This annual report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), regarding, among other things, our plans, strategies and prospects, both business and financial including, without limitation, the forward-looking statements set forth in Part I. Item 1. under the heading “Business” and in Part II. Item 7. under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this annual report. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including, without limitation, the factors described in Part I. Item 1A. under “Risk Factors” and in Part II. Item 7. under the heading, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this annual report. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this annual report may be identified by the use of forward‑looking words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “will,” “may,” “intend,” “estimated,” “aim,” “on track,” “target,” “opportunity,” “tentative,” “positioning,” “designed,” “create,” “predict,” “project,” “initiatives,” “seek,” “would,” “could,” “continue,” “ongoing,” “upside,” “increases” and “potential,” among others. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements we make in this annual report are set forth in this annual report and in other reports or documents that we file from time to time with the SEC, and include, but are not limited to:

Privacy and Information Security Regulation

The Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the “Communications Act”) limits our ability to collect, use, and disclose subscribers’customers’ personally identifiable information for our video, voice, and Internet services, as well as provides requirements to safeguard such information. We are subject to additional federal, state, and local laws and regulations that impose additional restrictions on the collection, use and disclosure of consumer subscriber and employee information. Further, the FCC, Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), and many states regulate and restrict the marketing practices of communications service providers, including telemarketing and online marketing efforts. The FCC recently adopted privacy rules that contain new restrictions affectingsending unsolicited commercial emails.

As a result of the use ofFCC’s 2017 decision to reclassify broadband and voice customer data, and various other federal agencies, includingInternet access service as an “information service,” the FTC continueonce again has the authority, pursuant to provide updated guidance onits authority to enforce against unfair or deceptive acts and practices, to protect the privacy of Internet service customers, including our use and protectiondisclosure of consumer data.certain customer information. Although one court decision has raised questions regarding the extent of FTC jurisdiction over companies that offer both common carrier services as well as non-common carrier services, that decision has been stayed, pending review by the full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Our operations are also subject to federal and state laws governing information security, including new “reasonable” data security requirements set forth in the FCC’s recently adopted privacy rules, which will become effective on March 3, 2017.security. In the event of an information security breach, such rules may require consumer and government agency notification and may result in regulatory enforcement actions with the potential of monetary forfeitures. The FCC, has recently used the existing authority under its privacy and security requirements for telecommunications services to bring enforcement actions against several companies for failing to protect customer data from unauthorized access by and disclosure to third parties, resulting in substantial monetary settlements. Similarly, the FTC and state attorneys general regularly bring enforcement actions against companies related to information security breaches and privacy violations. Several state legislatures are considering the adoption of new data security and cybersecurity legislation that could result in additional network and information security requirements for our business.

Various security standards provide guidance to telecommunications companies in order to help identify and mitigate cybersecurity risk. One such standard is the voluntary framework released by the National Institute for Standards and Technologies (“NIST”) in February 2014, in cooperation with other federal agencies and owners and operators of U.S. critical infrastructure.Theinfrastructure. The NIST cybersecurity framework provides a prioritized and flexible model for organizations to identify and manage cyber risks inherent to their business. It was designed to supplement, not supersede, existing cybersecurity regulations and requirements. Several government agencies have encouraged compliance with the NIST cybersecurity framework, including the FCC, which is also considering expansion of its cybersecurity guidelines or the adoption of cybersecurity requirements. NIST recently proposed draft updates to this voluntary framework and is expected to release final revisions in 2018.

After the repeal of the FCC’s 2016 privacy rules through the Congressional Review Act, many states and local authorities have considered legislative or other actions that would impose additional restrictions on our ability to collect, use and disclose certain information. Despite language in the FCC’s December 2017 decision reclassifying broadband Internet access service as an “information service,” that preempts state and local privacy regulations that conflict with federal policy, we expect these state and local efforts to regulate online privacy to continue in 2018. Additionally, several state legislatures are considering the adoption of new data security and cybersecurity legislation that could result in additional network and information security requirements for our business. There are also bills pending in both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate that could impose new privacy and data security obligations. We cannot predict what proposals maywhether any of these efforts will be adoptedsuccessful or preempted, or how new legislation and regulations, if any, would affect our business.

The Communications Act requires most utilities owning utility poles to provide cable systems with access to poles and conduits and simultaneously subjects the rates charged for this access to either federal or state regulation.  In 2011 and again in 2015, the FCC amended its existing pole attachment rules to promote broadband deployment.  The 2011 order allows for new penalties in certain cases involving unauthorized attachments, but generally strengthens the cable industry’s ability to access investor-owned utility poles on reasonable rates, terms, and conditions.  Additionally, the 2011 order reduces the federal rate formula previously applicable to “telecommunications” attachments to closely approximate the rate formula applicable to “cable” attachments. The 2015 order continues the reconciliation of rates, effectively closing the remaining “loophole” that potentially allowed for significantly higher rates for telecommunications than for “cable” attachments in certain scenarios.scenarios, and minimizing the rate consequences of any of our services if deemed “telecommunications” for pole attachment purposes. Utility pole owners have appealed the 2015 order. Neither the 2011 order nor the 2015 order directly affect the rate in states that self-regulate (rather than

allow the FCC to regulate pole rates), but many of those states have substantially the same rate for cable and telecommunications attachments.

AlthoughSome municipalities have enacted “one-touch” make-ready pole attachment ordinances, which permit third parties to alter components of our network attached to utility poles in ways that could adversely affect our businesses. Some of these ordinances have been challenged with differing results. In 2017, the 2011 and 2015 orders do not impact the status quo treatment of cable-provided VoIP service as an unclassified service eligibleFCC initiated a rulemaking that considers amending its pole attachment rules to permit a “one-touch” make-ready-like process for the favorable cable rate,poles within its jurisdiction. If adopted, these rules could have a similar effect as the issue has not been fully resolved by the FCC,municipal one-touch make-ready ordinances and a potential change in classification in a pending proceeding could adversely impactaffect our pole attachment rates in states or for periods of time in which the cable rate is or was lower than the telecommunications rate.  Additionally, although the FCC’s 2015 reclassification of broadband Internet access as a telecommunications service also set forth the FCC’s intention that pole rates not increase as result. That reclassification ruling could adversely impact our pole attachment rates in states or for periods of time in which the cable rate is or was lower than the telecommunications rate.

Federal law strictly limits the potential scope of cable rate regulation. Pursuant to federal law, all video offerings are universally exempt from rate regulation, except for a cable system’s minimum level of video programming service, referred to as “basic service,” and associated equipment. Rate regulation of basic service and associated equipment operates pursuant to a federal formula, with local governments, commonly referred to as local franchising authorities, primarily responsible for administering this regulation. The majority of our local franchising authorities have never certified to regulate basic service cable rates. In 2015, the FCC adopted an order (which is now underwas subsequently upheld on appeal) reversing its historic approach to rate regulation certifications and requiring a local franchise authority interested in regulating cable rates to first make an affirmative showing that there is no “effective competition” (as defined under federal law) in the community. Very few local franchise authorities have filed the necessary rate regulation certification, and the FCC’s 2015 order should make it more difficult for such entities to assert rate regulation in the future.

There have been calls to impose expanded rate regulation on the cable industry. Confronted with rapidly increasing cable programming costs, it is possible that Congress may adopt new constraints on the retail pricing or packaging of cable programming. Any such constraints could adversely affect our operations.

Federal regulation of the communications field traditionally included a host of ownership restrictions, which limited the size of certain media entities and restricted their ability to enter into competing enterprises. Through a series of legislative, regulatory, and judicial actions, most of these restrictions have been either eliminated or substantially relaxed. Changes in this regulatory area could alter the business environment in which we operate.

Local franchise agreements often require cable operators to set aside certain channels for public, educational, and governmental access programming. Federal law also requires cable systems to designate up to 15% of their channel capacity for commercial leased access by unaffiliated third parties, who may offer programming that our customers do not particularly desire. The FCC adopted revised rules in 2007 mandating a significant reduction in the rates that operators can charge commercial leased access users and imposing additional administrative requirements that would be burdensome on the cable industry. The effect of the FCC’s revised rules was stayed by a federal court, pending a cable industry appeal and an adverse finding by the Office of Management and Budget. Although commercial leased access activity historically has been relatively limited, increased activity in this area could further burden the channel capacity of our cable systems.

FCC regulations cover a variety of additional areas, including, among other things: (1) equal employment opportunity obligations; (2) customer service standards; (3) technical service standards; (4) mandatory blackouts of certain network and syndicated programming; (5) restrictions on political advertising; (6) restrictions on advertising in children’s programming; (7) licensing of systems and facilities; (8) maintenance of public files; (9) emergency alert systems; (10) inside wiring and (10)exclusive contracts for MDU complexes; and (11) disability access, including new requirements governing video-description and closed-captioning. Each of these regulations restricts our business practices to varying degrees and may impose additional costs on our operations.

It is possible that Congress or the FCC will expand or modify its regulation of cable systems in the future, and we cannot predict at this time how that might impact our business.

Cable systems are subject to a federal copyright compulsory license covering carriage of television and radio broadcast signals.

The copyright law provides copyright owners the right to audit our payments under the compulsory license, and we are currently subject to ongoing compulsory copyright audits. The possible modification or elimination of this compulsory copyright license is the subject of continuing legislative proposals and administrative review and could adversely affect our ability to obtain desired broadcast programming.

Copyright clearances for non-broadcast programming services are arranged through private negotiations. Cable operators also must obtain music rights for locally originated programming and advertising from the major music performing rights organizations. These licensing fees have been the source of litigation in the past, and we cannot predict with certainty whether license fee disputes may arise in the future.

Our cable systems generally are operated pursuant to nonexclusive franchises, permits, and similar authorizations granted by a municipality or other state or local government entity in order to utilize and cross public rights-of-way. Cable franchises generally are granted for fixed terms and in many cases include monetary penalties for noncompliance and may be terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with material provisions. The specific terms and conditions of cable franchises vary significantly between jurisdictions. Cable franchises generally contain provisions governing cable operations, franchise fees, system construction, maintenance, technical performance, customer service standards, supporting and carrying public access channels, and changes in the ownership of the franchisee. A number of states subject cable systems to the jurisdiction of centralized state government agencies, such as public utility commissions. Although local franchising authorities have considerable discretion in establishing franchise terms, certain federal protections benefit cable operators. For example, federal law caps local franchise fees.

Prior to the scheduled expiration of our franchises, we generally initiate renewal proceedings with the granting authorities. The Communications Act, of 1934, as amended (the “Communications Act”), which is the primary federal statute regulating interstate communications, provides for an orderly franchise renewal process in which granting authorities may not unreasonably withhold renewals. In connection with the franchise renewal process, however, many governmental authorities require the cable operator to make additional costly commitments. Historically, we have been able to renew our franchises without incurring significant costs, although any particular franchise may not be renewed on commercially favorable terms or otherwise. If we fail to obtain renewals of franchises representing a significant number of our customers, it could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations, or our liquidity, including our ability to comply with our debt covenants.liquidity. Similarly, if a local franchising authority’s consent is required for the purchase or sale of a cable system, the local franchising authority may attempt to impose more burdensome requirements as a condition for providing its consent.

The traditional cable franchising regime has undergone significant change as a result of various federal and state actions. The FCC has adopted rules that streamline entry for new competitors (particularly those affiliated with telephone companies) and reduce certain franchising burdens for these new entrants. The FCC adopted more modest relief for existing cable operators.

