Table of Contents

​

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

​

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

​

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2022

​

OR

​

​

FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM                 TO                .

​

Commission file number: 001-39144

​

DISH Network Corporation

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

​

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (303) 723-1000

​

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

​

​

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☒ No ☐

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

​

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 ⌧ No ◻

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ⌧ No ◻

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ◻

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

​

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ◻

​

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ◻

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

​

As of June 30, 2022, the aggregate market value of Class A common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $4.7 billion based upon the closing price of the Class A common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market as of the close of business on the last trading day of the month.

​

As of February 14, 2023, the registrant’s outstanding common stock consisted of 292,716,859 shares of Class A common stock and 238,435,208 shares of Class B common stock, each $0.01 par value.

​

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

​

The following documents are incorporated into this Form 10-K by reference:

​

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with its 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part III.

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

Unless otherwise required by the context, in this report, the words “DISH Network,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to DISH Network Corporation and its subsidiaries, “EchoStar” refers to EchoStar Corporation and its subsidiaries, and “DISH DBS” refers to DISH DBS Corporation, a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of DISH Network, and its subsidiaries.

​

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including, in particular, statements about our plans, objectives and strategies, growth opportunities in our industries and businesses, our expectations regarding future results, financial condition, liquidity and capital requirements, our estimates regarding the impact of regulatory developments and legal proceedings, and other trends and projections. Forward-looking statements are not historical facts and may be identified by words such as “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “goal,” “seek,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “predict,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “can,” “may,” and similar terms. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. Accordingly, actual performance, events or results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including, but not limited to, those summarized below:

​

SUMMARY OF RISK FACTORS

Competition and Economic Risks

COVID-19 Pandemic

i

Table of Contents

​

Operational and Service Delivery Risks

Acquisition and Capital Structure Risks

​

ii

Table of Contents

​

Legal and Regulatory Risks

​

Other factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, those discussed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” herein and those discussed in other documents we file with the SEC. All cautionary statements made or referred to herein should be read as being applicable to all forward-looking statements wherever they appear. Investors should consider the risks and uncertainties described or referred to herein and should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made, and we expressly disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

​

​

​

​

​

iii

Table of Contents

​

PART I

​

​

OVERVIEW

​

DISH Network Corporation was organized in 1995 as a corporation under the laws of the State of Nevada. We started offering the DISH® branded pay-TV service in March 1996, the SLING® branded pay-TV service in January 2015 and retail wireless services in July 2020. Our common stock is publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “DISH.” Our principal executive offices are located at 9601 South Meridian Boulevard, Englewood, Colorado 80112 and our telephone number is (303) 723-1000.

​

DISH Network Corporation is a holding company. Its subsidiaries operate two primary business segments, Pay-TV and Wireless. Our Wireless business segment operates in two business units, Retail Wireless and 5G Network Deployment.

​

Pay-TV

​

We offer pay-TV services under the DISH® brand and the SLING® brand (collectively “Pay-TV” services). The DISH branded pay-TV service consists of, among other things, Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) licenses authorizing us to use direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) and Fixed Satellite Service (“FSS”) spectrum, our owned and leased satellites, receiver systems, broadcast operations, a leased fiber optic network, in-home service and call center operations, and certain other assets utilized in our operations (“DISH TV”). We also design, develop and distribute receiver systems and provide digital broadcast operations, including satellite uplinking/downlinking, transmission and other services to third-party pay-TV providers. The SLING branded pay-TV services consist of, among other things, multichannel, live-linear and on-demand streaming over-the-top (“OTT”) Internet-based domestic, international and Latino video programming services (“SLING TV”). As of December 31, 2022, we had 9.750 million Pay-TV subscribers in the United States, including 7.416 million DISH TV subscribers and 2.334 million SLING TV subscribers.

​

Wireless – Retail Wireless

​

We offer nationwide prepaid and postpaid retail wireless services to subscribers primarily under our Boost Mobile, Boost Infinite and Gen Mobile brands (“Retail Wireless” services), as well as a competitive portfolio of wireless devices. Prepaid wireless subscribers generally pay in advance for monthly access to wireless talk, text, and data services. Postpaid wireless subscribers are qualified to pay after receiving wireless talk, text, and data services.

