Skip to content

EchoStar

NASDAQ: ECHO · USD

EchoStar (ECHO) Economic Moat Analysis25

Competitive advantages, dated evidence and erosion risks.

None economic moat

The supplied disclosures show realized competitive weakness rather than a durable economic moat: declining broadband demand, abandonment of the facilities-based 5G network, and weak historical Pay-TV retention and pricing outcomes. Reduced wholesale network rates and non-cancelable enterprise backlog provide contractual benefits, but neither establishes superior economics versus competitors. The completed spectrum sale materially improves funding capacity without demonstrating an operating moat. Substantial Pay-TV deconsolidation limits the relevance of its historical results to the remaining business.

Cost advantage

EchoStar achieved lower AT&T wholesale rates by meeting contractual thresholds. This is a demonstrated procurement improvement, but the passages do not establish a cost advantage over competitors.

Durability
AT&T agreed to provide services through December 31, 2031; the disclosed term supports service availability, not guaranteed competitive superiority.
Competitors
AT&T, T-Mobile
Erosion risks
EchoStar relies on network suppliers that also compete with it. Its own facilities-based 5G network was abandoned, undermining the earlier prospect of infrastructure differentiation.
What would invalidate the thesis
The limited benefit would be invalidated if effective wholesale costs or minimum commitments offset the rate savings. A durable relative advantage would require demonstrated lower total service costs than competitors while maintaining competitive service quality.
Evidence (2) · Counterevidence (3)

Switching costs

Approximately $1.4 billion of non-cancelable enterprise backlog provides contracted demand visibility. It does not demonstrate customer switching costs, renewals or pricing power after contract expiration.

Durability
Protection lasts for the underlying contracts; their remaining duration and renewal economics are not supplied.
Competitors
ViaSat, SpaceX, Amazon Leo
Erosion risks
Broadband subscriber declines and competition across satellite and terrestrial services weaken the case for durable customer dependency. Amazon Leo is identified as a potential competitor when launched.
What would invalidate the thesis
The limited contractual protection would weaken if backlog failed to convert into revenue or expired contracts were replaced on worse terms. A switching-cost moat would require demonstrated renewals and customer persistence despite competitive alternatives.
Evidence (2) · Counterevidence (2)

Changes since the previous analysis

  • No comparable previous version was supplied.

Evidence limitations

  • Evidence consists solely of supplied issuer filings dated March 2, August 3 and September 18, 2026; these dates retain dateKind filed. No subsequent outcomes are assumed.
  • Pay-TV results through June 30, 2026 document historical competitive weakness, but substantially all of that segment was deconsolidated on that date. The passages do not fully establish the resulting economic exposure or the remaining portfolio's operating economics.
  • Named wireless and satellite competitors are disclosed, but Pay-TV and terrestrial broadband competitors are largely generic categories. Comparative costs, service quality, market shares and competitor pricing are not established.
  • Enterprise backlog supports contractual demand visibility, not demonstrated renewals or switching friction. Remaining-business retention evidence is limited to disclosed broadband subscriber declines.
  • ARPU combines pricing and customer mix; nearly flat Pay-TV ARPU cannot isolate individual price changes. Detailed retail contract restrictions and remaining-business pricing outcomes are missing.
  • Generic risk factors are treated as contingent risks. Network abandonment, subscriber declines, impairments, completed repayments and received transaction proceeds are treated as reported outcomes.
  • Proxy disclosures support assessment of actual incentive and governance arrangements, but voting control does not establish proportional economic ownership. The October 30, 2026 advisory vote is not assumed to have occurred.
  • The none verdict reflects disclosed operating weakness rather than an assertion that every remaining business lacks valuable assets. Sustained broadband renewals, defensible relative costs and pricing without customer erosion could overturn it.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis

Calculated from annual filings. Missing data remains unavailable. Detailed financial charts remain in the other topics.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis
PeriodGross marginOperating marginROICFCF margin
2021-439.7%10.9%2.2%9.8%
2022-406.0%9.5%2.6%10.2%
202344.1%-1.6%—-3.9%
202436.0%-1.9%—-1.8%
202537.1%-118.1%—-7.1%

Pricing power38

  • Pricing outcomes

    Historical Pay-TV ARPU increased only 0.1% despite disclosed subscriber rate increases and supplier cost escalation. This supports weak realized pricing outcomes, although ARPU includes mix and the segment was subsequently deconsolidated.

