Back to GetFilings.com



Table of Contents

 
 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
     
(Mark One)
   
þ
  QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
    For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005
 
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: 000-29633
NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
     
Delaware
  91-1930918
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
  (I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
4500 Carillon Point
Kirkland, Washington 98033
(425) 576-3600
(Address of principal executive offices, zip code and registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes þ          No o
      Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes þ          No o
      Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date:
     
Outstanding Title of Class   Number of Shares on April 29, 2005
     
Class A Common Stock
  183,870,066 shares
Class B Common Stock
  84,632,604 shares
 
 


NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC.
FORM 10-Q
TABLE OF CONTENTS
             
        Page No.
         
 PART I  FINANCIAL INFORMATION
   Financial Statements        
     Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004     3  
     Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations Three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004     4  
     Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows Three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004     5  
     Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements     6  
   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations     23  
   Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk     38  
   Controls and Procedures     40  
 PART II  OTHER INFORMATION
   Legal Proceedings     40  
   Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds     42  
   Other Information     42  
   Exhibits     44  
 Signatures     46  
 EXHIBIT 10.14
 EXHIBIT 10.18(E)
 EXHIBIT 10.18(F)
 EXHIBIT 10.18(G)
 EXHIBIT 10.18(H)
 EXHIBIT 10.20
 EXHIBIT 10.20(A)
 EXHIBIT 10.21
 EXHIBIT 10.66
 EXHIBIT 10.74(A)
 EXHIBIT 10.75
 EXHIBIT 10.84
 EXHIBIT 10.85
 EXHIBIT 31.1
 EXHIBIT 31.2
 EXHIBIT 32.1
 EXHIBIT 32.2

2


Table of Contents

PART I — FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets
                     
    March 31,   December 31,
    2005   2004
         
    (Dollars in thousands,
    except per share amounts)
    (Unaudited)
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS:
               
 
Cash and cash equivalents
  $ 248,570     $ 147,484  
 
Short-term investments
    85,209       117,095  
 
Accounts and notes receivable, net of allowance $17,738 and $15,874, respectively
    207,793       190,954  
 
Subscriber equipment inventory
    30,210       49,595  
 
Other current assets
    33,240       31,388  
             
Total current assets
    605,022       536,516  
             
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, at cost
    1,603,567       1,546,685  
 
Less — accumulated depreciation and amortization
    (544,681 )     (503,967 )
             
   
Property, plant and equipment, net
    1,058,886       1,042,718  
             
OTHER NON-CURRENT ASSETS:
               
 
FCC licenses, net of accumulated amortization of $8,744
    375,490       375,470  
 
Debt issuance costs and other, net of accumulated amortization of $7,333 and $6,456, respectively
    20,730       20,995  
             
Total non-current assets
    396,220       396,465  
             
TOTAL ASSETS
  $ 2,060,128     $ 1,975,699  
             
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
               
 
Accounts payable
  $ 97,898     $ 82,833  
 
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
    98,500       115,447  
 
Due to Nextel WIP
    11,961       7,379  
             
Total current liabilities
    208,359       205,659  
             
LONG-TERM OBLIGATIONS:
               
 
Long-term debt
    1,631,845       1,632,518  
 
Deferred income taxes
    54,726       53,964  
 
Other long-term liabilities
    33,908       32,243  
             
Total long-term obligations
    1,720,479       1,718,725  
             
TOTAL LIABILITIES
    1,928,838       1,924,384  
             
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (See Note 7)
               
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:
               
 
Preferred stock, no par value, 100,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding
           
 
Series B Preferred stock, par value $.001 per share, 13,110,000 shares authorized, no shares outstanding
           
 
Common stock, Class A, par value $.001 per share, 500,000,000 shares authorized, 183,625,137 and 181,557,105 shares, respectively, issued and outstanding, and paid-in capital
    1,050,964       1,029,193  
 
Common stock, Class B, par value $.001 per share convertible, 600,000,000 shares authorized, 84,632,604 shares, issued and outstanding, and paid-in capital
    172,697       172,697  
 
Accumulated deficit
    (1,094,274 )     (1,150,806 )
 
Deferred compensation
    (468 )     (440 )
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income
    2,371       671  
             
Total stockholders’ equity
    131,290       51,315  
             
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
  $ 2,060,128     $ 1,975,699  
             
See accompanying notes to consolidated condensed financial statements.

3


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations
                     
    For the Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (Dollars in thousands, except per
    share amounts)
    (Unaudited)
REVENUES:
               
 
Service revenues (earned from Nextel WIP $44,824 and $33,787, respectively)
  $ 378,858     $ 287,262  
 
Equipment revenues
    25,226       20,870  
             
   
Total revenues
    404,084       308,132  
             
OPERATING EXPENSES:
               
 
Cost of service revenues (excludes depreciation of $32,499 and $29,696 respectively)
    98,626       84,462  
   
(incurred from Nextel WIP $32,911 and $26,324 and American Tower $3,092 and $2,463 respectively)
               
 
Cost of equipment revenues
    44,798       37,307  
 
Selling, general and administrative (Incurred from Nextel WIP $10,613 and $5,522, respectively)
    138,172       113,422  
 
Stock based compensation (primarily selling, general and administrative related)
    127       217  
 
Depreciation and amortization
    40,753       36,569  
             
   
Total operating expenses
    322,476       271,977  
             
INCOME FROM OPERATIONS
    81,608       36,155  
 
Interest expense, net
    (25,867 )     (30,952 )
 
Interest income
    2,643       677  
 
Loss on early retirement of debt
          (1,558 )
             
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAX PROVISION
    58,384       4,322  
 
Income tax provision
    (1,852 )     (799 )
             
NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
             
NET INCOME PER SHARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS, BASIC AND DILUTED:
               
 
Basic
  $ 0.21     $ 0.01  
             
 
Diluted
  $ 0.19     $ 0.01  
             
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
               
 
Basic
    267,091,076       262,398,591  
             
 
Diluted
    308,335,492       271,086,490  
             
See accompanying notes to consolidated condensed financial statements.

4


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows
                     
    For the Three Months
    Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
               
 
Net income
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash from operating activities
               
 
Deferred income tax provision
    762       799  
 
Depreciation and amortization
    40,753       36,569  
 
Amortization of debt issuance costs
    878       1,143  
 
Interest accretion for senior discount notes
          20  
 
Bond discount amortization
    269       228  
 
Loss on early retirement of debt
          1,558  
 
Fair value adjustments of derivative instruments
    (2,006 )     (1,134 )
 
Stock based compensation
    127       217  
 
Other
    1,573       (60 )
 
Changes in current assets and liabilities:
               
   
Accounts and notes receivable, net
    (16,839 )     (1,733 )
   
Subscriber equipment inventory
    19,385       (4,844 )
   
Other current and long-term assets
    (1,052 )     3,688  
   
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities
    14,952       (1,632 )
   
Operating advances due to (from) Nextel WIP
    1,880       (534 )
             
 
Net cash from operating activities
    117,214       37,808  
             
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
               
 
Capital expenditures
    (69,107 )     (31,667 )
 
FCC licenses
    (60 )     (2,336 )
 
Proceeds from maturities of short-term investments
    50,430       34,426  
 
Proceeds from sales of short-term investments
    19,659       198,409  
 
Purchases of short-term investments
    (38,203 )     (222,967 )
             
   
Net cash from investing activities
    (37,281 )     (24,135 )
             
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
               
 
Stock options exercised
    20,968       3,219  
 
Proceeds from stock issued for employee stock purchase plan
    630       620  
 
Proceeds from sale lease-back transactions
    405       389  
 
Debt repayments
          (13,678 )
 
Capital lease payments
    (846 )     (776 )
 
Debt and equity issuance costs
    (4 )     (275 )
             
   
Net cash from financing activities
    21,153       (10,501 )
             
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
    101,086       3,172  
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period
    147,484       122,620  
             
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period
  $ 248,570     $ 125,792  
             
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF NON-CASH TRANSACTIONS
               
 
Cash paid for income taxes
  $     $  
             
 
Retirement of long-term debt with common stock
  $ 19     $  
             
 
Cash paid for interest, net of capitalized amount
  $ 29,117     $ 42,774  
             
See accompanying notes to consolidated condensed financial statements.

5


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements
March 31, 2005
(Unaudited)
1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION
      Our interim consolidated condensed financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 have been prepared without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for interim financial reporting. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in the annual financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations for interim financial statements. These consolidated condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and quarterly filings on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC.
      During the course of preparing our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, we determined that based on clarification from the SEC we did not comply with the requirements of SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” and FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-3, “Accounting for Operating Leases with Scheduled Rent Increases.” Accordingly, we modified our accounting to recognize rent expense, on a straight-line basis, over the initial lease term and renewal periods that are reasonably assured. As the modifications related solely to accounting treatment, they did not affect our historical or future cash flow or the timing of payments under our relevant leases. As such, we restated certain prior periods, including our previously issued consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2004 and the consolidated statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004. Please refer to Note 4 to the accompanying consolidated condensed financial statements for a further discussion of this restatement.
      The financial information included herein reflects all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments and accruals), which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for the fair presentation of the results of the interim periods. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year ending December 31, 2005.
2. OPERATIONS
Description of Business
      Nextel Partners provides a wide array of digital wireless communications services throughout the United States, primarily to business users, utilizing frequencies licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). Our operations are primarily conducted by Nextel Partners Operating Corp. (“OPCO”), a wholly owned subsidiary. Substantially all of our assets, liabilities, operating losses and cash flows are within OPCO and our other wholly owned subsidiaries.
      Our digital network (“Nextel Digital Wireless Network”) has been developed with advanced mobile communication systems employing digital technology developed by Motorola, Inc. (“Motorola”) (such technology is referred to as the “integrated Digital Enhanced Network” or “iDEN”) with a multi-site configuration permitting frequency reuse. Our principal business objective is to offer high-capacity, high-quality, advanced communication services in our territories throughout the United States targeted toward mid-sized and rural markets. Various operating agreements entered into by our subsidiaries and Nextel WIP Corp. (“Nextel WIP”), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Nextel Communications, Inc. (“Nextel”), govern the support services to be provided to us by Nextel WIP (see Note 8).

6


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Concentration of Risk
      We believe that the geographic and industry diversity of our customer base minimizes the risk of incurring material losses due to concentration of credit risk.
      We are a party to certain equipment purchase agreements with Motorola. For the foreseeable future we expect that we will need to rely on Motorola for the manufacture of a substantial portion of the infrastructure equipment necessary to construct and make operational our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network as well as for the provision of digital mobile telephone handsets and accessories.
      As previously discussed, we are reliant on Nextel WIP for the provision of certain services. For the foreseeable future, we will need to rely on Nextel WIP for the provision of these services, as we will not have the infrastructure to support those services.
      In addition, if Nextel encounters financial or operating difficulties relating to its portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network, or experiences a significant decline in customer acceptance of its services and products, our business may be adversely affected, including the quality of our services, the ability of our customers to roam within the entire network and our ability to attract and retain customers.
Use of Estimates
      The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates.
Principles of Consolidation
      The consolidated condensed financial statements include our accounts and those of our wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Net Income per Share
      In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 128, “Computation of Earnings Per Share,” basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share adjust basic earnings per common share for the effects of potentially dilutive common shares. Potentially dilutive common shares primarily include the dilutive effects of shares issuable under our stock option plan and outstanding unvested restricted stock using the treasury stock method and the dilutive effects of shares issuable upon the conversion of our convertible senior notes using the if-converted method.

7


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
      The following schedule is our net income per share calculation for the periods indicated:
                   
    For the Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands, except share and per
    share amounts)
Income attributable to common stockholders (numerator for basic)
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
 
Effect of dilutive securities:
               
 
Convertible Senior Notes
  $ 1,125        
             
Adjusted Income attributable to common stockholders (numerator for diluted)
  $ 57,657     $ 3,523  
             
Gross weighted average common shares outstanding
    267,193,826       262,568,591  
 
Less: Weighted average shares subject to repurchase
    (102,750 )     (170,000 )
             
Weighted average common shares outstanding — basic (denominator for basic)
    267,091,076       262,398,591  
 
Effect of dilutive securities:
               
 
Convertible Senior Notes
    32,871,975        
 
Stock options
    8,284,331       8,564,089  
 
Restricted stock (unvested)
    88,110       123,810  
             
Weighted average common shares outstanding — diluted (denominator for diluted)
    308,335,492       271,086,490  
             
Net income per share, basic
  $ 0.21     $ 0.01  
             
Net income per share, diluted
  $ 0.19     $ 0.01  
             
      For the three months ended March 31, 2004, approximately 32.9 million shares issuable upon the assumed conversion of our 11/2% senior convertible notes that could potentially dilute earnings per share in the future were excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per common share due to their antidilutive effects. Additionally, for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, 59,000 and approximately 8.0 million options, respectively, were excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per common share as their exercise prices exceeded the average market price of our class A common stock.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
      Cash equivalents include time deposits and highly-liquid investments with remaining maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase.
Short-Term Investments
      Marketable debt securities with original purchase maturities greater than three months are classified as short-term investments. Short-term investments at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 consisted of U.S. government agency securities, U.S. Treasury securities, other asset backed securities, auction rate securities and commercial paper. We classify our investment securities as trading because the securities are bought and held principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term. Trading securities are recorded at fair value. Unrealized holding gains and losses on trading securities are included in earnings.