​

We are currently operating our Retail Wireless business unit as a mobile virtual network operator (“MVNO”) as we continue to complete our 5G Network Deployment. As an MVNO, today we depend on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide us with network services under the amended master network services agreement (“MNSA”) and Network Services Agreement (the “NSA”), respectively. Under the NSA, we expect AT&T will become our primary network services provider. As of December 31, 2022, we had 7.983 million Wireless subscribers.

​

Wireless – 5G Network Deployment

​

We have invested a total of over $30 billion in Wireless spectrum licenses, which includes over $10 billion in noncontrolling investments in certain entities. The $30 billion of investments related to Wireless spectrum licenses does not include $7 billion of capitalized interest related to the carrying value of such licenses. See Note 2 and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information. We plan to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of the nation’s first cloud-native, Open Radio Access Network (“O-RAN”) based 5G network (our “5G Network Deployment”).

​

Table of Contents

​

​

PAY-TV

​

Business Strategy – Pay-TV

​

Our Pay-TV business strategy is to be the best provider of video services in the United States by providing products with the best technology, outstanding customer service, and great value. We promote our Pay-TV services by providing our subscribers with a better “price-to-value” relationship and experience than those available from other subscription television service providers. We market our SLING TV services to consumers who do not subscribe to traditional satellite and cable pay-TV services, as well as to current and recent traditional pay-TV subscribers who desire a lower cost alternative.

​

​

​

​

Products and Services – Pay-TV

​

DISH TV services. We offer a wide selection of video services under the DISH TV brand, with access to hundreds of channels depending on the level of subscription. Our standard programming packages generally include programming provided by national cable networks. We also offer programming packages that include local broadcast networks, specialty sports channels, premium movie channels and Latino and international programming. Our Latino and international programming packages allow subscribers to choose from over 300 channels in over 20 languages.

​

In addition, we offer our DISH TV subscribers streaming access through DISH On Demand® to thousands of movies and television shows via their TV or Internet-connected devices.

​

Our DISH TV subscribers also have the ability to use dishanywhere.com and our DISH Anywhere mobile applications on Internet-connected devices to view authorized content, search program listings and remotely control certain features of their DVRs. Dishanywhere.com and our DISH Anywhere mobile applications provide access to thousands of movies and television shows.

​

SLING TV services. Our SLING TV services require an Internet connection and are available on multiple streaming-capable devices including, among others, streaming media devices, TVs, tablets, computers, game consoles and phones. We offer SLING domestic, SLING International, and SLING Latino video programming services. We offer domestic SLING TV services as a single-stream service branded SLING Orange and a multi-stream service branded SLING Blue, which includes, among other things, the ability to stream on up to three devices simultaneously. We also offer add-on extras, direct to consumer services, pay-per-view events and a cloud-based DVR service.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

Distribution Channels – Pay-TV

​

We operate in the consumer market in the United States and use print, radio, television and Internet media, on a local and national basis to motivate potential subscribers to contact DISH TV and SLING TV, visit our websites or contact independent third party retailers. We often offer our new DISH TV subscribers certain programming at no additional charge and/or promotional pricing during a commitment period. We often offer our new SLING TV subscribers free trials and/or streaming-capable devices at no additional charge and/or promotional pricing.

​

While we offer receiver systems and programming through direct sales channels, a meaningful percentage of our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations are generated through independent third parties such as small retailers, direct marketing groups, local and regional consumer electronics stores, nationwide retailers, and telecommunications companies. In general, we pay these independent third parties a mix of upfront and monthly incentives to solicit orders for our services and provide customer service. We offer our SLING TV services through direct sales channels and third-party marketing agreements.

​

We incur significant upfront costs to provide our new DISH TV subscribers with in-home equipment, which most of our new DISH TV subscribers lease from us. We also incur significant upfront costs to install satellite dishes and receivers in the homes of our new DISH TV subscribers.