At the same time, a substantial number of states have adopted new franchising laws. Again, these laws were principally designed to streamline entry for new competitors, and they often provide advantages for these new entrants that are not immediately available to existing cable operators. In many instances, these franchising regimes do not apply to established cable operators until the existing franchise expires or a competitor directly enters the franchise territory. The exact nature of these state franchising laws, and their varying application to new and existing video providers, will impact our franchising obligations and our competitive position.

In December 2017, the FCC regulations were upheld byadopted an order repudiating its treatment of broadband as a “telecommunications service,” reclassifying broadband as an “information service,” and eliminating the D.C. Circuit2015 rules other than the transparency requirement, which it eased in June 2016, but remain subjectsignificant ways. The FCC also ruled that state regulators may not impose obligations similar to additional appeals.federal obligations that the FCC removed. We expect that various parties will challenge the FCC’s December 2017 ruling in court, and, we cannot predict how those ongoing appealsany such court challenges will be resolved. Moreover, it is possible that Congress or the FCC will modify or repeal the existing regulations.

The FCC’s December 2017 ruling does not affect other regulatory obligations on Internet access service providers. In addition to the regulatory obligations noted above, providers of broadband Internet access serviceproviders. Notably, broadband providers are obliged by the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)("CALEA") to configure their networks in a manner that facilitates the ability of law enforcement, with proper legal authorization, to obtain information about

our customers, including the content of their Internet communicationscommunications. The FCC and Congress also are considering subjecting Internet access services to the Universal Service funding requirements. These funding requirements could impose significant new costs on our Internet service. Also, the FCC and some state regulatory commissions direct certain subsidies to telephone companies deploying broadband to areas deemed to be “unserved” or “underserved.” We have opposed such subsidies when directed to areas that we serve. Despite our efforts, future subsidies may be directed to areas served by us, which could

Aside from the FCC’s generally applicable regulations, we have made certain commitments to comply with the FCC’s order in connection with the FCC’s approval of the TWC Transaction and the Bright House Transaction (discussed above)below).

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 created a more favorable regulatory environment for us to provide telecommunications and/or competitive voice services than had previously existed. In particular, it established requirements ensuring that competitive telephone companies could interconnect their networks with those providers of traditional telecommunications services to open the market to competition. The FCC has subsequently ruled that competitive telephone companies that support VoIP services, such as those we offer our customers, are entitled to interconnection with incumbent providers of traditional telecommunications services, which ensures that our VoIP services can compete in the market. Since that time, the FCC has initiated a proceeding to determine whether such interconnection rights should extend to traditional and competitive networks utilizing IP technology, and how to encourage the transition to IP networks throughout the industry. The FCC initiated a further proceeding in 2017 to consider whether additional changes to interconnection obligations are needed, including how and where companies interconnect their networks with the networks of other providers. New rules or obligations arising from these proceedings may affect our ability to compete in the provision of voice services.

The FCC has collected extensive data from providers of point to point transport (“special access”) services, such as us, and the FCC may use that data to evaluate whether the market for such services is competitive, or whether the market should be subject to further regulation, which may increase our costs or constrain our ability to compete in this market. The FCC also recently selected a new national local number portability administrator, and the change to that new administrator may adversely impact our ability to manage number porting and related tasks.

Further regulatory changes are being considered that could impact our voice business and that of our primary telecommunications competitors. The FCC and state regulatory authorities are considering, for example, whether certain common carrier regulations traditionally applied to incumbent local exchange carriers should be modified or reduced, and, in some jurisdictions, the extent to which common carrier requirements should be extended to VoIP providers. The FCC has already determined that certain providers of voice services using Internet Protocol technology must comply with requirements relating to 911 emergency services (“E911”), the CALEA (the statute governing law enforcement access to and surveillance of communications), Universal Service Fund contributions, customer privacy and Customer Proprietary Network Information issues, number portability, network outage reporting, rural call completion, disability access, regulatory fees, back-up power obligations, and discontinuance of service. In November 2014, the FCC adopted an order imposing limited back-up power obligations on providers of facilities-based fixed, residential voice services that are not otherwise line-powered, including our VoIP services. This order became effective in February 2016 and requires us to disclose certain information to customers and to make back-up power available at the point of sale. In March 2007, a federal appeals court affirmed the FCC’s decision concerning federal regulation of certain VoIP services, but declined to specifically find that VoIP service provided by cable companies, such as we provide, should be regulated only at the federal level. As a result, some states have begun proceedings to subject cable VoIP services to state level regulation, and at least one state has asserted jurisdiction over our VoIP services. We have filedprevailed on a legal challenge to that state’s assertion of jurisdiction,jurisdiction. However, the state has appealed that ruling in a case which is now pending before a federal districtappellate court in Minnesota. Although we have registered with, or obtained certificates or authorizations from the FCC and the state regulatory authorities in those states in which we offer competitive voice services in order to ensure the continuity of our services and to maintain needed network interconnection arrangements, it is unclear whether and how these and other ongoing regulatory matters ultimately will be resolved.

In connection with approval of the Transactions, federal and state regulators imposed a number of post-merger conditions on us including but not limited to the following.

The FCC conditions also contain a number of compliance reporting requirements.

The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Order prohibits us from entering into or enforcing any agreement with a video programmer that forbids, limits or creates incentives to limit the video programmer’s provision of content to OVDs.online video distributors ("OVDs"). We will not be able to avail ourself of other distributors’ most favored nation (“MFN”) provisions if they are inconsistent with this prohibition. The DOJ’s conditions are effective for seven years, although we may petition the DOJ to eliminate the conditions after five years.

Certain state regulators, including California, New York, Hawaii and New Jersey also imposed conditions in connection with the approval of the Transactions. These conditions include requirements related to:

As of December 31, 2016,2017, we had approximately 91,50094,800 active full-time equivalent employees. At December 31, 2016, approximately 2,500 of our employees were represented by collective bargaining agreements. We believe we have good relations with our employees including those represented by collective bargaining agreements.

Item 1A.     Risk Factors.

UntilThere can be no assurances that we can successfully complete the closingintegration of the Transactions, Legacy Charter,our business with that of Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House operated independently, and there can be no assurances that their businesses can be integrated successfully.House. We now have significantly more systems, assets, investments, businesses, customers and employees than each company did prior to the Transactions. It is possible that the integration process could result in the loss of key Charter employees, the loss of customers, the disruption of our ongoing businesses or in unexpected integration issues, higher than expected integration costs and an overall post-completion integration process that takes longer than originally anticipated. The process of integrating Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House with the Legacy Charter operations will requirerequires significant capital expenditures and the expansion of certain operations and operating and financial systems. Management will be requiredcontinues to devote a significant amount of time and attention to the integration process and there is a significant degree of difficulty and management involvement inherent in that process. These difficulties include:

Even if the new businesses are successfully integrated, it may not be possible to realize the benefits that are expected to result from the Transactions, or realize these benefits within the time frame that is expected. For example, the eliminationbenefits of duplicative costsour pricing and packaging and converting our video product to all-digital in certain Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House systems may not be possiblefully realized or may take longer than anticipated, or the benefits from the Transactions may be offset by costs incurred or

delays in integrating the businesses and increased operating costs. If the combined company fails to realize the anticipated benefits from the transactions,Transactions, our liquidity, results of operations, financial condition and/or share price may be adversely affected. In addition, at times, the attention of certain members of our management and resources may be focused on the integration of the businesses and diverted from day-to-day business operations, which may disrupt the business of the combined company.

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, better access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater resources for marketing, greater and more favorable brand name recognition, and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation in the operatingcable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules have provided additional benefits to certain of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources, or efficiencies of scale.

Overbuilds could also adversely affect our growth, financial condition, and results of Legacy TWC and/operations, by creating or Legacy Bright Houseincreasing competition. We are less thanaware of traditional overbuild situations impacting certain of our markets, however, we are unable to predict the extent to which additional overbuild situations may occur.

Newer products and services, particularly alternative methods for the distribution, sale and viewing of content will likely continue to be developed, further increasing the number of competitors that we face. The increasing number of choices available to audiences, including low-cost or free choices, could negatively impact not only consumer demand for our products and services, but also advertisers’ willingness to purchase advertising from us. We compete for the sale of advertising revenue with television networks and stations, as well as other advertising platforms, such as radio, print and, increasingly, online media. Our failure to effectively anticipate or adapt to new technologies and changes in consumer expectations and behavior could significantly adversely affect our competitive position and our business and results of operations.

We are exposed to risks associated with the economic conditions of our current and potential customers, the potential financial instability of our customers and their financial ability to purchase our products. If there were a general economic downturn, we may experience increased cancellations by our customers or unfavorable changes in the mix of products purchased, including an increase in the capital expendituresnumber of homes that replace their video service with Internet-delivered and/or over-air content, which would negatively impact our ability to upgradeattract customers, increase rates and maintain those assetsor increase revenue. In addition, providing video

In addition, we are susceptible to risks associated with the potential financial instability of the vendors and third parties on which we rely to provide products and services or to which we outsource certain functions. The same economic conditions that may affect our customers, as well as volatility and disruption in the capital and credit markets, also could adversely affect vendors and third parties and lead to keep pace with technologicalsignificant increases in prices, reduction in output or the bankruptcy of our vendors or third parties upon which we rely. Any interruption in the services provided by our vendors or by third parties could adversely affect our cash flow, results of operation and financial condition.

We may encounter unforeseen difficulties as we increase the scale of our service offerings to businesses. We sell Internet access, data networking and fiber connectivity to cellular towers and office buildings, and video and business voice services to businesses and have increased our focus on growing this business. In order to grow our commercial business, we expect to continue to invest in technology, equipment and personnel focused on the commercial business. Commercial business customers often require service level agreements and generally have heightened customer expectations for reliability of services. If our efforts to build the infrastructure to scale the commercial business are not successful, the growth of our commercial services business would be limited. We depend on interconnection and related services provided by certain third parties for the growth of our commercial business. As a result, our ability to implement changes as the services grow may be limited. If we are unable to meet these service level requirements or expectations, our commercial business could be adversely affected. Finally, we expect advances in communications technology, as well as changes in the marketplace and the regulatory and legislative environment. Consequently, we are unable to predict the effect that ongoing or future developments in these areas might have on our voice and commercial businesses and operations.

Video programming has been, and is expected to continue to be, our largest operating expense item. In recent years, the cable industry has experienced a rapid escalation in the cost of programming. We will deriveexpect programming costs to continue to increase due to a portionvariety of factors including amounts paid for broadcast station retransmission consent, annual increases imposed by programmers, including sports programmers, and the carriage of incremental programming, including new services and VOD programming. The inability to fully pass programming cost increases on to our continuing revenuescustomers has had, and net income fromis expected in the operations of Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House. Therefore, any negativefuture to have, an adverse impact on our cash flow and operating margins associated with the video product. We have programming contracts that have expired and others that will expire at or before the end of 2018. There can be no assurance that these companiesagreements will be renewed on favorable or comparable terms. In addition, a number of programmers have begun to sell their services through alternative distribution channels, including IP-based platforms, which are less secure than our own video distribution platforms. There is growing evidence that these less secure video distribution platforms are leading to video product theft via password sharing among consumers. Password sharing may drive down the operating results derivednumber of customers who pay for certain programming, putting programmer revenues at risk, and which in turn may cause certain programmers to seek even higher programming fees from us. To the extent that we are unable to reach agreement with certain programmers on terms that we believe are reasonable, we have been, and may be in the future, forced to remove such companiesprogramming channels from our line-up, which may result in a loss of customers. Our failure to carry programming that is attractive to our customers could harm the combined company’s operatingadversely impact our customer levels, operations and financial results. In addition, if our Internet customers are unable to access desirable content online because content providers block or limit access by our customers as a class, our ability to gain and retain customers, especially Internet customers, may be negatively impacted.

