FORM 10-K
FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS
(Mark One)
| x |
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001
OR
| o |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to .
Commission file number 0-29752
LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
|
Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) |
33-0811062 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
10307 Pacific Center Court, San Diego, CA (Address of Principal Executive Offices) |
92121 (Zip Code) |
|
(858) 882-6000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, $.0001 par value
Preferred Stock Purchase Rights
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES x NO o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
As of March 27, 2002, the aggregate market value of the registrants voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $299,458,317, based on the closing price of Leaps Common Stock on the Nasdaq National Market on March 27, 2002, of $8.34 per share.
As of March 27, 2002, 37,316,663 shares of the registrants Common Stock, $.0001 par value per share, were outstanding.
Documents Incorporated By Reference
Information required to be furnished pursuant to Part III of this Form 10-K will be set forth in, and is incorporated by reference to, the Registrants definitive Proxy Statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held May 15, 2002, which definitive Proxy Statement will be filed by the Registrant not later than 120 days after the close of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.
LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| Page | ||||||
| PART 1 | ||||||
|
Item 1.
|
Business | 1 | ||||
|
Item 2.
|
Properties | 26 | ||||
|
Item 3.
|
Legal Proceedings | 26 | ||||
|
Item 4.
|
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders | 26 | ||||
| PART II | ||||||
|
Item 5.
|
Market for Registrants Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters | 27 | ||||
|
Item 6.
|
Selected Financial Data | 28 | ||||
|
Item 7.
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations | 30 | ||||
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk | 51 | ||||
|
Item 8.
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | 53 | ||||
|
Item 9.
|
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure | 98 | ||||
| PART III | ||||||
|
Item 10.
|
Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant | 98 | ||||
|
Item 11.
|
Executive Compensation | 98 | ||||
|
Item 12.
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management | 98 | ||||
|
Item 13.
|
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions | 98 | ||||
| PART IV | ||||||
|
Item 14.
|
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and Reports on Form 8-K | 98 | ||||
i
PART I
Forward-Looking Statements; Cautionary Statement
Except for the historical information contained herein, this document contains forward-looking statements reflecting managements current forecast of certain aspects of Leaps future. Some forward-looking statements can be identified by forward-looking words such as believe, think, may, could, will, estimate, continue, anticipate, intend, seek, plan, expect, should, would and similar expressions contained in this report. It is based on current information, which Leap has assessed but which by its nature is dynamic and subject to rapid and even abrupt changes. Our actual results could differ materially from those stated or implied by such forward-looking statements due to risks and uncertainties associated with our business. Factors that could cause actual results to differ include but are not limited to: changes in the economic conditions of the various markets our subsidiaries serve which could adversely affect the market for wireless services; our ability to access capital markets; a failure to meet the operational, financial or other covenants contained in our credit facilities; a deterioration of our relationships with our equipment vendors and related lenders, including our failure to obtain amendments to our credit facilities that we may request from time to time; a failure of network systems to perform according to expectations; the effect of competition; the acceptance of our product offering by our target customers; our ability to retain customers; our ability to maintain our cost, market penetration and pricing structure in the face of competition; technological challenges in developing wireless information services and customer acceptance of such services if developed; our ability to integrate the businesses and technologies we acquire; rulings by courts or the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adversely affecting our rights to own and/or operate certain wireless licenses or impacting our rights and obligations to acquire the licenses on which we were the winning bidder in the FCCs broadband PCS auction completed in January 2001 (Auction 35); the impacts on the global and domestic economies and the financial markets of recent terrorist activities, the ensuing declaration of war on terrorism and the continued threat of terrorist activity and other acts of war or hostility; and other factors detailed in the section entitled Risk Factors included elsewhere in this report and in our other Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings filed subsequent to this report. The forward-looking statements should be considered in the context of these risk factors. Investors and prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. We disclaim any obligation to update or revise the forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect new information, future events or developments.
Item 1. Business
The words Leap, we, our, ours and us refer to Leap Wireless International, Inc. and, unless the context otherwise requires, its consolidated subsidiaries. Unless otherwise specified, information relating to population and potential customers is based on 2001 population estimates provided by Easy Analytic Software Incorporated.