  • Customer demand

    Broadband subscriber declines provide indirect adverse retention evidence for the remaining business. Historical Pay-TV evidence is direct: six-month DISH TV churn increased from 1.33% to 1.42%, alongside subscriber losses.

  • Margin resilience

    Results are mixed: consolidated operating income improved and wholesale rates fell, while historical Pay-TV operating income declined and programming costs reduced service margins. Portfolio changes limit comparability; improved margins alone do not establish pricing power.

  • Pricing freedom

    Disclosed Pay-TV rate increases demonstrate some ability to adjust customer prices. Supplier contracts impose escalating costs and enterprise backlog locks in obligations without disclosed repricing rights. Freedom for the remaining portfolio is incompletely established.

Management44

  • Capital discipline

    The abandoned network and substantial 2025 impairments indicate poor realized investment outcomes. Completed $1.6 billion repayments and $20.250 billion of received spectrum-sale proceeds demonstrate material financial recovery actions, without establishing the lifetime return on the investment strategy.

  • Incentive alignment

    Existing stock-price and employment-conditioned awards create shareholder alignment. Completed option repricing and resignation-related accelerated vesting weaken incentive rigidity. These are actual arrangements, not assumed adoption of pending proposals.

  • Execution

    Execution is mixed: management achieved wholesale thresholds, completed the spectrum transaction and improved operating income, but abandoned the facilities-based network and continues to face broadband subscriber declines. Operating results are indirect evidence of execution rather than proof of individual management causation.

  • Governance

    Approximately 90.3% family voting control, controlled-company exemptions and no lead independent director limit minority shareholder influence. An entirely independent compensation committee provides a partial safeguard; exemptions alone do not prove every permitted practice is used.

Sources and methodology

Current publication · Updated 18/10/2026 · Version 4

AI interpretation based on checked source excerpts. Issuer assertions and evidence limitations remain explicit.

Policy quality-scores-2: six equally weighted categories. The overall score requires full coverage. Missing inputs are not zero. Qualitative grades are sourced interpretations, not probabilities. 6/6 · 18/10/2026

Moat25

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

structural advantage · 1/4 · Wholesale rate improvements and non-cancelable backlog offer limited contractual benefits. Neither demonstrates competitive superiority, while abandonment of the owned 5G network weakens the infrastructure advantage case.

durability · 1/4 · The AT&T service term provides visibility through 2031, but dependence on competing suppliers and realized broadband subscriber declines leave the competitive position fragile.

customer dependency · 1/4 · Enterprise contracts protect some demand, but broadband subscriber declines and historical Pay-TV customer losses contradict broad customer lock-in. Post-contract enterprise retention is not supplied.

erosion resilience · 1/4 · Network abandonment and broadband subscriber declines show realized erosion. Historical Pay-TV churn and programming interruptions add adverse evidence, with reduced relevance after deconsolidation.

Pricing power38

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

realized pricing · 1/4 · Historical Pay-TV ARPU increased only 0.1% despite disclosed subscriber rate increases and supplier cost escalation. This supports weak realized pricing outcomes, although ARPU includes mix and the segment was subsequently deconsolidated.

retention · 1/4 · Broadband subscriber declines provide indirect adverse retention evidence for the remaining business. Historical Pay-TV evidence is direct: six-month DISH TV churn increased from 1.33% to 1.42%, alongside subscriber losses.

margin resilience · 2/4 · Results are mixed: consolidated operating income improved and wholesale rates fell, while historical Pay-TV operating income declined and programming costs reduced service margins. Portfolio changes limit comparability; improved margins alone do not establish pricing power.

contractual freedom · 2/4 · Disclosed Pay-TV rate increases demonstrate some ability to adjust customer prices. Supplier contracts impose escalating costs and enterprise backlog locks in obligations without disclosed repricing rights. Freedom for the remaining portfolio is incompletely established.