Our business and the businessesIncreased demands by owners of Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright Housesome broadcast stations for carriage of other services or payments to those broadcasters for retransmission consent are characterized by rapid technological change and the introduction of new products and services. We intendlikely to further increase our programming costs. Federal law allows commercial television broadcast stations to make investments in the combined businessan election between “must-carry” rights and transition toward only using two-way all-digital set-top boxes. The increase in capital expenditures necessaryan alternative “retransmission-consent” regime. When a station opts for the transition toward two-way set-top boxesretransmission consent regime, we are not allowed to carry the station’s signal without that station’s permission. In some cases, we carry stations under short-term arrangements while we attempt to negotiate new long-term retransmission agreements. If negotiations with these programmers prove unsuccessful, they could require us to cease carrying their signals, possibly for an indefinite period. Any loss of stations could make our video service less attractive to customers, which could result in the business may negatively impact the expected financial results from the Transactions. The combined company may not be ableless subscription and advertising revenue. In retransmission-consent negotiations, broadcasters often condition consent with respect to fund the capital expenditures necessary to keep pace with technological developments, execute the plans to do so,one station on carriage of one or anticipate the demand of its customers for products andmore other stations or programming services requiring new technologyin which they or bandwidth. Our inability totheir affiliates have an interest.

Our inability to maintain and expand our upgraded systems and upgrade our existingprovide advanced services such as a state of the art user interface in a timely manner, or combined businessesto anticipate the demands of the marketplace, could materially adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers. In addition, as we launch our new mobile services using virtual network operator rights from a third party, we expect an initial funding period to grow a new product as well as negative working capital impacts from the timing of device-related cash flows when we provide the handset or tablet pursuant to equipment installation plans. Consequently, our growth, financial condition and results of operations could suffer materially.

Any of these events, if directed at, or experienced by, us or technologies upon which we depend, could have adverse consequences on our network, our customers and our business, including degradation of service, service disruption, excessive call volume to call centers, and damage to our or our customers’ equipment and data. Large expenditures may be necessary to repair or replace damaged property, networks or information systems or to protect them from similar events in the future. Moreover, the amount and scope of insurance that we maintain against losses resulting from any such events or security breaches may not be sufficient to cover our losses or otherwise adequately compensate us for any disruptions to our business that may result. Any such significant service disruption could result in damage to our reputation and credibility, customer dissatisfaction and ultimately a loss of customers or revenue. Any significant loss of customers or revenue, or significant increase in costs of serving those customers, could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations.

The Transactions were accounted for as an acquisitionFurthermore, our operating activities could be subject to risks caused by misappropriation, misuse, leakage, falsification or accidental release or loss of information maintained in accordanceour information technology systems and networks and those of our third-party vendors, including customer, personnel and vendor data. We provide certain confidential, proprietary and personal information to third parties in connection with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Under the acquisition method of accounting, the assetsour business, and liabilities of Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House have been recorded, as of the date of completion of the Transactions, at their respective fair values and added to our assets and liabilities.

As a result of the closingincreasing awareness concerning the importance of safeguarding personal information, the potential misuse of such information and legislation that has been adopted or is being considered regarding the protection, privacy and security of personal information, information-related risks are increasing, particularly for businesses like ours that process, store and transmit large amount of data, including personal information for our customers. We could be exposed to significant costs if such risks

The risk described above may be increased during the period in which we are integrating our people, processes and systems as a result of the Transactions, our businesses are subject to the conditions set forthTransactions.

Charter had approximately $10.9 billion of federal tax net operating loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset of approximately $2.3 billion as of December 31, 2017. These losses resulted from the operations of Charter Communications Holdings Company, LLC ("Charter Holdco") and its subsidiaries and from loss carryforwards received as a result of the DOJ Consent Decree and those imposed byTWC Transaction. Federal tax net operating loss carryforwards expire in the years 2018 through 2035. In addition, Charter had state utility commissions and local franchise authorities, and there can be no assurance that these conditions will not have an adverse effect on our businesses and resultstax net operating loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset (net of operations.federal tax benefit) of approximately $359 million as of December 31, 2017. State tax net operating loss carryforwards generally expire in the years 2018 through 2037.

In the past, Charter has experienced ownership changes as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). In general, an ownership change occurs whenever the percentage of the stock of a corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by 5-percent stockholders (within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code) increases by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock of such corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by such 5-percent stockholders at any time over the preceding three years. As a result, Charter is subject to an annual limitation on the use of its loss carryforwards which existed at November 30, 2009 for the first ownership change, those that existed at May 1, 2013 for the second ownership change, and those created at May 18, 2016 for the third ownership change. The limitation on Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards, in conjunction with the loss carryforward expiration provisions, could reduce Charter's ability to use a portion of its loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income, which could result in Charter being required to make material cash tax payments. Charter's ability to make such income tax payments, if any, will depend at such time on its liquidity or its ability to raise additional capital, and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries, including us.

As part of Legacy TWC’s separation from Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”) in March 2009 (the “Separation”), Time Warner received a private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and Time Warner and Legacy TWC received opinions of tax counsel confirming that the transactions undertaken in connection with the Transactions,Separation, including the FCC Order,transfer by a subsidiary of Time Warner of its 12.43% non-voting common stock interest in TW NY to Legacy TWC in exchange for 80 million newly issued shares of Legacy TWC’s Class A common stock, Legacy TWC’s payment of a special cash dividend to holders of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock, the DOJ Consent Decree,conversion of each share of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock into one share of Legacy TWC common stock, and the approvalspro-rata dividend of all shares of Legacy TWC common stock held by Time Warner to holders of record of Time Warner’s common stock (the “Distribution” and, together with all of the transactions, the “Separation Transactions”), should generally qualify as tax-free to Time Warner and its stockholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The ruling and opinions rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations and undertakings from state utility commissionsTime Warner and local franchise authorities incorporated numerous commitmentsLegacy TWC regarding the past and voluntary conditions made byfuture conduct of the parties and imposed numerous conditions on ourcompanies’ businesses relating to the operation of our business and other matters. Among other things, (i) we willIf any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are incorrect or not be permitted to charge usage-based prices or impose data capsotherwise satisfied, Time Warner and will be prohibited from charging interconnection fees for qualifying parties; (ii) we will be prohibited from entering into or enforcing any agreement with a programmer that forbids, limits or creates incentives to limit the programmer’s provision of content to OVD and cannot retaliate against programmers for licensing to OVDs; (iii) we willits stockholders may not be able to avail ourselfrely on the ruling or the opinions and could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Notwithstanding the private letter ruling and opinions, the IRS could determine on audit that the Separation Transactions should be treated as taxable transactions if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated, or for other distributors’ most favored nation (“MFN”) provisionsreasons, including as a result of significant changes in the stock ownership of Time Warner or Legacy TWC after the Distribution.

Time Warner against its taxes resulting from the failure of any of the Separation Transactions to qualify as tax-free as a result of (i) certain actions or failures to act by Legacy TWC or (ii) the failure of certain representations made by Legacy TWC to be true. In addition, even if they are inconsistent with this prohibition; (iv) we must undertake a number of actions designed to promote diversity; (v) we must appoint an independent compliance monitor and comply with a broad array of reporting requirements; and (v) we must satisfy various other conditions relating to our Internet services, including building out an additional two million locations with accessLegacy TWC bears no contractual responsibility for taxes related to a high-speed connectionfailure of at least 60 megabits per second with at least one million of those connections in competition with another high-speed broadband provider in the market served, and implementing a reduced price high-speed Internet programSeparation Transactions to qualify for lowtheir intended tax treatment, Treasury regulation section 1.1502-6 imposes on Legacy TWC several liability for all Time Warner federal income families. These and other conditions and commitmentstax obligations relating to the Transactions are of varying duration, ranging from three to seven years. In lightperiod during which Legacy TWC was a member of the breadth and durationTime Warner federal consolidated tax group, including the date of the conditions and potential changes in market conditions duringSeparation Transactions. Similar provisions may apply under foreign, state or local law. Absent Legacy TWC causing the timeSeparation Transactions to not qualify as tax-free, Time Warner has indemnified Legacy TWC against such several liability arising from a failure of the conditions and commitmentsSeparation Transactions to qualify for their intended tax treatment.

There can be no assurances that we can successfully complete the integration of our business with that of Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House. We now have significantly more systems, assets, investments, businesses, customers and employees than each company did prior to the Transactions. It is possible that the integration process could result in the loss of customers, the disruption of our ongoing businesses or in unexpected integration issues, higher than expected integration costs and an overall post-completion integration process that takes longer than originally anticipated. The process of integrating Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House with the Legacy Charter operations requires significant capital expenditures and the expansion of certain operations and operating and financial systems. Management continues to devote a significant amount of debttime and attention to the integration process and there is a significant degree of difficulty and management involvement inherent in that process.

Even if the new businesses are successfully integrated, it may incur significant additional debt, including secured debt,not be possible to realize the benefits that are expected to result from the Transactions, or realize these benefits within the time frame that is expected. For example, the benefits of our pricing and packaging and converting our video product to all-digital in certain Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House systems may not be fully realized or may take longer than anticipated, or the benefits from the Transactions may be offset by costs incurred or

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, better access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater resources for marketing, greater and more favorable brand name recognition, and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation in the cable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules have provided additional benefits to certain of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources, or efficiencies of scale.

Our services may not allow us to compete effectively. Competition may reduce our expected growth of future cash flows which may contribute to future impairments of our franchises and goodwill and our ability to meet cash flow requirements, including debt service requirements. For additional information regarding the competition we face, see “Business -Competition” and “-Regulation and Legislation.”

We are exposed to risks associated with the economic conditions of our current and potential customers, the potential financial instability of our customers and their financial ability to purchase our products. If there were a general economic downturn, we may experience increased cancellations by our customers or unfavorable changes in the mix of products purchased, including an increase in the number of homes that replace their video service with Internet-delivered and/or over-air content, which would negatively impact our ability to reactattract customers, increase rates and maintain or increase revenue. In addition, providing video

services is an established and highly penetrated business. Our ability to changesgain new video subscribers is dependent to a large extent on growth in occupied housing in our service areas, which is influenced by both national and local economic conditions. Weak economic conditions may also have a negative impact on our advertising revenue. These events have adversely affected us in the past, and may adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition if a downturn were to occur.