Overview
Leap is a wireless communications carrier that is providing innovative, affordable, simple wireless services designed to accelerate the transformation of wireless service into a mass consumer product. We generally seek to address a much broader population segment than traditional wireless providers have addressed to date. In the U.S., we are offering wireless service under the brand Cricket®. Our innovative Cricket strategy is designed to extend the benefits of mobility to the mass market by offering wireless service that is as simple to understand and use as, and is a mobile alternative to traditional landline service. In each of our markets, we are deploying 100% digital, Code Division Multiple Access, or CDMA, networks that we believe provide higher capacity and more efficient deployment of capital than competing technologies. This, when combined with our efforts to streamline operation and distribution systems, allows us to be a low-cost provider of wireless services in each of our markets.
Cricket service allows customers to make and receive virtually unlimited calls within a local calling area for a low, flat monthly rate compared with traditional wireless services. Cricket customers pay in advance each months service from a simple, straightforward bill. We offer Cricket service without a long-term contract, and
1
As of March 1, 2002, we had launched Cricket service in 40 markets covering a total population of approximately 25.2 million potential customers. These markets are located in 48 basic trading areas, or BTAs and make up all the markets that we refer to as our 40 Market Plan. As of December 31, 2001, we had approximately 1,119,000 million Cricket customers in our markets across the U.S. To date we have acquired wireless licenses covering approximately 53.4 million potential customers in 33 states. In addition, we were the winning bidder for wireless licenses covering approximately 23.8 million potential customers in an FCC auction that was completed in January 2001, referred to as Auction 35. NextWave Telecom, Inc., the original holder of these licenses, is a party to litigation against the federal government challenging the validity of Auction 35 and has prevailed on certain of its claims in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In response to a petition for certiorari by the FCC, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the case. The grant to us of these Auction 35 wireless licenses has been substantially delayed by the NextWave litigation. If these Auction 35 wireless licenses are ultimately granted to us, we will likely be required to make full payment for them of $350.1 million (less any amounts then on deposit with the FCC) within 10 business days of a public notice issued by the FCC establishing a payment deadline. We cannot predict what effect any challenges before the FCC or in court to the reauction generally, or the grant of these wireless licenses to us specifically, will have on us. Over time, as capital resources permit, we plan to continue to grow our business prudently on a market by market basis as we obtain additional financial resources to support the further expansion of our business. However, we have agreed in our vendor credit agreements not to build out or launch any new markets until after June 30, 2003, other than markets included in our 40 Market Plan. We also intend to continue pursuing opportunities to maximize the value of our current wireless license portfolio. We currently plan to expand our wireless service offerings to include information services designed to appeal to a broad segment of the population. We believe that wireless information services, like our innovative Cricket service, need to be simple, easy to use and affordable.
In Mexico, we were a founding shareholder and have made investments in and have loans to Pegaso Telecomunicaciones, S.A. de C.V. totaling $120.5 million. Pegaso is a company that is providing a wireless service in Mexico that is more traditional than our Cricket service. Pegaso holds wireless licenses covering all of Mexico, representing approximately 99 million potential customers. At the end of December 2001, Pegaso had approximately 804,000 customers. We currently own 20.1% of the outstanding capital stock of Pegaso. For a discussion of Pegaso and its business, see further discussion below under International Investments Pegaso.
