 450 basis points for the tranche C term loan facility. The Company may also elect, with lender approval, the nine month or twelve month LIBOR.
The Senior Secured Credit Facility, as amended, has customary covenants, or requirements, that the Company and certain of its subsidiaries must meet to remain in compliance with the contract. If the Company does not remain in compliance with the covenants, it could be in default under the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility. In this event, the lenders could take actions to require repayment.
As of December 31, 2002, Level 3 had not borrowed any funds under the $150 million revolving credit facility other than the letters of credit outlined above. The availability of funds and any requirement to repay previously borrowed funds is contingent upon the continued compliance with the
F-37
relevant debt covenants. The Company believes, based upon management's review of the amended covenants and other provisions of the Senior Secured Credit Facility, that it is in full compliance with all the terms of the Senior Secured Credit Facility as of December 31, 2002.2003.
9.125% Senior Notes due 2008
In April 1998, Level 3 Communications, Inc. received $1.94 billion of net proceeds from an offering of $2 billion aggregate principal amount 9.125% Senior Notes Due 2008 ("9.125% Senior Notes"). As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $612$796 million aggregate principal amount of the 9.125% Senior Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the notes accrues at 9.125% per year and is payable on May 1 and November 1 each year in cash.
The 9.125% Senior Notes are subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Communications, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after May 1, 2003, plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the redemption date, if redeemed during the twelve months beginning May 1, of the years indicated below:
| Year | Redemption Price | Redemption Price | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 104.563 | % | 104.563 | % | ||
| 2004 | 103.042 | % | 103.042 | % | ||
| 2005 | 101.521 | % | 101.521 | % | ||
| 2006 and thereafter | 100.000 | % | 100.000 | % |
The 9.125% Senior Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of Level 3 Communications, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of the Company. The notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit consolidated debt, dividend payments, and transactions with affiliates. Level 3 Communications, Inc. used the net proceeds of the note offering in connection with the implementation of its business plan.
F-49
Debt issuance costs of $65 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the Senior Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $24$17 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
11% Senior Notes due 2008
In February 2000, Level 3 Communications, Inc. received $779 million of net proceeds, after transaction costs, from a private offering of $800 million aggregate principal amount of its 11% Senior Notes due 2008 ("11% Senior Notes"). As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $367$439 million aggregate principal amount of the 11% Senior Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the notes accrues at 11% per year and is payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on March 15 and September 15, beginning September 15, 2000. The 11% Senior Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of Level 3 Communications, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior debt. The 11% Senior Notes cannot be prepaid by Level 3 Communications, Inc., and mature on March 15, 2008. The 11% Senior Notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates.
Debt issuance costs of $21 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the 11% Senior Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $7$5 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
10.5% Senior Discount Notes due 2008
In December 1998, Level 3 Communications, Inc. sold $834 million aggregate principal amount at maturity of 10.5% Senior Discount Notes Due 2008 ("10.5% Senior Discount Notes"). The sales
F-38
proceeds of $500 million, excluding debt issuance costs, were recorded as long-term debt. As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $213$425 million aggregate principal amount of the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes accretesaccreted at a rate of 10.5% per annum, compounded semiannually, to an aggregate principal amount of $834 million ($621409 million after repurchases) byat December 1, 2003. Cash interest will not accrue on the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes prior toCommencing December 1, 2003; however, Level 3 Communications, Inc. may elect to commence the accrual of cash interest on all outstanding 10.5% Senior Discount Notes on or after December 1, 2001, in which case the outstanding principal amount at maturity of each 10.5% Senior Discount Note will on the elected commencement date be reduced to the accreted value of the 10.5% Senior Discount Note as of that date and cash interest shall be payable on that Note on June 1 and December 1 thereafter. Commencing June 1, 2004,2003, interest on the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes will accrueaccrued at the rate of 10.5% per annum and will be payable in cash semiannually in arrears. Accrued interest expense for the year11 month period ended December 31, 2002November 30, 2003 on the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes of $62$53 million was added to long-term debt.
The 10.5% Senior Discount Notes will be subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Communications, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after December 1, 2003 at the following redemption prices (expressed as percentages of accreted value) plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the redemption date, if redeemed during the twelve months beginning December 1, of the years indicated below:
| Year | Redemption Price | Redemption Price | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 105.25 | % | 105.25 | % | ||
| 2004 | 103.50 | % | 103.50 | % | ||
| 2005 | 101.75 | % | 101.75 | % | ||
| 2006 and thereafter | 100.00 | % | 100.00 | % |
F-50
These notes are senior unsecured obligations of Level 3 Communications, Inc., rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of Level 3 Communications, Inc. The 10.5% Senior Discount Notes contain certain covenants which, among other things, restrict or limit the Company's ability to incur additional debt, make certain restricted payments, pay dividends, enter into sale and leaseback transactions, enter into transactions with affiliates, and sell assets or merge with another company.
Debt issuance costs of $14 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the 10.5% Senior Discount Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $6$3 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
10.75% Senior Euro Notes due 2008
On February 29, 2000, Level 3 Communications, Inc. received €488 million ($478 million when issued) of net proceeds, after debt issuance costs, from an offering of €500 million aggregate principal amount 10.75% Senior Euro Notes due 2008 ("10.75% Senior Euro Notes"). As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of €179 million aggregate principal amount of the 10.75% Senior Euro Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the notes accrues at 10.75% per year and is payable in Euros semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 each year beginning on September 15, 2000. The 10.75% Senior Euro Notes are not redeemable by Level 3 Communications, Inc. prior to maturity. Debt issuance costs of €12 million ($12 million) were originally capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the 10.75% Senior Euro Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the net capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to €5€4 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
The 10.75% Senior Euro Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior debt. The 10.75% Senior Euro Notes contain certain
F-39
covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates.
The issuance of the €500 million 10.75% Senior Euro Notes has been designated as, and is effective as, an economic hedge against the investment in certain of the Company's foreign subsidiaries. Therefore, foreign currency gains and losses resulting from the translation of the debt have been recorded in other comprehensive income (loss) to the extent of translation gains or losses on such investment. The 10.75% Senior Euro Notes were valued, based on current exchange rates, at $335$400 million in the Company's financial statements at December 31, 2002.2003. The difference between the carrying value at December 31, 20022003 and the value at issuance, after repurchases, was recorded in other comprehensive income.
12.875% Senior Discount Notes due 2010
On February 29, 2000, Level 3 Communications, Inc. sold in a private offering $675 million aggregate principal amount at maturity of its 12.875% Senior Discount Notes due 2010 ("12.875% Senior Discount Notes"). The sale proceeds of $360 million, excluding debt issuance costs, were recorded as long-term debt. As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $187 million aggregate principal amount of the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes had been repurchased, leaving $488 million aggregate principal amount outstanding. Interest on the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes accretes at a rate of 12.875% per year, compounded semi-annually, to an aggregate principal amount of $488 million by March 15, 2005. Cash interest will not accrue on the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes prior to
F-51
March 15, 2005. However, Level 3 Communications, Inc. may elect to commence the accrual of cash interest on all outstanding 12.875% Senior Discount Notes on or after March 15, 2003. In that case, the outstanding principal amount at maturity of each 12.875% Senior Discount Note will, on the elected commencement date, be reduced to the accreted value of the 12.875% Senior Discount Note as of that date and cash interest shall be payable on the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes on March 15 and September 15 thereafter. Commencing September 15, 2005, interest on the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes will accrue at the rate of 12.875% per year and will be payable in cash semi-annually in arrears. Accrued interest expense for the year ended December 31, 20022003 on the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes of $47$49 million was added to long-term debt.
The 12.875% Senior Discount Notes are subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Communications, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after March 15, 2005. Level 3 Communications, Inc. may redeem the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes at the redemption prices set forth below, plus interest, if any, to the redemption date. The following prices are for 12.875% Senior Discount Notes redeemed during the 12-month period commencing on March 15 of the years set forth below and are expressed as percentages of principal amount.
| Year | Redemption Price | Redemption Price | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 106.438 | % | 106.438 | % | ||
| 2006 | 104.292 | % | 104.292 | % | ||
| 2007 | 102.146 | % | 102.146 | % | ||
| 2008 and thereafter | 100.000 | % | 100.000 | % |
The 12.875% Senior Discount Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior debt. The 12.875% Senior Discount Notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates.
Debt issuance costs of $9 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the 12.875% Senior Discount Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $5$4 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
F-40
11.25% Senior Euro Notes due 2010
On February 29, 2000, Level 3 Communications, Inc. received €293 million ($285 million when issued) of net proceeds, after debt issuance costs, from an offering of €300 million aggregate principal amount 11.25% Senior Euro Notes due 2010 ("11.25% Senior Euro Notes"). As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of €196 million aggregate principal amount of the 11.25% Senior Euro Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the notes accrues at 11.25% per year and is payable semi-annually in arrears in Euros on March 15 and September 15 each year beginning September 15, 2000.
F-52
The 11.25% Senior Euro Notes are subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Communications, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after March 15, 2005. The 11.25% Senior Euro Notes may be redeemed at the redemption prices set forth below, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date. The following prices are for 11.25% Senior Euro Notes redeemed during the 12-month period commencing on March 15 of the years set forth below, and are expressed as percentages of principal amount.
| Year | Redemption Price | Redemption Price | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 105.625 | % | 105.625 | % | ||
| 2006 | 103.750 | % | 103.750 | % | ||
| 2007 | 101.875 | % | 101.875 | % | ||
| 2008 and thereafter | 100.000 | % | 100.000 | % |
Debt issuance costs of €7 million ($7 million) were originally capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the 11.25% Senior Euro Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to €2 million at December 31, 2002.2003. The 11.25% Senior Euro Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior debt. The 11.25% Senior Euro Notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates.
The issuance of the €300 million 11.25% Senior Euro Notes has been designated as, and is effective as, an economic hedge against the investment in certain of the Company's foreign subsidiaries. Therefore, foreign currency gains and losses resulting from the translation of the debt have been recorded in other comprehensive income (loss) to the extent of translation gains or losses on such net investment. The 11.25% Senior Euro Notes were valued, based on current exchange rates, at $109$130 million in the Company's financial statements at December 31, 2002.2003.
11.25% Senior Notes due 2010
In February 2000, Level 3 Communications, Inc. received $243 million of net proceeds, after transaction costs, from a private offering of $250 million aggregate principal amount of its 11.25% Senior Notes due 2010 ("11.25% Senior Notes"). As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $126$154 million aggregate principal amount of the 11.25% Senior Notes had been repurchased. Interest on the notes accrues at 11.25% per year and is payable semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 in cash beginning September 15, 2000.
The 11.25% Senior Notes are subject to redemption at the option of Level 3 Communications, Inc., in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time on or after March 15, 2005. Level 3 Communications, Inc. may redeem the 11.25% Senior Notes at the redemption prices set forth below, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date. The following prices are
F-41F-53
for 11.25% Senior Notes redeemed during the 12-month period commencing on March 15 of the years set forth below:
| Year | Redemption Price | Redemption Price | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 105.625 | % | 105.625 | % | ||
| 2006 | 103.750 | % | 103.750 | % | ||
| 2007 | 101.875 | % | 101.875 | % | ||
| 2008 and thereafter | 100.000 | % | 100.000 | % |
The 11.25% Senior Notes are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, rankingpari passu with all existing and future senior debt. The 11.25% Senior Notes contain certain covenants, which among other things, limit additional indebtedness, dividend payments, certain investments and transactions with affiliates.
Debt issuance costs of $7 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the 11.25% Senior Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $2 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2009
On September 14, 1999, the Company received $798 million of proceeds, after transaction costs, from an offering of $823 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes Due 2009 ("Subordinated Notes 2009"). The Subordinated Notes 2009 are unsecured and subordinated to all existing and future senior indebtedness of the Company. Interest on the Subordinated Notes 2009 accrues at 6% per year and is payable each year in cash on March 15 and September 15. The principal amount of the Subordinated Notes 2009 will be due on September 15, 2009. The Subordinated Notes 2009 may be converted into shares of common stock of the Company at any time prior to maturity, unless the Company has caused the conversion rights to expire. The conversion rate is 15.3401 shares per each $1,000 principal amount of Subordinated Notes 2009, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. On or after September 15, 2002, Level 3, at its option, may cause the conversion rights to expire. Level 3 may exercise this option only if the current market price exceeds approximately $91.27 (which represents 140% of the conversion price) for 20 trading days within any period of 30 consecutive trading days including the last day of that period. As of December 31, 2002,2003, less than $1 million of debt had been converted into shares of common stock. As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $459$461 million aggregate principal amount of the Subordinated Notes 2009 had been repurchased or exchanged for common stock.
Debt issuance costs of $25 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the Subordinated Notes 2009. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $7$6 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010
In February 2000, the Company received $836 million of net proceeds, after transaction costs, from a public offering of $863 million aggregate principal amount of its 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2010 ("Subordinated Notes 2010"). The Subordinated Notes 2010 are unsecured and subordinated to all existing and future senior indebtedness of the Company. Interest on the Subordinated Notes 2010
F-54
accrues at 6% per year and is payable semi-annually in cash on March 15 and September 15 beginning September 15, 2000. The principal amount of the Subordinated Notes 2010 will be due on March 15, 2010.