We may encounter unforeseen difficulties as we increase the scale of our service offerings to businesses. We sell Internet access, data networking and fiber connectivity to cellular towers and office buildings, and video and business voice services to businesses and have increased our focus on growing this business. In order to grow our commercial business, we expect to continue to invest in technology, equipment and personnel focused on the commercial business. Commercial business customers often require service level agreements and generally have heightened customer expectations for reliability of services. If our efforts to build the infrastructure to scale the commercial business are not successful, the growth of our commercial services business would be limited. We depend on interconnection and related services provided by certain third parties for the growth of our commercial business. As a significantresult, our ability to implement changes as the services grow may be limited. If we are unable to meet these service level requirements or expectations, our commercial business could be adversely affected. Finally, we expect advances in communications technology, as well as changes in the marketplace and the regulatory and legislative environment. Consequently, we are unable to predict the effect that ongoing or future developments in these areas might have on our voice and commercial businesses and operations.

Carriage of these other services, as well as increased fees for retransmission rights, may increase our programming expenses and diminish the amount of debtcapacity we have available to introduce new services, which could have an adverse effect on our business and may (subject to applicable restrictions in our debt instruments) incur additional debt in the future. As of December 31, 2016, our total principal amount of debt was approximately $60.0 billion.financial results.

The ability of some of our competitors to introduce new technologies, products and services more quickly than we do may adversely affect our competitive position. Furthermore, advances in technology, decreases in the cost of existing technologies or changes in competitors’ product and service offerings may require us in the future to make additional research and development expenditures or to offer at no additional charge or at a lower price certain products and services that we currently offer to customers separately or at a premium. In addition, the uncertainty of our ability, and the costs, to obtain intellectual property rights from third parties could impact our ability to raise additional capital at reasonable rates,respond to technological advances in a timely and effective manner.

Our inability to maintain and expand our upgraded systems and provide advanced services such as a state of the art user interface in a timely manner, or at all;

We depend on a limited number of third party service providers, suppliers and licensors to supply some of the services, hardware, software and operational support necessary to provide some of our services. Some of our hardware, software and operational support vendors, and service providers represent our sole source of supply or have, either through contract or as a result of intellectual property rights, a position of some exclusivity. If any of these parties breaches or terminates its agreement with us or otherwise fails to perform its obligations in a timely manner, demand exceeds these vendors’ capacity, they experience operating or financial difficulties, they significantly increase the amount we pay for necessary products or services, or they cease production of any necessary product due to lack of demand, profitability or a change in ownership or are otherwise unable to provide the equipment or services we need in a timely manner, at our specifications and at reasonable prices, our ability to provide some services might be materially adversely affected, or the need to procure or develop alternative sources of the affected materials or services might delay our ability to serve our customers. In addition, the existence of only a limited number of vendors of key technologies can lead to less product innovation and higher costs. These events could materially and adversely affect our ability to retain and attract customers and suppliers.our operations, business, financial results and financial condition.

IfOur cable systems have historically been restricted to using one of two proprietary conditional access security systems, which we believe has limited the number of manufacturers producing set-top boxes for such systems. As an alternative, we developed a new conditional access security system which can be downloaded into set-top boxes with features we specify that could be provided by a variety of manufacturers. We refer to our specified set-top box as our Worldbox. Additionally, we are developing technology to allow our two current debt amounts increase,proprietary conditional access security systems to be software downloadable into our business results are lower thanWorldbox. In order to realize the broadest benefits of our Worldbox technology, we must now complete the support for the downloadable proprietary conditional access security systems within the Worldbox. We cannot provide assurances that this implementation will ultimately be successful or completed in the expected timeframe or credit rating agencies downgrade our debt limiting our access to investment grade markets,at the related risks that we now face will intensify.expected budget.

We rely on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws and licenses and other agreements with our employees, customers, suppliers and instruments governingother parties to establish and maintain our debt contain restrictionsintellectual property rights in technology and limitations thatthe products and services used in our operations. Also, because of the rapid pace of technological change, we both develop our own technologies, products and services and rely on technologies developed or licensed by third parties. However, any of our intellectual property rights could significantly affectbe challenged or invalidated, or such intellectual property rights may not be sufficient to permit us to take advantage of current industry trends or otherwise to provide competitive advantages, which could result in costly redesign efforts, discontinuance of certain product or service offerings or other competitive harm. We may not be able to obtain or continue to obtain licenses from these third parties on reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, claims of intellectual property infringement could require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms, incur substantial monetary liability or be enjoined preliminarily or permanently from further use of the intellectual property in question, which could require us to change our business practices or offerings and limit our ability to operatecompete effectively. Even unsuccessful claims can be time-consuming and costly to defend and may divert management’s attention and resources away from our business, as well as significantly affectbusiness. In recent years, the number of intellectual property infringement claims has been increasing in the communications and entertainment industries, and, with increasing frequency, we are party to litigation alleging that certain of our liquidity.services or technologies infringe the intellectual property rights of others.

SomeNetwork and information systems technologies are critical to our operating activities, both for our internal uses, such as network management and supplying services to our customers, including customer service operations and programming delivery. Network or information system shutdowns or other service disruptions caused by events such as computer hacking, dissemination of computer viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software, “cyber attacks,” process breakdowns, denial of service attacks and other malicious activity pose increasing risks. Both unsuccessful and successful “cyber attacks” on companies have continued to increase in frequency, scope and potential harm in recent years. While we develop and maintain systems seeking to prevent systems-related events and security breaches from occurring, the development and maintenance of these factors are beyond our control. Ifsystems is costly and requires ongoing monitoring and updating as techniques used in such attacks become more sophisticated and change frequently. We, and the third parties on which we arerely, may be unable to generate sufficient cash flowanticipate these techniques or we are unableimplement adequate preventive measures. While from time to time attempts have been made to access additional liquidity sources, weour network, these attempts have not as yet resulted in any material release of information, degradation or disruption to our network and information systems.

Our network and information systems are also vulnerable to damage or interruption from power outages, telecommunications failures, accidents, natural disasters (including extreme weather arising from short-term or any long-term changes in weather patterns), terrorist attacks and similar events. Further, the impacts associated with extreme weather or long-term changes in weather patterns, such as rising sea levels or increased and intensified storm activity, may cause increased business interruptions or may require the relocation of some of our facilities. Our system redundancy may be ineffective or inadequate, and our disaster recovery planning may not be able to servicesufficient for all eventualities.

Any of these events, if directed at, or experienced by, us or technologies upon which we depend, could have adverse consequences on our network, our customers and repay our debt, operate our business, respondincluding degradation of service, service disruption, excessive call volume to competitive challenges,call centers, and damage to our or fund our other liquiditycustomers’ equipment and capital needs.data. Large expenditures may be necessary to repair or replace damaged property, networks or information systems or to protect them from similar events in the future. Moreover, the amount and scope of insurance that we maintain against losses resulting from any such events or security breaches may not be sufficient to cover our losses or otherwise adequately compensate us for any disruptions to our business that may result. Any such significant service disruption could result in damage to our reputation and credibility, customer dissatisfaction and ultimately a loss of customers or revenue. Any significant loss of customers or revenue, or significant increase in costs of serving those customers, could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations.

RestrictionsFurthermore, our operating activities could be subject to risks caused by misappropriation, misuse, leakage, falsification or accidental release or loss of information maintained in our subsidiaries’ debt instrumentsinformation technology systems and under applicable law limit their abilitynetworks and those of our third-party vendors, including customer, personnel and vendor data. We provide certain confidential, proprietary and personal information to provide funds to usthird parties in connection with our business, and our subsidiariesthere is a risk that are debt issuers.this information may be compromised.

Our primary assetsAs a result of the increasing awareness concerning the importance of safeguarding personal information, the potential misuse of such information and legislation that has been adopted or is being considered regarding the protection, privacy and security of personal information, information-related risks are increasing, particularly for businesses like ours that process, store and transmit large amount of data, including personal information for our equity interests in our subsidiaries. Our operating subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and are not obligatedcustomers. We could be exposed to make funds available to their debt issuer holding companies for payments on our notes or other obligations in the form of loans, distributions, or otherwise. Charter Operating’s ability to make distributions to us to service debt obligations is subject to its compliance with the terms of its credit facilities and the indenture that governs its secured notes and restrictions under applicable law. TWC, LLC’s and TWCE’s ability to make distributions to us or Charter Operating to service debt obligationssignificant costs if such risks

In the past, Charter has experienced ownership changes as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). In general, an ownership change occurs whenever the percentage of the stock of a corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by 5-percent stockholders (within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code) increases by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock of such corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by such 5-percent stockholders at any time over the preceding three years. As a result, Charter is subject to restrictions under applicable law. See Note 9an annual limitation on the use of its loss carryforwards which existed at November 30, 2009 for the first ownership change, those that existed at May 1, 2013 for the second ownership change, and those created at May 18, 2016 for the third ownership change. The limitation on Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards, in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements containedloss carryforward expiration provisions, could reduce Charter's ability to use a portion of its loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income, which could result in “Part II. Item 8. Financial StatementsCharter being required to make material cash tax payments. Charter's ability to make such income tax payments, if any, will depend at such time on its liquidity or its ability to raise additional capital, and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco and Supplementary Data.” Under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the “Act”), ourits subsidiaries, may only make distributions if the relevant entity has “surplus” as defined in the Act. Under fraudulent transfer laws, our subsidiaries may not pay dividends if the relevant entity is insolvent or is rendered insolvent thereby. The measures of insolvency for purposes of these fraudulent transfer laws vary depending upon the law applied in any proceeding to determine whether a fraudulent transfer has occurred. Generally, however, an entity would be considered insolvent if:including us.

If Charter were to experience additional ownership changes in the sumfuture (as a result of purchases and sales of stock by its 5-percent stockholders, new issuances or redemptions of our stock, certain acquisitions of its debts,stock and issuances, redemptions, sales or other dispositions or acquisitions of interests in its 5-percent stockholders), Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards could become subject to further limitations.

As part of Legacy TWC’s separation from Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”) in March 2009 (the “Separation”), Time Warner received a private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and Time Warner and Legacy TWC received opinions of tax counsel confirming that the transactions undertaken in connection with the Separation, including the transfer by a subsidiary of Time Warner of its 12.43% non-voting common stock interest in TW NY to Legacy TWC in exchange for 80 million newly issued shares of Legacy TWC’s Class A common stock, Legacy TWC’s payment of a special cash dividend to holders of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock, the conversion of each share of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock into one share of Legacy TWC common stock, and the pro-rata dividend of all shares of Legacy TWC common stock held by Time Warner to holders of record of Time Warner’s common stock (the “Distribution” and, together with all of the transactions, the “Separation Transactions”), should generally qualify as tax-free to Time Warner and its assets;stockholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The ruling and opinions rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations and undertakings from Time Warner and Legacy TWC regarding the past and future conduct of the companies’ businesses and other matters. If any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are incorrect or not otherwise satisfied, Time Warner and its stockholders may not be able to rely on the ruling or the opinions and could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Notwithstanding the private letter ruling and opinions, the IRS could determine on audit that the Separation Transactions should be treated as taxable transactions if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated, or for other reasons, including as a result of significant changes in the stock ownership of Time Warner or Legacy TWC after the Distribution.

Under the present fair saleable value of its assets was less than the amount thattax sharing agreement among Time Warner and Legacy TWC, Legacy TWC generally would be required to pay its probable liability on its existing debts, including contingent liabilities, as they become absolute and mature; or

Our operational results have surplusdepended, and are not insolvent, however, these subsidiaries may become insolventour future results will depend, upon the retention and continued performance of our management team. Our ability to retain and hire new key employees for management positions could be impacted adversely by the competitive environment for management talent in the future. Our directbroadband communications industry. The loss of the services of key members of management and the inability or indirect subsidiaries include the borrowersdelay in hiring new key employees could adversely affect our ability to manage our business and guarantors under the Charter Operating credit facilitiesour future operational and notes and under the TWC, LLC and TWCE notes. As of December 31, 2016, our total principal amount of debt was approximately $60.0 billion.financial results.