8


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
Sale-Leaseback Transactions
      We periodically enter into transactions whereby we transfer specified switching equipment and telecommunication towers and related assets to third parties, and subsequently lease all or a portion of these assets from these parties. During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 we received cash proceeds of approximately $405,000 and $389,000, respectively, for assets sold to third parties. Gains on sale-leaseback transactions are deferred and recognized over the lease term.
Leases
      We lease various cell sites, equipment and office facilities under operating leases. Leases for cell sites are typically five years with renewal options. The leases normally provide for the payment of minimum annual rentals and certain leases include provisions for renewal options of up to five years. Certain costs related to our cell sites are depreciated over a ten-year period on a straight-line basis, which represents the lesser of the lease term or economic life of the asset. The company calculates straight-line rent expense over the initial lease term and renewals that are reasonably assured. Office facilities and equipment are leased under agreements with terms ranging from one month to twenty years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the respective lives of the leases or the useful lives of the improvements.
FCC Licenses
      FCC operating licenses are recorded at historical cost. Our FCC licenses and the requirements to maintain the licenses are similar to other licenses granted by the FCC, including personal communications services (“PCS”) and cellular licenses, in that they are subject to renewal after the initial 10-year term. Historically, the renewal process associated with these FCC licenses has been perfunctory. The accounting for these licenses has historically not been constrained by the renewal and operational requirements.
      SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” requires the use of a non-amortization approach to account for purchased goodwill and certain intangibles. Under a non-amortization approach, goodwill and certain intangibles are not amortized into results of operations, but instead are reviewed at least annually for impairment, and written down as a charge to results of operations only in the periods in which the recorded value of goodwill and certain intangibles exceeds fair value. We have determined that FCC licenses have indefinite lives; therefore, as of January 1, 2002, we no longer amortize the cost of these licenses. We performed an annual asset impairment analyses on our FCC licenses and to date we have determined there has been no impairment related to our FCC licenses. For our impairment analysis, we used the aggregate of all our FCC licenses, which constitutes the footprint of our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network, as the unit of accounting for our FCC licenses based on the guidance in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 02-7, “Unit of Accounting for Testing Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets.”
      As a result of adopting SFAS No. 142, we record a non-cash income tax provision. This charge is required because we have significant deferred tax liabilities related to FCC licenses with a lower tax than book basis as a result of accelerated and continued amortization of FCC licenses for tax purposes. Historically, we did not need a valuation allowance for the portion of our net operating loss equal to the amount of license amortization expected to occur during the carry forward period of our net operating loss. Because we ceased amortizing licenses for financial statement purposes on January 1, 2002, we can no longer reasonably estimate the amount, if any, of deferred tax liabilities related to our FCC licenses which will reverse during the net operating loss carry forward period. Accordingly, we increase the valuation allowance with a corresponding deferred tax provision as the deferred tax liabilities related to FCC license amortization increase.

9


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
Income Taxes
      For the first quarter of 2005 our income tax provision was comprised of both current and deferred income taxes. Our current provision reflects taxes payable under the alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) system, which limits the amount of net operating loss carryforwards taxpayers can use to offset current income. Our deferred provision includes the expense associated with the FCC licenses (refer to the discussion on FCC licenses above) and the tax benefit of credit carryforwards related to the tax paid under the AMT system.
      Under the provisions of SFAS No. 109, all available evidence, both positive and negative, should be considered to determine whether, based on the weight of that evidence, a valuation allowance is needed. To date, due to our lack of earnings history, we have not relied on forecast of future earnings as a means to realize our deferred tax assets. Accordingly, we continue to record a deferred tax valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets.
                   
    For the Three
    Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Current Federal and State Income Tax (Provision)/ Benefit:
               
 
AMT
  $ (1,090 )   $  
Deferred Federal and State Income Tax (Provision)/ Benefit:
               
 
FCC Licenses
    (1,852 )     (799 )
 
AMT Credit Carryforward
    1,090        
             
Total Deferred Tax (Provision)/ Benefit
    (762 )     (799 )
Total Income Tax (Provision)/ Benefit
  $ (1,852 )   $ (799 )
             
Interest Rate Risk Management
      We use derivative financial instruments consisting of interest rate swap and interest rate protection agreements in the management of our interest rate exposures. We will not use financial instruments for trading or other speculative purposes, nor will we be a party to any leveraged derivative instrument. The use of derivative financial instruments is monitored through regular communication with senior management. We will be exposed to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the counter parties. This credit risk is minimized by dealing with a group of major financial institutions with whom we have other financial relationships. We do not anticipate nonperformance by these counter parties. We are also subject to market risk should interest rates change.
      SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” as amended by SFAS No. 138, establish accounting and reporting standards requiring that every derivative instrument (including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts) be recorded on the balance sheet as either an asset or liability measured at fair value. These statements require that changes in the derivative’s fair value be recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. If hedge accounting criteria are met, the changes in a derivative’s fair value (for a cash flow hedge) are deferred in stockholders’ equity as a component of other comprehensive income. These deferred gains and losses are recognized as income in the period in which hedged cash flows occur. The ineffective portions of hedge returns are recognized as earnings.

10


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
     Non-Cash Flow Hedging Instruments
      In April 1999 and 2000, we entered into interest rate swap agreements for $60 million and $50 million, respectively, to partially hedge interest rate exposure with respect to our term B and C loans. In April 2004, we terminated the $60 million interest rate swap agreement in accordance with its original terms and paid approximately $639,000 for the final settlement. We did not record any realized gain or loss with this termination since this swap did not qualify for cash flow hedge accounting and we recognized changes in its fair value up to the termination date as part of our interest expense.
      The term B and C loans were replaced in connection with the refinancing of our credit facility in May 2004; however, we maintained the existing $50 million rate swap agreement expiring in April 2005. The interest rate swap agreement has the effect of converting certain of our variable rate obligations to fixed or other variable rate obligations. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 133 (as described below), amounts paid or received under the interest rate swap agreement were accrued as interest rates changed and recognized over the life of the swap agreement as an adjustment to interest expense.
      The swap agreement does not qualify for cash flow hedge accounting. In accordance with SFAS No. 133, the fair value of the swap agreement is included in other current liabilities on the balance sheet. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we recorded non-cash, non-operating gains of $0.6 million and $1.1 million, respectively, related to the change in market value of the interest rate swap agreements in interest expense.
         
Non-Cash Flow Hedging Instruments    
     
    (In thousands)
Fair value of liability as of December 31, 2004
  $ 1,117  
Change in fair value — interest rate changes
    (597 )
       
Fair value of liability as of March 31, 2005
  $ 520  
       
     Cash Flow Hedging Instruments
      In September 2004 we entered into a series of interest rate swap agreements for $150 million, which had the effect of converting certain of our variable interest rate $700 million term C loan obligations to fixed interest rates. The commencement date for the swap transactions was December 1, 2004 and the expiration date is August 31, 2006. In December 2004 we entered into similar agreements to hedge an additional $50 million commencing March 1, 2005 and expiring August 31, 2006.
      These interest rate swap agreements qualify for cash flow accounting under SFAS 133. Both at inception and on an ongoing basis we perform an effectiveness test using the change in variable cash flows method. In accordance with SFAS 133, the fair value of the swap agreements at March 31, 2005 was included in other current assets and other non-current assets on the balance sheet. The change in fair value was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income on the balance sheet since the instruments were determined to be perfectly effective at March 31, 2005. There were no amounts reclassified into current earnings due to ineffectiveness during the quarter.
         
Cash Flow Hedging Instruments    
     
    (In thousands)
Fair value of assets as of December 31, 2004
  $ 579  
Change in fair value — interest rate changes
    1,409  
       
Fair value of assets as of March 31, 2005
  $ 1,988  
       

11


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
Revenue Recognition
      Service revenues primarily include fixed monthly access charges for the digital cellular voice service, Nextel Direct Connect, and other wireless services and variable charges for airtime usage in excess of plan minutes. We recognize revenue for access charges and other services charged at fixed amounts plus excess airtime usage ratably over the service period, net of customer discounts and adjustments, over the period earned.
      For regulatory fees billed to customers such as the Universal Service Fund (“USF”) we net those billings against payments to the USF. Total billings to customers during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 were $4.8 million and $3.0 million, respectively.
      Under EITF Issue No. 00-21 “Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables,” we are no longer required to consider whether a customer is able to realize utility from the handset in the absence of the undelivered service. Given that we meet the criteria stipulated in EITF Issue No. 00-21, we account for the sale of a handset as a unit of accounting separate from the subsequent service to the customer. Accordingly, we recognize revenue from handset equipment sales and the related cost of handset equipment revenues when title to the handset equipment passes to the customer for all arrangements entered into beginning in the third quarter of 2003. This has resulted in the classification of amounts received for the sale of the handset equipment, including any activation fees charged to the customer, as equipment revenues at the time of the sale. In December 2003, the SEC staff issued SAB No. 104, “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements,” which updated SAB No. 101 to reflect the impact of the issuance of EITF No. 00-21.
      For arrangements entered into prior to July 1, 2003, we continue to amortize the revenues and costs previously deferred as was required by SAB No. 101. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we recognized $4.5 million and $6.7 million, respectively, of activation fees and handset equipment revenues and equipment costs that had been previously deferred. The table below shows the recognition of service revenues, equipment revenues and cost of equipment revenues (handset costs) on a pro forma basis adjusted to exclude the impact of SAB No. 101 and as if EITF No. 00-21 had been historically recorded for all customer arrangements.
                 
    For the Three Months
    Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands, except per
    share amounts)
Service revenues
  $ 378,155     $ 286,223  
             
Equipment revenues
  $ 21,383     $ 15,175  
             
Cost of equipment revenues
  $ 40,252     $ 30,573  
             
Income attributable to common stockholders
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
             
Income per share attributable to common stockholders, basic
  $ 0.21     $ 0.01  
             
Income per share attributable to common stockholders, diluted
  $ 0.19     $ 0.01  
             
Reclassifications
      Certain amounts in prior years’ financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

12


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
Long-Lived Assets
      Our long-lived assets consist principally of property, plant and equipment. It is our policy to assess impairment of long-lived assets pursuant to SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.” This includes determining if certain triggering events have occurred, including significant decreases in the market value of certain assets, significant changes in the manner in which an asset is used, significant changes in the legal climate or business climate that could affect the value of an asset, or current period or continuing operating or cash flow losses or projections that demonstrate continuing losses associated with certain assets used for the purpose of producing revenue that might be an indicator of impairment. When we perform the SFAS No. 144 impairment tests, we identify the appropriate asset group to be our network system, which includes the grouping of all our assets required to operate our portion of the Nextel Digital Mobile Network and provide service to our customers. We based this conclusion of asset grouping on the revenue dependency, operating interdependency and shared costs to operate our network. Thus far, none of the above triggering events has resulted in any impairment charges.
Stock-Based Compensation
      In December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure.” This statement amends SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” to provide alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. We continue to apply the intrinsic value method for stock-based compensation to employees prescribed by Accounting Principles Board Opinion (“APB”) No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” We have provided below the disclosures required by SFAS No. 148.
      As required by SFAS No. 148, had compensation cost been determined based upon the fair value of the awards granted during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, our net income and basic and diluted income per share would have adjusted to the pro forma amounts indicated below:
      The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model as prescribed by SFAS No. 148 using the following assumptions:
                 
    For the Three Months
    Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands, except per
    share amounts)
Net income, as reported
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
Add: stock-based employee compensation expense included in reported net income
    127       217  
Deduct: total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair-value-based method for all awards
    (7,406 )     (6,239 )
             
As adjusted, net income
  $ 49,253     $ (2,499 )
             
Basic income per share attributable to common stockholders:
               
As reported
  $ 0.21     $ 0.01  
             
As adjusted
  $ 0.18     $ (0.01 )
             
Diluted income per share attributable to common stockholders:
               
As reported
  $ 0.19     $ 0.01  
             
As adjusted
  $ 0.16     $ (0.01 )
             
Weighted average fair value per share of options granted
  $ 7.64     $ 8.40  
             

13


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
      The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the input of subjective assumptions and does not necessarily provide a reliable measure of fair value.
                 
    For the Three
    Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
Expected stock price volatility
    43.0 %     70.7 %
Risk-free interest rate
    3.7 %     3.4 %
Expected life in years
    4 years       5 years  
Expected dividend yield
    0.00 %     0.00 %
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
      In November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs,” which clarifies the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs and wasted material (spoilage). SFAS No. 151 amends ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing.” We are in the process of evaluating the financial statement impact of the adoption of SFAS No. 151, which becomes effective July 1, 2005.
      In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R (revised 2004), “Share Based Payment,” which focuses primarily on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123R replaces SFAS No. 123 “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” which superceded APB No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” We will continue to apply the intrinsic value method for stock-based compensation to employees prescribed by APB No. 25 and provide the disclosures as required by SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure,” until SFAS No. 123R becomes effective January 1, 2006. Upon implementation of SFAS No. 123R, we will recognize in the income statement the grant-date fair value of stock options and other equity-based compensation issued to employees. In March 2005, the SEC issued SAB No. 107, “Share Based Payment,” which provides additional guidance for adoption of SFAS No. 123R.
      In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, “Exchange of Nonmonetary Assets,” which requires nonmonetary exchanges to be accounted for at fair value. SFAS No. 153 amends APB No. 29, “Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions,” which was issued in May 1973. We are in the process of evaluating the financial statement impact of the adoption of SFAS No. 153, which becomes effective July 1, 2005.
      In March 2005, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations” (“FIN 47”), which clarifies that an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation when incurred if the liability’s fair value can be reasonably estimated. We are in the process of evaluating the financial statement impact of the adoption of FIN 47, which becomes effective December 31, 2005.
4. RESTATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
      During the course of preparing our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, we determined that based on clarification from the SEC we did not comply with the requirements of SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” and FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-3, “Accounting for Operating Leases with Scheduled Rent Increases.” Accordingly, we modified our accounting to recognize rent expense, on a straight-line basis, over the initial lease term and renewal periods that are reasonably assured. We also adjusted deferred gains from sale-leaseback transactions related to telecommunication towers to correspond with the initial lease term and renewal periods that are reasonably assured. The impact of this adjustment for the three months ended March 31, 2004 resulted in a $1.1 million understatement of rent expense and a

14


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
$1.1 million understatement in accumulated deficit. The impact on our diluted earnings per share for the three months ended March 31, 2004 was $0.01 per share. As the modifications related solely to accounting treatment, they did not affect our historical or future cash flow or the timing of payments under its relevant leases. As such, the restatement did not have any impact on our previously reported net cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities, cash position and revenues.
      The following tables summarize the effects of this restatement on our consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2004 and the consolidated statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004. We have not presented a summary of impact of the restatement on our consolidated statements of cash flows for the above referenced period because the net impact was zero.
                         