The Subordinated Notes 2010 may be converted into shares of common stock of Level 3 Communications, Inc. at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding maturity, unless previously redeemed, repurchased or Level 3 Communications, Inc. has
F-42
caused the conversion rights to expire. The conversion rate is 7.416 shares per each $1,000 principal amount of Subordinated Notes 2010, subject to adjustment in certain events.
On or after March 18, 2003, Level 3, at its option, may cause the conversion rights to expire. Level 3 may exercise this option only if the current market price exceeds approximately $188.78 (which represents 140% of the conversion price) for at least 20 trading days within any period of 30 consecutive trading days, including the last trading day of that period. As of December 31, 2002,2003, no debt had been converted into shares of common stock. As of December 31, 2002,2003, a total of $338$350 million aggregate principal amount of the Subordinated Notes 2010 had been repurchased or exchanged for common stock.
Debt issue costs of $27 million were originally capitalized and are being amortized asto interest expense over the term of the Subordinated Notes. As a result of amortization and debt repurchases, the capitalized debt issuance costs have been reduced to $12$10 million at December 31, 2002.2003.
Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes
OnIn July 8, 2002, the Company sold $500 million aggregate principal amount of its 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2012 to entities controlled by three institutions: Longleaf Partners Funds, Berkshire Hathaway, Inc., and Legg Mason, Inc. Level 3 intends to use the net proceeds of approximately $488 million, after transactions costs of $12 million, for general corporate purposes, including potential acquisitions relating to industry consolidation opportunities, capital expenditures and working capital. The notes, which mature in 10 years, payhad a 10-year maturity, paid 9% cash interest annually, payable quarterly beginning October 15, 2002. The notes arewere convertible, at the option of the holders, into Level 3 common stock at any time at a conversion price of $3.41 (subject to certain customary adjustments) which would, at December 31, 2002, result in the issuance of approximately 147 million common shares.. The notes arewere convertible at the Company's option into convertible preferred stock under certain conditions and circumstances. The convertible notes rankranked junior to substantially all of the Level 3 Communications, Inc.'s outstanding indebtedness.
Debt issuance costs of $12 million were capitalized and are being amortized as interest expense over the termIn January 2003, a holder of the Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes.Notes converted $20 million principal amount of the Notes into approximately six million shares of Level 3 common stock. Pursuant to the original conversion terms, the holder received 293.255 shares of Level 3 common stock for each $1,000 principal amount of notes converted. The debt was converted pursuant to the original conversion terms; therefore, no gain or loss was recognized on the transaction.
In April 2003, a holder of the Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes converted $23 million principal amount of the Notes into approximately 7 million shares of Level 3 common stock. The debt was converted pursuant to the original conversion terms; therefore, no gain or loss was recognized on the transaction.
In the June 2003, the remaining $457 million aggregate principal amount of the Company's 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2012 were converted into approximately 161 million shares of Level 3 common stock with a market value of approximately $1.135 billion. The market value of securities issuable pursuant to original conversion privileges on the conversion date was approximately $945 million. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of SFAS No. 84, debt conversion expense of
F-55
$190 million was recorded in the second quarter of 2003. Approximately $7 million of foregone accrued interest through the date of the conversion was credited to additional paid-in capital. In addition, approximately $10 million of unamortized debt issuance costs were charged to additional paid-in capital as a result of the conversion to common stock. The total increase in common stock as a result of this conversion and related debt conversion expenses was $644 million.
GMAC Commercial Mortgage due 2003
In June 2000, HQ Realty, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company) entered into a $120 million floating-rate loan ("GMAC Mortgage") providing secured, non-recourse debt to finance the Company's world headquarters. HQ Realty, Inc. is a single purpose entity organized solely to own, hold, operate and manage the world headquarters which has been 100% leased to Level 3 Communications, LLC in Broomfield Colorado. Under the terms of the loan agreement, HQ Realty, Inc., will not engage in any business other than the ownership, management, maintenance and operation of the world headquarters. The assets of HQ Realty Inc. are not available to satisfy any third party obligations other than those of HQ Realty, Inc. In addition, the assets of the Company are not available to satisfy the obligations of HQ Realty, Inc. HQ Realty, Inc. received $119 million of net proceeds after transaction costs. Level 3 was required to place $13 million of the net proceeds in a restricted account. The release of these funds is contingent upon Level 3's debt rating increasing to BBB by S&P and Baa2 by Moody's which did not occur in 2002.2003.
The initial term of the GMAC Commercial Mortgage is 36 monthswas through June 2003 with two one-year no cost extensions. The first one-year extension options.was exercised by the Company during 2003. Interest varies monthly with the 30 day London Interbank Offering Rate ("LIBOR") for U.S. Dollar Deposits as follows:
The Index plus:
F-43
At December 31, 20022003 the interest rate was 3.84%3.67%.
The GMAC Mortgage may be prepaid at par in whole or in part in multiples of $100,000. The entire principal is due at maturity or at the end of the elected extension period. Interest only is due during the initial three-year term. Interest and amortization are due during the extension terms based on a 30 year30-year amortization period with a balloon payment at maturity.
Existing debt issuance costs of $1 million were capitalized and are being amortized as interest expense over the term of the GMAC Mortgage.
CPTC
On January 3, 2003, CPTC sold the "91 Express Lanes" toll road and related assets and obligations. The Company's long-term debt was reduced by approximately $139 million as a result of the transaction. The Company had reflected the debt on its consolidated balance sheet due to its 65% equity interest in CPTC.
F-56
Genuity Capital Lease Obligations
As part of the Genuity transaction that closed on February 4, 2003, the Company assumed certain capital lease obligations of Genuity for operating equipment. The Company used a 15% discount rate to present value the minimum lease payments, representing the effective interest rate that could be obtained by the Company for a similar agreement, resulting in a capital lease obligation of $309 million. The capital lease agreements also contain provisions whereby Level 3 is required to purchase approximately $30 million of O&M services and network capacity ratably over the lease term, which are recorded as prepaid assets (recognized as cost of revenue over the term of the agreement) and other current and noncurrent liabilities. The future minimum lease payments under the capital lease obligations as of December 31, 2003, excluding the O&M and network capacity obligations and assuming the lease terms remain the same as on the acquisition date, are $133 million in 2004; $116 million in 2005; and $76 million in 2006. The lease arrangements with the equipment contain certain provisions whereby Level 3 can reduce or terminate significant portions of the lease if one of the significant customers using the equipment terminates all or part of its commitment, subject to certain conditions, which would result in a reduction of the capital lease obligation at the time any such agreement occurs. As of the acquisition date of the lease, the exercise of the termination provision was considered remote. One of the customers utilizing this leased equipment has the option of reducing its minimum contractual commitment beginning in 2004.
iStar Commercial Mortgage due 2004
In March 2002, 85 Tenth Avenue, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company) amended its $113 million floating-rate loan, originally provided by Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (the "Lehman Mortgage") that provided secured, non-recourse debt to finance the purchase and renovations of the New York Gateway facility. The amendment resulted in iStar DB Seller, LLC ("iStar") becoming the sole lender for the property. Previously, iStar, along with other third parties, owned notes of the 85 Tenth Avenue Trust, purchased from Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. Using funds previously reserved for additional renovations at the New York Gateway facility, along with funds advanced from iStar, 85 Tenth Avenue, LLC repaid the other third party holders of the notes of 85 Tenth Avenue Trust and reduced the principal outstanding under the amended loan agreement to $60 million. Additionally, the amendment negotiated with iStar (the "iStar Mortgage") extended the initial term of the loan to March 1, 2004, with two optional one-year extensions. There was no prepayment penalty under the revised agreement. Interest varied monthly with the 30 day LIBOR for U.S. Dollar Deposits, plus 650 basis points. The amendment provided a LIBOR floor of 2.00% at all times. This interest, together with principal payments based on a 20-year amortization period, were due monthly during the initial term of the loan.
On December 31, 2002, the New York Gateway facility was sold. The proceeds from the transaction were used to repay the iStar Mortgage balance of $60 million including accrued interest. Unamortized existing debt issuance costs of $6 million were included in interest expense during the fourth quarter of 2002
CPTC
In July 2001, CPTC completed the refinancing of its development and construction debt. The $135 million financing proceeds were used to repay CPTC's original lenders, repay subordinated debt carried by Orange County Transportation Authority and cover refinancing and prepayment costs. The prepayment costs and write-off of debt issuance costs on the old debt of $9 million are reflected as an extraordinary loss, net of other gains, on early extinguishment of debt in the 2001 statement of operations. The debt carries an interest rate of 7.63% and requires principal payments in varying amounts through 2028. The debt is the obligation of CPTC and is nonrecourse to Level 3 Communications, Inc. (See Note 16)
The debt instruments above contain certain non financial covenants with which the Company believes it is in full compliance as of December 31, 2002.
The Company capitalized $58 million and $353 million of interest expense and amortized debt issuance costs related to network construction and business systems development projects for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000. No interest expense or amortized debt issuance costs were capitalized for the year ended December 31, 2002.
F-44
Scheduled maturities of long-term debt are as follows (in millions):2003—$4;
2004—$48;125; 2005—$240;203; 2006—$145;64; 2007—$6601; 2008—$2,376 and $5,009$2,606 thereafter.
F-57
Included in the 2005 long-term debt maturities is $117 million related to the GMAC Commercial Mortgage. The initial term of the GMAC Commercial Mortgage iswas through June 2003 with two one-year no cost extensions. The first one-year extension was exercised by the Company during 2003 and the debt maturities schedule assumes the Company will exercise both of the final one-year extensions.extension.
(12)(14) Employee Benefit Plans
The Company adopted the recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123, "Accounting for Stock Based Compensation" ("SFAS No. 123") in 1998. Under SFAS No. 123, the fair value of an option or other stock-based compensation (as computed in accordance with accepted option valuation models) on the date of grant is amortized over the vesting periods of the options in accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 28 "Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans"("FIN 28").28. Although the recognition of the value of the instruments results in compensation or professional expenses in an entity's financial statements, the expense differs from other compensation and professional expenses in that these charges may not be settled in cash, but rather, are generally settled through issuance of common stock.
The adoption of SFAS No. 123 has resulted in material non-cash charges to operations since its adoption in 1998, and will continue to do so. The amount of the non-cash charges will be dependent upon a number of factors, including the number of grants and the fair value of each grant estimated at the time of its award.
The Company recognized on the statement of operations a total of $86 million, $181 million $314 million and $236$314 million of non-cash compensation in 2003, 2002 and 2001, and 2000, respectively. IncludedIn addition, included in discontinued operations is non-cash compensation expense of $7 million and $5 million for the yearsyear ended 2001 and 2000, respectively.2001. In addition, the Company capitalized $4 million, $7 million and $49 million in 2003, 2002 and $12 million in 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively, of non-cash compensation for those employees and contractors directly involved in the construction of the network or development of the business support systems.
The following table summarizes non-cash compensation expense and capitalized non-cash compensation for the three years ended December 31, 2002.2003.
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||
| NQSO | $ | — | $ | 8 | $ | 9 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 8 | ||||||||
| Warrants | 11 | 42 | 1 | 9 | 11 | 42 | ||||||||||||||
| OSO | 116 | 227 | 193 | 30 | 116 | 227 | ||||||||||||||
| C-OSO | 40 | 58 | 18 | 15 | 40 | 58 | ||||||||||||||
| Restricted Stock | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||||||
| Stock Issued | — | — | 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| Shareworks Match Plan | 12 | 13 | 5 | 8 | 12 | 13 | ||||||||||||||
| Shareworks Grant Plan | 8 | 13 | 13 | 11 | 8 | 13 | ||||||||||||||
| 401(k) Match Expense | 15 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||
| 188 | 363 | 248 | 90 | 188 | 363 | |||||||||||||||
| Capitalized Noncash Compensation | (7 | ) | (49 | ) | (12 | ) | (4 | ) | (7 | ) | (49 | ) | ||||||||
| 181 | 314 | 236 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Non-cash Compensation Expense—Continuing Operations | 86 | 181 | 314 | |||||||||||||||||
| Discontinued Asian Operations | — | 7 | 5 | — | — | 7 | ||||||||||||||
| $ | 181 | $ | 321 | $ | 241 | $ | 86 | $ | 181 | $ | 321 | |||||||||
F-45F-58
Non-qualified Stock Options and Warrants
During the first quarter of 2003, the Company issued approximately 684,000 fully vested warrants to a consultant as payment primarily for acquisition-related consulting services. The warrants allow the consultant to purchase common stock at $4.90 per share. The warrants were fully vested at issuance and will expire on January 1, 2013. At December 31, 2003, the fair value of the warrants was $2 million and was calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation model with a risk free interest rate of 4.12% and an expiration date of January 1, 2013. The Company used a volatility rate of 70% to reflect the longer exercise period.