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, better access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater resources for marketing, greater and more favorable brand name recognition, and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation in the cable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules have provided additional benefits to certain of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources, or efficiencies of scale.

Our residential video service faces competition from a number of sources, including direct broadcast satellite services, as well as other companies that deliver movies, television shows and other video programming over broadband Internet connections to TVs, computers, tablets and mobile devices. Our residential Internet service faces competition from the phone companies’ DSL, FTTH and wireless broadband offerings as well as from a variety of companies that offer other forms of online services, including wireless and satellite-based broadband services. Our residential voice service and our planned mobile service competes with wireless and wireline phone providers, as well as other forms of communication, such as text messaging on cellular phones, instant messaging, social networking services, video

Overbuilds could also adversely affect our growth, financial condition, and results of operations, by creating or increasing competition. We are aware of traditional overbuild situations impacting certain of our markets, however, we are unable to predict the extent to which additional overbuild situations may occur.

Our services may not allow us to compete effectively. Competition may reduce our expected growth of future cash flows which may contribute to future impairments of our franchises and goodwill and our ability to meet cash flow requirements, including debt service requirements. For additional information regarding the competition we face, see “Business —Competition”-Competition” and “—Regulation“-Regulation and Legislation.”

In addition to the various competitive factors discussed above, we are subject to risks relating to increasing competition for the leisure time, shifting consumer needs and discretionary spending of consumers. We compete with all other sources of entertainment, news and information delivery, as well as a broad range of communications products and services. Technological advancements, such as new video formats and Internet streaming and downloading of programming that can be viewed on televisions, computers, smartphones and tablets, many of which have been beneficial to us, have nonetheless increased the number of entertainment and information delivery choices available to consumers and intensified the challenges posed by audience fragmentation.

Newer products and services, particularly alternative methods for the distribution, sale and viewing of content will likely continue to be developed, further increasing the number of competitors that we face. The increasing number of choices available to audiences, including low-cost or free choices, could negatively impact not only consumer demand for our products and services, but also advertisers’ willingness to purchase advertising from us. We compete for the sale of advertising revenue with television networks and stations, as well as other advertising platforms, such as radio, print and, increasingly, online media. Our failure to effectively anticipate or adapt to new technologies and changes in consumer expectations and behavior could significantly adversely affect our competitive position and our business and results of operations.

We are exposed to risks associated with the economic conditions of our current and potential customers, the potential financial instability of our customers and their financial ability to purchase our products. If there were a general economic downturn, we may experience increased cancellations by our customers or unfavorable changes in the mix of products purchased, including an increase in the number of homes that replace their video service with Internet-delivered and/or over-air content, which would negatively impact our ability to attract customers, increase rates and maintain or increase revenue. In addition, providing video

services is an established and highly penetrated business. Our ability to gain new video subscribers is dependent to a large extent on growth in occupied housing in our service areas, which is influenced by both national and local economic conditions. Weak economic conditions may also have a negative impact on our advertising revenue. These events have adversely affected us in the past, and may adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition if a downturn were to occur.

In addition, we are susceptible to risks associated with the potential financial instability of the vendors and third parties on which we rely to provide products and services or to which we outsource certain functions. The same economic conditions that may affect our customers, as well as volatility and disruption in the capital and credit markets, also could adversely affect vendors and third parties and lead to significant increases in prices, reduction in output or the bankruptcy of our vendors or third parties upon which we rely. Any interruption in the services provided by our vendors or by third parties could adversely affect our cash flow, results of operation and financial condition.

We may encounter unforeseen difficulties as we increase the scale of our service offerings to businesses. We sell Internet access, data networking and fiber connectivity to cellular towers and office buildings, and video and business voice services to businesses and have increased our focus on growing this business. In order to grow our commercial business, we expect to continue investmentto invest in technology, equipment and personnel focused on the commercial business. Commercial business customers often require service level agreements and generally have heightened customer expectations for reliability of services. If our efforts to build the infrastructure to scale the commercial business are not successful, the growth of our commercial services business would be limited. We depend on interconnection and related services provided by certain third parties for the growth of our commercial business.

Video programming has been, and is expected to continue to be, our largest operating expense item. In recent years, the cable industry has experienced a rapid escalation in the cost of programming. We expect programming costs to continue to increase because ofdue to a variety of factors including amounts paid for broadcast station retransmission consent, annual increases imposed by programmers, including sports programmers, and the carriage of incremental programming, including new services and VOD programming. The inability to fully pass programming cost increases on to our customers has had, and is expected in the future to have, an adverse impact on our cash flow and operating margins associated with the video product. We have programming contracts that have expired and others that will expire at or before the end of 2017.2018. There can be no assurance that these agreements will be renewed on favorable or comparable terms. Three programmers have filed lawsuits against us regarding which legacy programming arrangements apply after the closing of the Transactions, and there can be no assurance that other programmers will not bring similar suits in the future. In addition, a number of programmers have begun to sell their services through alternative distribution channels, including IP-based platforms, which are less secure than our own video distribution platforms. There is growing evidence that these less secure video distribution platforms are leading to video product theft via password sharing among consumers. Password sharing may drive down the number of customers who pay for certain programming, putting programmer revenues at risk, and which in turn may cause thosecertain programmers to seek even higher programming fees from us as this may degrade security of their product, increase their operating costs or reduce their advertising revenue.us. To the extent that we are unable to reach agreement with certain programmers on terms that we believe are reasonable, we have been, and may be in the future, forced to remove such programming channels from our line-up, which may result in a loss of customers. Our failure to carry programming that is attractive to our subscriberscustomers could adversely impact our customer levels, operations and financial results. In addition, if our Internet customers are unable to access desirable content online because content providers block or limit access by our subscriberscustomers as a class, our ability to gain and retain customers, especially Internet customers, may be negatively impacted.

Increased demands by owners of some broadcast stations for carriage of other services or payments to those broadcasters for retransmission consent are likely to further increase our programming costs. Federal law allows commercial television broadcast stations to make an election between “must-carry” rights and an alternative “retransmission-consent” regime. When a station opts for the retransmission consent regime, we are not allowed to carry the station’s signal without thethat station’s permission. In some cases, we carry stations under short-term arrangements while we attempt to negotiate new long-term retransmission agreements. If negotiations with these programmers prove unsuccessful, they could require us to cease carrying their signals, possibly for an indefinite period. Any loss of stations could make our video service less attractive to customers, which could result in less subscription and advertising revenue. In retransmission-consent negotiations, broadcasters often condition consent with respect to one station on carriage of one or more other stations or programming services in which they or their affiliates have an interest.

Carriage of these other services, as well as increased fees for retransmission rights, may increase our programming expenses and diminish the amount of capacity we have available to introduce new services, which could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results.

We operate in a highly competitive, consumer-driven and rapidly changing environment. From time to time, we may pursue strategic initiatives, including, for example, our mobile strategy. Our success is, to a large extent, dependent on our ability to acquire, develop, adopt, upgrade and exploit new and existing technologies to address consumers’ changing demands and distinguish our services from those of our competitors. We may not be able to accurately predict technological trends or the success of new products and services. If we choose technologies or equipment that are less effective, cost-efficient or attractive to customers than those chosen by our competitors, if we offer services that fail to appeal to consumers, are not available at competitive prices or that do not function as expected, or we are not able to fund the expenditures necessary to keep pace with technological developments, our competitive position could deteriorate, and our business and financial results could suffer.

The ability of some of our competitors to introduce new technologies, products and services more quickly than we do may adversely affect our competitive position. Furthermore, advances in technology, decreases in the cost of existing technologies or changes in competitors’ product and service offerings may require us in the future to make additional research and development expenditures or to offer at no additional charge or at a lower price certain products and services that we currently offer to customers separately or at a premium. In addition, the uncertainty of our ability, and the costs, to obtain intellectual property rights from third parties could impact our ability to respond to technological advances in a timely and effective manner.

We depend on a limited number of third party service providers, suppliers and licensors to supply some of the services, hardware, software and operational support necessary to provide some of our services. Some of our hardware, software and operational support vendors, and service providers represent our sole source of supply or have, either through contract or as a result of intellectual property rights, a position of some exclusivity. If any of these parties breaches or terminates its agreement with us or otherwise fails to perform its obligations in a timely manner, demand exceeds these vendors’ capacity, they experience operating or financial difficulties, they significantly increase the amount we pay for necessary products or services, or they cease production of any necessary product due to lack of demand, profitability or a change in ownership or are otherwise unable to provide the equipment or services we need in a timely manner, at our specifications and at reasonable prices, our ability to provide some services might be materially adversely affected, or the need to procure or develop alternative sources of the affected materials or services might delay our ability to serve our customers. In addition, the existence of only a limited number of vendors of key technologies can lead to less product innovation and higher costs. These events could materially and adversely affect our ability to retain and attract customers and our operations, business, financial results and financial condition.

Our cable systems have historically been restricted to using one of two proprietary conditional access security systems, which we believe has limited the number of manufacturers producing set-top boxes for such systems. As an alternative, we developed a new conditional access security system which can be downloaded into set-top boxes with features we specify that could be provided by a variety of manufacturers. We refer to our specified set-top box as our Worldbox. Additionally, we are developing technology to allow our two current proprietary conditional access security systems to be software downloadable into our Worldbox. In order to realize the broadest benefits of our Worldbox technology, we must now complete the support for the downloadable proprietary conditional access security systems within the Worldbox. We cannot provide assurances that this implementation will ultimately be successful or completed in the expected timeframe or at the expected budget.

We rely on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws and licenses and other agreements with our employees, customers, suppliers and other parties to establish and maintain our intellectual property rights in technology and the products and services used in our operations. Also, because of the rapid pace of technological change, we both develop our own technologies, products and services and rely on technologies developed or licensed by third parties. However, any of our intellectual property rights could be challenged or invalidated, or such intellectual property rights may not be sufficient to permit us to take advantage of current industry trends or otherwise to provide competitive advantages, which could result in costly redesign efforts, discontinuance of certain product or service offerings or other competitive harm. We may not be able to obtain or continue to obtain licenses from these third parties on reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, claims of intellectual property infringement could require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms, incur substantial monetary liability or be enjoined preliminarily or permanently from further use of the intellectual property in question, which could require us to change our business practices or offerings and limit our ability to compete effectively. Even unsuccessful claims can be time-consuming and costly to defend and may divert management’s attention and resources away from our business. In recent years, the number of intellectual property infringement claims has been increasing in the communications and entertainment industries, and, with increasing frequency, we are party to litigation alleging that certain of our services or technologies infringe the intellectual property rights of others.