    As of March 31, 2004
     
Consolidated Balance Sheet   As Reported   Adjustments   As Restated
             
    (Dollars in thousands)
Other long-term liabilities
  $ 17,280     $ 15,040     $ 32,320  
Total long-term liabilities
    1,704,113       15,040       1,719,153  
Total liabilities
    1,880,587       15,040       1,895,627  
Accumulated deficit
    (1,185,989 )     (15,040 )     (1,201,029 )
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)
    (4,620 )     (15,040 )     (19,660 )
                         
    For the Three Months
    Ended March 31, 2004
     
Consolidated Statement of Operations   As Reported   Adjustments   As Restated
             
    (Dollars in thousands, except
    per share amounts)
Cost of service revenues
  $ 83,331     $ 1,131     $ 84,462  
Total operating expenses(1)
    268,845       1,131       269,976  
Income (loss) from operations
    37,286       (1,131 )     36,155  
Income (loss) before deferred income tax provision
    5,453       (1,131 )     4,322  
Net income (loss)
    4,654       (1,131 )     3,523  
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
    4,654       (1,131 )     3,523  
Basic net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders
  $ 0.02     $ (0.01 )   $ 0.01  
Diluted net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders
  $ 0.02     $ (0.01 )   $ 0.01  
 
(1)  Total operating expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2004 presented in this table does not reflect certain amounts that have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. Including reclassifications, total operating expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2004 was $272.0 million.

15


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
5. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
                 
    As of
     
    March 31,   December 31,
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Equipment
  $ 1,392,762     $ 1,358,969  
Furniture, fixtures and software
    135,514       125,299  
Building and improvements
    11,228       9,870  
Less — accumulated depreciation and amortization
    (544,681 )     (503,967 )
             
Subtotal
    994,823       990,171  
Construction in progress
    64,063       52,547  
             
Total property and equipment
  $ 1,058,886     $ 1,042,718  
             
6. NON-CURRENT PORTION OF LONG-TERM DEBT
                 
    As of
     
    March 31,   December 31,
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Bank Credit Facility — tranche C loan, interest, at our option, calculated on Administrative Agent’s alternate base rate or reserve adjusted LIBOR
  $ 700,000     $ 700,000  
81/8% Senior Notes due 2011, net of $0.4 million discount at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, interest payable semi-annually in cash and in arrears
    474,605       474,593  
11/2% Convertible Senior Notes due 2008, interest payable semi-annually in cash and in arrears
    299,981       300,000  
121/2% Senior Discount Notes due 2009, net discount of $6.7 million and $7.0 million, respectively
    139,553       139,296  
11% Senior Notes due 2010, interest payable semi-annually in cash and in arrears
    1,157       1,157  
Capital leases
    16,549       17,472  
             
Total non-current portion of long-term debt
  $ 1,631,845     $ 1,632,518  
             
Bank Credit Facility
      On May 19, 2004, OPCO refinanced its existing $475.0 million credit facility with a syndicate of banks and other financial institutions led by J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. and Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc. as joint lead arrangers and book runners, Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc. as syndication agent, and JPMorgan Chase Bank as administrative agent. The new credit facility includes a $700.0 million tranche C term loan, a $100.0 million revolving credit facility and an option to request an additional $200.0 million of incremental term loans. Such incremental term loans shall not exceed $200.0 million or have a final maturity date earlier than the maturity date for the tranche C term loan. The tranche C term loan matures on the last business day in May falling on or nearest to May 31, 2011. The revolving credit facility will terminate on the last business day in May falling on or nearest to May 31, 2011. The incremental term loans, if any, shall mature on the date specified on the date the respective loan is made, provided that such maturity date shall not be earlier than the maturity date for the tranche C term loan. As of March 31, 2005, $700.0 million of the tranche C term loan was outstanding and no amounts were outstanding under either the

16


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
$100.0 million revolving credit facility or the incremental term loans. The proceeds from the tranche C term loan were used to repay borrowings under our previous tranche B senior secured credit facility as well as fund a portion of the tender offer for our 11% senior notes due 2010.
      The tranche C term loan bears interest, at our option, at the administrative agent’s alternate base rate or reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus, in each case, applicable margins. The initial applicable margin for the tranche C term loan is 2.50% over LIBOR and 1.50% over the base rate. For the revolving credit facility, the initial applicable margin is 3.00% over LIBOR and 2.00% over the base rate and thereafter will be determined on the basis of the ratio of total debt to annualized EBITDA and will range between 1.50% and 3.00% over LIBOR and between 0.50% and 2.00% over the base rate. As of March 31, 2005, the interest rate on the tranche C term loan was 5.4375%.
      Borrowings under the term loans are secured by, among other things, a first priority pledge of all assets of OPCO and all assets of the subsidiaries of OPCO and a pledge of their respective capital stock. The credit facility contains financial and other covenants customary for the wireless industry, including limitations on our ability to incur additional debt or create liens on assets. The credit facility also contains covenants requiring that we maintain certain defined financial ratios. As of March 31, 2005, we were in compliance with all covenants associated with this credit facility.
81/8% Senior Notes Due 2011
      On June 23, 2003, we issued $450.0 million of 81/8% senior notes due 2011 in a private placement. We subsequently exchanged all of the 81/8% senior notes due 2011 for registered notes having the same financial terms and covenants as the privately placed notes. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 81/8% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on January 1 and July 1 of each year, which commenced on January 1, 2004.
      On May 19, 2004, we issued an additional $25 million of 81/8% senior notes due 2011 under a separate indenture in a private placement for proceeds of $24.6 million. We subsequently exchanged all of the 81/8% senior notes due 2011 for registered notes having the same financial terms and covenants as the privately placed notes. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 81/8% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on January 1 and July 1 of each year, which commenced on July 1, 2004.
      The 81/8% senior notes due 2011 represent our senior unsecured obligations and rank equally in right of payment to our entire existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness and senior in right of payment to all of our existing and future subordinated indebtedness. The 81/8% senior notes due 2011 are effectively subordinated to (i) all of our secured obligations, including borrowings under the bank credit facility, to the extent of assets securing such obligations and (ii) all indebtedness including borrowings under the bank credit facility and trade payables, of OPCO. As of March 31, 2005, we were in compliance with applicable covenants.
11/2% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2008
      In May and June 2003, we issued an aggregate principal amount of $175.0 million of 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 in private placements. At the option of the holders, these 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 are convertible into shares of our Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of 131.9087 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which represents a conversion price of $7.58 per share, subject to adjustment. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 11/2% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on May 15 and November 15 of each year, which commenced on November 15, 2003. We subsequently filed a registration statement with the SEC to register the resale of the 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 and the shares of our Class A common stock into which the 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 are convertible.

17


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
      In addition, in August 2003 we closed a private placement of $125.0 million of 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008. At the option of the holders, these 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 are convertible into shares of our Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of 78.3085 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which represents a conversion price of $12.77 per share, subject to adjustment. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 11/2% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on May 15 and November 15 of each year, which commenced on November 15, 2003. We subsequently filed a registration statement with the SEC to register the resale of the 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 and the shares of our Class A common stock into which the 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 are convertible. During the first quarter of 2005, $19,000 of these 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 were converted into 1,484 shares of our Class A common stock.
      The 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 represent our senior unsecured obligations, and rank equally in right of payment to our entire existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness and senior in right of payment to all of our existing and future subordinated indebtedness. The 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 are effectively subordinated to (i) all of our secured obligations, including borrowings under the bank credit facility, to the extent of assets securing such obligations and (ii) all indebtedness, including borrowings under the bank credit facility and trade payables, of OPCO.
121/2% Senior Discount Notes Due 2009
      On December 4, 2001, we issued in a private placement $225.0 million of 121/2% senior discount notes due 2009. These notes were issued at a discount to their aggregate principal amount at maturity and generated aggregate gross proceeds to us of approximately $210.4 million. We subsequently exchanged all of these 121/2% senior discount notes due 2009 for registered notes having the same financial terms as the privately placed notes. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 121/2% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on May 15 and November 15, which commenced on May 15, 2002. During August 2003, we repurchased for cash $11.1 million (principal amount at maturity) of our 121/2% senior discount notes due 2009 in open-market purchases. On December 31, 2003 we completed the redemption of $67.7 million (principal amount at maturity) of the notes outstanding with net proceeds from our public offering in November 2003.
      The 121/2% senior discount notes due 2009 represent our senior unsecured obligations and rank equally in right of payment to our entire existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness and senior in right of payment to all of our existing and future subordinated indebtedness. The 121/2% senior discount notes due 2009 are effectively subordinated to (i) all of our secured obligations, including borrowings under the bank credit facility, to the extent of assets securing such obligations and (ii) all indebtedness, including borrowings under the bank credit facility and trade payables, of OPCO.
      The 121/2% senior discount notes contain certain covenants that limit, among other things, our ability to: (i) pay dividends, redeem capital stock or make certain other restricted payments or investments, (ii) incur additional indebtedness or issue preferred equity interests, (iii) merge, consolidate or sell all or substantially all of our assets, (iv) create liens on assets, and (v) enter into certain transactions with affiliates or related persons. As of March 31, 2005, we were in compliance with applicable covenants.
      The 121/2% senior discount notes are redeemable at our option, in whole or in part, any time on or after November 15, 2005 in cash at the redemption price on that date, plus accrued and unpaid interest and liquidated damages if any, at the date of redemption.
11% Senior Notes Due 2010
      On March 10, 2000, we issued $200.0 million of 11% senior notes due 2010, and on July 27, 2000, we issued an additional $200.0 million of 11% senior notes due 2010, each in a private placement. We

18


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
subsequently exchanged all of the March 2000 and July 2000 notes for registered notes having the same financial terms and covenants as the privately placed notes. Interest accrues for these notes at the rate of 11% per annum, payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on March 15 and September 15 of each year, which commenced on September 15, 2000.
      In November 2002 we exchanged $10.0 million (principal amount at maturity) of the notes for shares of our Class A common stock. During August 2003 and March 2004, we repurchased for cash $22.6 million and $10.5 million (principal amounts at maturity), respectively, of our 11% senior notes dues 2010 in open-market purchases for $25.0 million and $11.8 million, respectively, including accrued interest.
      On April 28, 2004, we commenced a tender offer and consent solicitation relating to all of our outstanding 11% senior notes due 2010. The tender offer expired May 25, 2004 and we received the consents necessary to amend the indentures governing the 11% senior notes due 2010 to eliminate substantially all restrictive covenants and certain event of default provisions. As of December 31, 2004 we had purchased approximately $355.8 million (principal amount at maturity) of our 11% senior notes due 2010 for $406.6 million including accrued interest, resulting in a loss of approximately $43.8 million for the premium paid for retiring the debt early. The tender offer was funded through a combination of proceeds from a private placement of $25 million aggregate principal amount of 81/8% senior notes due 2011, refinancing our wholly owned subsidiary’s existing $375.0 million tranche B term loan with a new $700.0 million tranche C term loan and available cash.
      The 11% senior notes due 2010 represent our senior unsecured obligations, and rank equally in right of payment to our entire existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness and senior in right of payment to all of our existing and future subordinated indebtedness. The 11% senior notes due 2010 are effectively subordinated to (i) all of our secured obligations, including borrowings under the bank credit facility, to the extent of assets securing such obligations and (ii) all indebtedness, including borrowings under the bank credit facility and trade payables, of OPCO.
      The 11% senior notes due 2010 contain certain covenants that limit, among other things, our ability to: (i) pay dividends, redeem capital stock or make certain other restricted payments or investments, (ii) incur additional indebtedness or issue preferred equity interests, (iii) merge, consolidate or sell all or substantially all of our assets, (iv) create liens on assets and (v) enter into certain transactions with affiliates or related persons. As of March 31, 2005, with respect to $1.2 million (principal amount at maturity) of 11% senior notes due 2010 that remain outstanding, we were in compliance with applicable covenants.
      The 11% senior notes due 2010 are redeemable at our option, in whole or in part, any time on or after March 15, 2005 in cash at the redemption price on that date, plus accrued and unpaid interest and liquidated damages, if any, at the date of redemption.
7. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Legal Proceedings
      On December 5, 2001, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against us, two of our executive officers and four of the underwriters involved in our initial public offering. The lawsuit is captioned Keifer v. Nextel Partners, Inc., et al, No. 01 CV 10945. It was filed on behalf of all persons who acquired our common stock between February 22, 2000 and December 6, 2000 and initially named as defendants us, John Chapple, our president, chief executive officer and chairman of the board, John D. Thompson, our chief financial officer and treasurer until August 2003, and the following underwriters of our initial public offering: Goldman Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation (predecessor of Credit Suisse First Boston LLC), Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated. Mr. Chapple and Mr. Thompson have been dismissed from the lawsuit without prejudice. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Act and the Exchange Act by issuing a registration statement and offering circular that were false

