Earthlink 2011 Annual Report Download - page 23

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 23 of the 2011 Earthlink annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 163

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 139
  • 140
  • 141
  • 142
  • 143
  • 144
  • 145
  • 146
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 153
  • 154
  • 155
  • 156
  • 157
  • 158
  • 159
  • 160
  • 161
  • 162
  • 163

Table of Contents
these proceedings may entail or to what extent requirements arising from such proceedings will affect our operations is unclear.
In addition, state legislatures are considering, and in some cases enacting, new laws that limit the authority of the state PUCs to regulate and
oversee the business dealings of carriers. We could be harmed by these actions.
We will be affected by how states regulate the retail prices of the incumbent carriers with which we compete. As the degree of intrastate
competition is perceived to increase, states are offering incumbent carriers increased pricing flexibility and deregulation of particular services
deemed to be competitive. This flexibility and deregulation may present the incumbent carriers with an opportunity to subsidize services that
compete with our services with revenues generated from their non-
competitive services, thereby allowing them to offer competitive services at
prices lower than most or all of their competitors. For example, AT&T has obtained authority to create affiliates that would operate on a much
less regulated basis and, therefore, could provide significant competition in addition to the local services historically offered by a much more
regulated AT&T. We cannot predict the extent to which these developments may affect our business.
Many states require prior approval for transfers of control of certified carriers, corporate reorganizations, acquisitions of
telecommunications operations, assignment of carrier assets, carrier stock offerings and incurrence by carriers of significant debt obligations.
These requirements can delay and increase the cost we incur to complete various financing transactions, including future stock or debt offerings,
the sale of part or all of our regulated business or the acquisition of assets and other entities to be used in our regulated business.
Local Government Authorizations and Related Rights
-of-Way
We are subject to numerous local regulations such as building codes, municipal franchise requirements and licensing. Such regulations vary
on a city-by-city and county-by-
county basis and can affect our provision of both network services and carrier services. We are required to
obtain street use and construction permits and licenses or franchises to install and expand our fiber optic network using municipal rights-of-
way.
In some municipalities where we have installed network equipment, we are required to pay license or franchise fees based on a percentage of
gross revenues or a per linear foot basis. Following the expiration of existing franchises, these fees are at risk of increasing. In many markets,
incumbent carriers do not pay these franchise fees or pay fees that are substantially lower than those required to be paid by us, although the
Telecommunications Act requires that, in the future, such fees be applied in a competitively neutral manner. To the extent that our competitors
do not pay the same level of fees that we do, we could be at a competitive disadvantage. Termination of the existing franchise or license
agreements before their expiration dates, or a failure to renew the franchise or license agreements, and a requirement that we remove the
corresponding portion of our facilities or abandon the corresponding portion of our network, could harm our business. In addition, we would be
adversely affected if we are unable to obtain additional authorizations for any new network construction on reasonable terms.
A number of states are considering reforming their laws and regulations governing the issuance of franchises and permits by local
governmental authorities, and some states already have enacted laws authorizing some types of entities to secure a state-
wide franchise.
Congress also has considered from time to time, and may consider in the future, various proposals intended to reform the relationship between
federal, state and local governments in connection with the franchising process. We cannot predict how these issues will be resolved, or the
extent to which these developments will affect our ability to compete. Unresolved issues also exist regarding the ability of new local service
providers to gain access to commercial office buildings to serve tenants. The outcome of these challenges cannot be predicted.
18