On March 31, 2003, the Company issued approximately 1.7 million warrants to a consultant as payment for future consulting financial advisory services. The warrants allow the consultant to purchase common stock at $5.16 per share. The warrants vest equally in quarterly installments over twelve months. The warrants expire March 31, 2010. Pursuant to the relevant accounting guidance, the fair value of these warrants is determined on their respective vesting dates. The fair value of the unvested portion of these warrants is determined at each financial reporting date and was $2 million at December 31, 2003 for the approximately 400,000 unvested warrants. At December 31, 2003, the total fair value of these warrants was approximately $7 million and was calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation model with a risk free interest rate of 3.6%, a term of six years and a volatility rate of 75% over the term.
In June 2002, the Company issued two million warrants to a contractor as payment for consulting services. The warrants allow the contractor to purchase common stock at $4.25 per share. Warrants to purchase 640,000 shares of common stock were vested immediately upon grant with the remaining 1,360,000 vesting equally over eight months. The warrants expire in February 2010. Pursuant to the relevant accounting guidance, the fair value of these warrants is determined on their respective vesting dates. The fair value of the unvested portion of these warrants is determined at each financial reporting date and was $1 million at December 31, 2002 for the 340,000 unvested warrants. At December 31, 2002,2003, the total fair value ofamount expensed for these warrants was approximately $7 million and was calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation model with a risk free interest rate of 4.88%, a term of approximately seven years, and an expected volatility rate of 86% over the term. As of December 31, 2002, the Company had not reflected less than $1 million of unamortized compensation expense in its financial statements for the warrants.
In 2001, the Company issued approximately 9.8 million fully vested warrants to Peter Kiewit Sons' Inc ("Kiewit") as payment for certain construction services. The warrants, which allow Kiewit to purchase Common Stock at $8 per share, were fully vested at issuance and will expire on June 30, 2009. The fair value of the warrants granted in 2001 was $32 million and was calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation model with a risk free interest rate of 4.8% and an expiration date of June 30, 2009. The Company used an expected volatility rate of 70% to reflect the longer exercise period. Kiewit has pledged these warrants as collateral to Level 3 while the two parties resolve outstanding claims with regard to the North American intercity network. If it is determined through the dispute resolution process, that Kiewit is liable for certain claims, it may settle, at Level 3's option, the obligation with cash or by returning all or part of the outstanding warrants.million.
As of December 31, 2002,2003, there were approximately 14.616.4 million warrants outstanding ranging in prices from $4.25 to $60.06. Of these warrants, approximately 14.016.0 million were exercisable at December 31, 20022003 with a weighted average exercise price of $10.05$9.64 per warrant.
The Company did not grant any NQSOs during the year ended December 31, 2002.2003. As of December 31, 2002, the company had not reflected $1 million of unamortized expense in its financial statements for2003, all NQSOs and warrants previously granted.granted were fully vested.
F-46F-59
Transactions involving NQSO stock options granted are summarized as follows:
| | Units | Exercise Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Exercise Price | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 1999 | 14,078,563 | $ .12 - $84.75 | $ | 6.64 | ||||
| Options granted | 230,000 | 21.69 | 21.69 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (228,029 | ) | .12 - 61.75 | 9.58 | ||||
| Options exercised | (2,079,326 | ) | .12 - 56.75 | 8.00 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 12,001,208 | .12 - 84.75 | 6.63 | |||||
| Options granted | — | — | — | |||||
| Options cancelled | (348,956 | ) | 1.76 - 56.75 | 10.18 | ||||
| Options exercised | (460,546 | ) | .12 - 35.31 | 5.32 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 11,191,706 | .12 - 84.75 | 6.58 | |||||
| Options granted | — | — | — | |||||
| Options cancelled | (1,181,124 | ) | 1.76 - 56.75 | 6.77 | ||||
| Options exercised | (215,346 | ) | .12 - 5.43 | 4.51 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 9,795,236 | $ .12 - $84.75 | $ | 6.60 | ||||
Options exercisable: | ||||||||
| December 31, 2000 | 7,166,636 | $ .12 - $84.75 | $ | 6.67 | ||||
| December 31, 2001 | 9,013,915 | .12 - 84.75 | 6.70 | |||||
| December 31, 2002 | 9,667,663 | $ .12 - $84.75 | $ | 6.60 | ||||
| | Options Outstanding | | | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Options Exercisable | |||||||||||
| | | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | | |||||||||
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding as of 12/31/02 | Weighted Average Exercise Price | Number Exercisable as of 12/31/02 | Weighted Average Exercise Price | ||||||||
| $ 0.12 - $ 0.12 | 61,168 | 5.15 | $ | .12 | 61,168 | $ | .12 | |||||
| 1.76 - 1.79 | 5,199 | 5.33 | 1.76 | 3,121 | 1.76 | |||||||
| 4.04 - 5.43 | 7,285,825 | 4.29 | 5.09 | 7,285,825 | 5.09 | |||||||
| 6.20 - 8.50 | 1,944,458 | 5.05 | 6.97 | 1,818,963 | 6.96 | |||||||
| 17.50 - 25.03 | 230,678 | 2.46 | 21.70 | 230,678 | 21.70 | |||||||
| 26.80 - 39.13 | 230,641 | .54 | 30.62 | 230,641 | 30.62 | |||||||
| 40.38 - 51.88 | 23,667 | .67 | 40.55 | 23,667 | 40.55 | |||||||
| 56.00 - 57.47 | 7,000 | 1.59 | 55.87 | 7,000 | 55.87 | |||||||
| 61.75 - 84.75 | 6,600 | 1.28 | 84.75 | 6,600 | 84.75 | |||||||
| 9,795,236 | 4.30 | $ | 6.60 | 9,667,663 | $ | 6.60 | ||||||
| | Units | Exercise Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Exercise Price | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 12,001,208 | $ .12 – $84.75 | $ | 6.63 | ||||
| Options granted | — | — | — | |||||
| Options cancelled | (348,956 | ) | 1.76 – 56.75 | 10.18 | ||||
| Options exercised | (460,546 | ) | .12 – 35.31 | 5.32 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 11,191,706 | .12 – 84.75 | 6.58 | |||||
| Options granted | — | — | — | |||||
| Options cancelled | (1,181,124 | ) | 1.76 – 56.75 | 6.77 | ||||
| Options exercised | (215,346 | ) | .12 – 5.43 | 4.51 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 9,795,236 | .12 – 84.75 | 6.60 | |||||
| Options granted | — | — | — | |||||
| Options cancelled | (352,719 | ) | 6.50 – 42.00 | 24.79 | ||||
| Options exercised | (521,153 | ) | 1.76 – 6.50 | 5.48 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2003 | 8,921,364 | $ .12 – $84.75 | $ | 5.95 | ||||
| Options exercisable: | ||||||||
| December 31, 2001 | 9,013,915 | $ .12 – $84.75 | $ | 6.70 | ||||
| December 31, 2002 | 9,667,663 | .12 – 84.75 | 6.60 | |||||
| December 31, 2003 | 8,921,364 | $ .12 – $84.75 | $ | 5.95 | ||||
| | Options Outstanding | | | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Options Exercisable | |||||||||||
| | | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | | |||||||||
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding as of 12/31/03 | Weighted Average Exercise Price | Number Exercisable as of 12/31/03 | Weighted Average Exercise Price | ||||||||
| $ 0.12 – $ 0.12 | 61,168 | 4.16 | $ | .12 | 61,168 | $ | .12 | |||||
| 1.76 – 1.79 | 4,046 | 4.30 | 1.76 | 4,046 | 1.76 | |||||||
| 4.04 – 5.43 | 6,795,825 | 3.26 | 5.07 | 6,795,825 | 5.07 | |||||||
| 6.20 – 8.50 | 1,816,725 | 4.06 | 6.96 | 1,816,725 | 6.96 | |||||||
| 17.50 – 25.03 | 230,000 | 1.47 | 21.69 | 230,000 | 21.69 | |||||||
| 40.38 – 51.88 | 2,000 | .08 | 51.88 | 2,000 | 51.88 | |||||||
| 56.00 – 57.47 | 5,000 | .80 | 57.47 | 5,000 | 57.47 | |||||||
| 61.75 – 84.75 | 6,600 | .28 | 84.75 | 6,600 | 84.75 | |||||||
| 8,921,364 | 3.38 | $ | 5.95 | 8,921,364 | $ | 5.95 | ||||||
Outperform Stock Option Plan
�� In April 1998, the Company adopted an outperform stock option ("OSO") program that was designed so that the Company's stockholders would receive a market return on their investment before OSO holders receive any return on their options. The Company believes that the OSO program aligns directly management's and stockholders' interests by basing stock option value on the Company's ability to outperform the market in general, as measured by the Standard & Poor's ("S&P") 500 Index.
F-60
Participants in the OSO program do not realize any value from awards unless the Company's common stock price outperforms the S&P 500 Index during the life of the grant. When the stock price gain is greater than the corresponding gain on the S&P 500 Index (or less than the corresponding loss on the S&P Index), the value received for awards under the OSO plan is based on a formula involving a
F-47
multiplier related to the level by which the Company's common stock outperforms the S&P 500 Index. To the extent that Level 3's common stock outperforms the S&P 500 Index, the value of OSOs to a holder may exceed the value of nonqualified stock options.
In August 2002, the Company modified the OSO program to target that no more than 25% of Level 3's outperformance was delivered to employee-owners, and that the exercise of past and future OSO grants does not exceed shares reserved for issuance under the Company's 1995 Stock Plan, as amended. The following modifications, affecting August 19, 2002 and later grants, were made to the Plan:
The mechanics for determining the value of an individual OSO is described below:
The initial strike price, as determined on the day prior to the OSO grant date, is adjusted over time (the "Adjusted Strike Price"), until the exercise date. The adjustment is an amount equal to the percentage appreciation or depreciation in the value of the S&P 500 Index from the date of grant to the date of exercise. The value of the OSO increases for increasing levels of outperformance. OSOs granted prior to August 19, 2002 have a multiplier range from zero to eight depending upon the performance of Level 3 common stock relative to the S&P 500 Index as shown in the following table. OSOs granted August 19, 2002 and later have a multiplier range from zero to four depending upon the performance of Level 3 common stock relative to the S&P 500 Index as shown in the following table.
| | Then the Pre-multiplier Gain Is Multiplied by a Success Multiplier of: | Then the Pre-multiplier Gain Is Multiplied by a Success Multiplier of: | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| If Level 3 Stock Outperforms the S&P 500 Index by: | ||||||||
| Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 and Later Grants | Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 and Later Grants | |||||
| 0% or Less | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
More than 0% but Less than 11% | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 8/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by 4/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by8/11 | Outperformance percentage multiplied by4/11 | ||||
11% or More | 8.00 | 4.00 | 8.00 | 4.00 | ||||
The Pre-multiplier gain is the Level 3 common stock price minus the Adjusted Strike Price on the date of exercise
F-61
OSO awards are made quarterly to eligible participants on the date of the grant.
Awards granted prior to August 19, 2002 vest in equal quarterly installments over two years and have a four-year life. Awards granted prior to March 2001 typically have a two-year moratorium on exercise from the date of grant. As a result, once a participant is 100% vested in the grant, the two-year moratorium expires. Therefore, most awards granted prior to March 2001 have an exercise window of two years. Level 3 granted 2.1 million OSOs to employees in December 2000 that vest 25% after six months with the remaining 75% vesting after 18 months. These OSOs and all additional OSOs granted March 1, 2001 and later are exercisable immediately upon vesting and have a four-year life. One half of OSOs granted on and after August 19, 2002 vest at the end of the first year after grant, with the remaining 50% vesting over the second year (12.5% per quarter).
F-48
The fair value of the OSOs granted in 2002 was calculated by applying a modified Black-Scholes model with the assumptions identified below. The Company uses a modified Black-Scholes model due to the additional variables required to calculate the outperformance multiplier of the OSO program. The Company consulted with option valuation experts when the program was established to determine the appropriate methodology to fair value these options.
| | Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 and Later Grants | Pre August 19, 2002 Grants | August 19, 2002 through the Year Ended December 31, 2002 | Year Ended December 31, 2003 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 Expected Dividend Yield Rate | 1.80 | % | 1.88 | % | 1.80 | % | 1.88 | % | 1.51 | % | ||
| Expected Life | 2 | 2 | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | |||||||
| S&P 500 Expected Volatility Rate | 23 | % | 25 | % | 23 | % | 25 | % | 25 | % | ||
| Level 3 Common Stock Expected Volatility Rate | 55 | % | 100 | % | 55 | % | 100 | % | 80 | % | ||
| Expected Correlation Factor | .81 | .60 | .81 | .60 | .46 | |||||||
Calculated Theoretical Value | 150 | % | 186 | % | 150 | % | 186 | % | 156 | % |
The fair value of each OSO grant equals the theoretical value multiplied by the Level 3 common stock price on the day prior to the grant date.