19


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
and misleading in that they failed to disclose that: (i) the defendant underwriters allegedly had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors who purchased our common stock issued in connection with our initial public offering; and (ii) the defendant underwriters allegedly allocated shares of our common stock issued in connection with our initial public offering to investors who allegedly agreed to purchase additional shares of our common stock at pre-arranged prices. The complaint seeks rescissionary and/or compensatory damages. We dispute the allegations of the complaint that suggest any wrongdoing on our part or by our officers. However, the plaintiffs and the issuing company defendants, including us, have reached a settlement of the issues in the lawsuit. In June 2004, an agreement of settlement was submitted to the court for preliminary approval. The court granted the preliminary approval on February 15, 2005, subject to certain modifications. The proposed settlement, which is not material to us, is subject to a number of contingencies, including final approval by the court. We are unable to determine whether or when a settlement will occur or be finalized.
      On June 8, 2001, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the State Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia by Reidy Gimpelson against us and several other wireless carriers and manufacturers of wireless telephones. The lawsuit is captioned Riedy Gimpelson vs. Nokia, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. 2001-CV-3893. The complaint alleges that the defendants, among other things, manufactured and distributed wireless telephones that cause adverse health effects. The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, reimbursement for certain costs including reasonable legal fees, punitive damages and injunctive relief. The defendants timely removed the case to Federal court and this case and related cases were consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The district court denied plaintiffs’ motion to remand the consolidated cases back to their respective state courts, and, on March 5, 2003, the district court granted the defendants’ consolidated motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s remand and dismissal decisions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. On March 16, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court’s remand and dismissal decisions. The Fourth Circuit’s Order remanded the Gimpelson case to the State Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia. On or about April 16, 2005, the Fourth Circuit denied a motion to reconsider its March 16, 2005 decision. We dispute the allegations in the complaint, will vigorously defend against the action in whatever forum it is litigated, and intend to seek indemnification from the manufacturers of the wireless telephones if necessary.
      On April 1, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas against us, Nextel and Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Rolando Prado v. Nextel Communications, et al, Civil Action No. C-695-03-B. On May 2, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of Shelby County for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, Tennessee against us, Nextel and Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Steve Strange v. Nextel Communications, et al, Civil Action No. 01-002520-03. On May 3, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida against Nextel Partners Operating Corp. d/b/a Nextel Partners and Nextel South Corp. d/b/a Nextel Communications. The lawsuit is captioned Christopher Freeman and Susan and Joseph Martelli v. Nextel South Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 03-CA1065. On July 9, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, California against us, Nextel, Nextel West, Inc., Nextel of California, Inc. and Nextel Operations, Inc. The lawsuit is captioned Nick’s Auto Sales, Inc. v. Nextel West, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. BC298695. On August 7, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama against us and Nextel. The lawsuit is captioned Andrea Lewis and Trish Zruna v. Nextel Communications, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. CV-03-907. On October 3, 2003, an amended complaint for a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The amended complaint named us and Nextel Communications, Inc. as defendants; Nextel Partners was substituted for the previous defendant, Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Joseph Blando v. Nextel West Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 02-0921 (the “Blando Case”). All of these complaints allege that we, in conjunction with the

20


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
other defendants, misrepresented certain cost-recovery line-item fees as government taxes. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin such practices and seek a refund of monies paid by the class based on the alleged misrepresentations. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys’ fees, costs and, in some cases, punitive damages. We believe the allegations are groundless. On October 9, 2003, the court in the Blando Case entered an order granting preliminary approval of a nationwide class action settlement that encompasses most of the claims involved in these cases. On April 20, 2004, the court approved the settlement. On May 27, 2004, various objectors and class members appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. On February 1, 2005, the appellate court affirmed the settlement. On February 15, 2005, one of the objectors petitioned for a rehearing. Distribution of settlement benefits is stayed until the appellate court issues a final order resolving the appeal. In conjunction with the settlement, we recorded an estimated liability during the third quarter of 2003, which did not materially impact our financial results.
      On December 27, 2004, Dolores Carter filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Dolores Carter v. Nextel WIP Corp., et al. Also on December 27, 2004, Donald Fragnoli filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Donald Fragnoli v. Nextel WIP Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 955-N. On February 1, 2005, Selena Mintz filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Selena Mintz v. John Chapple, et al, Civil Action No. 1065-N. In all three lawsuits, the plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief declaring that the announced merger transaction between Sprint Corporation and Nextel is an event that triggers the put right set forth in our restated certificate of incorporation and directing the defendants to take all necessary measures to give effect to the rights of our Class A common stockholders arising therefrom. We believe that the allegations in the lawsuits to the effect that the Nextel Partners defendants may take action, or fail to take action, that harms the interests of our public stockholders are without merit.
      We are subject to other claims and legal actions that may arise in the ordinary course of business. We do not believe that any of these other pending claims or legal actions or the items discussed above will have a material effect on our business, financial position or results of operations.
8. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Nextel Operating Agreements
      We, our operating subsidiary (OPCO) and Nextel WIP, which held approximately 31.6% of our outstanding common stock as of March 31, 2005 and with which one of our directors is affiliated, entered into a joint venture agreement dated January 29, 1999. The joint venture agreement, along with the other operating agreements, defines the relationships, rights and obligations between the parties and governs the build-out and operation of our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network and the transfer of licenses from Nextel WIP to us. Our roaming agreement with Nextel WIP provides that each party pays the other company’s monthly roaming fees in an amount based on the actual system minutes used by our respective customers when they are roaming on the other party’s network. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we earned approximately $44.8 million and $33.8 million, respectively, from Nextel customers roaming on our system, which is included in our service revenues.
      During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we incurred charges from Nextel WIP totaling $32.9 million and $26.3 million, respectively, for services such as specified telecommunications switching services, charges for our customers roaming on Nextel’s system and other support costs. The costs for these services are recorded in cost of service revenues.

21


Table of Contents

NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements — (Continued)
      During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, Nextel continued to provide certain services to us for which we paid a fee based on their cost. These services are limited to Nextel telemarketing and customer care, fulfillment, activations and billing for the national accounts. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we were charged approximately $8.8 million and $4.3 million, respectively, for these services including a royalty fee and a sponsorship fee for NASCAR. Nextel WIP also provides us access to certain back office and information systems platforms on an ongoing basis. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we were charged approximately $1.8 million and $1.2 million, respectively, for these services. The costs for all of these services are included in selling, general and administrative expenses.
      In the event of a termination of the joint venture agreement, Nextel WIP could, under certain circumstances, purchase or be required to purchase all of our outstanding common stock. In such event, Nextel WIP, at its option, would be entitled to pay the purchase price therefore in cash or in shares of Nextel common stock. The circumstances that could trigger these rights and obligations include, without limitation, termination of our operating agreements with Nextel WIP, a change of control of Nextel or a failure by us to make certain required changes to our business. See our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and our restated certificate of incorporation for a more detailed description of these provisions.
Business Relationship
      In the ordinary course of business, we lease tower space from American Tower Corporation. One of our directors is a stockholder and former president, chief executive officer and chairman of the board of directors of American Tower Corporation. During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we paid American Tower Corporation for these tower leases $3.1 million and $2.5 million, respectively.
9. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
                   
    For the Three
    Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Net Income attributable to common stockholders (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations)
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
 
 
Unrealized gain/loss on cash flow hedge
    1,700        
             
Other comprehensive income
    1,700        
Comprehensive Income, net of tax
  $ 58,232     $ 3,523  
             

22


Table of Contents

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
      The following is discussion of our consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004. Some statements and information contained in this “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” are not historical facts but are forward-looking statements. For a discussion of these forward-looking statements and of important factors that could cause results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained in this report, see “— Forward-Looking Statements” below.
      Please read the following discussion together with our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, along with “— Selected Consolidated Financial Data,” the consolidated condensed financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this report.
      During the course of preparing our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, we determined that based on clarification from the SEC we did not comply with the requirements of SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” and FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-3, “Accounting for Operating Leases with Scheduled Rent Increases.” Accordingly, we modified our accounting to recognize rent expense, on a straight-line basis, over the initial lease term and renewal periods that are reasonably assured. As the modifications related solely to accounting treatment, they did not affect our historical or future cash flow or the timing of payments under our relevant leases. As such, we restated certain prior periods, including our previously issued consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2004 and the consolidated statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004. Please refer to Note 4 to the accompanying consolidated condensed financial statements for a further discussion of this restatement. The following discussion reflects the impact of this restatement.
Overview
      We provide fully integrated, wireless digital communications services using the Nextel brand name in mid-sized and rural markets throughout the United States. We offer four distinct wireless services in a single wireless handset. These services include International and Nationwide Direct Connect, digital cellular voice, short messaging and cellular Internet access, which provides users with wireless access to the Internet and an organization’s internal databases as well as other applications, including e-mail. We hold licenses for wireless frequencies in markets where approximately 54 million people, or Pops, live and work. We have constructed and operate a digital mobile network compatible with the Nextel Digital Wireless Network in targeted portions of these markets, including 13 of the top 100 metropolitan statistical areas and 56 of the top 200 metropolitan statistical areas in the United States ranked by population. Our combined Nextel Digital Wireless Network constitutes one of the largest fully integrated digital wireless communications systems in the United States, currently covering 297 of the top 300 metropolitan statistical areas in the United States.
      We offer a package of wireless voice and data services under the Nextel brand name targeted primarily to business users. We currently offer the following four services, which are fully integrated and accessible through a single wireless handset:
  •  digital cellular voice, including advanced calling features such as speakerphone, conference calling, voicemail, call forwarding and additional line service;
 
  •  Direct Connect service, the digital walkie-talkie service that allows customers to instantly connect with business associates, family and friends without placing a phone call;
 
  •  short messaging, the service that utilizes the Internet to keep customers connected to clients, colleagues and family with text, numeric and two-way messaging; and
 
  •  Nextel Online services, which provide customers with Internet-ready handsets access to the World Wide Web and an organization’s internal database, as well as web-based applications such as e-mail, address books, calendars and advanced Java enabled business applications.
      As of March 31, 2005, we had approximately 1,701,800 digital subscribers. Our network provides coverage to approximately 41 million Pops in 31 different states, which include markets in Alabama,

23


Table of Contents

Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. We also hold licenses in Kansas and Wyoming, but currently do not have any cell sites operational in these states.
      During the first quarter of 2005 we continued to focus on our key financial and operating performance metrics, including increasing our net income attributable to common stockholders, growth in subscribers, service revenues, Adjusted EBITDA and net cash from operating activities, reducing churn and increasing lifetime revenue per subscriber (“LRS”).
      Accomplishments during the first quarter of 2005, which we believe are important indicators of our overall performance and financial well-being, include:
  •  Increasing our net income attributable to common stockholders from $3.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $56.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005.
 
  •  Growing our subscriber base approximately 29% in a twelve-month period by adding approximately 379,800 net new customers to end the first quarter of 2005 at 1,701,800 subscribers as compared to 1,322,000 as of March 31, 2004.
 
  •  Growing our service revenues approximately 32% from $287.3 million for the prior year’s first quarter to $378.9 million for first quarter 2005.
 
  •  Increasing Adjusted EBITDA by 68% from $72.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $122.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005.
 
  •  Generating $117.2 million net cash from operating activities during the first quarter of 2005 compared to $37.8 million during the first quarter of 2004.
 
  •  Lowering our customer churn rate to 1.4% for the three months ended March 31, 2005 compared to 1.5% for the same period ended March 31, 2004.
 
  •  Remaining one of the industry leaders in LRS with an LRS of $4,786 for the first quarter of 2005 compared to $4,467 for the first quarter of 2004.
      Please see “— Selected Consolidated Financial Data — Additional Reconciliations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures (Unaudited)” for more information regarding our use of Adjusted EBITDA and LRS as non-GAAP financial measures. Our operations are primarily conducted by OPCO. Substantially all of our assets, liabilities, operating losses and cash flows are within OPCO and our other wholly owned subsidiaries.
      During the three months ended March 31, 2005, we launched the i325IS handset, an intrinsically safe, ruggedized phone that provides off-network communications capabilities. This handset is designed for those who need advanced technical features in a durable form. We also launched the i265, a compact phone that delivers powerful performance at a moderate cost.

24


Table of Contents

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA (Unaudited)
      We have summarized below our historical consolidated condensed financial data as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, which are derived from our records.
                     
    Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands, except per
    share amounts)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
               
Operating revenues:
               
 
Service revenues(1)
  $ 378,858     $ 287,262  
 
Equipment revenues(1)
    25,226       20,870  
             
Total revenues
    404,084       308,132  
             
Operating expenses:
               
 
Cost of service revenues (excludes depreciation of $32,499 and $29,696, respectively)
    98,626       84,462  
 
Cost of equipment revenues(1)
    44,798       37,307  
 
Selling, general and administrative
    138,172       113,422  
 
Stock-based compensation (primarily selling, general and administrative related)
    127       217  
 
Depreciation and amortization
    40,753       36,569  
             
Total operating expenses
    322,476       271,977  
             
Income from operations
    81,608       36,155  
             
Other income (expense):
               
 
Interest expense, net
    (25,867 )     (30,952 )
 
Interest income
    2,643       677  
 
Loss on early extinguishment of debt
          (1,558 )
             
Income before income tax provision
    58,384       4,322  
Income tax provision
    (1,852 )     (799 )
             
Net Income attributable to common stockholders
  $ 56,532     $ 3,523  
             
Net Income per share attributable to common stockholders
               
   
Basic
  $ 0.21     $ 0.01  
             
   
Diluted
  $ 0.19     $ 0.01  
             
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
               
   
Basic
    267,091       262,399  
             
   
Diluted
    308,335       271,086  
             

25


Table of Contents

                 
    As of   As of
    March 31,   December 31,
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
               
Cash and cash equivalents, and short-term investments
  $ 333,779     $ 264,579  
Property, plant and equipment, net
    1,058,886       1,042,718  
FCC operating licenses, net
    375,490       375,470  
Total assets
  $ 2,060,128     $ 1,975,699  
Current liabilities
    208,359       205,659  
Long-term debt
    1,631,845       1,632,518  
Total stockholders’ equity
    131,290       51,315  
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
  $ 2,060,128     $ 1,975,699  
                 
    As of   As of
    March 31,   March 31,
    2005   2004
         
Other Data:
               
Covered Pops (end of period)(millions)
    41       38  
Subscribers (end of period)
    1,701,800       1,322,000  
                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands)
Other Data:
               
Statements of Cash Flows Data:
               
Net cash from operating activities
  $ 117,214     $ 37,808  
Net cash from investing activities
  $ (37,281 )   $ (24,135 )
Net cash from financing activities
  $ 21,153     $ (10,501 )
Adjusted EBITDA(2)
  $ 122,488     $ 72,941  
Net capital expenditures(3)
  $ 56,557     $ 26,039  
 
(1)  Effective July 1, 2003, we adopted Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-21, “Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables,” and elected to apply the provisions prospectively to our existing customer arrangements. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for a more detailed description of the impact of our adoption of this policy.
 
(2)  The term “EBITDA” refers to a financial measure that is defined as earnings (loss) before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; we use the term “Adjusted EBITDA” to reflect that our financial measure also excludes cumulative effect of change in accounting principle, loss from disposal of assets, gain (loss) from early extinguishment of debt and stock-based compensation. Adjusted EBITDA is commonly used to analyze companies on the basis of leverage and liquidity. However, Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure determined under generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, in the United States of America and may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies. Adjusted EBITDA should not be construed as a substitute for operating income or as a better measure of liquidity than cash flow from operating activities, which are determined in accordance with GAAP. We have presented Adjusted EBITDA to provide additional information with respect to our ability to meet future debt service, capital expenditure and working capital requirements. The following schedule reconciles

26


Table of Contents

Adjusted EBITDA to net cash from operating activities reported on our Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, which we believe is the most directly comparable GAAP measure:

                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
        (As restated)
    (In thousands)
Net cash from operating activities (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows)
  $ 117,214     $ 37,808  
Adjustments to reconcile to Adjusted EBITDA:
               
Cash paid interest expense, net of capitalized amount
    29,117       42,774  
Interest income
    (2,643 )     (677 )
Change in working capital and other
    (21,200 )     (6,964 )
             
Adjusted EBITDA
  $ 122,488     $ 72,941  
             
(3)  Net capital expenditures exclude capitalized interest and are offset by net proceeds from the sale and leaseback transactions of telecommunication towers and related assets to third parties accounted for as operating leases. Net capital expenditures as defined are not a measure determined under GAAP in the United States of America and may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies. Net capital expenditures should not be construed as a substitute for capital expenditures reported on the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, which is determined in accordance with GAAP. We report net capital expenditures in this manner because we believe it reflects the net cash used by us for capital expenditures and to satisfy the reporting requirements for our debt covenants. The following schedule reconciles net capital expenditures to capital expenditures reported on our Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, which we believe is the most directly comparable GAAP measure:
                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Capital expenditures (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows)
  $ 69,107     $ 31,667  
Less: cash paid portion of capitalized interest
    (322 )     (209 )
Less: cash proceeds from sale and lease-back transactions accounted for as operating leases
    (405 )     (389 )
Change in capital expenditures accrued or unpaid
    (11,823 )     (5,030 )
             
Net capital expenditures
  $ 56,557     $ 26,039  
             
Additional Reconciliations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures (Unaudited)
      The information presented in this report includes financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP, as well as other financial measures that may be considered non-GAAP financial measures. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of a company’s performance, financial position or cash flows that either excludes or includes amounts that are not normally excluded or included in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. As described more fully below, management believes these non-GAAP measures provide meaningful additional information about our performance and our ability to service our long-term debt and other fixed obligations and to fund our continued growth. The non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to, but not as a substitute for, the information prepared in accordance with GAAP.

27


Table of Contents

ARPU — Average Revenue Per Unit
      ARPU is an industry term that measures service revenues per month from our subscribers divided by the average number of subscribers in commercial service. ARPU itself is not a measurement under GAAP in the United States and may not be similar to ARPU measures of other companies; however, ARPU uses GAAP measures as the basis for calculation. We believe that ARPU provides useful information concerning the appeal of our rate plans and service offerings and our performance in attracting high value customers. The following schedule reflects the ARPU calculation and reconciliation of service revenues reported on the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations to service revenues used for the ARPU calculation:
                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands, except
    ARPU)
ARPU (without roaming revenues)
               
Service revenues (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations)
  $ 378,858     $ 287,262  
Adjust: activation fees deferred and recognized for SAB No. 101
    (703 )     (1,039 )
Add: activation fees reclassed for EITF No. 00-21(1)
    4,633       2,181  
Less: roaming and other revenues
    (48,476 )     (33,964 )
             
Service revenue for ARPU
  $ 334,312     $ 254,440  
             
Average units (subscribers)
    1,669       1,271  
             
ARPU
  $ 67     $ 67  
             
                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands, except
    ARPU)
ARPU (including roaming revenues)
               
Service revenues (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations
  $ 378,858     $ 287,262  
Adjust: activation fees deferred and recognized for SAB No. 101
    (703 )     (1,039 )
Add: activation fees reclassed for EITF No. 00-21(1)
    4,633       2,181  
Less: other revenues
    (3,652 )     (177 )
             
Service revenue for ARPU
  $ 379,136     $ 288,227  
             
Average units (subscribers)
    1,669       1,271  
             
ARPU
  $ 76     $ 76  
             
 
(1)  Since implementation of EITF Issue No. 00-21, “Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables,” each month we recognize the activation fees, handset equipment revenues and equipment costs that had been previously deferred in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin, or SAB, No. 101. Based on EITF Issue No. 00-21, we now recognize the activation fees that were formerly deferred and recognized as services revenues as equipment revenues.
LRS — Lifetime Revenue Per Subscriber
      LRS is an industry term calculated by dividing ARPU (see above) by the subscriber churn rate. The subscriber churn rate is an indicator of subscriber retention and represents the monthly percentage of the subscriber base that disconnects from service. Subscriber churn is calculated by dividing the number of

28


Table of Contents

handsets disconnected from commercial service during the period by the average number of handsets in commercial service during the period. LRS itself is not a measurement determined under GAAP in the United States of America and may not be similar to LRS measures of other companies; however, LRS uses GAAP measures as the basis for calculation. We believe that LRS is an indicator of the expected lifetime revenue of our average subscriber, assuming that churn and ARPU remain constant as indicated. We also believe that this measure, like ARPU, provides useful information concerning the appeal of our rate plans and service offering and our performance in attracting and retaining high value customers. The following schedule reflects the LRS calculation:
                 
    Three Months
    Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
ARPU
  $ 67     $ 67  
Divided by: churn
    1.4 %     1.5 %
             
Lifetime revenue per subscriber (LRS)
  $ 4,786     $ 4,467  
             
      In addition, see Notes 2 and 3 above for reconciliations of Adjusted EBITDA and net capital expenditures as non-GAAP financial measures.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2004
Revenues
      Total revenues increased 31% to $404.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as compared to $308.1 million generated in the same period in 2004. This growth in revenues was due mostly to the increase in our subscriber base. We expect our revenues to continue to increase as we add more subscribers and continue to introduce new products and data services.
      For the first quarter of 2005, our ARPU was $67 (or $76, including roaming revenues from Nextel), which were the same for the first quarter of 2004. We expect to continue to achieve ARPU levels above the industry average and anticipate our ARPU to be in the mid to high $60s for the remainder of 2005. We expect to continue the strong growth of our data services, specifically GPS services, workforce management tools, navigation tools and wireless payment solutions. We believe growth in these services and solutions will continue to enhance our ARPU during the year.
      The following table illustrates service and equipment revenues as a percentage of total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and our ARPU for those periods.
                                                 
    For the Three       For the Three        
    Months Ended   % of   Months Ended   % of   2005 vs 2004
    March 31,   Consolidated   March 31,   Consolidated    
    2005   Revenues   2004   Revenues   $ Change   % Change
                         
    (Dollars in thousands, expect ARPU)
Service and roaming revenues
  $ 378,858       94 %   $ 287,262       93 %   $ 91,596       32 %
Equipment revenues
    25,226       6 %     20,870       7 %     4,356       21 %
                                     
Total revenues
  $ 404,084       100 %   $ 308,132       100 %   $ 95,952       31 %
                                     
ARPU(1)
  $ 67             $ 67                          
                                     
 
(1)  See “— Selected Consolidated Financial Data — Additional Reconciliations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures (Unaudited)” for more information regarding our use of ARPU as a non-GAAP financial measure.
      Our primary sources of revenues are service revenues and equipment revenues. Service revenues increased 32% to $378.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as compared to $287.3 million for

29


Table of Contents

the same period in 2004. Our service revenues consist of charges to our customers for airtime usage and monthly network access fees from providing integrated wireless services within our territory, specifically digital cellular voice services, Direct Connect services, text messaging and Nextel Online services. Service revenues also include roaming revenues from Nextel subscribers using our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network. Roaming revenues for the first quarter of 2005 accounted for approximately 12% of our service revenues, which was the same percentage for the same period in 2004. Although we continue to see growth in roaming revenues due to an increase in coverage and on-air cell sites, we expect roaming revenues as a percentage of our service revenues to remain flat or decline due to the anticipated revenue growth that we expect to achieve from our own customer base.
      Under EITF Issue No. 00-21,“Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables,” we are no longer required to consider whether a customer is able to realize utility from the phone in the absence of the undelivered service. See the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this report for a more detailed description of this policy. The following table shows the reconciliation of the reported service revenues, equipment revenues and cost of equipment revenues to the adjusted amounts that exclude the adoption of EITF No. 00-21 and SAB No. 101. We believe the adjusted amounts best represent the actual service revenues and the actual subsidy on equipment costs when equipment revenues are netted with cost of equipment revenues that we use to measure our operating performance.
                 
    Three Months Ended
    March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Revenues:
               
Service revenues (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations)
  $ 378,858     $ 287,262  
Previously deferred activation fees recognized (SAB No. 101)
    (703 )     (1,039 )
Activation fees to equipment revenues (EITF No. 00-21)
    4,633       2,181  
             
Total service revenues without SAB No. 101 and EITF No. 00-21
  $ 382,788     $ 288,404  
             
Equipment revenues (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations)
  $ 25,226     $ 20,870  
Previously deferred equipment revenues recognized (SAB No. 101)
    (3,843 )     (5,695 )
Activation fees from service revenues (EITF No. 00-21)
    (4,633 )     (2,181 )
             
Total equipment revenues without SAB No. 101 and EITF No. 00-21
  $ 16,750     $ 12,994  
             
Cost of equipment revenues (as reported on Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations)
  $ 44,798     $ 37,307  
Previously deferred cost of equipment revenues recognized (SAB No. 101)
    (4,546 )     (6,734 )
             
Total cost of equipment revenues without SAB No. 101 and EITF No. 00-21
  $ 40,252     $ 30,573  
             
      Equipment revenues reported for the first quarter of 2005 were $25.2 million as compared to $20.9 million reported for the same period in 2004, representing an increase of $4.3 million. Of the $4.3 million increase from 2004 to 2005, $2.4 million was for additional activation fees recorded as equipment revenues based on EITF No. 00-21 and $3.8 million was due to growth in our subscriber base offset by $1.9 million less equipment revenues previously deferred pursuant to SAB No. 101. Our equipment revenues consist of revenues received for wireless handsets and accessories purchased by our subscribers.
Cost of Service Revenues
      Cost of service revenues consists primarily of network operating costs, which include site rental fees for cell sites and switches, utilities, maintenance and interconnect and other wireline transport charges. Cost of

30


Table of Contents

service revenues also includes the amounts we must pay Nextel WIP when our customers roam onto Nextel’s portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network. These expenses depend mainly on the number of operating cell sites, total minutes of use and the mix of minutes of use between interconnect and Direct Connect. The use of Direct Connect is more efficient than interconnect and, accordingly, less costly for us to provide.
      For the three months ended March 31, 2005, our cost of service revenues was $98.6 million as compared to $84.5 million for the same period in 2004, representing an increase of $14.1 million, or 17%. The increase in costs was partially the result of bringing on-air approximately 496 additional cell sites since March 31, 2004. Furthermore, our number of customers as of March 31, 2005 grew 29% since March 31, 2004, and we experienced an increase in airtime usage by our customers, both of which resulted in higher network operating costs. Compared to first quarter 2004, the average monthly minutes of use per subscriber increased by 10%, to 772 average monthly minutes of use per subscriber for the first quarter of 2005 from 701 average monthly minutes of use per subscriber for the same period in 2004. Our roaming fees paid to Nextel also increased as our growing subscriber base roamed on Nextel’s compatible network.
      We expect cost of service revenues to increase as we place more cell sites in service and the usage of minutes increases as our customer base grows. However, we expect our cost of service revenues as a percentage of service revenues and cost per average minute of use to decrease as economies of scale continue to be realized. From the first quarter of 2004 to the same period in 2005, our cost of service revenues as a percentage of service revenues declined from 29% to 26%.
Cost of Equipment Revenues
      Cost of equipment revenues includes the cost of the subscriber wireless handsets and accessories sold by us. Our cost of equipment revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was $44.8 million as compared to $37.3 million for the same period in 2004, or an increase of $7.5 million. The increase in costs relates mostly to $9.7 million from the increased volume of subscribers offset by recognizing $2.2 million less of equipment costs that were previously deferred in accordance with SAB No. 101.
      Due to the “push to talk” functionality of our handsets, the cost of our equipment tends to be higher than that of our competitors. As part of our business plan, we often offer our equipment at a discount or as part of a promotion as an incentive to our customers to commit to contracts for our higher priced service plans and to compete with the lower priced competitor handsets. The table below shows that the gross subsidy (without the effects of SAB No. 101 and EITF No. 00-21) between equipment revenues and cost of equipment revenues was a loss of $23.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as compared to a loss of $17.6 million for the same period in 2004. We expect to continue to employ these discounts and promotions in an effort to grow our subscriber base. Therefore, for the foreseeable future, we expect that cost of equipment revenues will continue to exceed our equipment revenues.
                 