​

Competition – Pay-TV

​

Competition has intensified in recent years as the pay-TV industry has matured. We and our competitors increasingly must seek to attract a greater proportion of new subscribers from each other’s existing subscriber bases rather than from first-time purchasers of pay-TV services. We face substantial competition from established pay-TV providers and broadband service providers and increasing competition from companies providing/facilitating the delivery of video content via the Internet to computers, televisions, and other streaming and mobile devices, including wireless service providers. In recent years, industry consolidation and convergence has created competitors with greater scale and multiple product/service offerings. These developments, among others, have contributed to intense and increasing competition, and we expect such competition to continue.

​

We incur significant costs to retain our existing DISH TV subscribers, generally as a result of upgrading their equipment to next generation receivers, primarily including our Hopper® receivers, and by providing retention credits. Our DISH TV subscriber retention costs may vary significantly from period to period.

​

Many of our competitors have been especially aggressive by offering discounted programming and services for both new and existing subscribers, including, but not limited to, bundled offers combining broadband, video and/or wireless services and other promotional offers. Certain competitors have been able to subsidize the price of video services with the price of broadband and/or wireless services.

​

Our Pay-TV services also face increased competition from programmers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunications companies that are increasing their Internet-based video offerings. We also face competition from providers of video content, many of which are providers of our programming content, that distribute content over the Internet including services with live-linear television programming, as well as single programmer offerings and offerings of large libraries of on-demand content, including in certain cases original content. These product offerings include, but are not limited to, Netflix, Hulu, Apple+, Prime Video, YouTube TV, Disney+, ESPN+, Paramount+, HBO Max, STARZ, Peacock, Fubo, Philo and Tubi. 

​

Significant changes in consumer behavior regarding the means by which consumers obtain video entertainment and information in response to digital media competition could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition or otherwise disrupt our business. In particular, consumers have shown increased interest in viewing certain video programming in any place, at any time and/or on any broadband or Internet-connected device they choose. Online content providers may cause our subscribers to disconnect our DISH TV services (“cord cutting”), downgrade to smaller, less expensive programming packages (“cord shaving”) or elect to purchase through these online content providers a certain portion of the services that they would have historically purchased from us.

​

Table of Contents

​

Mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and alliances among cable television providers, telecommunications companies, programming providers and others may result in, among other things, greater scale and financial leverage and increase the availability of offerings from providers capable of bundling video, broadband and/or wireless services in competition with our services and may exacerbate the risks described in our public filings. These transactions may affect us adversely by, among other things, making it more difficult for us to obtain access to certain programming networks on nondiscriminatory and fair terms, or at all.

​

For further information see “Item 1A – Risk Factors – Competition and Economic Risks – We face intense and increasing competition from providers of video, broadband and/or wireless services, which may require us to further increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn.”

​

RETAIL WIRELESS

​

Business Strategy - Retail Wireless

​

We offer nationwide prepaid and postpaid retail wireless services to subscribers primarily under our Boost Mobile, Boost Infinite and Gen Mobile brands, as well as a competitive portfolio of wireless devices. We offer customers value by providing choice and flexibility in our Retail Wireless services. Prepaid wireless subscribers generally pay in advance for monthly access to wireless talk, text, and data services. Postpaid wireless subscribers are qualified to pay after receiving wireless talk, text, and data services.

​

Boost Infinite. In the fourth quarter of 2022, we launched Boost Infinite, a postpaid wireless service, to a limited number of customers who had signed up for early registration. During the first half of 2023, we anticipate launching our nationwide expansion of Boost Infinite.

​

We are currently operating our Retail Wireless business unit primarily as a MVNO as we continue to complete our 5G Network Deployment. As an MVNO, today we depend on T-Mobile and AT&T to provide us with network services under the MNSA and the NSA, respectively. Under the NSA, we expect AT&T will become our primary network services provider.

​

Our Retail Wireless business strategy is to expand our current target segments and profitably grow our subscriber base by acquiring and retaining high quality subscribers while we complete our 5G Network Deployment. We intend to acquire high quality subscribers by providing competitive offers, choice and outstanding customer service that better meet those subscribers’ needs and budget.