The fair value under SFAS No. 123 for the approximately fivetwo million OSOs awarded to participants during the year ended December 31, 20022003 was approximately $34$20 million. As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had not reflected $20$9 million of unamortized compensation expense in its financial statements for OSOspreviously granted previously.OSOs.
F-62
Transactions involving OSO stock awards granted are summarized below:
| | Units | Option Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Option Price | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 1999 | 5,138,989 | $ | 29.78 - $ 78.50 | $ | 54.15 | ||||
| Options granted | 5,402,553 | 26.87 - 113.87 | 52.96 | ||||||
| Options cancelled | (262,545 | ) | 26.87 - 113.87 | 72.55 | |||||
| Options exercised | (214,409 | ) | 29.78 - 37.13 | 36.28 | |||||
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 10,064,588 | 26.87 - 113.87 | 53.50 | ||||||
| Options granted | 15,757,972 | 3.82 - 25.31 | 9.52 | ||||||
| Options cancelled | (1,758,725 | ) | 3.82 - 113.87 | 25.69 | |||||
| Options expired | (406,387 | ) | 25.31 - 113.87 | 48.65 | |||||
| Options exercised | (96,031 | ) | 3.82 - 34.50 | 8.45 | |||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 23,561,417 | 3.82 - 113.87 | 26.43 | ||||||
| Options granted | 5,435,942 | 2.45 - 5.58 | 3.92 | ||||||
| Options cancelled | (567,124 | ) | 3.02 - 113.87 | 9.57 | |||||
| Options expired | (2,955,669 | ) | 3.02 - 113.87 | 39.53 | |||||
| Options exercised | (977,513 | ) | 3.02 - 5.58 | 4.19 | |||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 24,497,053 | $ | 2.45 - $113.87 | $ | 21.14 | ||||
Options vested as of: | |||||||||
| December 31, 2000 | 4,237,277 | $ | 29.78 - $113.87 | $ | 56.18 | ||||
| December 31, 2001 | 8,738,516 | 3.82 - 113.87 | 47.33 | ||||||
| December 31, 2002 | 15,714,493 | $ | 3.02 - $113.87 | $ | 29.62 | ||||
F-49
| | OSOs Outstanding at December 31, 2002 | OSOs Vested At December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | Weighted Average Option Price | Number Vested | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||||
| $ 2.45 - 3.02 | 2,959,932 | 3.17 | $ | 2.99 | 1,007,143 | $ | 3.02 | |||||
| 3.82 - 5.58 | 9,292,328 | 2.89 | 4.86 | 3,636,909 | 4.68 | |||||||
| 11.20 | 3,713,175 | 2.42 | 11.20 | 2,806,657 | 11.20 | |||||||
| 25.31 - 37.12 | 4,579,629 | 2.01 | 26.34 | 4,340,471 | 26.38 | |||||||
| 56.00 - 78.50 | 2,844,460 | .73 | 68.69 | 2,820,257 | 68.69 | |||||||
| 87.23 - 113.87 | 1,107,529 | 1.51 | 95.96 | 1,103,056 | 95.90 | |||||||
| 24,497,053 | 2.37 | $ | 21.14 | 15,714,493 | $ | 29.62 | ||||||
| | Units | Option Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 10,064,588 | $26.87 – $113.87 | $ | 53.50 | ||||
| Options granted | 15,757,972 | 3.82 – 25.31 | 9.52 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (1,758,725 | ) | 3.82 – 113.87 | 25.69 | ||||
| Options expired | (406,387 | ) | 25.31 – 113.87 | 48.65 | ||||
| Options exercised | (96,031 | ) | 3.82 – 34.50 | 8.45 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 23,561,417 | 3.82 – 113.87 | 26.43 | |||||
| Options granted | 5,435,942 | 2.45 – 5.58 | 3.92 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (567,124 | ) | 3.02 – 113.87 | 9.57 | ||||
| Options expired | (2,955,669 | ) | 3.02 – 113.87 | 39.53 | ||||
| Options exercised | (977,513 | ) | 3.02 – 5.58 | 4.19 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 24,497,053 | 2.45 – 113.87 | 21.14 | |||||
| Options granted | 2,165,221 | 4.90 – 6.66 | 5.46 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (172,881 | ) | 2.45 – 113.87 | 4.85 | ||||
| Options expired | (3,374,396 | ) | 3.02 – 113.87 | 56.93 | ||||
| Options exercised | (1,631,583 | ) | 2.45 – 5.58 | 4.12 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2003 | 21,483,414 | $ 2.45 – $113.87 | $ | 15.36 | ||||
| Options vested as of: | ||||||||
| December 31, 2001 | 8,738,516 | $ 3.82 – $113.87 | $ | 47.33 | ||||
| December 31, 2002 | 15,714,493 | 3.02 – 113.87 | 29.62 | |||||
| December 31, 2003 | 19,264,131 | $ 2.45 – $113.87 | $ | 16.54 | ||||
| | OSOs Outstanding at December 31, 2003 | OSOs Vested at December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | Weighted Average Option Price | Number Vested | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||||
| $ 2.45 – 3.02 | 2,536,881 | 2.17 | $ | 3.00 | 2,273,327 | $ | 3.00 | |||||
| 3.82 – 5.58 | 9,558,855 | 2.14 | 4.95 | 8,068,573 | 4.93 | |||||||
| 6.66 | 465,447 | 3.50 | 6.66 | — | — | |||||||
| 11.20 | 3,371,115 | 1.42 | 11.20 | 3,371,115 | 11.20 | |||||||
| 25.31 – 37.12 | 4,159,369 | 1.01 | 26.33 | 4,159,369 | 26.33 | |||||||
| 56.00 – 78.50 | 506,561 | .42 | 76.31 | 506,561 | 76.31 | |||||||
| 87.23 – 113.87 | 885,186 | .48 | 97.19 | 885,186 | 97.19 | |||||||
| 21,483,414 | 1.73 | $ | 15.36 | 19,264,131 | $ | 16.54 | ||||||
All of the approximately 1619 million OSO units vested at December 31, 20022003 are exercisable. At December 31, 2002,2003, based on the Level 3 stock price and post-multiplier values, the Company would have been obligated to issue approximately 1123 million shares for vested and exercisable OSO units.
F-63
In July 2000, the Company adopted a convertible outperform stock option program, ("C-OSO") as an extension of the existing OSO plan. The program is a component of the Company's ongoing employee retention efforts and offers similar features to those of an OSO, but provides an employee with the greater of the value of a single share of the Company's common stock at exercise, or the calculated OSO value of a single OSO at the time of exercise.
C-OSO awards were made to eligible employees employed on the date of the grant. The awards were made in September 2000, December 2000, and September 2001. The awards granted in 2000 vest over three years as follows: 1/1/6 of each grant at the end of the first year, a further 2/2/6 at the end of the second year and the remaining 3/3/6 in the third year. The September 2001 awards vest in equal quarterly installments over three years. Each award is immediately exercisable upon vesting. Awards expire four years from the date of the grant.
F-50
As of December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had not reflected $18$1 million of unamortized compensation expense in its financial statements for C-OSOs awarded in 2000 and 2001.
Transactions involving C-OSO stock awards are summarized below:
| | Units | Option Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 1999 | — | $ | — | - | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||
| Options granted | 1,965,509 | 26.87 | - | 87.23 | 56.67 | |||||||||
| Options cancelled | (25,522 | ) | 87.23 | 87.23 | ||||||||||
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 1,939,987 | 26.87 | - | 87.23 | 56.67 | |||||||||
| Options granted | 4,958,786 | 3.82 | 3.82 | |||||||||||
| Options cancelled | (890,057 | ) | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 28.07 | ||||||||
| Options expired | (7,822 | ) | 87.23 | 87.23 | ||||||||||
| Options exercised | (35,366 | ) | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 46.56 | ||||||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 5,965,528 | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 16.90 | |||||||||
| Options cancelled | (318,188 | ) | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 13.02 | ||||||||
| Options expired | (76,602 | ) | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 20.46 | ||||||||
| Options exercised | (570,753 | ) | 3.82 | - | 87.23 | 13.40 | ||||||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 4,999,985 | $ | 3.82 | - | $ | 87.23 | $ | 17.49 | ||||||
Options vested as of: | ||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2000 | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| December 31, 2001 | 622,675 | $ | 3.82 | - | $ | 87.23 | $ | 24.70 | ||||||
| December 31, 2002 | 1,957,804 | $ | 3.82 | - | $ | 87.23 | $ | 19.83 | ||||||
| | C-OSOs Outstanding at December 31, 2002 | C-OSOs Exercisable at December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | Weighted Average Option Price | Number Exercisable | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||||
| $ 3.82 | 3,670,282 | 2.7 | $ | 3.82 | 1,369,321 | $ | 3.82 | |||||
| 26.87 | 705,346 | 1.9 | 26.87 | 294,106 | 26.87 | |||||||
| 87.23 | 624,357 | 1.7 | 87.23 | 294,377 | 87.23 | |||||||
| 4,999,985 | 2.44 | $ | 17.49 | 1,957,804 | $ | 19.83 | ||||||
| | Units | Option Price Per Unit | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balance December 31, 2000 | 1,939,987 | $26.87 – $87.23 | $ | 56.67 | ||||
| Options granted | 4,958,786 | 3.82 | 3.82 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (890,057 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 28.07 | ||||
| Options expired | (7,822 | ) | 87.23 | 87.23 | ||||
| Options exercised | (35,366 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 46.56 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2001 | 5,965,528 | 3.82 – 87.23 | 16.90 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (318,188 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 13.02 | ||||
| Options expired | (76,602 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 20.46 | ||||
| Options exercised | (570,753 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 13.40 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2002 | 4,999,985 | 3.82 – 87.23 | 17.49 | |||||
| Options cancelled | (120,015 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 12.39 | ||||
| Options expired | (35,929 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 19.13 | ||||
| Options exercised | (779,359 | ) | 3.82 – 87.23 | 29.19 | ||||
| Balance December 31, 2003 | 4,064,682 | $ 3.82 – $87.23 | $ | 15.38 | ||||
| Options vested as of: | ||||||||
| December 31, 2001 | 622,675 | $ 3.82 – $87.23 | $ | 24.70 | ||||
| December 31, 2002 | 1,957,804 | 3.82 – 87.23 | 19.83 | |||||
| December 31, 2003 | 3,469,141 | $ 3.82 – $87.23 | $ | 17.37 | ||||
F-64
| | C-OSOs Outstanding at December 31, 2003 | C-OSOs Exercisable at December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range of Exercise Prices | Number Outstanding | Weighted Average Remaining Life (years) | Weighted Average Option Price | Number Exercisable | Weighted Average Option Price | |||||||
| $ 3.82 | 3,117,831 | 1.7 | $ | 3.82 | 2,522,290 | $ | 3.82 | |||||
| 26.87 | 529,940 | .9 | 26.87 | 529,940 | 26.87 | |||||||
| 87.23 | 416,911 | .7 | 87.23 | 416,911 | 87.23 | |||||||
| 4,064,682 | 1.47 | $ | 15.38 | 3,469,141 | $ | 17.37 | ||||||
At December 31, 2002,2003, based on the Level 3 stock price and post-multiplier values, the Company would have been obligated to issue approximately 510 million shares for vested and exercisable C-OSO units.
Restricted Stock
In 20012003 and 2000,2002, approximately 96 thousand670,000 and 116 thousand50,000 shares, respectively, of restricted stock were granted to employees. The restricted stock shares were granted to employees at no cost. The shares typically vest over a one to three year period; however, the employees are restricted from selling these shares for three years. The fair value of restricted stock granted in 20012003 and 20002002 of $4 million and less than $1 million and $7 million, respectively, was calculated using the value of the Common StockLevel 3 common stock the day prior to the grant. As of December 31, 2003, the Company had not reflected $2 million of unamortized compensation expense in its financial statements for the restricted stock granted.
F-51
Shareworks and 401(k) Plans
Level 3 has designed its compensation programs with particular emphasis on equity-based incentive programs. The Company had developed two plans under its Shareworks program: the Match Plan and the Grant Plan. In December 2002, in order to provide employees opportunities to diversify their investments in Company-sponsored savings and retirement plans and to use Level 3's resources as effectively as possible, the Company decided to enhance the 401(k) plan by introducing a Company match on employee contributions. At the same time the Company determined that, effective January 1, 2003, the Shareworks Match and Grant Plans would be discontinued and past Shareworks Grant Plan contributions would be rolled into the 401(k) plan.
Match Plan—Plan—The Match Plan allowed eligible employees to defer between 1% and 7% of their eligible compensation to purchase Common Stock at the average stock price for the quarter. Full time employees of the communications business and certain information services businesses were considered eligible on the first day of the calendar quarter after their hire. The Company matched the shares purchased by the employee on a one-for-one basis. Stock purchased with payroll deductions was fully vested. Stock purchased with the Company's matching contributions vests three years after the end of the quarter in which it was made. Effective January 1, 2003, past contributions to the Match Plan will continue to vest, however, there will be no further contributions to the Plan by either employees or the Company.