Network and information systems technologies are critical to our operating activities, both for our internal uses, such as network management and supplying services to our customers, including customer service operations and programming delivery. Network or information system shutdowns or other service disruptions caused by events such as computer hacking, dissemination of computer viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software, “cyber attacks,” process breakdowns, denial of service attacks and other malicious activity pose increasing risks. Both unsuccessful and successful “cyber attacks” on companies have continued to increase in frequency, scope and potential harm in recent years. While we develop and maintain systems seeking to prevent systems-related events and security breaches from occurring, the development and maintenance of these systems is costly and requires

Our network and information systems are also vulnerable to damage or interruption from power outages, telecommunications failures, accidents, natural disasters (including extreme weather arising from short-term or any long-term changes in weather patterns), terrorist attacks and similar events. Further, the impacts associated with extreme weather or long-term changes in weather patterns, such as rising sea levels or increased and intensified storm activity, may cause increased business interruptions or may require the relocation of some of our facilities. Our system redundancy may be ineffective or inadequate, and our disaster recovery planning may not be sufficient for all eventualities.

Any of these events, if directed at, or experienced by, us or technologies upon which we depend, could have adverse consequences on our network, our customers and our business, including degradation of service, service disruption, excessive call volume to call centers, and damage to our or our customers’ equipment and data. Large expenditures may be necessary to repair or replace damaged property, networks or information systems or to protect them from similar events in the future. Moreover, the amount and scope of insurance that we maintain against losses resulting from any such events or security breaches may not be sufficient to cover our losses or otherwise adequately compensate us for any disruptions to our business that may result. Any such significant service disruption could result in damage to our reputation and credibility, customer dissatisfaction and ultimately a loss of customers or revenue. Any significant loss of customers or revenue, or significant increase in costs of serving those customers, could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, our operating activities could be subject to risks caused by misappropriation, misuse, leakage, falsification or accidental release or loss of information maintained in our information technology systems and networks and those of our third-party vendors, including customer, personnel and vendor data. We provide certain confidential, proprietary and personal information to third parties in connection with our business, and there is a risk that this information may be compromised.

As a result of the increasing awareness concerning the importance of safeguarding personal information, the potential misuse of such information and legislation that has been adopted or is being considered regarding the protection, privacy and security of personal information, information-related risks are increasing, particularly for businesses like ours that process, store and transmit large amount of data, including personal information for our customers. We could be exposed to significant costs if such risks

were to materialize, and such events could damage our reputation, credibility and business and have a negative impact on our revenue. We could be subject to regulatory actions and claims made by consumers in private litigations involving privacy issues related to consumer data collection and use practices. We also could be required to expend significant capital and other resources to remedy any such security breach.

The risk described above may be increased during the period in which we are integrating our people, processes and systems as a result of the Transactions.

Charter had approximately $11.2$10.9 billion of federal tax net operating loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset of approximately $3.9$2.3 billion as of December 31, 2016.2017. These losses resulted from the operations of Charter Communications Holdings Company, LLC ("Charter Holdco") and its subsidiaries and from loss carryforwards received as a result of the TWC Transaction. Federal tax net operating loss carryforwards expire in the years 2018 through 2035. In addition, Charter had state tax net operating loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset (net of federal tax benefit) of approximately $304$359 million as of December 31, 2016.2017. State tax net operating loss carryforwards generally expire in the years 20172018 through 2035.2037.

In the past, Charter has experienced “ownership changes”ownership changes as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). In general, an “ownership change”ownership change occurs whenever the percentage of the stock of a corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by “5-percent stockholders”5-percent stockholders (within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code) increases by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock of such corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by such “5-percent stockholders”5-percent stockholders at any time over the preceding three years. As a result, Charter is subject to an annual limitation on the use of its loss carryforwards which existed at November 30, 2009 for the first “ownershipownership change,” those that existed at May 1, 2013 for the second “ownershipownership change,” and those created at May 18, 2016 for the third “ownershipownership change.” The limitation on Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards, in conjunction with the loss carryforward expiration provisions, could reduce Charter's ability to use a portion of its loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income, which could result in Charter being required to make material cash tax payments. Charter's ability to make such income tax payments, if any, will depend at such time on its liquidity

If Charter were to experience additional ownership changes in the future (as a result of purchases and sales of stock by its “5-percent5-percent stockholders,” new issuances or redemptions of our stock, certain acquisitions of its stock and issuances, redemptions, sales or other dispositions or acquisitions of interests in its “5-percent stockholders”)5-percent stockholders), Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards could become subject to further limitations.

If Legacy TWC’s Separation Transactions (as defined below), including the Distribution (as defined below), do not qualify as tax-free, either as a result of actions taken or not taken by Legacy TWC or as a result of the failure of certain representations by Legacy TWC to be true, Legacy TWC has agreed to indemnify Time Warner Inc. for its taxes resulting from such disqualification, which would be significant.

As part of Legacy TWC’s separation from Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”) in March 2009 (the “Separation”), Time Warner received a private letter ruling from the IRSInternal Revenue Service ("IRS") and Time Warner and Legacy TWC received opinions of tax counsel confirming that the transactions undertaken in connection with the Separation, including the transfer by a subsidiary of Time Warner of its 12.43% non-voting common stock interest in TW NY to Legacy TWC in exchange for 80 million newly issued shares of Legacy TWC’s Class A common stock, Legacy TWC’s payment of a special cash dividend to holders of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock, the conversion of each share of Legacy TWC’s outstanding Class A and Class B common stock into one share of Legacy TWC common stock, and the pro-rata dividend of all shares of Legacy TWC common stock held by Time Warner to holders of record of Time Warner’s common stock (the “Distribution” and, together with all of the transactions, the “Separation Transactions”), should generally qualify as tax-free to Time Warner and its stockholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The ruling and opinions rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations and undertakings from Time Warner and Legacy TWC regarding the past and future conduct of the companies’ businesses and other matters. If any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are incorrect or not otherwise satisfied, Time Warner and its stockholders may not be able to rely on the ruling or the opinions and could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Notwithstanding the private letter ruling and opinions, the IRS could determine on audit that the Separation Transactions should be treated as taxable transactions if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated, or for other reasons, including as a result of significant changes in the stock ownership of Time Warner or Legacy TWC after the Distribution.

Under the tax sharing agreement among Time Warner and Legacy TWC, Legacy TWC generally would be required to indemnify

Time Warner against its taxes resulting from the failure of any of the Separation Transactions to qualify as tax-free as a result of (i) certain actions or failures to act by Legacy TWC or (ii) the failure of certain representations made by Legacy TWC to be true. In addition, even if Legacy TWC bears no contractual responsibility for taxes related to a failure of the Separation Transactions to qualify for their intended tax treatment, Treasury regulation section 1.1502-6 imposes on Legacy TWC several liability for all Time Warner federal income tax obligations relating to the period during which Legacy TWC was a member of the Time Warner federal consolidated tax group, including the date of the Separation Transactions. Similar provisions may apply under foreign, state or local law. Absent Legacy TWC causing the Separation Transactions to not qualify as tax-free, Time Warner has indemnified Legacy TWC against such several liability arising from a failure of the Separation Transactions to qualify for their intended tax treatment.

Our operational results have depended, and our future results will depend, upon the retention and continued performance of our management team. Our ability to retain and hire new key employees for management positions could be impacted adversely by the competitive environment for management talent in the broadband communications industry. The loss of the services of key members of management and the inability or delay in hiring new key employees could adversely affect our ability to manage our business and our future operational and financial results.

We have a significant amount of debt and may (subject to applicable restrictions in our available cashdebt instruments) incur additional debt in the future. As of December 31, 2017, our total principal amount of debt was approximately $69.0 billion.

Additionally, the terms of any potential acquisition, conducting thorough due diligence, financing the acquisition or effectively integrating the acquired business, product or technology into our existing business andCharter Communications Operating, LLC ("Charter Operating") credit facilities require Charter Operating to

Liberty Broadband currently owns a significant amount of Charter Class A common stock and is entitled to certain governance rights with respect to Charter and us. A/N currently owns Charter Class A common stock and a significant amount of membership interests in our indirect parent company, Charter Holdings, that are convertible into our Charter Class A common stock and is entitled to certain governance rights with respect to Charter. Members of the Charter board of directors include directors who are also officers and directors of Liberty Broadband and directors who are current or former officers and directors of A/N. Dr. John Malone is the Chairman of Liberty Broadband, and Mr. Greg Maffei is the president and chief executive officer of Liberty Broadband. Steven Miron is the Chief Executive Officer of A/N and Michael Newhouse is an officer or director of several of A/N’s affiliates. As of December 31, 2016,2017, Liberty Broadband beneficially held approximately approximately 19%21% of Charter’s Class A common stock (including shares owned by Liberty Interactive over which Liberty Broadband holds an irrevocable voting proxy) and A/N beneficially held approximately approximately 13% of Charter’s Class A common stock, in each case assuming the conversion of the membership interests held by A/N. Pursuant to the stockholders agreement between Liberty Broadband, A/N and Charter, Liberty Broadband currently has the right to designate up to three directors as nominees for Charter’s board of directors and A/N currently has the right to designate up to two directors as nominees for Charter’s board of directors with one designated director to be appointed to each of the audit committee, the nominating and corporate governance committee, the compensation and benefits committee and the Finance Committee, in each case provided that each maintains certain specified voting or equity ownership thresholds and each nominee meets certain applicable requirements or qualifications.

In connection with the TWC Transaction, Liberty Broadband and Liberty Interactive entered into a proxy and right of first refusal agreement, pursuant to which Liberty Interactive granted Liberty Broadband an irrevocable proxy to vote all Charter Class A common stock owned beneficially or of record by Liberty Interactive, with certain exceptions. In addition, at the closing of the Bright House Transaction, A/N and Liberty Broadband entered into a proxy agreement pursuant to which A/N granted to Liberty Broadband a 5-year irrevocable proxy (which we refer to as the “A/N proxy”) to vote, subject to certain exceptions, that number of shares of New Charter Class A common stock and New Charter Class B common stock, in each case held by A/N (such shares are referred to as the “proxy shares”), that will result in Liberty Broadband having voting power in Charter equal to 25.01% of the outstanding voting power of Charter, provided, that the voting power of the proxy shares is capped at 7.0% of the outstanding voting power of Charter. Therefore, giving effect to the Liberty Interactive proxy and the A/N proxy and the voting cap contained in the stockholders agreement, Liberty Broadband has 25.01% of the outstanding voting power in Charter. The stockholders agreement and Charter’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation fixes the size of the board at 13 directors. Liberty Broadband and A/N are required to vote (subject to the applicable voting cap) their respective shares of Charter Class A common stock and Charter Class B common stock for the director nominees nominated by the nominating and corporate governance committee of the board of directors, including the respective designees of Liberty Broadband and A/N, and against any other nominees, except that, with respect to the unaffiliated directors, Liberty Broadband and A/N must instead vote in the same proportion as the voting securities are voted by stockholders other than A/N and Liberty Broadband or any group which includes any of them are voted, if doing so would cause a different outcome with respect to the unaffiliated directors. As a result of their rights under the stockholders agreement and their significant equity and voting stakes in Charter, Liberty Broadband and/or A/N, who may have interests different from those of other stockholders, will be able to exercise substantial influence over certain matters relating to the governance of Charter and us, including the approval of significant corporate actions, such as mergers and other business combination transactions.