​

Products and Services - Retail Wireless

​

Currently, we offer Wireless subscribers competitive consumer plans with no annual service contracts and monthly service plans including high-speed data and unlimited talk and text. We also offer a variety of value-added services, including device payment and protection plans.

​

Distribution Channels - Retail Wireless

​

We operate in the consumer market in the United States and use, among other things, print, radio, television and Internet media, on a local and national basis to motivate potential subscribers to contact us, visit our websites or contact independent third party retailers.

​

We have both an indirect sales channel, which includes third-party owned retail stores and big box stores, and a direct sales channel, which services customers online. Through the indirect sales channel, we use direct distribution partners to facilitate product delivery to the third-party retailers. We currently market and distribute our products and services indirectly through third-party owned Boost-branded stores, multi-branded stores, national retail stores (such as Target, Best Buy, and Walmart stores) and other stores (such as convenience and grocery stores).

​

We have relationships with most large manufacturers of wireless devices. We can incur significant upfront costs to subsidize wireless devices offered under promotional pricing to consumers.

​

Table of Contents

​

Competition - Retail Wireless

​

The Boost Mobile and Gen Mobile brands operate within the prepaid wireless industry segment and the Boost Infinite brand operates within the postpaid wireless industry segment. Retail wireless is a mature market with moderate year over year organic growth. Competitors include providers who offer similar communication services, such as talk, text and data. Competitive factors within the wireless communications services industry include, but are not limited to, pricing, market saturation, service and product offerings, customer experience and service quality. We compete with a number of national wireless carriers, including Verizon Communications, Inc. (“Verizon”), AT&T, Inc. (“AT&T”) and T-Mobile US, Inc. (“T-Mobile”), all of which are significantly larger than us, serve a significant percentage of all wireless subscribers and enjoy scale advantages compared to us. Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are currently the only nationwide Mobile Network Operators (“MNOs”) in the United States.

​

Primary competitors to our Retail Wireless business unit include, but are not limited to, Metro PCS (owned by T-Mobile), Cricket Wireless (owned by AT&T), Visible (owned by Verizon), Tracfone Wireless (owned by Verizon), and other MVNOs such as Consumer Cellular, Mint Mobile and Xfinity Mobile.

​

5G NETWORK DEPLOYMENT

​

We have invested a total of over $30 billion in Wireless spectrum licenses, which includes over $10 billion in noncontrolling investments in certain entities. The $30 billion of investments related to Wireless spectrum licenses does not include $7 billion of capitalized interest related to the carrying value of such licenses.  See Note 2 and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

DISH Network Spectrum

​

We have invested a total of over $30 billion to acquire certain Wireless spectrum licenses. These Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to certain interim and final build-out requirements, as well as certain renewal requirements. We plan to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of the nation’s first cloud-native, Open Radio Access Network (“O-RAN”) based 5G network (our “5G Network Deployment”). We have committed to deploy a facilities-based 5G broadband network capable of serving increasingly larger portions of the U.S. population at different deadlines, including 20% of the U.S. population by June 2022 and 70% of the U.S. population by June 2023.  If by June 2023, we are offering 5G broadband service to at least 50% of the U.S. population but less than 70% of the U.S. population, the 70% June 2023 deadline will be extended automatically to June 2025; however, as a result, we may, under certain circumstances, potentially be subject to certain penalties. On June 14, 2022, we announced we had successfully reached our 20% population coverage requirement. We are currently focused on our progression towards offering 5G broadband service to at least 70% of the U.S. population with a minimum of 15,000 5G sites. As of December 31, 2022, we had started construction on over 15,000 5G sites, which, if completed, are capable of providing broadband coverage to over 60% of the U.S. population. Construction starts are continuing at a rate of approximately 1,000 5G sites per month. 