F-65
The Company's quarterly matching contribution is amortized to compensation expense over the vesting period of 36 months. The Company did not make matching contributions for the year ended December 31, 2003. The Company's matching contributions were $9 million $16 million and $14$16 million under the Match Plan in 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively.
As of December 31, 2003 and 2002, the Company had not yet reflected unamortized compensation expense of $6 and $16 million, respectively related to the Company's matching contributions.
Grant Plan—Plan—The Grant Plan enabled the Company to grant shares of Common Stock to eligible employees of the Communications business and certain information services businesses based upon a percentage of the employees' eligible salary up to a maximum of 5%. Level 3 employees employed on December 31 of each year, who were age 21 or older with a minimum of 1,000 hours credited service were considered eligible. The shares granted were valued at the fair market value as of the last business day of the calendar year. All prior and future grants vested immediately upon the employee's third anniversary of joining the Shareworks Plan. All prior grants for active employees were vested as of January 1, 2003 and were transferred into the 401(k) plan. As discussed below, the Company made a three percent discretionary contribution under the Shareworks Grant Plan for the year ended December 31, 2003, into the 401(k) plan.
Foreign subsidiaries of the Company adopted Shareworks programs in 2000. These programs primarily include a grant plan and a stock purchase plan whereby employees may purchase Level 3 Common Stock at 80% of the share price at the beginning of the plan year.
401(k) Plan—The Company and its subsidiaries offer their qualified employees the opportunity to participate in a defined contribution retirement plan qualifying under the provisions of Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Each employee was eligible to contribute, on a tax deferred basis, a portion of annual earnings not to exceed $11,000$12,000 in 2002.2003. The Company did not match employee contributions for the communications business and therefore did not incur any compensation expense related to the 401(k) plan prior to January 1, 2003. Employees of CorpSoft and Software Spectrum were eligible to receive matching contributions up to a certain level. The Company recognized less than $1 million of cash compensation expense for this plan. Effective January 1, 2003, the Company will match 100% of employee contributions up to 7% of eligible earnings or applicable regulatory limits. The Company's matching contribution will be made with Level 3 Common Stock based on the closing stock price on each pay date. The employees will be able to diversify the Company match contribution as soon as they are made, even if they are not fully vested. The Company's matching contributions will be fully vested upon completion of three years of service. For the year ended December 31, 2003, the Company made bi-weekly matching contributions of $15 million.
F-52
The Company made a discretionary contribution to the 401(k) Plan in Level 3 Common Stockcommon stock as of December 31, 2002,2003, equal to three percent of eligible employees' 20022003 eligible earnings under the Shareworks Grant Plan. The deposit was made into the employees' 401(k) accounts during the first quarter of 2004. Level 3 recorded an expense of $11 million attributable to this contribution in 2003.
F-66
Other
The Company recorded approximately $5 million of non-cash compensation expense for stock issued to employees during the year ended December 31, 2000. The non-cash compensation charge was based on the Company's stock price on the day prior to the grant. The Company did not issue stock to employees in 2002 and 2001.
(13)(15) Income Taxes
An analysis of the income tax benefit (provision) attributable to loss from continuing operations before income taxes for the three years ended December 31, 2003 follows:
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| Current: | ||||||||||
| United States Federal | $ | — | $ | 120 | $ | — | ||||
| State | (7 | ) | 1 | — | ||||||
| (7 | ) | 121 | — | |||||||
| Deferred, net of changes in valuation allowances: | ||||||||||
| United States Federal | 57 | — | — | |||||||
| State | — | — | — | |||||||
| 57 | — | — | ||||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | $ | 50 | $ | 121 | $ | — | ||||
During 2003, the Internal Revenue Service completed the audit of the Company's 1996 and 1997 federal tax returns. The resolution of these federal tax audits and other state tax issues primarily related to its coal mining operations resulted in the Company reducing its deferred tax liabilities and recording an income tax benefit of $50 million.
During 2002 follows:the Company received income tax refunds of $121 million primarily due to a change in tax legislation related to net operating loss carrybacks, which was enacted in the first quarter of 2002.
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| Current: | |||||||||||
| United States Federal | $ | 120 | $ | — | $ | 50 | |||||
| State | 1 | — | (1 | ) | |||||||
| 121 | — | 49 | |||||||||
Deferred: | |||||||||||
| United States Federal | (17 | ) | 1,357 | 255 | |||||||
| State | — | — | — | ||||||||
| (17 | ) | 1,357 | 255 | ||||||||
Valuation Allowance | 17 | (1,357 | ) | (255 | ) | ||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | $ | 121 | $ | — | $ | 49 | |||||
The United States and foreign components of loss from continuing operations before income taxes follows:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| United States | $ | (630 | ) | $ | (4,508 | ) | $ | (995 | ) | |
| Foreign | (604 | ) | (940 | ) | (461 | ) | ||||
| $ | (1,234 | ) | $ | (5,448 | ) | $ | (1,456 | ) | ||
F-53
| | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||
| United States | $ | (581 | ) | $ | (391 | ) | $ | (3,600 | ) | |
| Foreign | (190 | ) | (590 | ) | (773 | ) | ||||
| $ | (771 | ) | $ | (981 | ) | $ | (4,373 | ) | ||
A reconciliation of the actual income tax benefit (provision) and the tax computed by applying the U.S. Federal rate (35%) to the loss from continuing operations, before income taxes for the three years ended December 31, 20022003 follows:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Computed Tax Benefit at Statutory Rate | $ | 432 | $ | 1,907 | $ | 526 | $ | 270 | $ | 343 | $ | 1,531 | ||||||||
| State Income Taxes | — | — | (1 | ) | 18 | 1 | — | |||||||||||||
| Coal Depletion | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||||
| Goodwill Amortization | — | (13 | ) | (17 | ) | — | — | (13 | ) | |||||||||||
| Taxes on Unutilized Losses of Foreign Operations | (26 | ) | (63 | ) | (35 | ) | (15 | ) | (26 | ) | (63 | ) | ||||||||
| Taxes on Extinguishments of Convertible Debt | (83 | ) | — | — | (68 | ) | (83 | ) | — | |||||||||||
| Other | 2 | (90 | ) | (1 | ) | 65 | 2 | (90 | ) | |||||||||||
| Excess Book Net Operating Losses | (205 | ) | (1,742 | ) | (425 | ) | (221 | ) | (117 | ) | (1,366 | ) | ||||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | $ | 121 | $ | — | $ | 49 | $ | 50 | $ | 121 | $ | — | ||||||||
F-67
For federal income tax reporting purposes, the Company has approximately $2.3$3.9 billion of net operating loss carryforwards, net of previous carrybacks, available to offset future Federal taxable income. The net operating loss carryforwards expire in 20222023 and are subject to examination by the tax authorities.
The Internal Revenue Code contains provisions which may limit the net operating loss carryforwards available to be used in any given year upon the occurrence of certain events, including significant changes in ownership interests.
For federal income tax reporting purposes, the Company has approximately $19 million of alternative minimum tax credits available to offset future regular federal income tax. The credits can be carried forward until fully utilized.
F-54
The components of the net deferred tax liabilitiesassets (liabilities) for the years ended December 31, 20022003 and 20012002 were as follows:
| | | 2002 | 2001 | | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
| Deferred Tax Assets: | Deferred Tax Assets: | Deferred Tax Assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Asset bases—accumulated depreciation | $ | 1,045 | $ | 1,109 | Asset bases—accumulated depreciation | $ | 938 | $ | 1,045 | |||||||
| Compensation and related benefits | 307 | 254 | Compensation and related benefits | 316 | 307 | |||||||||||
| Investment in securities | 1 | — | Investment in securities | 27 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Investment in subsidiaries | 2 | 2 | Investment in subsidiaries | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||
| Provision for estimated expenses or deferred revenue | 54 | 189 | Provision for estimated expenses or deferred revenue | — | 54 | |||||||||||
| Investment in joint ventures | 54 | 52 | Investment in joint ventures | 84 | 54 | |||||||||||
| Unutilized tax net operating losses | 790 | 613 | Unutilized tax net operating losses | 1,503 | 790 | |||||||||||
| Other | 66 | 45 | Other | 60 | 66 | |||||||||||
| Total Deferred Tax Assets | Total Deferred Tax Assets | 2,319 | 2,264 | Total Deferred Tax Assets | 2,930 | 2,319 | ||||||||||
Deferred Tax Liabilities: | Deferred Tax Liabilities: | Deferred Tax Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||
| Investments in securities | — | 9 | Investments in securities | — | — | |||||||||||
| Coal sales | 32 | 32 | Coal sales | — | 32 | |||||||||||
| Other | 45 | 22 | Other | 33 | 45 | |||||||||||
| Total Deferred Tax Liabilities | Total Deferred Tax Liabilities | 77 | 63 | Total Deferred Tax Liabilities | 33 | 77 | ||||||||||
Net Deferred Tax Assets before valuation allowance | Net Deferred Tax Assets before valuation allowance | 2,242 | 2,201 | Net Deferred Tax Assets before valuation allowance | 2,897 | 2,242 | ||||||||||
Valuation Allowance Components: | Valuation Allowance Components: | Valuation Allowance Components: | ||||||||||||||
| Net Deferred Tax Assets | (2,212 | ) | (2,152 | ) | Net Deferred Tax Assets | (2,855 | ) | (2,311 | ) | |||||||
| Stockholders' Equity (primarily tax benefit from option exercises) | (120 | ) | (120 | ) | Stockholders' Equity (primarily tax benefit from option exercises) | (75 | ) | (21 | ) | |||||||
| Net Deferred Tax Liabilities after Valuation Allowance | $ | (90 | ) | $ | (71 | ) | ||||||||||
| Net Non-current Deferred Tax Liabilities after Valuation Allowance | Net Non-current Deferred Tax Liabilities after Valuation Allowance | $ | (33 | ) | $ | (90 | ) | |||||||||
The current net deferred tax assets at December 31, 2002 and 2001 are zero, after current valuation allowances of ($70) million and ($206) million, respectively, and the non-current deferred tax liabilities are ($90) million and ($71) million, respectively, after non-current valuation allowance of ($2,262) million and ($2,066) million respectively.F-68
(14)(16) Stockholders' Equity
During 2003, the Company issued approximately 216 million shares in exchange for approximately $1.007 billion aggregate principal amount of long-term debt (See Note 13).
During 2002, the Company issued approximately 47 million shares in exchange for $582 million aggregate principal amount of long-term debt. Seedebt (See Note 11.13).
During August and December 2001, the Company issued approximately 15.9 million shares, valued at approximately $72 million, in exchange for $194 million in convertible subordinated notes.
In February 2000, the Company raised $2.4 billion, after underwriting discounts and offering expenses, from an offering of 23 million shares of its common stock through an underwritten public offering. The net proceeds from the offering was used for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate purposes in connection with the implementation of the Company's business plan.
F-55
Issuances of common stock, for sales, conversions, option exercises and acquisitions for the three years ended December 31, 2002 are shown below. The Level 3 1995 Stock Plan permits option holders to tender shares to the Company to cover income taxes due on option exercises.
Issuances of common stock, for sales, conversions, option exercises and acquisitions for the three years ended December 31, 2003 are shown below.
| Outstanding Common Shares | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2000 | 367,599,870 | ||||||
Option and Shareworks Activity | 1,245,093 | ||||||
| Debt for Equity Exchanges and Conversions | 15,858,959 | ||||||
| December 31, 2001 | 384,703,922 | ||||||
Option and Shareworks Activity | 11,852,318 | ||||||
| Debt for Equity Exchanges and Conversions | 46,970,434 | ||||||
| Other | 30,190 | ||||||
| December 31, 2002 | 443,556,864 | ||||||
Option and Shareworks Activity | 14,021,135 | ||||||
| Debt for Equity Exchanges and Conversions | 42,464,770 | ||||||
| Conversion of 9% Junior Convertible Subordinated Notes | 173,611,065 | ||||||
| Telverse Communications, Inc. | 4,174,800 | ||||||
| December 31, 2003 | 677,828,634 | ||||||
(15)(17) Industry and Geographic Data
SFAS No. 131 "Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information" defines operating segments as components of an enterprise for which separate financial information is available and which is evaluated regularly by the Company's chief operating decision maker, or decision making group, in deciding how to allocate resources and assess performance. Operating segments are managed separately and represent strategic business units that offer different products and serve different markets. The Company's reportable segments include: communications; information services (including Software Spectrum); and coal mining. Other primarily includes California Private Transportation Company, L.P. ("CPTC"), equity investments, and other corporate assets and overhead not attributable to a specific segment.