Regulation of the cable industry has increased cable operators’ operational and administrative expenses and limited their revenues. Cable operators are subject to various laws and regulations including those covering the following:

Legislators and regulators at all levels of government frequently consider changing, and sometimes do change, existing statutes, rules, regulations, or interpretations thereof, or prescribe new ones. Any future legislative, judicial, regulatory or administrative actions may increase our costs or impose additional restrictions on our businesses. For example, with respect to our retail broadband Internet access service, the FCC has (1) reclassified the service as a Title II service, (2) applied certain existing Title II provisions and associated regulations to it, (3) forborne from applying a range of other existing Title II provisions and associated regulations, but to varying degrees indicated that this forbearance may be only temporary, and (4) issued new rules expanding disclosure requirements and prohibiting blocking, throttling, paid prioritization, and unreasonable interference with the ability of end users and edge providers to reach each other. The order also subjected broadband providers’ Internet traffic exchange rates and practices to potential FCC oversight for the first time and created a mechanism for third parties to file complaints regarding these matters. These FCC actions were upheld on appeal in June 2016, although additional appeals remain pending.

In connection with the Transactions, the FCC Order, the DOJ Consent Decree, and the approvals from state utility commissions and local franchise authorities incorporated numerous commitments and voluntary conditions made by the parties and imposed numerous conditions on our businesses relating to the operation of our business and other matters. Among other things, (i) we are not permitted to charge usage-based prices or impose data caps and are prohibited from charging interconnection fees for qualifying parties; (ii) we are prohibited from entering into or enforcing any agreement with a programmer that forbids, limits or creates incentives to limit the programmer’s provision of content to OVD and cannot retaliate against programmers for licensing to OVDs; (iii) we are not able to avail ourself of other distributors’ MFN provisions if they are inconsistent with this prohibition; (iv) we must undertake a number of actions designed to promote diversity; (v) we appointed an independent compliance monitor and comply with a broad array of reporting requirements; and (vi) we must satisfy various other conditions relating to our Internet services, including building out an additional regulatory approvaltwo million locations with access to a high-speed connection of at least 60 megabits per second, and legal challenges.implementing a reduced price high-speed Internet program for low income families. These and other conditions and commitments relating to the Transactions are of varying duration, ranging from three to seven years. In light of the breadth and duration of the conditions and potential changes in market conditions during the time the conditions and commitments are in effect, there can be no assurance that our compliance, and ability to comply, with the conditions will not have a material adverse effect on our business or results of operations.

There are ongoing efforts to amend or expand the federal, state, and local regulation of some of the services offered over our cable systems, which may compound the regulatory risks we already face. For example, with respect to our retail broadband Internet access service, the FCC recently issuedhas reclassified the service twice in the last few years, with the first change adding regulatory obligations and the second change largely removing those new regulatory obligations. These changes reflect a proposal to impose new regulations on our point to point transport servicelack of regulatory certainty in this business area, which may continue as a result of litigation, as well as other commercial datafuture legislative or administrative changes.

Other potential legislative and regulatory changes could adversely impact our business by increasing our costs and competition and limiting our ability to offer services (“business data services”). Asin a result,manner that that would maximize our revenue potential. These changes could include, for example, the FCC may price regulate business data services as common carriage services and impose additionaladoption of new privacy restrictions on contracting terms. The FCC also has considered adoptingour collection, use and disclosure of certain customer information, new navigation device rules, pursuantdata security and cybersecurity mandates that could result in additional network and information security requirements for our business, new restraints on our discretion over programming decisions, including the provision of public, educational and governmental access programming and unaffiliated, commercial leased access programming, new restrictions on the rates we charge for video programming and the marketing of that video programming, changes to Section 629 of the Communications Act, which directs the FCCcable industry’s compulsory copyright license to carry broadcast signals, new requirements to assure the availability of navigation devices (such as set-top boxes) from third party providers. In 2016, the FCC proposed burdensomeproviders, new rulesUniversal Service Fund obligations on our provision of Internet service that would have required usadd to make disaggregated “information flows” available to set-top boxes and apps supplied by third parties. That proposal has not been adopted, but various parties may continue to advocate alternative regulatory approaches to reduce consumer dependency on traditional operator provided set-top boxes. The FCC also is considering the appropriate regulatory framework for VoIP service, including whethercost of that service should be regulated under Title II.

If any of these pending laws and regulations are enacted, they could affect our operations and require significant expenditures. We cannot predict future developments in these areas, and we are already subject to Charter-specific conditions regarding certain Internet practices as a result of the FCC’s approval of the Transactions, but any changes to the regulatory framework for our video, Internet or VoIP services could have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

It remains uncertain what rule changes, if any, will ultimately be adopted by Congress and the FCC and what operating or financial impact any such rules might have on us, including on our programming agreements, customer privacy and the user experience. In addition, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau has been actively investigating certain industry practices of various companies and imposing forfeitures for alleged regulatory violations.

Our cable systems generally operate pursuant to franchises, permits, and similar authorizations issued by a state or local governmental authority controlling the public rights-of-way. Many franchises establish comprehensive facilities and service requirements, as well as specific customer service standards and monetary penalties for non-compliance. In many cases, franchises are terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with significant provisions set forth in the franchise agreement governing system operations. Franchises are generally granted for fixed terms and must be periodically renewed. Franchising authorities may resist granting a renewal if either past performance or the prospective operating proposal is considered inadequate. Franchise authorities often demand concessions or other commitments as a condition to renewal. In some instances, local franchises have not been renewed at expiration, and we have operated and are operating under either temporary operating agreements or without a franchise while negotiating renewal terms with the local franchising authorities.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to comply with all significant provisions of our franchise agreements and certain of our franchisers have from time to time alleged that we have not complied with these agreements. Additionally, although historically we have renewed our franchises without incurring significant costs, we cannot assure you that we will be able to renew, or to renew as favorably, our franchises in the future. A termination of or a sustained failure to renew a franchise in one or more key markets could adversely affect our business in the affected geographic area.

Our cable system franchises are non-exclusive. Accordingly, local and state franchising authorities can grant additional franchises and create additional competition for our products, resulting in overbuilds, which could adversely affect results of operations.

We operate cable systems in locations throughout the United States and, as a result, we are subject to the tax laws and regulations of federal, state and local governments. From time to time, various legislative and/or administrative initiatives may be proposed that could adversely affect our tax positions. There can be no assurance that our effective tax rate or tax payments will not be adversely affected by these initiatives. Certain states and localities have imposed or are considering imposing new or additional taxes or fees on our services or changing the methodologies or base on which certain fees and taxes are computed. Potential changes include additional taxes or fees on our services which could impact our customers, combined reportingchanges to income tax sourcing rules and other changes to general business taxes, central/unit-level assessment of property taxes and other matters that could increase our income, franchise, sales, use and/or property tax liabilities. For example, some local franchising authorities are seeking to impose franchise fee assessments on our broadband Internet access service, and more may do so in the future. If they do so, and challenges to such assessments are unsuccessful, it could adversely impact our costs. In addition, federal, state and local tax laws and regulations are extremely complex and subject to varying interpretations. There can be no assurance that our tax positions will not be challenged by relevant tax authorities or that we would be successful in any such challenge.

None.

Our principal physical assets consist of cable distribution plant and equipment, including signal receiving, encoding and decoding devices, headend reception facilities, distribution systems, and customer premise equipment for each of our cable systems.

Our cable plant and related equipment are generally attached to utility poles under pole rental agreements with local public utilities and telephone companies, and in certain locations are buried in underground ducts or trenches. We own or lease real property for signal reception sites, and own our service vehicles.

Our subsidiariesWe generally lease space for business offices. Our headend and tower locations are located on owned or leased parcels of land, and we generally own the towers on which our equipment is located. We lease space for our corporate headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut.

The physical components of our cable systems require maintenance as well as periodic upgrades to support the new services and products we introduce. See “Item 1. Business – Our Network Technology.Technology and Customer Premise Equipment.” We believe that our properties are generally in good operating condition and are suitable for our business operations.

The legal proceedings information set forth in Note 18 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated herein by reference.

None.

 

For information regarding securities issued under Charter's equity compensation plans, see Note 15 to our accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Item“Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Reference is made to “Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” which describe important factors that could cause actual results to differ from expectations and non-historical information contained herein. In addition, the following discussion should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes thereto of CCO Holdings LLC and subsidiaries included in “Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

We are the second largest cable operator in the United States and a leading broadband communications services company providing video, Internet and voice services to approximately 26.227.2 million residential and business customers at December 31, 2016.2017. In addition, we sell video and online advertising inventory to local, regional and national advertising customers and fiber-delivered communications and managed IT solutions to largerlarge enterprise customers. We also own and operate regional sports networks and local sports, news and community channels and sell security and home management services toin the residential marketplace. See “Part I. Item 1. Business — Products and Services” for further description of these services, including customer statistics for different services.

Since 2012, Legacy Charter has actively invested in its network and operations and improvedIn the quality and valuefirst half of the products and packages that Legacy Charter offered. Through2017, we completed the roll-out of Spectrum pricingSPP to Legacy TWC and packaging we have simplifiedLegacy Bright House markets simplifying our offers and improvedimproving our packaging of products, deliveringallowing us to deliver more value to new and existing customers. Further, through the transitionAs of December 31, 2017, approximately 60% of our Legacy Charter markets to our all-digital platform, we increased our offerings to more than 200 HD channelsresidential customers are in mostan SPP package. In the second half of the Legacy Charter markets and offered Internet speeds of at least 60 or 100 Mbps, among other benefits. We believe that this product set combined with improved customer service, as we insource our workforce in our call centers and in our field operations, has led to lower customer churn and longer customer lifetimes.

Our integration activities will continue in 2018 with the expectation that by 2019 we will have substantially integrated the practices and systems of Legacy Charter, Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House. In 2018, we will also launch our mobile product. As a result of growth costs for a new product line and implementing our operating strategy atacross Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House, we cannot be certain that we will be able to grow revenues or maintain our margins at recent historical rates.

The Company realized revenue, Adjusted EBITDA and income from operations during the periods presented as follows (in millions; all percentages are calculated using whole numbers. Minor differences may exist due to rounding).

Adjusted EBITDA is defined as consolidated net income plus net interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, stock compensation expense, loss on extinguishment of debt, (gain) loss on financial instruments, net, other pension benefits, other (income) expense, net and other operating (income) expenses, such as merger and restructuring costs, other pension benefits, special charges and gain (loss) on sale or retirement of assets. See “—Use of Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow” for further information on Adjusted EBITDA and free cash flow.   

Growth in total revenue, Adjusted EBITDA and income from operations was primarily due to the Transactions.

Approximately 90%91%, 91%90% and 90%91% of our revenues for years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 2015 and 2014,2015, respectively, are attributable to monthly subscription fees charged to customers for our video, Internet, voice and commercial services provided by

our cable systems. Generally, these customer subscriptions may be discontinued by the customer at any time subject to a fee for certain commercial customers. The remaining 10%9%, 9%10% and 10%9% of revenue for fiscal years 2017, 2016 2015 and 2014,2015, respectively, is derived primarily from advertising revenues, franchise and other regulatory fee revenues (which are collected by us but then

We incurred the following transition costs in connection with the Transactions (in millions).

Amounts included in transition operating expenses and transition capital expenditures represent incremental costs incurred to integrate the Legacy TWC and Legacy Bright House operations and to bring the three companies’ systems and processes into a uniform operating structure.  Costs are incremental and would not be incurred absent the integration.  Other operating expenses associated with the Transactions represent merger and restructuring costs and include advisory, legal and accounting fees, employee retention costs, employee termination costs and other exit costs. 