​

We may need to make significant additional investments or partner with others to, among other things, complete our 5G Network Deployment and further commercialize, build-out and integrate these licenses and related assets and any additional acquired licenses and related assets, as well as to comply with regulations applicable to such licenses. Depending on the nature and scope of such activities, any such investments or partnerships could vary significantly. In addition, as we complete our initial 5G Network Deployment, we have and will continue to incur significant additional expenses related to, among other things, research and development, wireless testing and ongoing upgrades to the wireless network infrastructure, software and third party integration. We may also determine that additional wireless spectrum licenses may be required to complete our 5G Network Deployment and to compete effectively with other wireless service providers. See Note 2 and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

DISH Network Noncontrolling Investments in the Northstar Entities and the SNR Entities Related to AWS-3 Wireless Spectrum Licenses

​

During 2015, through our wholly-owned subsidiaries American AWS-3 Wireless II L.L.C. (“American II”) and American AWS-3 Wireless III L.L.C. (“American III”), we initially made over $10 billion in certain noncontrolling investments in Northstar Spectrum, LLC (“Northstar Spectrum”), the parent company of Northstar Wireless, L.L.C. (“Northstar Wireless,” and collectively with Northstar Spectrum, the “Northstar Entities”), and in SNR Wireless HoldCo, LLC (“SNR HoldCo”), the parent company of SNR Wireless LicenseCo, LLC (“SNR Wireless,” and collectively with SNR HoldCo, the “SNR Entities”), respectively. On October 27, 2015, the FCC granted certain AWS-3 wireless spectrum licenses (the “AWS-3 Licenses”) to Northstar Wireless and to SNR Wireless, respectively, which are recorded in “FCC authorizations” on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

​

Under the applicable accounting guidance in Accounting Standards Codification 810, Consolidation (“ASC 810”), Northstar Spectrum and SNR HoldCo are considered variable interest entities (“VIEs”) and, based on the characteristics of the structure of these entities and in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance, we consolidate these entities into our financial statements. See Note 2 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

The AWS-3 Licenses are subject to certain interim and final build-out requirements, as well as certain renewal requirements. The Northstar Entities and/or the SNR Entities may need to raise significant additional capital in the future, which may be obtained from third party sources or from us, so that the Northstar Entities and the SNR Entities may commercialize, build-out and integrate these AWS-3 Licenses, comply with regulations applicable to such AWS-3 Licenses, and make any potential Northstar Re-Auction Payment and SNR Re-Auction Payment for the AWS-3 licenses retained by the FCC. Depending upon the nature and scope of such commercialization, build-out and integration efforts, regulatory compliance, and potential Northstar Re-Auction Payment and SNR Re-Auction Payment, any loans, equity contributions or partnerships could vary significantly.

​

There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain a profitable return on our noncontrolling investments in the Northstar Entities and the SNR Entities. See Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

NEW BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES

​

From time to time we evaluate opportunities for strategic investments or acquisitions that may complement our current services and products, enhance our technical capabilities, improve or sustain our competitive position, or otherwise offer growth opportunities.

​

GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS

​

Our operations, particularly our Pay-TV operations, our Wireless services business and our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to significant government regulation and oversight, primarily by the FCC and, to a certain extent, by Congress, other federal agencies and international, foreign, state and local authorities. Depending on the circumstances, noncompliance with legislation or regulations promulgated by these authorities could result in limitations on, or the suspension or revocation of, our licenses or registrations, the termination or loss of contracts or the imposition of contractual damages, civil fines or criminal penalties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. These governmental authorities could also adopt regulations or take other actions that would adversely affect our business prospects.

​

Furthermore, any government policy changes, which may be substantial, could increase regulatory uncertainty. The adoption or modification of laws or regulations relating to video programming distribution, satellite services, wireless telecommunications, broadband, the Internet or other areas of our business could limit or otherwise adversely affect the manner in which we currently conduct our business. In addition, the manner in which regulations or legislation in these areas may be interpreted and enforced cannot be precisely determined, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

As detailed below, our Pay-TV operations are subject to FCC jurisdiction, including, without limitation, the FCC’s rules for satellite licensing, placement of satellites, interference avoidance, spectrum sharing, and coordination with other satellite systems. We must comply with FCC rules promulgating public interest requirements for DBS providers, security functionality for video providers, technology standards, media ownership, carriage of cable programming, and net neutrality. In addition, the Copyright Act of 1976 (the “Copyright Act”) and the Communications Act of 1934 (the “Communications Act”) govern our carriage of broadcast signals.