EBITDA,Adjusted OIBDA, as defined by the Company, consists of earningsincome (loss) from operations before interest, income taxes,(1) depreciation and amortization non-cash operating expenses (includingexpense, (2) stock-based compensation expense included within
F-69
selling, general and impairments)administrative expenses on the consolidated statements of operations and other non-operating income or expense.(3) non-cash impairment costs included within restructuring and impairment expenses on the consolidated statements of operations. The Company excludes non-cashstock based compensation due to its adoption of the expense recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123. EBITDAAdjusted OIBDA (or equivalent) is an important part of the Company's internal reporting and is an indicator of profitability and operating performance used by the chief operating decision maker or decision making group, especially in a capital-intensive industry such as telecommunications. It is also a commonly used indicator in the communications industry to analyze companies on the basis of operating performance. EBITDAperformance over time. Adjusted OIBDA is not intended to represent net income or cash flow for the periods presented, is not calculated consistently with the commonly used metric "EBITDA", and is not recognized under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") but is used by management to measureassess segment results.
In 2002, Level 3 was able to finalize negotiationsresults and claims on several of its large multi-year network construction projects. As a result, the Company was able to release approximately $215 million of capital accruals for the year ended December 31, 2002 previously reported as property, plant and equipment. In the ordinary course of business, as construction projects come to a close, the Company reviews the final amounts due and settles any outstanding amounts related to these contracts which can result in adjustments to the estimated costs of the construction projects.allocate resources.
The information presented in the following tables following includes information for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, 2002 2001 and 20002001 for all statement of operations and cash flow information presented, and as of December 31, 20022003 and 20012002 for all balance sheet information presented. Information related to the acquired businesses is included from their respective acquisition dates. Revenue and the related expenses are attributed to countries based on where services are provided. Information for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 have been revised due to discontinued operations (See Note 3).
F-56F-70
Industry and geographic segment financial information follows. Certain prior year information has been reclassified to conform to the 20022003 presentation.
| | | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | Total | | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2003 | 2003 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: | Revenue: | Revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 1,000 | $ | 1,391 | $ | 84 | $ | 30 | $ | 2,505 | North America | $ | 1,821 | $ | 1,363 | $ | 80 | $ | — | $ | 3,264 | ||||||||||||
| Europe | 101 | 488 | — | — | 589 | Europe | 125 | 565 | — | — | 690 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asia | — | 54 | — | — | 54 | Asia | 1 | 71 | — | — | 72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,933 | $ | 84 | $ | 30 | $ | 3,148 | $ | 1,947 | $ | 1,999 | $ | 80 | $ | — | $ | 4,026 | ||||||||||||||
EBITDA: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA: | Adjusted OIBDA: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 341 | $ | 36 | $ | 20 | $ | 10 | $ | 407 | North America | $ | 730 | $ | 12 | $ | 17 | $ | (5 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Europe | (60 | ) | 6 | — | — | (54 | ) | Europe | 5 | (3 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Asia | — | 1 | — | — | 1 | Asia | — | 1 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 281 | $ | 43 | $ | 20 | $ | 10 | $ | 354 | $ | 735 | $ | 10 | $ | 17 | $ | (5 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Gross Capital Expenditures: | Gross Capital Expenditures: | Gross Capital Expenditures: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 177 | $ | 15 | $ | 1 | $ | 2 | $ | 195 | North America | $ | 166 | $ | 10 | $ | 2 | $ | — | $ | 178 | ||||||||||||
| Europe | 23 | — | — | — | 23 | Europe | 13 | — | — | — | 13 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | Asia | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 200 | $ | 15 | $ | 1 | $ | 2 | $ | 218 | $ | 179 | $ | 10 | $ | 2 | $ | — | $ | 191 | ||||||||||||||
Depreciation and Amortization: | Depreciation and Amortization: | Depreciation and Amortization: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 674 | $ | 25 | $ | 3 | $ | 5 | $ | 707 | North America | $ | 705 | $ | 26 | $ | 6 | $ | — | $ | 737 | ||||||||||||
| Europe | 94 | 1 | — | — | 95 | Europe | 87 | 3 | — | — | 90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | Asia | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 768 | $ | 26 | $ | 3 | $ | 5 | $ | 802 | $ | 792 | $ | 29 | $ | 6 | $ | — | $ | 827 | ||||||||||||||
2001 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 1,137 | $ | 110 | $ | 87 | $ | 25 | $ | 1,359 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Europe | 161 | 13 | — | — | 174 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 1,298 | $ | 123 | $ | 87 | $ | 25 | $ | 1,533 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
EBITDA: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | (139 | ) | $ | 4 | $ | 23 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (119 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Europe | (183 | ) | 2 | — | — | (181 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | (322 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 23 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (300 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Capital Expenditures: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 2,131 | $ | 17 | $ | 5 | $ | 1 | $ | 2,154 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Europe | 171 | — | — | — | 171 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 2,302 | $ | 17 | $ | 5 | $ | 1 | $ | 2,325 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
F-57F-71
Depreciation and Amortization: | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 894 | $ | 15 | $ | 3 | $ | 6 | $ | 918 | |||||||
| Europe | 202 | 2 | — | — | 204 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 1,096 | $ | 17 | $ | 3 | $ | 6 | $ | 1,122 | ||||||||
2000 | |||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 744 | $ | 103 | $ | 190 | $ | 22 | $ | 1,059 | |||||||
| Europe | 113 | 12 | — | — | 125 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 857 | $ | 115 | $ | 190 | $ | 22 | $ | 1,184 | ||||||||
EBITDA: | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | (407 | ) | $ | 2 | $ | 86 | $ | 7 | $ | (312 | ) | |||||
| Europe | (174 | ) | 4 | — | — | (170 | ) | ||||||||||
| $ | (581 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 86 | $ | 7 | $ | (482 | ) | ||||||
Capital Expenditures: | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 4,573 | $ | 11 | $ | 2 | $ | — | $ | 4,586 | |||||||
| Europe | 989 | 1 | — | — | 990 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 5,562 | $ | 12 | $ | 2 | $ | — | $ | 5,576 | ||||||||
Depreciation and Amortization: | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 438 | $ | 18 | $ | 5 | $ | 6 | $ | 467 | |||||||
| Europe | 110 | 2 | — | — | 112 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 548 | $ | 20 | $ | 5 | $ | 6 | $ | 579 | ||||||||
Identifiable Assets | |||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2002 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,296 | $ | 763 | $ | 296 | $ | 1,533 | $ | 7,888 | |||||||
| Europe | 881 | 155 | — | 30 | 1,066 | ||||||||||||
| Asia | — | 9 | — | — | 9 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 6,177 | $ | 927 | $ | 296 | $ | 1,563 | $ | 8,963 | ||||||||
December 31, 2001 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 6,256 | $ | 74 | $ | 303 | $ | 1,566 | $ | 8,199 | |||||||
| Europe | 1,001 | 5 | — | 37 | 1,043 | ||||||||||||
| Discontinued Asian Operations | 74 | — | — | — | 74 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 7,331 | $ | 79 | $ | 303 | $ | 1,603 | $ | 9,316 | ||||||||
Long-Lived Assets (excluding Goodwill) | |||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2002 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,193 | $ | 132 | $ | 15 | $ | 587 | $ | 5,927 | |||||||
| Europe | 820 | 3 | — | — | 823 | ||||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||
| $ | 6,013 | $ | 135 | $ | 15 | $ | 587 | $ | 6,750 | ||||||||
| 2002 | ||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 1,000 | $ | 1,354 | $ | 84 | $ | 30 | $ | 2,468 | ||||||
| Europe | 101 | 488 | — | — | 589 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | 54 | — | — | 54 | |||||||||||
| $ | 1,101 | $ | 1,896 | $ | 84 | $ | 30 | $ | 3,111 | |||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 285 | $ | 33 | $ | 20 | $ | 10 | ||||||||
| Europe | (4 | ) | 6 | — | — | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | 1 | — | — | ||||||||||||
| $ | 281 | $ | 40 | $ | 20 | $ | 10 | |||||||||
| Gross Capital Expenditures: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 177 | $ | 15 | $ | 1 | $ | 2 | $ | 195 | ||||||
| Europe | 23 | — | — | — | 23 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 200 | $ | 15 | $ | 1 | $ | 2 | $ | 218 | |||||||
| Depreciation and Amortization: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 674 | $ | 24 | $ | 3 | $ | 5 | $ | 706 | ||||||
| Europe | 94 | 1 | — | — | 95 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 768 | $ | 25 | $ | 3 | $ | 5 | $ | 801 | |||||||
F-58F-72
December 31, 2001 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 6,038 | $ | 50 | $ | 16 | $ | 230 | $ | 6,334 | |||||||
| Europe | 919 | 1 | — | — | 920 | ||||||||||||
| $ | 6,957 | $ | 51 | $ | 16 | $ | 230 | $ | 7,254 | ||||||||
Goodwill | |||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2002 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 69 | $ | 208 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 277 | |||||||
| Europe | — | 2 | — | — | 2 | ||||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||
| $ | 69 | $ | 210 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 279 | ||||||||
December 31, 2001 | |||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 28 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 28 | |||||||
| Europe | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||
| $ | 28 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 28 | ||||||||
| | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | Total | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||
| 2001 | ||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 1,137 | $ | 110 | $ | 87 | $ | 25 | $ | 1,359 | ||||||
| Europe | 161 | 13 | — | — | 174 | |||||||||||
| $ | 1,298 | $ | 123 | $ | 87 | $ | 25 | $ | 1,533 | |||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | (139 | ) | $ | 4 | $ | 23 | $ | (7 | ) | ||||||
| Europe | (183 | ) | 2 | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | (322 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 23 | $ | (7 | ) | |||||||
| Gross Capital Expenditures: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 2,131 | $ | 17 | $ | 5 | $ | 1 | $ | 2,154 | ||||||
| Europe | 171 | — | — | — | 171 | |||||||||||
| $ | 2,302 | $ | 17 | $ | 5 | $ | 1 | $ | 2,325 | |||||||
| Depreciation and Amortization: | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 894 | $ | 15 | $ | 3 | $ | 6 | $ | 918 | ||||||
| Europe | 202 | 2 | — | — | 204 | |||||||||||
| $ | 1,096 | $ | 17 | $ | 3 | $ | 6 | $ | 1,122 | |||||||
| Identifiable Assets | ||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,215 | $ | 690 | $ | 78 | $ | 1,234 | $ | 7,217 | ||||||
| Europe | 884 | 149 | — | 30 | 1,063 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | 13 | — | — | 13 | |||||||||||
| $ | 6,099 | $ | 852 | $ | 78 | $ | 1,264 | $ | 8,293 | |||||||
| December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,296 | $ | 763 | $ | 68 | $ | 1,761 | $ | 7,888 | ||||||
| Europe | 881 | 155 | — | 30 | 1,066 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | 9 | — | — | 9 | |||||||||||
| $ | 6,177 | $ | 927 | $ | 68 | $ | 1,791 | �� | $ | 8,963 | ||||||
| Long-Lived Assets (excluding Goodwill) | ||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,028 | $ | 119 | $ | 60 | $ | 2 | $ | 5,209 | ||||||
| Europe | 858 | 2 | — | — | 860 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 5,886 | $ | 121 | $ | 60 | $ | 2 | $ | 6,069 | |||||||
| December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 5,193 | $ | 127 | $ | 51 | $ | 551 | $ | 5,922 | ||||||
| Europe | 820 | 3 | — | — | 823 | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 6,013 | $ | 130 | $ | 51 | $ | 551 | $ | 6,745 | |||||||
F-73
| | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | Total | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||
| Goodwill | ||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 71 | $ | 207 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 278 | ||||||
| Europe | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 71 | $ | 207 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 278 | |||||||
| December 31, 2002 | ||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 69 | $ | 210 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 279 | ||||||
| Europe | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
| $ | 69 | $ | 210 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 279 | |||||||
Product information for the Company's communications segment follows:
| | | Services | | | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | Services | Reciprocal Compensation | Up-front Dark Fiber | Total | | Transport and Infrastructure | Softswitch | IP & Data | Reciprocal Compensation | Up-front Dark Fiber | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Communications Revenue | Communications Revenue | Communications Revenue | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2003 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 716 | $ | 644 | $ | 334 | $ | 127 | $ | — | $ | 1,821 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Europe | 63 | — | 62 | — | — | 125 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asia | — | — | 1 | — | — | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 779 | $ | 644 | $ | 397 | $ | 127 | $ | — | $ | 1,947 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 | 2002 | 2002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 878 | $ | 122 | $ | — | $ | 1,000 | North America | $ | 451 | $ | 328 | $ | 99 | $ | 122 | $ | — | $ | 1,000 | |||||||||||
| Europe | 101 | — | — | 101 | Europe | 58 | 4 | 39 | — | — | 101 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 979 | $ | 122 | $ | — | $ | 1,101 | $ | 509 | $ | 332 | $ | 138 | $ | 122 | $ | — | $ | 1,101 | |||||||||||||
2001 | 2001 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 715 | $ | 134 | $ | 288 | $ | 1,137 | North America | $ | 446 | $ | 189 | $ | 80 | $ | 134 | $ | 288 | $ | 1,137 | |||||||||||
| Europe | 161 | — | — | 161 | Europe | 111 | 21 | 29 | — | — | 161 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 876 | $ | 134 | $ | 288 | $ | 1,298 | $ | 557 | $ | 210 | $ | 109 | $ | 134 | $ | 288 | $ | 1,298 | |||||||||||||
2000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| North America | $ | 480 | $ | 55 | $ | 209 | $ | 744 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Europe | 113 | — | — | 113 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| $ | 593 | $ | 55 | $ | 209 | $ | 857 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The majority of North American revenue consists of services and products delivered within the United States. The majority of European revenue consists of services and products delivered primarily within the United Kingdom but also includes France and Germany. Transoceanic revenue is allocated equally between North America and Europe as it represents services provided between these two regions.