Certain of our accounting policies require our management to make difficult, subjective and/or complex judgments. Management has discussed these policies with the Audit Committee of Charter’s board of directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the following disclosure. We consider the following policies to be the most critical in understanding the estimates, assumptions and judgments that are involved in preparing our financial statements, and the uncertainties that could affect our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows:

In addition, there are other items within our financial statements that require estimates or judgment that are not deemed critical, such as the allowance for doubtful accounts and valuations of our financial instruments, but changes in estimates or judgment in these other items could also have a material impact on our financial statements.

include materials, direct labor and certain indirect costs.  These indirect costs are associated with the activities of personnel who assist in installation activities, and consist of compensation and overhead costs associated with these support functions.  While our capitalization is based on specific activities, once capitalized, we track these costs on a composite basis by fixed asset category at the cable system level, and not on a specific asset basis.  For assets that are sold or retired, we remove the estimated applicable

We make judgments regarding the installation and construction activities to be capitalized. We capitalize direct labor and overhead using standards developed from actual costs and applicable operational data. We calculate standards annually (or more frequently if circumstances dictate) for items such as the labor rates, overhead rates, and the actual amount of time required to perform a capitalizable activity. For example, the standard amounts of time required to perform capitalizable activities are based on studies of the time required to perform such activities. Overhead rates are established based on an analysis of the nature of costs incurred in support of capitalizable activities, and a determination of the portion of costs that is directly attributable to capitalizable activities. The impact of changes that resulted from these studies were not material in the periods presented.

Labor costs directly associated with capital projects are capitalized. Capitalizable activities performed in connection with installations include such activities as:

Judgment is required to determine the extent to which overhead costs incurred result from specific capital activities, and therefore should be capitalized. The primary costs that are included in the determination of the overhead rate are (i) employee benefits and payroll taxes associated with capitalized direct labor, (ii) direct variable costs associated with capitalizable activities, (iii) the cost of support personnel, such as care personnel and dispatchers, who assist with capitalizable installation activities, and (iv) indirect costs directly attributable to capitalizable activities.

We utilize the cost approach as the primary method used to establish fair value for our property, plant and equipment in connection with business combinations.  The cost approach considers the amount required to replace an asset by constructing or purchasing a new asset with similar utility, then adjusts the value in consideration of physical depreciation and functional and economic obsolescence as of the appraisalvaluation date. The cost approach relies on management’s assumptions regarding current material and labor costs required to rebuild and repurchase significant components of our property, plant and equipment along with assumptions regarding the age and estimated remaining useful lives of our property, plant and equipment.

Valuation and impairment of franchises. The net carrying value of franchises as of December 31, 20162017 and 20152016 was approximately $67.3 billion (representing 45%46% of total assets) and $6.0$67.3 billion (representing 34%45% of total assets excluding restricted cash and cash equivalents)assets), respectively. For more information and a complete discussion of how we value and test franchise assets for impairment, see Note 6 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

 

We perform an impairment assessment of franchise assets annually or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances. We performed a qualitative assessment in 2016.2017. Our assessment included consideration of thea fair value appraisalsappraisal performed for tax purposes in the beginning of Legacy Charter and the newly-acquired operations performed2017 as of thea December 31, 2016 valuation date of acquisition for tax and acquisition accounting purposes, respectively,(the "Appraisal") along with a multitude of factors that affect the fair value of our franchise assets. Examples of such factors include environmental and competitive changes within our operating footprint, actual and projected operating performance, the consistency of our operating margins, equity and debt market trends, including changes in our market capitalization, and changes in our regulatory and political landscape, among other factors. Based on our assessment, we concluded that it was more likely than not that the estimated fair values of our franchise assets equals or exceeds their carrying values and that a quantitative impairment test is not required.

The appraisalsAppraisal indicated that the fair value of our franchise assets exceeded carrying value by approximately 25%more than 40% in the aggregate, with the excess entirely attributable to the franchise assets of Legacy Charter to which acquisition accounting was not applied.aggregate. At our unit of accounting level for franchise asset impairment testing, the amount by which fair value exceedsexceeded carrying value variesvaried based on the extent to which the unit of accounting was comprised of newly-acquired operations.operations acquired in 2016. For units of accounting comprised entirely or substantially of newly-acquired operations, we believe the Appraisal fair value exceeded carrying value approximatesby a range of 16% to 46% due to the recency of the Transactions, while fair value given that there has been no significant adverse changes in factors impacting our fair value estimates since the Transaction date. Forfor units of accounting comprised of at least 25% Legacy Charter operations, the fair value exceeded carrying value by a range of 36%29% to 260%264%.

Valuation and impairment of goodwill. The net carrying value of goodwill as of December 31, 20162017 and 20152016 was approximately $29.5$29.6 billion (representing 20% of total assets) and $1.2$29.5 billion (representing 7%20% of total assets), respectively. For more information and a complete discussion on how we test goodwill for impairment, see Note 6 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” We perform our impairment assessment of goodwill annually as of November 30^th.30. As with our franchise impairment testing, we elected to perform a qualitative assessment of goodwill in 20162017 which included the fair value appraisalsappraisal and other factors described above. Based on the appraisals,Appraisal, we determined that the fair value of our goodwill exceeded carrying value by approximately 28% as of the closing of the Transactions.53%. Given the limited amount of time between the closing of the Transactions and the completion of the assessment and absence of significant adverse changes in factors impacting our fair value estimates, we concluded that it is more likely than not that our goodwill is not impaired.

Valuation, impairment and amortization of customer relationships. The net carrying value of customer relationships as of December 31, 20162017 and 20152016 was approximately $14.6$12.0 billion (representing 10%8% of total assets) and $856 million$14.6 billion (representing 5%10% of total assets excluding restricted cash and cash equivalents)assets), respectively. Amortization expense related to customer relationships for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, 2015 and 20142015 was approximately $2.7 billion, $1.9 billion and $249 million and $282

In determining our tax provision for financial reporting purposes, we establish a reserve for uncertain tax positions unless such positions are determined to be “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination, based on their technical merits. In evaluating whether a tax position has met the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, we presume the position will be examined by the appropriate taxing authority that has full knowledge of all relevant information. A tax position that meets the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold is measured to determine the amount of benefit to be recognized in our financial statements. The tax position is measured as the largest amount of benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized when the position is ultimately resolved. There is considerable judgment involved in determining whether positions taken on the tax return are “more likely than not” of being sustained. We adjust our uncertain tax reserve estimates periodically because of ongoing examinations by, and settlements with, the various taxing authorities, as well as changes in tax laws, regulations and interpretations.

No tax years for Charter, Charter Holdings or Charter Holdco, our indirect parent companies, for income tax purposes, are currently under examination by the IRS. Charter and Charter Holdings' 2016 and 2017 tax year remainsyears remain open for examination and assessment. Legacy Charter’s tax years ending 20132014 through the short period return dated May 17, 2016 remain subject to examination and assessment. Years prior to 20132014 remain open solely for purposes of examination of Legacy Charter’s loss and credit carryforwards. The IRS is currently examining Legacy TWC’s income tax returns for 2011 and 2012.through 2014. Legacy TWC’s tax years ending 2013 throughyear 2015 remainremains subject to examination and assessment. Prior to Legacy TWC’s separation from Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”) in March 2009 (the “Separation”), Legacy TWC was included in the consolidated U.S. federal and certain state income tax returns of Time Warner. The IRS is currently examining Time Warner’s 2008 through 2010 income tax returns. Time Warner’s income tax returns for 2005 to 2007, which are periods prior to the separation,Separation, were settled with the exception of an immaterial item that has been referred to the IRS Appeals Division. We do not anticipate that these examinations will have unrecognizeda material impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. In addition, we are also subject to ongoing examinations of our tax benefits, exclusivereturns by state and local tax authorities for various periods. Activity related to these state and local examinations did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position or results of interest and penalties, totaling approximately $159 million as ofoperations during the year ended December 31, 2016.2017, nor do we anticipate a material impact in the future.

Legal contingencies have a high degree of uncertainty. When a loss from a contingency becomes estimable and probable, a reserve is established. The reserve reflects management’s best estimate of the probable cost of ultimate resolution of the matter and is revised as facts and circumstances change. A reserve is released when a matter is ultimately brought to closure or the statute of limitations lapses. We have established reserves for certain matters. Although these matters are not expected individually to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, such matters could have, in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Upon completion of the TWC Transaction, we assumed Legacy TWC’s pension plans. We sponsor two qualified defined benefit pension plans, the TWC Pension Plan and the TWC Union Pension Plan (collectively, the “TWC Pension Plans”), that provide

defined benefit pension plan for certain employees under the TWC Excess Pension Plan. As of December 31, 2017, the accumulated benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for the TWC Pension Plans was $3.6 billion and $3.3 billion, respectively, and the net underfunded liability of the TWC Pension Plans was recorded as a $1 million noncurrent asset, $5 million current liability and $292 million long-term liability. As of December 31, 2016, the accumulated benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for the TWC Pension Plans was $3.3 billion and $2.9 billion, respectively, and the net underfunded liability of the TWC Pension Plans was recorded as a $1 million noncurrent asset, $6 million current liability and $309 million long-term liability.

Pension benefits are based on formulas that reflect the employees’ years of service and compensation during their employment period. Actuarial gains or losses are changes in the amount of either the benefit obligation or the fair value of plan assets resulting from experience different from that assumed or from changes in assumptions. We have elected to follow a mark-to-market pension accounting policy for recording the actuarial gains or losses annually during the fourth quarter, or earlier if a remeasurement event occurs during an interim period. We use a December 31 measurement date for our pension plans.

We recognized a net periodic pension benefitbenefits of $1 million and $813 million in 2016.2017 and 2016, respectively. Net periodic pension benefit or expense is determined using certain assumptions, including the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets, discount rate and expected rate of compensation increases.mortality assumptions. We determined the discount rate used to compute pension expense based on the yield of a large population of high-quality corporate bonds with cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future defined benefit payments. In developing the expected long-term rate of return on assets, we considered the current pension portfolio’s composition, past average rate of earnings, and our asset allocation targets. We used a discount rate of 3.99%4.20% from the date of the TransactionJanuary 1, 2017 to JuneSeptember 30, 2016,2017 and 3.72%3.88% from JulyOctober 1, 20162017 to December 31, 20162017 to compute 20162017 pension expense. A decrease in the discount rate of 25 basis points would result in a $154$173 million increase in our pension plan benefit obligation as of December 31, 20162017 and net periodic pension expense recognized in 20162017 under our mark-to-market accounting policy. Our expected long-term rate of return on plan assets used to compute 20162017 pension expense was 6.50%. A decrease in the expected long-term rate of return of 25 basis points, from 6.50% to 6.25%, while holding all other assumptions constant, would result in an increase in our 20172018 net periodic pension expense of approximately $7$8 million. See Note 19 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Part II. Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” for additional discussion on these assumptions.

The following table sets forth the consolidated statements of operations for the periods presented (dollars in millions, except per share data):

Revenues. Total revenues grew $12.6 billion or 43.4% in the year ended December 31, 2017 as compared to 2016 and grew $19.2 billion or 197%197.3% in the year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to 2015 and grew $646 million or 7.1% in the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to 2014. Revenue growth primarily reflects the Transactions

Revenues by service offering were as follows (dollars in millions; all percentages are calculated using whole numbers. Minor differences may exist due to rounding):