Business Strategy
Our business strategy is to bring innovative wireless communications products and services to markets with strong growth potential. Key elements of this strategy include:
| | Enhancing the Mass Market Appeal of Wireless Service. We are working to remove the price and complexity barriers that we believe have prevented many potential customers from using wireless service. We believe that large segments of the population do not use wireless service because they view wireless service as an expensive luxury item, believe they cannot control the cost of service, or find existing service plans too confusing. Our service plans are designed to offer appealing value in simple formats that customers can understand and budget for. | |
| | Offering an Appealing Value Proposition. We strive to provide service offerings that combine high quality and advanced features with simplicity and attractive pricing to create a high value/ reasonable price proposition and broaden the market for wireless services. In the U.S., we offer the Cricket service plan at a flat rate, paid in advance each month that is a mobile alternative to traditional landline service. |
2
| | Controlling and Minimizing Costs. To become one of the lowest-cost providers in the wireless industry, we are designing high-quality networks to minimize our capital costs and streamlining marketing, distribution and back-office procedures. | |
| | Leveraging CDMA Technology. We are deploying state-of-the-art CDMA networks that are designed to provide higher capacity at a lower capital cost which can be easily upgraded to support enhanced capacity. We believe this enables us to operate superior networks that support rapid customer growth and high usage. In addition, we believe our CDMA networks will provide a better platform to expand into other wireless information services based on advances in second and third generation digital technology in the future. | |
| | Expanding Our Cricket Service Through Acquisitions of Domestic Licenses and Buildout of Additional Networks. Over time, as capital resources permit, we intend to expand the Cricket service to selected metropolitan areas in the U.S. through the acquisition of additional wireless licenses and the buildout of networks for our wireless licenses. However, we have agreed in our vendor credit agreements not to build out or launch any new markets until after June 30, 2003, other than markets included in our 40 Market Plan. | |
| | Expanding Our Service Offerings to Include Wireless Information Services. As capital resources permit, we plan to expand our service offerings to include wireless information services designed to appeal to a broad segment of the population and further transform the nature of wireless communications for our customers. We believe that wireless information services, like our innovative Cricket service, need to be simple, easy to use and affordable for all consumers. | |
| | Investing Selectively in Foreign Ventures. While we expect our emphasis for the next few years to be on our U.S.-based operations, if presented with attractive opportunities, and as capital resources permit, we may invest in international markets where we believe the combination of unfulfilled demand and our attractive wireless service offerings can fuel rapid growth. |
U.S. Business
Cricket
General. In the U.S., our business strategy is different from existing models used by typical cellular or PCS wireless providers. Most of these providers offer consumers a complex array of rate plans that include additional charges for minutes above a set maximum, as well as fees for roaming, that may result in monthly service charges that are higher than expected. Approximately 55% of the U.S. population currently does not subscribe to wireless service, and we believe that many of these potential customers perceive wireless service as too expensive and complicated. The Cricket service is based on our vision that the mass market wants wireless service to be predictable, affordable and as simple to understand and use as traditional landline telephone service, but with the benefits of mobility.
We have designed the Cricket service to appeal to consumers who make the majority of their calls from within the local areas in which they live, work and play. The Cricket service allows customers to make and receive virtually unlimited calls within a local calling area for an affordable, flat monthly rate that is a mobile alternative to landline service. Cricket customers pay for each months service in advance from a simple, straightforward bill. We offer Cricket service without a long-term contract and because Cricket service is paid in advance, we currently require no credit check. In addition to local calling, directory assistance calls and long distance minutes can be purchased in advance and direct dialed without the use of a special code or card.
We expect Crickets simple pricing to attract customers who have been apprehensive about the more complicated and unpredictable pricing plans offered by traditional wireless providers. The simplicity of the Cricket service also allows us to reduce costs by eliminating costly features of wireless services, such as expansive geographic coverage and roaming, that our target customers are likely to use infrequently. We are therefore able to offer our customers a high quality mobile service at an affordable price.
3
Strategy. We believe that the Cricket service offering has begun to help transform wireless phone service from a luxury product into a mass consumer product. The Cricket strategy is to provide digital wireless service to the mass market with a simple, easy to understand approach. As a part of the Cricket strategy, we intend to:
| | attract new customers more quickly than traditional wireless providers that offer complex pricing plans with peak/off-peak rates, roaming charges and expensive extra minutes; | |
| | maintain lower customer acquisition costs by offering one simple service plan with a limited choice of handsets, and by distributing our product through company stores and multiple third-party retail stores where the mass market shops; | |
| | sustain lower operating costs per customer compared to traditional wireless providers through reduced network operation costs, streamlined billing procedures, lower customer care expenses, lower credit investigation costs and reduced bad debt; and | |
| | deploy our capital more efficiently by building our networks to cover only the urban and suburban areas of our markets where most of our potential customers live, work and play, while avoiding rural areas and corridors between distant markets. |
Market Opportunity. Wireless penetration was approximately 45% in the U.S. at the end of December 2001. Traditional wireless companies have generally focused their U.S. marketing on highly mobile customers, including business users, who are likely to generate the highest revenues. Their customers are typically offered multiple service plans with prices based on the customers minutes of use during the billing period. Leap believes that the numerous plans offered by wireless companies have tended to confuse many potential customers. Market research indicates that many people are interested in a wireless product but are concerned about the cost, complexity and unpredictability of traditional wireless pricing plans.