    For the Three Months
    Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004
         
    (In thousands)
Equipment revenues billed
  $ 16,750     $ 12,994  
Cost of equipment revenues billed
    (40,252 )     (30,573 )
             
Total gross subsidy for equipment
  $ (23,502 )   $ (17,579 )
             
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
      Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of sales and marketing expenses and general and administrative costs as described below. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, selling, general and administrative expenses were $138.2 million compared to $113.4 million for the same period in 2004, representing an increase of $24.8 million, or 22%.

31


Table of Contents

      Sales and marketing expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2005 were $57.2 million, an increase of $8.6 million, or 17.6%, from first quarter 2004 due to the following:
  •  $7.7 million increase in commissions, commission bonuses and residuals paid to account representatives and the indirect sales channel;
 
  •  $0.6 million increase in facility and lease costs primarily for the additional retail stores put in operation in the first quarter of 2005; and
 
  •  $0.3 million increase in advertising and media expenses as a result of general marketing campaigns.
      General and administrative costs include costs associated with customer care center operations and service and repair for customer handsets along with corporate personnel including billing, collections, legal, finance, human resources and information technology. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, general and administrative costs were $80.9 million, an increase of $16.2 million, or 25%, compared to the same period in 2004 due to the following:
  •  $9.0 million increase in expenses for service and repair, billing, collection and customer retention expenses, including handset upgrades to support a larger and growing customer base, offset by a $2.1 million decrease in bad debt expenses due to improved collection activity;
 
  •  $6.4 million increase in support of our information systems, facilities and corporate expenses; and
 
  •  $2.9 million increase due to hiring additional staff and operating expenses to support our growing customer base and related activities in Las Vegas, Nevada and Panama City Beach, Florida.
      As we continue to grow our customer base and expand our operations, we expect our sales and marketing expenses and general and administrative costs to continue to increase, but at a slower rate than our customer growth due to efficiencies we anticipate being able to implement.
Non-Cash Compensation Expense
      For the three months ended March 31, 2005 we recorded a non-cash stock-based compensation expense associated with our grants of restricted stock and employee stock options of approximately $127,000 and $217,000, respectively. We expect stock-based compensation expense to increase upon our mandatory adoption of SFAS No. 123R, which was recently deferred to January 1, 2006. See “Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements” in the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this report for additional information regarding SFAS No. 123R.
Depreciation and Amortization Expense
      For the first quarter ended March 31, 2005, our depreciation and amortization expense was $40.8 million compared to $36.6 million for the same period in 2004, representing an increase of 11%. The $4.2 million increase in depreciation and amortization expense was due to adding approximately 496 cell sites since March 31, 2004. We also acquired furniture and equipment for the expansion of our existing customer call center in Panama City Beach, Florida which became operational during third quarter 2004 and 38 new company-owned stores since March 31, 2004. We expect depreciation and amortization to continue to increase due to additional cell sites we plan to place in service along with furniture and equipment for new company-owned stores.
Interest Expense and Interest Income
      Interest expense, net of capitalized interest, declined $5.1 million, or 16%, from $31.0 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2004 to $25.9 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2005. This decline was due mostly to the debt reduction activity related to our repurchase for cash of our 14% senior discount notes due 2009 and 11% senior notes due 2010. In addition, for our interest rate swap agreements we recorded non-cash fair market value gains of approximately $0.6 million and $1.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

32


Table of Contents

      For the three months ended March 31, 2005, interest income was $2.6 million compared to $677,000 for 2004. The increase is due mostly to improved rates of return as well as a larger investment portfolio.
Income Tax Provision
      As a result of adopting SFAS 142, we record a non-cash income tax provision. See the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this report for a more detailed description of this policy. During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we recorded a deferred income tax provision relating to our FCC licenses of $1.9 million and $799,000, respectively. Our interim period tax provision (or benefit) is calculated as the estimated annual effective tax rate applied to the quarter-to-date income. The increase in tax expense over the prior year is a result of the fact that our net income is higher compared with the same period in the prior year. Other than the AMT deferred tax asset, we have continued to record a full valuation allowance on our net deferred tax assets through March 31, 2005, given cumulative losses in recent years. We believe sufficient positive evidence, predominately taxable income, may emerge in 2005 which could support a conclusion that some or all of the valuation allowance may not be necessary in the second half of 2005.
      During the three months ended March 31, 2005 we recorded a current income tax provision of $1.1 million for AMT, which was offset by a corresponding credit to deferred income tax provision of $1.1 million to account for the tax benefit of credit carryforwards related to taxes paid under AMT. We expect to continue to incur a minimal amount of AMT for the remainder of 2005.
Net Income Attributable to Common Stockholders
      For the three months ended March 31, 2005, we had a net income attributable to common stockholders of approximately $56.5 million compared to a net income attributable to common stockholders of $3.5 million for the same period in 2004, representing an improvement of $53.0 million. We expect to continue generating positive net income for the remainder of 2005.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
      As of March 31, 2005, our cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments balance was approximately $333.8 million, an increase of $69.2 million compared to the balance of $264.6 million as of December 31, 2004 and an increase of $71.7 million compared to the balance of $262.1 million as of March 31, 2004. In addition, we had access to an undrawn line of credit of $100.0 million for a total liquidity position of $433.8 million as of March 31, 2005. The $69.2 million increase in our liquidity position from December 31, 2004 was in part a result of positive cash from operating activities and stock options exercised offset by additional capital spending.
Statement of Cash Flows Discussion
                                 
    For the Three Months Ended March 31,
     
    2005   2004   $ Change   % Change
                 
    (Dollars in thousands)
Net cash from operating activities
  $ 117,214     $ 37,808     $ 79,406       210 %
Net cash from investing activities
  $ (37,281 )   $ (24,135 )   $ (13,146 )     n/m  
Net cash from financing activities
  $ 21,153     $ (10,501 )   $ 31,654       n/m  
 
n/m — not meaningful
      For the three months ended March 31, 2005, we generated $117.2 million in cash from operating activities as compared to $37.8 million in cash for the same period in 2004. The $79.4 million increase in funds from operating activities was due to the following:
  •  a $56.0 million increase in income generated from operating activities, excluding changes in current assets and liabilities;

33


Table of Contents

  •  a $19.5 million decrease in our on-hand subscriber equipment inventory and other current assets; and
 
  •  a $19.0 million increase in accounts payable and other current liabilities and advances to Nextel WIP due to the timing of payments; offset by
 
  •  a $15.1 million increase in our accounts receivable balance from customers due to the growth in number of subscribers.
      Net cash used from investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was $37.3 million compared to $24.1 million for the same period in 2004. The $13.1 million increase in net cash used from investing activities was primarily due to:
  •  a $37.4 million increase in capital expenditures; offset by
 
  •  a $2.3 million decrease in FCC licenses acquired; and
 
  •  a $184.7 million decrease in purchases of short-term investments offset by $162.7 decrease in cash proceeds from the sale and maturities of short-term investments.
      Net cash from financing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2005 totaled $21.2 million, which was an increase of $31.7 million compared to $10.5 million used in the same period in 2004. The $31.7 million net increase in cash from financing activities was due to:
  •  a $17.7 million increase in proceeds from stock options exercised and cash proceeds from employee purchases of stock;
 
  •  a $13.7 million increase from cash used in 2004 for redemption of the remainder of our outstanding 14% senior discount notes due 2009 and repurchase for cash in open-market purchases of our 11% senior notes due 2010; and
 
  •  a $0.3 million decline in debt and equity issuance costs.
Capital Needs and Funding Sources
      Our primary liquidity needs arise from the capital requirements necessary to expand and enhance coverage in our existing markets that are part of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network. Other liquidity needs include the future acquisition of additional frequencies, the installation of new or additional switch equipment, the introduction of new technology and services, and debt service requirements related to our long-term debt and capital leases. Without limiting the foregoing, we expect capital expenditures to include, among other things, the purchase of switches, base radios, transmission towers and antennae, radio frequency engineering, cell site construction, and information technology software and equipment.
      Based on our ten-year operating and capital plan, we believe that our cash flow from operations, existing cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments and access to our line of credit, as necessary, will provide sufficient funds for the foreseeable future to finance our capital needs and working capital requirements to build out and maintain our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network using the current 800 MHz iDEN system as well as provide the necessary funds to acquire any additional FCC licenses required to operate the current 800 MHz iDEN system.
      To the extent we are not able to continue to generate positive cash from operating activities, we will be required to use more of our available liquidity to fund operations or we would require additional financing. We may be unable to raise additional capital on acceptable terms, if at all. Furthermore, our ability to generate positive cash from operating activities is dependent upon the amount of revenue we receive from customers, operating expenses required to provide our service, the cost of acquiring and retaining customers and our ability to continue to grow our customer base.
      Additionally, to the extent we decide to expand our digital wireless network or deploy next generation technologies, we may require additional financing to fund these projects. In the event that additional financing is necessary, such financing may not be available to us on satisfactory terms, if at all, for a number of reasons, including, without limitation, restrictions in our debt instruments on our ability to raise additional funds,

34


Table of Contents

conditions in the economy generally and in the wireless communications industry specifically, and other factors that may be beyond our control. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of equity or securities convertible into equity, the issuance of such securities could result in dilution of our stockholders.
      The following table provides details regarding our contractual obligations subsequent to March 31, 2005:
                                                         
    Payments Due by Period
     
    Remainder of    
Contractual Obligations   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   Thereafter   Total
                             
    (In thousands)
Long-term debt(1)
  $ 1,157     $     $ 5,250     $ 306,981     $ 153,250     $ 1,155,750     $ 1,622,388  
Interest on long-term debt(2)
    70,625       107,747       110,383       111,075       106,979       130,335       637,144  
Operating leases
    70,018       74,821       60,324       48,542       37,139       49,854       340,698  
Capital lease obligations(3)
    3,920       5,227       5,227       5,227       5,227             24,828  
Purchase obligations(4)
    2,386       787                               3,173  
                                           
Total contractual obligations
  $ 148,106     $ 188,582     $ 181,184     $ 471,825     $ 302,595     $ 1,335,939     $ 2,628,231  
                                           
 
(1)  Assumes redemption of the remaining 11% senior notes due 2010 in April 2005.
 
(2)  Includes interest on swaps of approximately ($444,000) and ($713,000) for the remainder of 2005 and 2006, respectively. These amounts include estimated payments based on management’s expectation as to future interest rates. Assumes non-renewal of the interest rate swap with notional amount of $50.0 million that expired in April 2005 and redemption of the remaining 11% senior notes due 2010 that were redeemed in April 2005.
 
(3)  Includes interest.
 
(4)  Included in the “Purchase obligations” caption above are minimum amounts due under our most significant agreements for telecommunication services required for back-office support. Amounts actually paid under some of these agreements may be higher due to variable components of these agreements. In addition to the amounts reflected in the table, we expect to pay significant amounts to Motorola for infrastructure, handsets and related services in future years. Potential amounts payable to Motorola are not shown above due to the uncertainty surrounding the timing and extent of these payments. See notes to the consolidated condensed financial statements appearing elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and notes to the consolidated financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for amounts paid to Motorola.
Sources of Funding
      To date, third-party financing activities and cash flow from operations have provided all of our funding. Refer to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for additional information on our sources of funding, including our refinancing activities.
      As discussed in more detail in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, if we fail to satisfy the financial covenants and other requirements contained in our credit facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes, our debts could become immediately payable at a time when we are unable to pay them, which could adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition.
      In the future, we may opportunistically engage in additional debt-for-equity exchanges or repurchase additional outstanding notes for cash if the financial terms are sufficiently attractive.