Predictability41

Five consecutive annual periods. Equal weights: nondeclining revenue frequency; revenue-growth volatility (5–40pp); positive FCF frequency; FCF-margin volatility (3–20pp). Stability indicator, not a growth forecast.

Nondeclining revenue years (%)
50.00
Revenue growth volatility (pp)
327.13
Positive FCF years (%)
40.00
FCF margin volatility (pp)
7.19

Financial strength0

Equal-weight grades: debt/FCF (1–8x), net debt/earnings before interest and tax (0–5x), interest service (1–12x), current ratio (0.75–2x). Earnings use reported operating income, or reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense when operating income is unavailable. Interest service uses earnings/interest expense; if unavailable, it uses reported operating cash flow/cash interest paid, without relabeling cash paid as accrued expense. Nonpositive cash flow/earnings score 0 for their service component; reported zero interest with a positive numerator scores 100. Net cash scores 100 for net leverage. Missing disclosures remain unavailable. General nonfinancial-company rubric, not a credit rating; exceptional and nonoperating gains are not normalized out. IFRS finance-cost and cash-flow classifications retain their reported scope.

debtFcfGrade
0.00
netDebtEbitGrade
0.00
interestCoverageGrade
0.00
currentRatioGrade
0.00
Current ratio (x)
0.42
cashInterestPaid
2087.13
cashInterestCoverage
-0.05

Capital allocation25

Three-year equal-weight indicators: pretax return on average invested capital (0–25%; equity + debt − cash, each year and its prior year), share-count growth (0–5%, lower better), share-based cost/revenue (2–20%, lower better), consolidated FCF/net income (0–1x). Return uses reported operating income or, if unavailable, EBIT calculated from reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense; exceptional/nonoperating gains are not normalized out. Share-based cost uses the reported cash-flow add-back or, if absent, separately reported recognized compensation expense; the latter never becomes an FCF adjustment. Nonpositive net income scores 0 for cash conversion; absent income/FCF stays unavailable. Nonpositive invested capital has no defined return and remains unavailable. Does not establish acquisition quality or buyback timing.

3-year pre-tax operating return (%)
-16.95
3-year average dilution (%)
76.06
3-year average SBC / revenue (%)
0.26
cashConversionGrade
0.00

Management44

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

capital discipline · 2/4 · The abandoned network and substantial 2025 impairments indicate poor realized investment outcomes. Completed $1.6 billion repayments and $20.250 billion of received spectrum-sale proceeds demonstrate material financial recovery actions, without establishing the lifetime return on the investment strategy.

incentive alignment · 2/4 · Existing stock-price and employment-conditioned awards create shareholder alignment. Completed option repricing and resignation-related accelerated vesting weaken incentive rigidity. These are actual arrangements, not assumed adoption of pending proposals.

execution · 2/4 · Execution is mixed: management achieved wholesale thresholds, completed the spectrum transaction and improved operating income, but abandoned the facilities-based network and continues to face broadband subscriber declines. Operating results are indirect evidence of execution rather than proof of individual management causation.

governance · 1/4 · Approximately 90.3% family voting control, controlled-company exemptions and no lead independent director limit minority shareholder influence. An entirely independent compensation committee provides a partial safeguard; exemptions alone do not prove every permitted practice is used.

Evidence

​ The Sixth Amendment sets forth new terms including reduced rates if we meet certain minimum data thresholds while transitioning to a Hybrid MNO.

Amendments to the Network Services Agreement: conditional reduced rates · Filed 02/03/2026

In the fourth quarter of 2025, we gave notice to AT&T that we had met such thresholds, triggering the Sixth Amendment rates and AT&T agreed to provide these services to us through December 31, 2031.

Amendments to the Network Services Agreement: achieved thresholds and service term · Filed 02/03/2026

​ ● Through the MNSA and the NSA, we depend on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide network services to our Wireless subscribers.

Competition and Economic Risks: named network suppliers · Filed 03/08/2026

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

Competition and Economic Risks: competing network suppliers · Filed 03/08/2026

Beginning on November 15, 2025, as we have no customer traffic on our 5G Network, “Cost of services” excludes certain direct costs related to our 5G Network that we abandoned and are decommissioning, including lease expense on communication towers and other costs, which are now included in “Cost of sales – equipment and other” on our Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss).