Sales and Distribution. We differentiate the Cricket service concept and expect to continue to increase our market share through promoting a simplified buying process and focusing marketing efforts on potential customers in the communities covered by our local wireless networks. The Cricket approach is to rapidly penetrate our target markets while minimizing our sales and marketing expenses, primarily by keeping the customers purchase decision simple, thus minimizing the need for sales agent commissions and associated residuals.
The Cricket service and wireless handsets are sold through three main channels:
| | Cricket retail stores in high-traffic locations and Cricket kiosks located in major shopping malls; | |
| | the local stores of national retail chains; and | |
| | independent third-party dealers who are well positioned through their principal lines of business to reach our target potential customers, such as furniture and appliance retailers and rental companies, convenience stores and other local service businesses. |
The Cricket service plan is designed so that a potential customer can make a purchase decision with little or no sales assistance. Customers can read about the Cricket service on the retail package for our wireless handsets and learn virtually all they need to know about the service without consulting a complicated plan summary or a specialized sales person. We simplify the customers decision process by limiting the number of Cricket handset models available. We believe the sales costs for the Cricket service are lower than traditional wireless providers because of this streamlined sales approach.
We currently offer handsets in a limited number of price points, priced with the first months Cricket service included. We expect to continue to charge customers a partially subsidized price for handsets to ensure that they have made an investment in the equipment related to our wireless service and provide a moderate economic incentive to maintain the Cricket service rather than switching to the services of a competitor. We do not require customers to sign a long-term contract, unlike traditional wireless providers that require long-term commitments.
4
We combine mass marketing strategies and tactics to build awareness of the Cricket service concept and brand name within the communities we service. Because the Cricket service is offered in distinct island markets, we advertise in local publications, on local radio stations and in local spot television commercials. In addition to local advertising efforts, we maintain an informational Web site for the Cricket service. Although we currently do not sell our products or services directly over the Internet, some third-party Internet retailers do sell the Cricket service over the Internet.
Network and Operations. The Cricket service is based on providing customers with levels of usage equivalent to landline and at prices substantially lower than most of our wireless competitors for similar usage. We believe our success depends on designing and operating our networks to provide high, concentrated capacity with good in-building coverage rather than the broad, geographically dispersed coverage provided by traditional wireless carriers. Our current and planned Cricket networks are in local population centers of self-contained communities where we believe roaming is not an important component of service for our target customers. Unlike traditional wireless providers who build comprehensive networks to permit full-roaming by their customers, we believe that we can deploy our capital more efficiently by tailoring our networks only to our target population centers and omitting underutilized roaming sites between those population centers.
We also seek to maintain lower operating costs through simplified billing. Our simple, straight-forward bills show the monthly flat rate without any per-call itemization. This simple format is expected to result in fewer billing inquiries to our customer service center. Fewer calls to our customer service center should, in turn, result in reduced customer service expenses compared to more traditional wireless providers. In addition, because Cricket customers pay in advance for each months service, we minimize our costs of credit checks, bad debt expenses and customer fraud. We also maintain low operating costs by outsourcing our customer service center to third-party call centers. By centralizing customer service in a few locations, we are able to streamline our customer care operations and gain economies of scale while maximizing customer service availability.
The appeal of our service in any given market is not dependent on the Cricket service having ubiquitous coverage in the rest of the country or region surrounding the market. Because our business model is scalable, we can launch our networks on a market-by-market basis.