35


Table of Contents

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
      The SEC requires registrants to disclose off-balance sheet arrangements. As defined by the SEC, an off-balance sheet arrangement includes any contractual obligation, agreement or transaction arrangement involving an unconsolidated entity under which a company 1) has made guarantees, 2) has a retained or a contingent interest in transferred assets, 3) has an obligation under derivative instruments classified as equity, or 4) has any obligation arising out of a material variable interest in an unconsolidated entity that provides financing, liquidity, market risk or credit risk support to the company, or that engages in leasing, hedging or research and development services with the company.
      We have examined our contractual obligation structures that may potentially be impacted by this disclosure requirement and have concluded that no arrangements of the types described above exist with respect to our company.
Critical Accounting Policies
      The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in the consolidated condensed financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The SEC has defined a company’s most critical accounting policies as the ones that are most important to the portrayal of the company’s financial condition and results of operations, and which require the company to make its most difficult and subjective judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates of matters that are inherently uncertain. For additional information, see the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and also please refer to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for a more detailed discussion of our critical accounting policies. Although we believe that our estimates and assumptions are reasonable, they are based upon information presently available. Actual results may differ significantly from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, we did not make any material changes in or to our critical accounting policies.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
      See “Note 3 — Significant Accounting Policies” in the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for a full description of recently issued accounting pronouncements.
Related Party Transactions
      See “Note 8 — Related Party Transactions” in the notes to consolidated condensed financial statements included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for a full description of our related party transactions.
RISK FACTORS
      Please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for a detailed description of some of the risks and uncertainties that we face. If any of those risks were to occur, our business, operating results and financial condition could be seriously harmed.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
      This report contains forward-looking statements. They can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “believes,” “expects,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should” or “anticipates” or other comparable words, or by discussions of strategy, plans or goals that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those currently anticipated. You are cautioned that any

36


Table of Contents

forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties, including those set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and as described from time to time in our reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including this Quarterly Report on Form  10-Q. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to the following:
  •  our business plan, its advantages and our strategy for implementing our plan;
 
  •  the success of efforts to improve and enhance, and satisfactorily address any issues relating to, our network performance;
 
  •  the characteristics of the geographic areas and occupational markets that we are targeting in our portion of the Nextel Digital Wireless Network;
 
  •  the implementation and performance of the technology, including higher speed data infrastructure and software designed to significantly increase the speed of our network, being deployed or to be deployed in our various markets, including the expected 6:1 voice coder software upgrade being developed by Motorola and technologies to be implemented in connection with the completed launch of Nationwide Direct Connect capability;
 
  •  the potential impact on us if the Nextel-Sprint merger is completed and the uncertainties related to such proposed merger;
 
  •  our ability to attract and retain customers;
 
  •  our anticipated capital expenditures, funding requirements and contractual obligations, including our ability to access sufficient debt or equity capital to meet operating and financing needs;
 
  •  the availability of adequate quantities of system infrastructure and subscriber equipment and components to meet our service deployment, marketing plans and customer demand;
 
  •  no significant adverse change in Motorola’s ability or willingness to provide handsets and related equipment and software applications or to develop new technologies or features for us, or in our relationship with it;
 
  •  our ability to achieve and maintain market penetration and average subscriber revenue levels;
 
  •  our ability to successfully scale, in some circumstances in conjunction with third parties under our outsourcing arrangements, our billing, collection, customer care and similar back-office operations to keep pace with customer growth, increased system usage rates and growth in levels of accounts receivables being generated by our customers;
 
  •  the development and availability of new handsets with expanded applications and features, including those that operate using the 6:1 voice coder, and market acceptance of such handsets and service offerings;
 
  •  the availability and cost of acquiring additional spectrum;
 
  •  the quality and price of similar or comparable wireless communications services offered or to be offered by our competitors, including providers of PCS and cellular services including, for example, two-way walkie-talkie services that have been introduced by several of our competitors;
 
  •  future legislation or regulatory actions relating to specialized mobile radio services, other wireless communications services or telecommunications services generally;
 
  •  the potential impact on us of the reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band required by the recent rebanding orders issued to Nextel;
 
  •  delivery and successful implementation of any new technologies deployed in connection with any future enhanced iDEN or next generation or other advanced services we may offer; and

37


Table of Contents

  •  the costs of compliance with regulatory mandates, particularly the requirement to deploy location-based 911 capabilities and wireless number portability.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
      We are subject to market risks arising from changes in interest rates. Our primary interest rate risk results from changes in LIBOR or the prime rate, which are used to determine the interest rate applicable to the term loan of OPCO under our credit facility. Our potential loss over one year that would result from a hypothetical, instantaneous and unfavorable change of 100 basis points in the interest rate of all our variable rate obligations would be approximately $5.0 million.
      As of March 31, 2005, we had 11% senior notes due 2010, 121/2% senior notes due 2009, 81/8% senior notes due 2011 and 11/2% convertible senior notes due 2008 outstanding. While fluctuations in interest rates may affect the fair value of these notes, causing the notes to trade above or below par, interest expense will not be affected due to the fixed interest rate of these notes.
      We use derivative financial instruments consisting of interest rate swap and interest rate protection agreements in the management of our interest rate exposures. We will not use financial instruments for trading or other speculative purposes, nor will we be a party to any leveraged derivative instrument. The use of derivative financial instruments is monitored through regular communication with senior management. We will be exposed to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the counter parties. This credit risk is minimized by dealing with a group of major financial institutions with whom we have other financial relationships. We do not anticipate nonperformance by these counter parties.
      SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” as amended by SFAS No. 138, establish accounting and reporting standards requiring that every derivative instrument (including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts) be recorded on the balance sheet as either an asset or liability measured at fair value. These statements require that changes in the derivative’s fair value be recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. If hedge accounting criteria are met, the changes in a derivative’s fair value (for a cash flow hedge) are deferred in stockholders’ equity as a component of other comprehensive income. These deferred gains and losses are recognized as income in the period in which hedged cash flows occur. The ineffective portions of hedge returns are recognized as earnings.
Non-Cash Flow Hedging Instruments
      In April 1999 and 2000, we entered into interest rate swap agreements for $60 million and $50 million, respectively, to partially hedge interest rate exposure with respect to our term B and C loans. In April 2004, we terminated the $60 million interest rate swap agreement in accordance with its original terms and paid approximately $639,000 for the final settlement. We did not record any realized gain or loss with this termination since this swap did not qualify for cash flow hedge accounting and we recognized changes in its fair value up to the termination date as part of our interest expense.
      The term B and C loans were replaced in connection with the refinancing of our credit facility in May 2004; however, we maintained the existing $50 million rate swap agreement expiring in April 2005. The interest rate swap agreement has the effect of converting certain of our variable rate obligations to fixed or other variable rate obligations. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 133 (as described below), amounts paid or received under the interest rate swap agreement were accrued as interest rates changed and recognized over the life of the swap agreement as an adjustment to interest expense.
      The swap agreement does not qualify for cash flow hedge accounting. In accordance with SFAS No. 133, the fair value of the swap agreement is included in other current liabilities on the balance sheet. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we recorded non-cash, non-operating gains of $0.6 million and $1.1 million, respectively, related to the change in market value of the interest rate swap agreements in interest expense.

38


Table of Contents

Cash Flow Hedging Instruments
      In September 2004 we entered into a series of interest rate swap agreements for $150 million, which had the effect of converting certain of our variable interest rate $700 million term C loan obligations to fixed interest rates. The commencement date for the swap transactions was December 1, 2004 and the expiration date is August 31, 2006. In December 2004 we entered into similar agreements to hedge an additional $50 million commencing March 1, 2005 and expiring August 31, 2006.
      These interest rate swap agreements qualify for cash flow accounting under SFAS 133. Both at inception and on an ongoing basis we perform an effectiveness test using the change in variable cash flows method. In accordance with SFAS 133, the fair value of the swap agreements at March 31, 2005 was included in other current assets and other non-current assets on the balance sheet. The change in fair value was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income on the balance sheet since the instruments were determined to be perfectly effective at March 31, 2005. There were no amounts reclassified into current earnings due to ineffectiveness during the quarter.
      A summary of our long-term debt obligations, including scheduled principal repayments and weighted average interest rates, as of March 31, 2005 follows:
                                                                     
    Remainder of                            
    2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   Thereafter   Total   Fair Value
                                 
    (Dollars in thousands)
Long-term debt obligations:
                                                               
 
Fixed-rate debt(1)
  $ 1,157     $     $     $ 299,981     $ 146,250     $ 475,000     $ 922,388     $ 1,382,888  
   
Average interest rate
    6.7%       6.7 %     6.7 %     6.9 %     9.1 %     8.1 %     7.2 %        
 
Variable-rate debt(2)
  $     $     $ 5,250     $ 7,000     $ 7,000     $ 680,750     $ 700,000     $ 700,000  
 
Average interest rate
 
(LIBOR + 2.5%)
                                       
 
(1)  Assumes redemption of the remaining 11% senior notes due 2010 in April 2005.
 
(2)  As of March 31, 2005, variable-rate debt consisted of our bank credit facility. The bank credit facility includes a $700.0 million tranche C term loan, a $100.0 million revolving credit facility and an option to request an additional $200.0 million of incremental term loans. The tranche C term loan bears interest, at our option, at the administrative agent’s alternate base rate or reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus, in each case, applicable margin. The initial applicable margin for the tranche C term loan is 2.50% over LIBOR and 1.50% over the base rate. For the revolving credit facility, the initial applicable margin is 3.00% over LIBOR and 2.00% over the base rate and thereafter will be determined on the basis of the ratio of total debt to annualized EBITDA and will range between 1.50% and 3.00% over LIBOR and between 0.50% and 2.00% over the base rate. As of March 31, 2005, the average interest rate on the tranche C term loan was 5.4375%.
      Aggregate notional amounts associated with interest rate swaps in place as of March 31, 2005 were as follows (listed by maturity date):
                                                                           
    Remainder of                           Fair Value   Fair Value
    2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   Thereafter   Total   Asset   Liability
                                     
    (Dollars in thousands)
Interest rate swaps:
                                                                       
 
Notional amount(1)
  $ 50,000     $ 200,000     $     $     $     $     $ 250,000     $ 1,988     $ 520  
 
Weighted-average fixed rate payable(2)
    3.0 %     3.6 %                                          
 
Weighted-average fixed rate receivable(3)
                                                     
 
(1)  Includes notional amounts of $50.0 million and $200.0 million that will expire in April 2005 and August 2006, respectively.

39


Table of Contents

(2)  Represents the weighted-average fixed rate based on the contract notional amount as a percentage of total notional amounts in a given year.
 
(3)  The initial applicable margin for the tranche C term loan is 2.50% over LIBOR and 1.50% over the base rate. For the revolving credit facility, the applicable margin is 3.00% over LIBOR and 2.00% over the base rate and thereafter will be determined on the basis of the ratio of total debt to annualized EBITDA and will range between 1.50% and 3.00% over LIBOR and between 0.50% and 2.00% over the base rate. As of March 31, 2005, the interest rate on the tranche C term loan was 5.4375%.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
      We carried out an evaluation required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, under the supervision and with the participation of our senior management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, are effective in timely alerting them to material information required to be included in our periodic SEC reports.
      There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting during our first fiscal quarter of 2005 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II — OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
      On December 5, 2001, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against us, two of our executive officers and four of the underwriters involved in our initial public offering. The lawsuit is captioned Keifer v. Nextel Partners, Inc., et al, No. 01 CV 10945. It was filed on behalf of all persons who acquired our common stock between February 22, 2000 and December 6, 2000 and initially named as defendants us, John Chapple, our president, chief executive officer and chairman of the board, John D. Thompson, our chief financial officer and treasurer until August 2003, and the following underwriters of our initial public offering: Goldman Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation (predecessor of Credit Suisse First Boston LLC), Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated. Mr. Chapple and Mr. Thompson have been dismissed from the lawsuit without prejudice. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Act and the Exchange Act by issuing a registration statement and offering circular that were false and misleading in that they failed to disclose that: (i) the defendant underwriters allegedly had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors who purchased our common stock issued in connection with our initial public offering; and (ii) the defendant underwriters allegedly allocated shares of our common stock issued in connection with our initial public offering to investors who allegedly agreed to purchase additional shares of our common stock at pre-arranged prices. The complaint seeks rescissionary and/or compensatory damages. We dispute the allegations of the complaint that suggest any wrongdoing on our part or by our officers. However, the plaintiffs and the issuing company defendants, including us, have reached a settlement of the issues in the lawsuit. In June 2004, an agreement of settlement was submitted to the court for preliminary approval. The court granted the preliminary approval on February 15, 2005, subject to certain modifications. The proposed settlement, which is not material to us, is subject to a number of contingencies, including final approval by the court. We are unable to determine whether or when a settlement will occur or be finalized.
      On June 8, 2001, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the State Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia by Reidy Gimpelson against us and several other wireless carriers and manufacturers of wireless telephones. The lawsuit is captioned Riedy Gimpelson vs. Nokia, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. 2001-CV-3893. The complaint alleges that the defendants, among other things, manufactured and distributed wireless