MD&A: abandoned 5G network and absence of customer traffic · Filed 02/03/2026

​ Backlog ​ As of June 30, 2026, our Broadband and Satellite Services segment had approximately $1.4 billion of contracted revenue backlog.

Broadband and Satellite Services: contracted backlog · Filed 03/08/2026

We define the Broadband and Satellite Services segment contracted revenue backlog as our expected future revenue under enterprise customer contracts that are non-cancelable, including lease revenue.

Broadband and Satellite Services: non-cancelable backlog definition · Filed 03/08/2026

Our primary satellite competitors in the North American consumer market are ViaSat and SpaceX, as well as Amazon Leo when launched.

Broadband competition: current and prospective satellite competitors · Filed 03/08/2026

Our DISH TV and Broadband subscriber bases have been declining and there can be no assurance that both subscriber bases will not continue to decline and that the pace of such decline will not accelerate.

Future Capital Requirements: realized DISH TV and Broadband subscriber declines · Filed 03/08/2026

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ For the Six Months Ended ​ ​ ​ ​ June 30, ​ Variance Statements of Operations Data ​ ​ ​ 2026 ​ ​ ​ 2025 ​ ​ ​ Amount ​ ​ ​ % ​ ​ (In thousands) ​ ​ Revenue: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Service revenue ​ $ 4,466,710 ​ $ 4,971,196 ​ $ (504,486) ​ (10.1) Equipment sales and other revenue ​ ​ 76,088 ​ ​ 29,780 ​ ​ 46,308 ​ * Total revenue ​ ​ 4,542,798 ​ ​ 5,000,976 ​ ​ (458,178) ​ (9.2) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Costs and Expenses: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Cost of services ​ ​ 2,768,342 ​ ​ 3,105,607 ​ ​ (337,265) ​ (10.9) % of Service revenue ​ ​ 62.0 % ​ 62.5 % ​ ​ ​ ​ Cost of sales - equipment and other ​ ​ 64,035 ​ ​ 19,118 ​ ​ 44,917 ​ * Selling, general and administrative expenses ​ ​ 582,332 ​ 483,001 ​ ​ 99,331 ​ 20.6 % of Total revenue ​ ​ 12.8 % ​ 9.7 % ​ ​ ​ ​ Depreciation and amortization ​ ​ 114,181 ​ ​ 144,268 ​ ​ (30,087) ​ (20.9) Total costs and expenses ​ ​ 3,528,890 ​ ​ 3,751,994 ​ ​ (223,104) ​ (5.9) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Operating income (loss) ​ $ 1,013,908 ​ $ 1,248,982 ​ $ (235,074) ​ (18.8) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Other data: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Pay-TV subscribers, as of period end (in millions) ​ ​ 6.391 ​ ​ 7.108 ​ ​ (0.717) ​ (10.1) DISH TV subscribers, as of period end (in millions)** ​ ​ 4.684 ​ ​ 5.323 ​ ​ (0.639) ​ (12.0) SLING TV subscribers, as of period end (in millions)*** ​ ​ 1.707 ​ ​ 1.785 ​ ​ (0.078) ​ (4.4) Pay-TV subscriber additions (losses), net (in millions) ​ ​ (0.607) ​ ​ (0.642) ​ ​ 0.035 ​ 5.5 DISH TV subscriber additions (losses), net (in millions) ​ ​ (0.338) ​ ​ (0.335) ​ ​ (0.003) ​ (0.9) SLING TV subscriber additions (losses), net (in millions) ​ ​ (0.269) ​ ​ (0.307) ​ ​ 0.038 ​ 12.4 Pay-TV ARPU ​ $ 111.27 ​ $ 111.18 ​ $ 0.09 ​ 0.1 DISH TV subscriber additions, gross (in millions) ​ ​ 0.074 ​ ​ 0.103 ​ ​ (0.029) ​ (28.2) DISH TV churn rate ​ ​ 1.42 % ​ 1.33 % ​ 0.09 % 6.8 DISH TV SAC ​ $ 1,404 ​ $ 1,150 ​ $ 254 ​ 22.1 Purchases of property and equipment, net of refunds (1) ​ $ 143,390 ​ $ 140,968 ​ $ 2,422 ​ 1.7 OIBDA ​ $ 1,128,089 ​ $ 1,393,250 ​ $ (265,161) ​ (19.0) *Percentage is not meaningful.