Cricket Communications, Inc. has entered into infrastructure equipment purchase agreements with Lucent Technologies, Inc., Nortel Networks, Inc. and Ericsson Wireless Communications, Inc. to lead the overall buildout of our Cricket networks for the 40 Market Plan. Under the terms of the agreements, Cricket Communications has contracted most site acquisition activities and other services associated with site development to third parties, including but not limited to these vendors. To the extent the vendors have been contracted to perform such services, they have subcontracted many of these services to a number of different suppliers. In connection with our purchase of equipment and services from Lucent, Nortel and Ericsson, these vendors have agreed to provide financing for the equipment and services they provide and for certain other related expenses. At December 31, 2001, Cricket Communications had $1,112.0 million outstanding under the vendor credit agreements, and $158.3 million in other long-term liabilities that are expected to be financed under the vendor credit agreements. Borrowings under the vendor credit agreements at December 31, 2001 had a weighted-average interest rate of 7.3% per annum. These agreements are described elsewhere in this report under the heading Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources Credit Facilities and Other Financing Arrangements. See also, Risk Factors High Levels of Debt Could Adversely Affect Our Business and Financial Condition and Our Debt Instruments Contain Provisions and Requirements that Could Limit Our Ability to Pursue Borrowing Opportunities described below.
5
Wireless Licenses. The following table shows the wireless licenses that we own which cover approximately 53.3 million potential customers:
| Market | Population(1) | MHz | |||||||
|
Anchorage, AK
|
461,478 | 30 | |||||||
|
Birmingham, AL
|
1,328,593 | 15 | |||||||
|
Florence, AL(3)
|
192,297 | 15 | |||||||
|
Tuscaloosa, AL
|
255,315 | 15 | |||||||
|
Blytheville, AR(3)
|
71,601 | 30 | |||||||
|
Fayetteville, AR(2)
|
332,638 | 30 | |||||||
|
Fort Smith, AR(2)
|
330,029 | 30 | |||||||
|
Hot Springs, AR(2)
|
140,502 | 15 | |||||||
|
Jonesboro, AR(2)
|
182,637 | 10 | |||||||
|
Little Rock, AR(2)
|
971,470 | 20 | |||||||
|
Pine Buff, AR(2)
|
154,091 | 20 | |||||||
|
Russellville, AR
|
99,561 | 15 | |||||||
|
Nogales, AZ
|
39,108 | 20 | |||||||
|
Phoenix, AZ(2)
|
3,539,920 | 10 | |||||||
|
Tucson, AZ(2)
|
857,246 | 15 | |||||||
|
Merced, CA(2)
|
230,409 | 15 | |||||||
|
Modesto, CA(2)
|
507,675 | 15 | |||||||
|
Redding, CA(3)
|
278,572 | 15 | |||||||
|
Visalia, CA(2)
|
503,948 | 15 | |||||||
|
Denver/ Boulder, CO(2)
|
2,759,099 | 10 | |||||||
|
Ft. Collins, CO(2)
|
256,324 | 10 | |||||||
|
Greeley, CO(2)
|
184,429 | 10 | |||||||
|
Pueblo, CO(2)(3)
|
316,376 | 30 | |||||||
|
Lakeland, FL(3)
|
489,650 | 10 | |||||||
|
Albany, GA
|
357,815 | 15 | |||||||
|
Columbus, GA(2)
|
366,390 | 30 | |||||||
|
Macon, GA(2)
|
668,632 | 30 | |||||||
|
Boise, ID(2)
|
596,255 | 30 | |||||||
|
Idaho Falls, ID(4)
|
225,322 | 15 | |||||||
|
Lewiston, ID(3)
|
124,661 | 30 | |||||||
|