F-59F-74
Product information for the Company's information services segment follows:
| | | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | (dollars in millions) | | (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||
| Services | Services | Services | |||||||||||||||||||
| (i) Structure: | (i) Structure: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (i)Structure: | Outsourcing | $ | 77 | $ | 80 | $ | 85 | ||||||||||||||
| Outsourcing | $ | 80 | $ | 85 | $ | 65 | Systems Integration | 2 | 16 | 38 | |||||||||||
| Systems Integration | 16 | 38 | 50 | Software Spectrum. | 9 | 17 | — | ||||||||||||||
| Software Spectrum | 54 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| 88 | 113 | 123 | |||||||||||||||||||
| 150 | 123 | 115 | |||||||||||||||||||
Software Sales | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Software Sales and Licensing | Software Sales and Licensing | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Software Spectrum | 1,783 | — | — | Software Spectrum | 1,911 | 1,783 | — | ||||||||||||||
| $ | 1,933 | $ | 123 | $ | 115 | $ | 1,999 | $ | 1,896 | $ | 123 | ||||||||||
The following information provides a reconciliation of EBITDA,Net Income (Loss) to Adjusted OIBDA by operating segment, as defined by the Company, to loss from continuing operations for the three years ended December 31, 2002:2003, 2002, and 2001:
| | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
| EBITDA | $ | 354 | $ | (300 | ) | $ | (482 | ) | |||
| Depreciation and Amortization Expense | (802 | ) | (1,122 | ) | (579 | ) | |||||
| Non-Cash Compensation Expense | (181 | ) | (314 | ) | (236 | ) | |||||
| Non-Cash Impairment Expense | (182 | ) | (3,245 | ) | — | ||||||
| Loss from Operations | (811 | ) | (4,981 | ) | (1,297 | ) | |||||
| Other Income (Expense) | (423 | ) | (467 | ) | (159 | ) | |||||
| Income Tax Benefit | 121 | — | 49 | ||||||||
| Net Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (1,113 | ) | $ | (5,448 | ) | $ | (1,407 | ) | ||
| | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
| 2003 | |||||||||||||
| Net Income (Loss) | $ | (820 | ) | $ | (33 | ) | $ | 16 | $ | 126 | |||
| (Income) Loss from Discontinued Operations | (12 | ) | 7 | — | — | ||||||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting principle | — | — | (5 | ) | — | ||||||||
| Income Tax Provision (Benefit) | — | 1 | — | (51 | ) | ||||||||
| Total Other (Income) Expense | 697 | (2 | ) | — | (80 | ) | |||||||
| Operating Income (Loss) | (135 | ) | (27 | ) | 11 | (5 | ) | ||||||
| Depreciation and Amortization Expense | 792 | 29 | 6 | — | |||||||||
| Non-Cash Compensation Expense | 78 | 8 | — | — | |||||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA | $ | 735 | $ | 10 | $ | 17 | $ | (5 | ) | ||||
F-75
| | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
| 2002 | |||||||||||||
| Net Income (Loss) | $ | (1,099 | ) | $ | 14 | $ | 17 | $ | 210 | ||||
| Income from Discontinued Operations | — | (2 | ) | — | — | ||||||||
| Income Tax Benefit | (118 | ) | (2 | ) | — | (1 | ) | ||||||
| Total Other (Income) Expense | 373 | (1 | ) | — | (204 | ) | |||||||
| Operating Income (Loss) | (844 | ) | 9 | 17 | 5 | ||||||||
| Depreciation and Amortization Expense | 768 | 25 | 3 | 5 | |||||||||
| Non-Cash Compensation Expense | 175 | 6 | — | — | |||||||||
| Non-Cash Impairment Expense | 182 | — | — | — | |||||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA | $ | 281 | $ | 40 | $ | 20 | $ | 10 | |||||
| | Communications | Information Services | Coal Mining | Other | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
| 2001 | |||||||||||||
| Net Income (Loss) | $ | (4,975 | ) | $ | (22 | ) | $ | 20 | $ | (1 | ) | ||
| Loss from Discontinued Operations | 605 | — | — | — | |||||||||
| Total Other Income | (596 | ) | — | — | (12 | ) | |||||||
| Operating Income (Loss) | (4,966 | ) | (22 | ) | 20 | (13 | ) | ||||||
| Depreciation and Amortization Expense | 1,096 | 17 | 3 | 6 | |||||||||
| Non-Cash Compensation Expense | 303 | 11 | — | — | |||||||||
| Non-Cash Impairment Expense | 3,245 | — | — | — | |||||||||
| Adjusted OIBDA | $ | (322 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 23 | $ | (7 | ) | |||
(16)(18) Commitments and Contingencies
In May 2001, a subsidiary of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (the "Company") was, and two of its subsidiaries were named as a defendant inBauer, et. al. v. Level 3 Communications, LLC, et al.,, a purported multi-state class action, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois andIllinois. In April 2002, the same plaintiffs filed a second nearly identical purported multi-state class action in state court in Madison County, Illinois. In July 2001, the Company was named as a defendant inKoyle, et. al. v. Level 3 Communications, Inc., et. al., a purported multi-state class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. BothIn September 2002, Level 3 Communications, LLC was named as a defendant inSmith et al v. Sprint Communications Company, L.P., et a.l, a purported nationwide class action filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of theseIllinois. These actions involve the Company's right to install its fiber optic cable network in easements and right-of-ways crossing the plaintiffs' land. In general, the Company obtained the rights to construct its network from railroads, utilities, and others, and is installing its network along the rights-of-way so granted. Plaintiffs in the purported class actions assert
F-76
that they are the owners of lands over which the Company's fiber optic cable network passes, and that the railroads, utilities, and others who granted the Company the right to construct and maintain its network did not have the legal ability to do so. The plaintiff's efforts to seek class action status for this action have been denied. The complaint seeks damages on theories of trespass, unjust enrichment and slander of title and property, as well as punitive damages. The Company has also received, and may in the future receive, claims and demands related to rights-of-way issues similar to the issues in these cases that may be based on similar or different legal theories. To date, all attempts to have class action status granted on complaints filed against the Company or any of its subsidiaries involving claims and demands related to rights-of-way issues have been denied. Although it
On July 25, 2003, theSmith Court entered an Order preliminarily approving a settlement agreement that will resolve all claims against the Company arising out of the Company's location of fiber optic cable and related telecommunications facilities that the Company owns within railroad rights-of-way throughout the United States. In connection with the Court's Order preliminarily approving the settlement, the Court entered an Order enjoining the parties in all pending federal and state railroad rights-of-way class action litigation involving the Company from further pursuing those pending actions at this time.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, landowners who own property adjacent to the railroad rights- of-way in which the Company placed its fiber optic cable and related facilities may submit claims and receive specified compensation. The Company is unable to quantify the ultimate amount of payments to be made pursuant to the settlement until if and when (1) the settlement receives final approval and all appeals have been exhausted; and (2) the claims process has been completed.
In September 2003, a petition for appeal was granted which seeks a reversal of theSmith Court's decision to preliminarily approve the settlement and certify a nationwide class for settlement purposes. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held oral argument on the appeal in January 2004, and a decision is pending. It is still too early for the Company to reach a conclusion as to the ultimate outcome of these actions,actions. However, management believes that the Company and its subsidiaries have substantial defenses to the claims
F-60
asserted in all of these actions (and any similar claims which may be named in the future), and intends to defend them vigorously.vigorously if the settlement is not approved.
On November 19, 2002, Gary Haegle commenced a shareholder's derivative suit on behalf of the Company in the District Court of Colorado for the City and County of Broomfield entitledHaegle v. Scott, et al., (Index No. 02-CV-0196). The action is brought against the Company as a nominal defendant and against the directors of the Company, a former director of the Company and Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. ("PKS"). The Complaint alleges that the director defendants, aided and abetted by PKS, breached their fiduciary duties to the Company in connection with several transactions between the Company and PKS including contracts under which PKS constructed the Company's fiber optic cable network and manages the Company's mine properties. The Complaint also alleges that in building the fiber optic cable network, the defendants caused the Company to violate the property rights of landowners, thereby subjecting the Company to substantial potential liability. In addition, the Complaint alleges that Company assets were transferred to its officers and directors in the form of personal loans, excessive salaries and the payment of personal expenses. The action seeks both equitable and legal relief, including restitution, compensatory and punitive damages of an unspecified amount, imposition of a constructive trust, disgorgement and injunctive relief. The defendants filed a
F-77
motion to dismiss, which was denied by the court in early October. Subsequently, the Board of Directors of the Company appointed a Special Litigation Committee comprised of an independent director with the exclusive power to conduct or cause to be conducted an impartial and independent investigation of all matters alleged by the Plaintiff and to determine whether the litigation should be maintained, terminated, or otherwise disposed, in accordance with its findings as to whether the litigation is in the best interests of the Company. In addition, the Company filed a motion to stay all proceedings in the case, including all discovery, for a period of six months to enable the Special Litigation Committee to complete its evaluation. This motion was granted by the Court. As a result, all proceedings in this case have not yet responded to the Complaint.been stayed until June 17, 2004. Although it is too early for the Company to reach a conclusion as to the ultimate outcome of these actions, management believes that there are substantial defenses to the claims asserted in this action, and intends to defend them vigorously.
During the third quarter of 2002, the Company made a $21 million payment in full settlement of an outstanding litigation matter that did not relate to the Company's core businesses. The settlement payment approximated the liability that had been established for this issue. The payment is reflected in Net Cash Used in Continuing Operations—Other on the consolidated statement of cash flows.
The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to many other legal proceedings. Management believes that any resulting liabilities for these legal proceedings, beyond amounts reserved,accrued, will not materially affect the Company's financial condition or future results of operations, orbut could impact future cash flows.
Operating Leases
The Company is leasing rights of way, communications capacity and premises under various operating leases which, in addition to rental payments, require payments for insurance, maintenance, property taxes and other executory costs related to the lease. Certain leases provide for adjustments in lease cost based upon adjustments in the consumer price index and increases in the landlord's management costs. The lease agreements have various expiration dates through 2030.
The Company has obligations under non-cancelable operating leases for certain facilities and equipment.equipment, including lease obligations for which facility related restructuring charges have been recorded. Future minimum payments, including common area maintenance, for the next five years under these leases consist of the following at December 31, 20022003 (in millions):
| 2003 | $ | 76 | ||||||
| 2004 | 2004 | 74 | 2004 | $ | 84 | |||
| 2005 | 2005 | 73 | 2005 | 80 | ||||
| 2006 | 2006 | 71 | 2006 | 77 | ||||
| 2007 | 2007 | 71 | 2007 | 77 | ||||
| 2008 | 2008 | 74 | ||||||
| Thereafter | Thereafter | 389 | Thereafter | 418 | ||||
| Total | $ | 754 | Total | $ | 810 | |||
Rent expense, including common area maintenance, under non-cancelable lease agreements was $100 million in 2003, $61 million in 2002 and $95 million in 2001 and $63 million in 2000.2001.
F-78
It is customary in Level 3's industries to use various financial instruments in the normal course of business. These instruments include items such as letters of credit. Letters of credit are conditional commitments issued on behalf of Level 3 in accordance with specified terms and conditions. As of December 31, 2002,2003, Level 3 had outstanding letters of credit of approximately $47 million.$28 million, which are collateralized by cash. The Company does not believe it is practicable to estimate the fair value of the letters of credit and does not believe exposure to loss is likely nor material.
F-61
(17)(19) Related Party Transactions
Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. ("PKS") acted as the general contractor on several significant projects for the Company in 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000.2001. These projects include the (i)Structure Phoenix Data Center, the U.S. intercity network, certain metropolitan networks and certain Gateway sites, the Company's corporate headquarters and other office space in Colorado. PKS provided approximately $4 million, $9 million, $693 million, and $1,764$693 million of construction services related to these projects in 2003, 2002, 2001, and 20002001 respectively. In 2001, Level 3 issued warrants, valued at $32 million, in lieu of cash for services related to construction of the North American intercity network. PKS transferred a portion of these warrants to Walter Scott, Jr. and William L. Grewcock, a director and former director, respectively of Level 3 and PKS, for consideration in 2002.