Pay-TV six-month operating results: subscribers, ARPU, acquisition costs and profitability · Filed 03/08/2026

Our DISH TV churn rate for the three months ended June 30, 2026 was negatively impacted by programming interruptions in connection with the scheduled expiration of programming carriage contracts with content providers.

DISH TV churn: realized impact of programming interruptions · Filed 03/08/2026

Our Pay-TV service margins have been reduced by, among other things, higher programming costs.

Liquidity and cash flow: realized Pay-TV service margin pressure · Filed 02/03/2026

​ In addition, increases in programming costs cause us to increase the rates that we charge our Pay-TV subscribers, which could in turn cause our existing Pay-TV subscribers to disconnect service.

Programming cost risks: subscriber rate increases and possible disconnections · Filed 02/03/2026

In addition, programming costs per subscriber continue to increase due to contractual price increases and the renewal of long-term programming contracts on less favorable pricing terms.

Programming contracts: contractual increases and less favorable renewal pricing · Filed 02/03/2026

130 Table of Contents Item 2.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS – Continued ​ On July 28, 2026, in connection with the AT&T Closing, we received proceeds of $20.250 billion in cash from AT&T.

Liquidity: completed AT&T closing and cash proceeds received July 28, 2026 · Filed 03/08/2026

​ In addition, on March 16, 2026, we prepaid without penalty, the remaining balance of our Term Loan due 2029 and Mandatorily Redeemable Preferred Shares due 2029 totaling approximately $1.6 billion.

Restructuring discussion: completed loan and preferred share repayment · Filed 03/08/2026

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ For the Years Ended December 31, ​ Variance Statements of Operations Data ​ ​ ​ 2025 ​ ​ ​ 2024 ​ ​ ​ Amount ​ ​ ​ % ​ ​ (In thousands) ​ ​ Revenue: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Service revenue ​ $ — ​ $ — ​ $ — ​ * Equipment sales and other revenue ​ ​ 294,823 ​ ​ 156,702 ​ ​ 138,121 ​ 88.1 Total revenue ​ ​ 294,823 ​ ​ 156,702 ​ ​ 138,121 ​ 88.1 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Costs and Expenses: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Cost of services ​ ​ 1,130,167 ​ ​ 1,304,295 ​ ​ (174,128) ​ (13.4) Cost of sales - equipment and other ​ ​ 105,296 ​ ​ — ​ ​ 105,296 ​ * Selling, general and administrative expenses ​ ​ 160,744 ​ ​ 166,402 ​ ​ (5,658) ​ (3.4) Depreciation and amortization ​ ​ 844,487 ​ ​ 1,039,920 ​ ​ (195,433) ​ (18.8) Impairments and other ​ ​ 16,102,029 ​ ​ — ​ ​ 16,102,029 ​ * Total costs and expenses ​ ​ 18,342,723 ​ ​ 2,510,617 ​ ​ 15,832,106 ​ * ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Operating income (loss) ​ $ (18,047,900) ​ $ (2,353,915) ​ $ (15,693,985) ​ * ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Other data: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Purchases of property and equipment, net of refunds ​ $ 496,338 ​ $ 1,113,823 ​ $ (617,485) ​ (55.4) OIBDA ​ $ (17,203,413) ​ $ (1,313,995) ​ $ (15,889,418) ​ * * Percentage is not meaningful.

2025 operating results table: impairments, losses and capital expenditure · Filed 02/03/2026

● Potential parent-level claims and financial exposure: Although the Prepackaged Chapter 11 Cases are limited to DISH DBS, DISH Wireless and certain of their subsidiaries, and EchoStar Corporation is not a debtor, certain creditors have asserted and may in the future assert claims or causes of action against, have sought and may in the future seek recovery from, or otherwise attempt to impose liability on EchoStar or its non-debtor subsidiaries, whether or not the Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan is confirmed.