Twin Falls, ID(4)
|
164,293 | 15 | |||||||
|
Peoria, IL
|
461,865 | 15 | |||||||
|
Evansville, IN
|
524,945 | 10 | |||||||
|
Ft. Wayne, IN
|
720,322 | 10 | |||||||
|
Coffeyville, KS
|
61,365 | 15 | |||||||
|
Wichita, KS(2)
|
660,794 | 30 | |||||||
|
Middlesboro, KY(3)
|
118,250 | 15 | |||||||
|
Owensboro, KY
|
165,216 | 10 | |||||||
|
Adrian, MI
|
99,413 | 25 | |||||||
|
Battle Creek, MI(2)
|
241,424 | 25 | |||||||
|
Escanaba, MI(3)
|
47,541 | 10 | |||||||
|
Flint, MI(2)
|
508,496 | 10 | |||||||
|
Grand Rapids, MI
|
1,090,913 | 25 | |||||||
|
Houghton, MI
|
47,227 | 10 | |||||||
|
Iron Mountain, MI
|
45,768 | 10 | |||||||
|
Ironwood, MI
|
31,989 | 20 | |||||||
|
Jackson, MI(2)
|
205,759 | 25 | |||||||
|
Kalamazoo, MI(2)
|
379,353 | 10 | |||||||
|
Lansing, MI
|
510,831 | 10 | |||||||
|
Marquette, MI
|
74,328 | 10 | |||||||
|
Mount Pleasant, MI
|
138,096 | 10 | |||||||
|
Muskegon, MI
|
226,631 | 25 | |||||||
|
Saginaw-Bay City, MI
|
640,657 | 10 | |||||||
|
Sault Ste, Marie, MI
|
58,007 | 20 | |||||||
|
Traverse City, MI
|
250,103 | 10 | |||||||
|
Bemidji, MN(3)
|
67,132 | 10 | |||||||
|
Brainerd, MN(3)
|
98,930 | 10 | |||||||
|
Duluth, MN
|
414,915 | 10 | |||||||
|
Jackson, MS
|
682,055 | 10 | |||||||
|
Vicksburg, MS
|
61,651 | 10 | |||||||
|
Bozeman, MT(3)
|
84,818 | 30 | |||||||
|
Charlotte/ Salisbury, NC(2)
|
2,107,435 | 10 | |||||||
|
Greensboro/ Winston-Salem, NC(2)
|
1,469,394 | 10 | |||||||
|
Hickory, NC(2)
|
345,317 | 10 | |||||||
|
Fargo, ND
|
317,873 | 15 | |||||||
|
Grand Forks, ND
|
202,542 | 15 | |||||||
|
Lincoln, NE(2)
|
349,510 | 15 | |||||||
|
Omaha, NE(2)
|
998,073 | 10 | |||||||
|
Albuquerque, NM(2)
|
842,451 | 15 | |||||||
|
Gallup, NM
|
145,922 | 15 | |||||||
|
Roswell, NM
|
81,586 | 15 | |||||||
|
Santa Fe, NM(2)
|
222,016 | 15 | |||||||
|
Reno, NV(2)
|
601,268 | 10 | |||||||
|
Buffalo, NY(2)
|
1,212,839 | 10 | |||||||
|
Syracuse, NY(2)
|
780,393 | 15 | |||||||
|
Utica, NY
|
298,911 | 10 | |||||||
|
Dayton/ Springfield, OH(2)
|
1,221,056 | 10 | |||||||
|
Sandusky, OH(2)
|
139,491 | 15 | |||||||
|
Toledo, OH(2)
|
789,824 | 15 | |||||||
|
Tulsa, OK(2)
|
958,093 | 15 | |||||||
|
Eugene, OR(2)
|
325,831 | 10 | |||||||
|
Salem/ Corvallis, OR(2)(3)
|
534,999 | 30 | |||||||
|
Pittsburgh/ Butler/ Uniontown/ Washington/
Latrobe, PA(2)
|
2,469,722 | 10 | |||||||
|
Chattanooga, TN(2)
|
572,258 | 15 | |||||||
|
Clarksville, TN(2)
|
268,476 | 15 | |||||||
|
Cookeville, TN(3)
|
139,561 | 15 | |||||||
|
Dyersburg, TN(3)
|
120,794 | 15 | |||||||
|
Jackson, TN(3)
|
289,279 | 15 | |||||||
|
Kingsport/ Johnson/ Bristol, TN(3)
|
711,686 | 15 | |||||||
|
Knoxville, TN(2)
|
1,130,516 | 15 | |||||||
|
Memphis, TN(2)
|
1,565,645 | 15 | |||||||
|
Nashville/ Murfreesboro, TN(2)
|
1,785,651 | 15 | |||||||
|
Provo, UT(2)
|
384,722 | 15 | |||||||
|
Salt Lake City/ Ogden, UT(2)
|
1,652,234 | 15 | |||||||
|
Kennewick/ Pasco/ Richland, WA
|
194,952 | 15 | |||||||
|
Spokane, WA(2)
|
751,212 | 15 | |||||||
|
Yakima, WA
|
258,928 | 15 | |||||||
|
Appleton-Oshkosh, WI
|
456,172 | 10 | |||||||
|
Eau Claire, WI
|
196,580 | 10 | |||||||
|
La Crosse, WI-Winona, MN
|
322,112 | 10 | |||||||
|