The Company reached a final agreement with PKS in May 2003 regarding disputed claims on the intercity network contract. PKS returned approximately 606,000 fully vested warrants that had been granted to them in December 2001 and had been capitalized to property, plant and equipment. The Company reduced stockholders' equity and property, plant and equipment by approximately $2 million for the value of the warrants returned. The Company also satisfied $10 million of related current obligations with PKS through the payment of funds that had been classified as restricted cash.
Level 3 also receives certain mine management services from PKS. The expense for these services was $5 million for 2003, $7 million for 2002, and $5 million for 2001, and $29 million for 2000, and is recorded in selling, general and administrative expenses. As of December 31, 2003 and 2002, the Company owed approximately $2 million and $2 million, respectively for fourth quarter mine management services.
In September 2000, the Company sold its entire interest in Walnut Creek Mining Company to PKS for cash of $37 million. The sale resulted in a pre-tax gain of $21 million to the Company, which is included in gain on sale of assets in the accompanying Consolidated Statement of Operations.
RCN, an equity method investee, purchased less than $1$5 million, $3$5 million and $2$3 million of telecommunications and information services outsourcing services from the Company in 2003, 2002 2001 and 2000,2001, respectively. At December 31, 2003 and 2002, RCN owed Level 3 approximately $2 million and $3 million, respectively for costs associated with communications joint build projects. RCN and the Company are currently negotiating a settlement of this receivable.
On February 22, 2002, Level 3 Holdings, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, agreed to acquire from Mr. David C. McCourt, a director of the Company, his 10% interest in Level 3 Telecom Holdings, Inc., the Company's subsidiary that indirectly holds the Company's ownership interests in RCN and Commonwealth Telephone. The total cash consideration paid to Mr. McCourt in this transaction was $15 million and was accounted for as goodwill attributable to the RCN and Commonwealth Telephone investments.(See Note 12).
(18)(20) Subsequent Events
On January 3, 2003 Level 3 received20, 2004, the Company sold its remaining shares in Commonwealth Telephone for approximately $46$41 million in cash, from the saleresulting in a gain of approximately $22 million.
F-79
As of the "91 Express Lanes" toll road in Orange County, California. In addition, the Company's long-term debt was reduced by approximately $139 million. The Orange County Transportation Authority purchased the toll road from the California Private Transportation Company, L.P. (CPTC),date of this report RCN has indicated that it intends to file for $207.5 million in cash and assumed debt. Level 3 received proceeds from the sale because it is a 65 percent owner of CPTC. Level 3 recorded a gain on the transaction of approximately $70 million in the first quarter of 2003.
In January 2003, in order to ensure a cost structure appropriate for the difficult communications market, Level 3 announced a limited workforce reduction of approximately 120 employees in the communications business in North America and Europe. In addition, the information services business announced workforce reductions related to its systems integration business in Ireland and Software Spectrum in Dallas. Approximately 75 and 50 employees were affected in Ireland and Dallas, respectively. Charges related to these actions will be recorded as incurred.
F-62
On February 4, 2003, Level 3 announced the acquisition of substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity, Inc., a Massachusetts-based provider of communications services. Under the agreement, Level 3 paid $60 million in net cash consideration to Genuity and assumed certain long-term operating agreements. The Company also paid $77 million in cash for assumed network obligations to be used by Level 3 in 2003. As part of the transaction, Level 3 assumed most of Genuity's existing customer contracts and in addition, has signed new multi-year customer contracts with AOL Time Warner and Verizon.
In February 2003, Level 3 and XO Communications ("XO") amended their 1998 cost sharing and IRU agreement. As part of that agreement, XO purchased 24 fibers and one empty conduit along Level 3's North American intercity network. The amended agreement, among other things, requires XO to return six fibers and the empty conduit to Level 3. In return Level 3 will 1) reduce the annual operations and maintenance ("O&M") charges XO was required to pay under the original agreement, 2) provide XO an option, expiring in July 2007, to acquire a 20 year IRU for a single conduit within or along Level 3's intercity network and 3) provide XO an option to purchase up to 25% of the fiber installed in the next conduit within or along each segment of the intercity network.
As individual segments were delivered, Level 3 deferred and amortized the revenue attributable to the conduit over the term of the original agreement.Chapter 11 bankruptcy. As a result of this announcement, the amended agreement,market value of Level 3's investment in RCN decreased significantly. However, this did not have an effect on the carrying value of the investment in RCN as of December 31, 2003 as it was zero. On March 5, 2004, the market value of the Company's investment in RCN was approximately $9 million.
In February 2004, Level 3 will have no further obligationagreed to settle a vendor contract with respectAllegiance Telecom, Inc. The settlement, which is subject to the original conduit, and thus expects to be able to recognize as revenue, the remaining unamortized deferred revenue, less the fair valuesapproval of the Allegiance bankruptcy court and other separable elements that meet the relevant accounting criteria. An independent valuation firm has been engaged byconditions, would terminate a multi-year contract Level 3 has to determinepurchase wholesale dial access services, including the fair valueuse of these other elements. The valuation firm has not completed its assessment atoperating equipment, from Allegiance. To settle the time of this filing, however,contract, Level 3 expectshas agreed to recognize a significant amountpay Allegiance $54 million in cash. The Company has approximately $200 million of revenue and incomeoutstanding debt in the first quarterform of 2003capital lease obligations that will be eliminated as a result of this transaction.the settlement.
(19)(21) Unaudited Quarterly Financial Data
| | | March | June | September | December | | March | June | September | December | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | 2002 | 2001 | 2002 | 2001 | 2002 | 2001 | 2002 | 2001 | | 2003 | 2002 | 2003 | 2002 | 2003 | 2002 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | (in millions except per share data) | | (in millions except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue | Revenue | $ | 386 | $ | 448 | $ | 750 | $ | 387 | $ | 1,067 | $ | 372 | $ | 945 | $ | 326 | Revenue | $ | 1,227 | $ | 386 | $ | 937 | $ | 750 | $ | 874 | $ | 1,049 | $ | 988 | $ | 926 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Loss from Operations | (223 | ) | (413 | ) | (211 | ) | (572 | ) | (129 | ) | (396 | ) | (248 | ) | (3,600 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | (90 | ) | (535 | ) | (156 | ) | (731 | ) | (299 | ) | (437 | ) | (313 | ) | (3,275 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating Income (Loss) | Operating Income (Loss) | 171 | (223 | ) | (142 | ) | (211 | ) | (109 | ) | (130 | ) | (76 | ) | (249 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations | Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations | 110 | (90 | ) | (456 | ) | (156 | ) | (250 | ) | (300 | ) | (125 | ) | (314 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | 4 | — | (6 | ) | — | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Income (Loss) | Net Income (Loss) | 119 | (90 | ) | (462 | ) | (156 | ) | (247 | ) | (299 | ) | (121 | ) | (313 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loss per Share (Basic and Diluted): | Loss per Share (Basic and Diluted): | Loss per Share (Basic and Diluted): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss from Continuing Operations | $ | (0.56 | ) | $ | (1.41 | ) | $ | (0.58 | ) | $ | (1.92 | ) | $ | (0.74 | ) | $ | (1.35 | ) | $ | (0.83 | ) | $ | (9.70 | ) | Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations | $ | 0.24 | $ | (0.23 | ) | $ | (0.93 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | $ | (0.38 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | ||||
| Discontinued Operations | — | (0.04 | ) | — | (0.07 | ) | — | (0.07 | ) | — | (1.40 | ) | Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations | 0.01 | — | (0.02 | ) | — | — | — | 0.01 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Extraordinary Gain on Debt Extinguishment | 0.33 | — | 0.19 | — | 0.01 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 2.56 | Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle | 0.01 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Loss | $ | (0.23 | ) | $ | (1.45 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | $ | (1.99 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | $ | (1.17 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | $ | (8.54 | ) | Net Income (Loss) | $ | 0.26 | $ | (0.23 | ) | $ | (0.95 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | $ | (0.38 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | $ | (0.18 | ) | $ | (0.73 | ) | ||||
Loss per share was calculated for each three-month period on a stand-alone basis. As a result of stock transactions during the periods, the sum of the loss per share for the four quarters of each year may not equal the loss per share for the twelve month periods. As a result of discontinued operations in 2003, certain amounts previously included in the 2003 quarterly reports on Forms 10-Q have been reclassified from continuing operations to discontinued operations.
The increase in revenues during 2003 is largely attributable to the acquisition of substantially all of the assets and operations of Genuity in February 2003. In addition, the Company recognized $294 million of revenue related to XO in the first quarter of 2003. The Company also recognized income tax benefit of $12 million and $38 million during the third and fourth quarters of 2003, respectively.
The Company realized a gain of approximately $70 million in the first quarter of 2003 attributable to the sale of the "91 Express Lanes" toll road assets.
The Company exchanged approximately $1.007 billion of its long-term for common stock in 2003. The Company recognized gains on extinguishment of debt of approximately $2 million, $2 million, and $37 million during the second, third and fourth quarters of 2003, respectively. In addition, the Company
F-80
recognized induced conversion expense related to the exchange of equity for convertible debt of $190 million and $9 million during the second and third quarters of 2003, respectively. The induced conversion expense is included in other, net on the consolidated statement of operations.
The Company purchased software resellers CorpSoft and Software Spectrum in March and June of 2002, respectively. Revenue attributable to these businesses was $53 million, $422 million, 742$742 million and $620 million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2002, respectively.
The Company recorded impairment charges of $44 million and $57 in the second and fourth quarters of 2002 related to a colocation facility in Boston, as well as excess communications inventory and certain corporate facilities in Colorado, which are classified as held for sale in other non-current
F-63
assets. As a result of the completion of additional colocation space in Boston by other providers, the continued overabundance of communications equipment in the secondary markets, and the soft demand for office space in the metropolitan Denver area, the Company believes that these assets are obsolete and that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to these assets will be insufficient to recover their current carrying value. The new carrying values of these assets are based on offers received from third parties for the real estate properties or actual sales of similar communications assets.
In December 2002, Level 3 sold one of its New York colocation facilities and a colocation facility near Boston. The Company recognized a loss on these transactions of approximately $81 million which is included in restructuring and impairment charges on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statements of Operations.
In the fourth quarter of 2001, the Company determined that, due to the continuing economic slowdown and continued over-capacity in certain areas of the telecommunications industry, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows attributable to certain assets would not exceed the current carrying value of the assets. The Company, therefore, recorded an impairment charge of $3.2 billion to reflect the difference between the estimated fair value of the assets and their current carrying value.operations.
The Company realized gains of $102 million and $89 million in the second and fourth quarters of 2002, respectively, attributable to the sale of Commonwealth Telephone common stock.
Level 3 recognized an income tax benefit of $120 million in the first quarter of 2002 due to Federal tax legislation enacted in the period.
As described in Note 3, the Company sold its Asian telecommunication operations to Reach Ltd. in January 2002. In accordance with SFAS No. 144, the Company classified these assets as held-for-sale and accordingly reclassified the losses attributable to the Asian operations to Discontinued Operations. In the fourth quarter of 2001, the Company recognized a loss of $516 million within discontinued operations, equal to the difference between the carrying value of the Asian operations and its estimated fair value.
The Company repurchasedexchanged approximately $671 million of its long-term debt using cash and equityfor common stock in 2002. The Company recognized extraordinary gains on extinguishment of debt of approximately $130 million, $76 million, $5 million and $44 million during the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2002, respectively. In addition, the Company recognized induced conversion expense related to the exchange of equity for convertible debt of $20 million and $68 million during the third and fourth quarters of 2002, respectively. The induced conversion expense is included in Other,other, net on the Consolidated Statementsconsolidated statement of Operations.operations.
The Company repurchased approximately $1.8 billion of its long-term debt using cash and equity in 2001. The Company recognized extraordinary gains of approximately $93 million and $981 million on these transactions in the third and fourth quarters of 2001, respectively.
F-64F-81
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, this 2515th day of March, 2003.2004.
| LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. | |||
By: | Name: James Q. Crowe Title:Chief Executive Officer | ||
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Walter Scott Jr. | Chairman of the Board | March | ||
James Q. Crowe | Chief Executive Officer and Director | March | ||
/s/ | ||||
Charles C. Miller, III | Vice Chairman and Executive Vice President | March | ||
/s/ | Group Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) | March | ||
Eric J. Mortensen | Senior Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer) | March | ||
Mogens C. Bay | Director | March | ||
/s/ RICHARD R. JAROS Richard R. Jaros | Director | March | ||
/s/ ROBERT E. JULIAN Robert E. Julian | Director | March | ||
David C. McCourt | Director | March | ||
Arun Netravali | Director | March 15, 2004 | ||
/s/ JOHN T. REED John T. Reed | Director | March | ||
/s/ | ||||
Colin | Director | March | ||
/s/ MICHAEL B. YANNEY Michael B. Yanney | Director | March |
I, James Q. Crowe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Level 3 Communications, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
I, Sureel A. Choksi, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Level 3 Communications, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James Q. Crowe, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sureel A. Choksi, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| 15, 2004 |