Chapter 11 risks: debtor scope and asserted parent-level claims · Filed 03/08/2026

​ ​ 90 Table of Contents Item 2.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS – Continued ​ ​ Pay-TV Segment ​ Substantially all of our Pay-TV segment was deconsolidated as of June 30, 2026.

Pay-TV Segment: substantial deconsolidation as of June 30, 2026 · Filed 03/08/2026

Ergen, our Chairman, and certain entities established for the benefit of his family beneficially own equity securities representing approximately 90.3% of the total voting power of all classes of our outstanding shares as of the Record Date, and through such beneficial ownership Mr.

Corporate Governance: approximately 90.3% family voting power at the record date · Filed 18/09/2026

Therefore, we are not subject to the Nasdaq listing requirements that would otherwise require us to have: (i) a Board of Directors composed of a majority of independent directors; (ii) a nominating committee composed solely of independent directors; (iii) compensation of our executive officers determined by a majority of the independent directors or a compensation committee composed solely of independent directors; (iv) a compensation committee charter that provides the compensation committee with the authority and funding to retain compensation consultants and other advisors; and/or (v) director nominees selected, or recommended for the Board’s selection, either by a majority of the independent directors or a nominating committee composed solely of independent directors.

Corporate Governance: controlled-company exemptions · Filed 18/09/2026

Furthermore, in light of Mr. Ergen’s voting control and position with the Corporation, we believe that the creation of a lead independent director position is not necessary at this time.

Board Leadership Structure: absence of a lead independent director · Filed 18/09/2026

Akhavan and Swieringa; ● we provide our NEOs with few perquisites, no long-term cash incentive, no defined benefit or retiree medical benefits; ● our NEOs are not provided with tax gross-ups; ● our NEOs are not entitled to cash severance; ● we maintain a Compensation Committee composed entirely of independent directors.

Compensation Best Practices: independent compensation committee and benefit restrictions · Filed 18/09/2026

Subject to Mr. Ergen’s continued employment in his position as Chairman of DISH Network (or, following the Merger, EchoStar) through the date on which the EchoStar Stock Price Targets are achieved, the Ergen 2020 Performance Award will vest in the following tranches upon achievement of the following EchoStar Stock Price Targets: ​ Tranche EchoStar Stock Price Targets Vesting Schedule 1 $ 98.72 10% 2 $123.40 10% 3 $154.24 10% 4 $192.80 10% 5 $241.00 10% 6 $301.27 10% 7 $376.57 10% 8 $470.71 10% 9 $588.41 10% 10 $735.50 10% ​ In the event that a EchoStar Stock Price Target is determined by the Compensation Committee to have been achieved during an applicable calendar quarter (or at its ten-year anniversary) as set forth below: (i) that applicable EchoStar Stock Price Target will be retired; and (ii) the corresponding tranche of the option will vest and shall become exercisable contemporaneously with the filing of the Corporation’s financial results for that quarter or year, as applicable, with the SEC.

Executive Compensation: existing stock-price and continued-employment vesting conditions · Filed 18/09/2026

As a result of the Exchange Offer, options to purchase shares under the 2019 LTIP were exchanged and the exercise price of these options was adjusted to $14.04 effective April 1, 2024.

Executive Compensation: completed option exchange and exercise-price adjustment · Filed 18/09/2026

In connection with his resignation, we entered into a separate agreement providing for the accelerated vesting of one tranche of his options.

Executive Compensation: accelerated option vesting following resignation · Filed 18/09/2026

​ Total operating income (loss). Our consolidated operating income totaled $906 million for the six months ended June 30, 2026, compared to a loss of $302 million for the same period in 2025.

Consolidated six-month results: operating income improvement · Filed 03/08/2026

This change primarily resulted from a decrease in operating loss from our Other segment and to a lesser extent our Wireless segment and a net increase in operating income from our Broadband and Satellite Services segment, partially offset by a decrease in operating income from our Pay-TV segment.

Consolidated operating income: segment contributions to improvement · Filed 03/08/2026

Publication history

Publication history
VersionUpdatedCompetitive advantage
418/10/2026none
318/10/2026none
218/10/2026none
118/10/2026Unavailable

Sources

Research methodology and limitations · What is an economic moat?