Marinette, WI-Menominee, MI
|
68,935 | 10 | |||||||
|
Stevens Point-Marshfield-Wisconsin Rapids, WI
|
215,593 | 20 | |||||||
|
Casper, WY(3)
|
146,928 | 30 | |||||||
|
Total
|
53,351,910 | (5) | |||||||
| (1) | 2001 market population estimates provided by Easy Analytic Software Incorporated. |
| (2) | Designates wireless licenses or portions of wireless licenses in markets launched under our 40 Market Plan. |
| (3) | Designates wireless licenses covering a total of approximately 3.8 million potential customers that we have contracted to exchange and sell in several transactions for certain operating assets, cash and wireless licenses which cover a total of approximately 2.3 million potential customers in the following markets: Rochester, NY; Plattsburgh, NY; Watertown, NY; Marion, OH; Steubenville, OH; Johnstown, PA, Lufkin, TX; and Eagle Pass, TX. In these transactions, we have contracted to exchange only 15 MHz of our wireless licenses in the markets of Blytheville, AR, Lewiston, ID and Casper, WY, and only 10 MHz of our wireless licenses in the markets of Pueblo, CO and Salem, OR. |
| (4) | Designates wireless licenses, covering a total of approximately 0.4 million potential customers, for which we have agreed to contribute a 15 MHz portion of each wireless license to a third party in exchange for an equity ownership interest in such third party. |
| (5) | Upon the completion of the transactions described in the above footnotes (3) and (4), we will own wireless licenses covering approximately 53.0 million potential customers. |
6
The following table shows the wireless licenses for approximately 23.8 million potential customers for which Leap was the winning bidder in the FCCs re-auction of C-Block and F-Block PCS spectrum that was completed in January 2001. These license grants are subject to the resolution of litigation between the FCC and NextWave Telecom, Inc. currently under appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court.
| Market | Population(1) | MHz | |||||||
|
New London, CT
|
369,197 | 10 | |||||||
|
Jacksonville, FL
|
1,377,296 | 10 | |||||||
|
Melbourne, FL
|
482,322 | 10 | |||||||
|
Columbus, IN
|
156,509 | 10 | |||||||
|
Indianapolis, IN
|
1,569,550 | 10 | |||||||
|
Lexington, KY
|
935,826 | 10 | |||||||
|
Louisville, KY
|
1,496,153 | 10 | |||||||
|
Worcester, MA
|
754,348 | 10 | |||||||
|
Asheville, NC
|
615,193 | 10 | |||||||
|
Las Cruces, NM
|
254,011 | 10 | |||||||
|
Albany, NY
|
1,049,390 | 10 | |||||||
|
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
460,125 | 10 | |||||||
|
Columbus, OH
|
1,709,011 | 10 | |||||||
|
Scranton, PA
|
672,047 | 10 | |||||||
|
Providence, RI
|
1,588,140 | 10 | |||||||
|
Austin, TX
|
1,355,744 | 10 | |||||||
|
Brownsville, TX
|
361,365 | 10 | |||||||
|
Bryan, TX
|
187,229 | 10 | |||||||
|
El Paso, TX
|
757,233 | 10 | |||||||
|
Houston, TX
|
5,117,983 | 10 | |||||||
|
McAllen, TX
|
638,066 | 10 | |||||||
|
San Antonio, TX
|
1,880,744 | 10 | |||||||
|
Total
|
23,787,482 | ||||||||
| (1) | 2001 market population estimates provided by Easy Analytic Software Incorporated. |
Leaps Rights and Interests. Our who