40


Table of Contents

telephones that cause adverse health effects. The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, reimbursement for certain costs including reasonable legal fees, punitive damages and injunctive relief. The defendants timely removed the case to Federal court and this case and related cases were consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The district court denied plaintiffs’ motion to remand the consolidated cases back to their respective state courts, and, on March 5, 2003, the district court granted the defendants’ consolidated motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s remand and dismissal decisions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. On March 16, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court’s remand and dismissal decisions. The Fourth Circuit’s Order remanded the Gimpelson case to the State Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia. On or about April 16, 2005, the Fourth Circuit denied a motion to reconsider its March 16, 2005 decision. We dispute the allegations in the complaint, will vigorously defend against the action in whatever forum it is litigated, and intend to seek indemnification from the manufacturers of the wireless telephones if necessary.
      On April 1, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas against us, Nextel and Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Rolando Prado v. Nextel Communications, et al, Civil Action No. C-695-03-B. On May 2, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of Shelby County for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, Tennessee against us, Nextel and Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Steve Strange v. Nextel Communications, et al, Civil Action No. 01-002520-03. On May 3, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida against Nextel Partners Operating Corp. d/b/a Nextel Partners and Nextel South Corp. d/b/a Nextel Communications. The lawsuit is captioned Christopher Freeman and Susan and Joseph Martelli v. Nextel South Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 03-CA1065. On July 9, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, California against us, Nextel, Nextel West, Inc., Nextel of California, Inc. and Nextel Operations, Inc. The lawsuit is captioned Nick’s Auto Sales, Inc. v. Nextel West, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. BC298695. On August 7, 2003, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama against us and Nextel. The lawsuit is captioned Andrea Lewis and Trish Zruna v. Nextel Communications, Inc., et al, Civil Action No. CV-03-907. On October 3, 2003, an amended complaint for a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The amended complaint named us and Nextel Communications, Inc. as defendants; Nextel Partners was substituted for the previous defendant, Nextel West Corp. The lawsuit is captioned Joseph Blando v. Nextel West Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 02-0921 (the “Blando Case”). All of these complaints allege that we, in conjunction with the other defendants, misrepresented certain cost-recovery line-item fees as government taxes. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin such practices and seek a refund of monies paid by the class based on the alleged misrepresentations. Plaintiffs also seek attorneys’ fees, costs and, in some cases, punitive damages. We believe the allegations are groundless. On October 9, 2003, Judge Gaitan in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri in the Blando Case entered an order granting preliminary approval of a nationwide class action settlement that encompasses most of the claims involved in these cases. Notice of the settlement was provided to the identified class, and on January 29, 2004, the court conducted a final approval hearing and, on April 20, 2004, approved the settlement. On May 27, 2004, various objectors and class members appealed Judge Gaitan’s order granting final approval of the settlement to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Distribution of settlement benefits is stayed until the appellate court issues a final order resolving the appeal. In conjunction with the settlement, we recorded an estimated liability during the third quarter of 2003, which did not materially impact our financial results.
      On December 27, 2004, Dolores Carter filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Dolores Carter v. Nextel WIP Corp., et al. Also on December 27, 2004, Donald Fragnoli filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Donald Fragnoli v. Nextel WIP Corp., et al, Civil Action No. 955-N. On February 1, 2005, Selena Mintz filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us, Nextel WIP Corp., Nextel

41


Table of Contents

Communications, Inc., Sprint Corporation, and several of the members of our board of directors. The lawsuit is captioned Selena Mintz v. John Chapple, et al, Civil Action No. 1065-N. In all three lawsuits, the plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief declaring that the announced merger transaction between Sprint Corporation and Nextel is an event that triggers the put right set forth in our restated certificate of incorporation and directing the defendants to take all necessary measures to give effect to the rights of our Class A common stockholders arising therefrom. We believe that the allegations in the lawsuits to the effect that the Nextel Partners defendants may take action, or fail to take action, that harms the interests of our public stockholders are without merit.
      We are subject to other claims and legal actions that may arise in the ordinary course of business. We do not believe that any of these other pending claims or legal actions or the items discussed above will have a material effect on our business, financial position or results of operations.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
      As compensation for services to be rendered as a member of our board of directors, on January 27, 2005, we issued 7,500 restricted shares of Class A common stock to Arthur W. Harrigan, Jr., one of our directors, which shares vest in three annual installments beginning January 27, 2006. These shares were issued pursuant to and are subject to our restricted stock plan. This issuance was exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and the rules promulgated thereunder.
Item 5. Other Information
Agreements with Officers and Directors
      Effective as of May 9, 2005, our compensation committee approved amendments to our employment agreements for the following executive officers: John Chapple, Barry Rowan, David Aas and Donald Manning. For all of these officers, the purposes of the amendments were to incorporate the annual merit increases in salary, to set their respective targeted bonus percentages and to establish the performance criteria for the payment of the bonuses. The salary adjustments were retroactive to February 24, 2005. The compensation amounts for 2005 were previously disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. Moreover, Mr. Rowan’s agreement was further amended to reflect his recent promotion to Executive Vice President and corresponding compensation increase effective as of May 9, 2005. The employment agreement for Mark Fanning, one of our former executive officers, was amended to reflect his decision to step down as an executive officer and to work part time for the company in a non-executive position as Vice President of Organizational Development.
      In addition, all of the employment agreements, other than Mr. Fanning’s, were amended to incorporate the applicable provisions of our Retention and Severance Plan adopted by our compensation committee effective as of January 27, 2005. The terms of our Retention and Severance Plan were disclosed in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 2, 2005 and in our definitive proxy statement filed on April 8, 2005 in connection with our annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 12, 2005. The agreements, other than Mr. Fanning’s, were amended to provide that we will make any necessary additional payments (the “Gross-up Payments”) to the executive officers such that the net amount of any retention and severance payments and other benefits (whether pursuant to the Retention and Severance Plan or otherwise) (the “Compensation Payments”) paid to any such individual, after deduction of any tax imposed by Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code or any successor to Section 4999 on the Compensation Payments and any U.S. federal, state, and local income or payroll tax imposed on the Gross-up Payments, but before any deduction for U.S. federal, state and local income or payroll tax on the Compensation Payments, is equal to the Compensation Payments, provided that we meet or exceed the operating cash flow objectives for 2005 adopted at our January 2005 compensation committee meeting. Copies of these amended employment agreements (other than the agreement for Mr. Fanning, who is no longer an executive officer) are being filed as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
      In addition, on May 9, 2005, our compensation committee approved the execution and delivery by OPCO and Nextel Partners, Inc. of employment agreements with each of James Ryder and Philip Gaske, our Chief

42


Table of Contents

Operating Officer and Vice President, Customer Care, respectively. These agreements, which have an effective date of February 24, 2005, set forth each officer’s base salary and bonus. Under these agreements, each officer has agreed that while employed by us and for one year thereafter, he will not compete against, or solicit employees or business from, us or any of our direct or indirect subsidiaries. Each agreement has an initial term of one year and automatically extends for successive one-year terms unless the employee or the board of directors provides written notice of termination to the other party at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the end of the then-current term. For as long as each employment agreement is renewed, each year the compensation committee is required to review the executive’s base salary and bonus payment in light of the performance of the executive and the company, and the committee may then increase (but not decrease) the base salary and bonus payment by an amount it determines to be appropriate. Each agreement incorporates the applicable provisions of the Retention and Severance Plan adopted by our compensation committee effective as of January 27, 2005. Finally, each of these agreements provides for the same Gross-Up Payments described above. Copies of these employment agreements are being filed as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
      Certain of our executive officers and directors are currently parties to Restricted Stock Purchase Agreements, some of which have been amended and/or amended and restated (the “RSPAs”). Pursuant to these RSPAs, we issued to these executive officers and directors certain restricted shares of our Class A common stock, which were subject to vesting schedules. The RSPAs provided that if the executive officer’s employment or director’s service with us was terminated for “Cause,” or if the executive officer or director resigned without “Good Reason” (in each case, as defined in the RSPA), then we would have the right for 90 days following the date of termination to purchase from such individual all or any portion of the vested shares at the “Fair Market Value” of the shares (as defined in the applicable RSPA) or, with respect to directors, at the lesser of the Fair Market Value or $0.01 per share. Effective as of May 9, 2005, our compensation committee approved amendments to the RSPAs for our executive officers and directors such that, with respect to any shares of Class A common stock that were issued to an executive officer or director pursuant to an RSPA that have vested in full or that shall vest in full in accordance with the terms of the respective RSPA, the repurchase rights relating to such shares provided to us under the applicable RSPA shall be terminated in their entirety (i) as of May 9, 2005 with respect to all shares fully vested as of such date and (ii) with respect to shares that are not fully vested as of May 9, 2005, as of the date such shares fully vest, if ever, whereupon any such vested shares shall, upon the applicable dates set forth above, no longer be subject to the repurchase rights under the RSPAs. In addition, the RSPAs were amended to revise the definition of change of control to delete references to events that are no longer applicable and to make certain other definitional changes. Copies of the forms of Restricted Stock Purchase Agreements used for these executive officers and directors are being filed as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
      Finally, on May 9, 2005, our compensation committee approved amendments to the form of stock option agreements entered into between us and each of our executive officers for options granted on or after January 27, 2005. Our form of option agreement for option grants to executive officers prior to January 27, 2005 provided for acceleration of the vesting of such options upon any change of control of us or Nextel Communications. As amended, the option agreement for options granted on or after January 27, 2005 now provide for the vesting of such options only upon a change of control of us if, at the time of such change of control event, we have achieved our 2005 operating cash flow targets as established by the committee at its January 27, 2005 meeting. The option agreements for options granted to executive officers prior to January 27, 2005 remain unchanged. Moreover, if the proposed merger between Sprint Corporation and Nextel Communications does not close on or before May 31, 2006, then the accelerated vesting provisions for the options granted on or after January 27, 2005 will revert back to those contained in the prior form of option agreement. The option agreements were also amended to revise the definition of change of control to delete references to events that are no longer applicable. Copies of the form of (a) stock option agreement used for executive officers for options granted prior to January 27, 2005 and (b) stock option agreement used for executive officers for options granted on or after January 27, 2005 are being filed as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form  10-Q.

43


Table of Contents

Changes to Nomination Process
      Effective as of April 21, 2005, our board of directors, upon recommendation of the nominating committee, ratified and approved an amendment to the charter of the nominating committee. The change amends the advance notice provisions of the nominating committee charter to conform the charter to the advance notice provisions of our amended bylaws. Specifically, stockholders suggesting persons as director nominees should send information about the proposed nominee to the Corporate Secretary at our address not less than ninety (90) days and not more than one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the anniversary of the prior year’s annual stockholder meeting. Prior to the amendment of the nominating committee charter, stockholders were required to send information about the proposed nominee at least one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the anniversary of the mailing date of the prior year’s proxy statement.
Item 6. Exhibits
(a) List of Exhibits.
         
  3 .1   Restated Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1.1 to Registration Statement on Form S-1 declared effective February 22, 2000 (File No. 333-95473)).
 
  3 .1(a)   Certificate of Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Nextel Partners, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 (a) to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2004).
 
  3 .2   Amended and Restated Bylaws, effective of June 3, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K filed March 16, 2005).
 
  10 .14^   Employment Agreement, amended and restated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and John Chapple.
 
  10 .18(e)   Form of Stock Option Agreement — Senior Manager (for options granted prior to January 27, 2005).
 
  10 .18(f)   Form of Stock Option Agreement — Senior Manager (for options granted on or after January 27, 2005).
 
  10 .18(g)   Form of Stock Option Agreement — Board Member (for options granted prior to January 27, 2005).
 
  10 .18(h)   Form of Stock Option Agreement — Board Member (for options granted on or after January 27, 2005).
 
  10 .20^^   Form of Amended and Restated Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement (Senior Managers) dated May 9, 2005 to be executed by Nextel Partners, Inc. and certain of its executive officers (other than Barry Rowan).
 
  10 .20(a)   Amended and Restated Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement dated May 9, 2005 by and between Nextel Partners, Inc. and Barry Rowan.
 
  10 .21^   Employment Agreement, amended and restated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and David Aas.
 
  10 .66^   Employment Agreement, amended and restated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and Donald Manning.
 
  10 .74(a)^^^    Form of Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement (Directors) to be executed between Nextel Partners, Inc. and each of its outside directors who are issued restricted stock.
 
  10 .75^   Employment Agreement, amended and restated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and Barry Rowan.
 
  10 .83   Cooperation Agreement 800MHz Spectrum Rebanding dated March 7, 2005 between Nextel Communications, Inc. and Nextel Partners, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.83 to Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 11, 2005).
 
  10 .84   Employment Agreement, dated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and James Ryder.
 
  10 .85   Employment Agreement, dated as of February 24, 2005, between Nextel Partners, Inc., Nextel Partners Operating Corp. and Philip Gaske.

44


Table of Contents

         
  31 .1   Certification of John Chapple, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Nextel Partners, Inc., pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
  31 .2   Certification of Barry Rowan, Chief Financial Officer of Nextel Partners, Inc., pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
  32 .1   Certification of John Chapple, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Nextel Partners, Inc., pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350.
 
  32 .2   Certification of Barry Rowan, Chief Financial Officer of Nextel Partners, Inc., pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
 
  Replaces previously filed exhibit of same number.
  ^^  Replaces previously filed Exhibits 10.19, 10.20 and 10.32.
^^^  Replaces previously filed Exhibit 10.18(c).

45


Table of Contents

SIGNATURES
      Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
  NEXTEL PARTNERS, INC.
  (Registrant)
  By:  /s/ BARRY ROWAN
 
 
  Barry Rowan
  Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
  (Principal Financial Officer)
  By:  /s/ LINDA ALLEN
 
 
  Linda Allen
  Chief Accounting Officer
  (Principal Accounting Officer)
Date: May 10, 2005

46