​

Wireless services and our Wireless spectrum licenses are subject to regulation by the FCC and, depending on the jurisdiction, other federal, state and local, as well as international, governmental authorities and regulatory agencies, including, among other things, regulations governing the licensing, construction, operation, sale and interconnection arrangements of wireless telecommunications systems. In particular, the FCC imposes significant regulation on licensees of wireless spectrum with respect to how radio spectrum is used by licensees, the nature of the services that licensees may offer and how the services may be offered, and resolution of issues of interference between spectrum bands. The FCC grants wireless licenses for terms of generally 10-12 years that are subject to renewal or revocation. There can be no assurances that our Wireless spectrum licenses will be renewed. Failure to comply with FCC build-out requirements in a given license area may result in acceleration of other build-out requirements or in the modification, cancellation, or non-renewal of licenses. For further information related to our licenses and build-out requirements related to our Wireless spectrum licenses see Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Our Pay-TV and Wireless operations are subject to federal, state, and international laws relating to the collection, use, retention, security, and transfer of personally identifiable information. The regulatory framework for privacy and security issues worldwide is rapidly evolving and as a result implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. Any failure by us, our suppliers, or other parties with whom we do business to comply with these standards and practices or with other federal, state, or international regulations could result in proceedings against us by governmental entities or others. In many jurisdictions, enforcement actions and consequences for noncompliance are rising. In the United States, these include enforcement actions in response to rules and regulations promulgated under the authority of federal agencies and state attorneys general and legislatures and consumer protection agencies. 

​

The following summary of regulatory developments and legislation in the United States is not intended to describe all present and proposed government regulation and legislation affecting the video programming distribution, satellite services, wireless telecommunications, broadband, and Internet industries. Government regulations that are currently the subject of judicial or administrative proceedings, legislative hearings or administrative proposals could change these industries to varying degrees. We cannot predict either the outcome of such proceedings or any potential impact they might have on these industries or on our operations.

​

FCC Regulations Governing our Pay-TV Operations

​

FCC Jurisdiction over our DBS Operations. The Communications Act gives the FCC broad authority to regulate the operations of satellite companies. Specifically, the Communications Act gives the FCC regulatory jurisdiction over the following areas relating to communications satellite operations:

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

To obtain FCC satellite licenses and authorizations, satellite operators must satisfy strict legal, technical and financial qualification requirements. Once issued, these licenses and authorizations are subject to a number of conditions including, among other things, satisfaction of ongoing due diligence obligations, construction milestones, and various reporting requirements. Necessary federal approval of these applications may not be granted, may not be granted in a timely manner, or may be granted subject to conditions that may be cumbersome.

​

Overview of our DBS Satellites, Authorizations and Contractual Rights for Satellite Capacity. Our satellites are located in orbital positions, or slots, that are designated by their western longitude. An orbital position describes both a physical location and an assignment of spectrum in the applicable frequency band. Each DBS orbital position has 500 MHz of available Ku-band spectrum that is divided into 32 frequency channels. Several of our satellites also include spot-beam technology that enables us to increase the number of markets where we provide local channels, but reduces the number of video channels that could otherwise be offered across the entire United States.

​

The FCC has licensed us to operate a total of 82 DBS frequency channels at the following orbital locations:

​

​

In addition, we currently lease or have entered into agreements to lease capacity on satellites using the following spectrum at the following orbital locations:

​

​

We also have month-to-month FSS capacity available from EchoStar on an FSS satellite located at the 121 degree orbital location. As of December 31, 2022, we no longer lease this satellite.

​

Duration of our DBS Licenses. Generally speaking, all of our satellite licenses are subject to expiration unless renewed by the FCC. The term of each of our DBS licenses is ten years. Our licenses are currently set to expire at various times. In addition, at various times we have relied on special temporary authorizations for our operations. A special temporary authorization is granted for a period of only 180 days or less, subject again to possible renewal by the FCC. From time to time, we apply for authorizations to use new satellites at our existing orbital locations. Generally, our FCC licenses and special temporary authorizations have been renewed, and our applications for new satellites at our existing orbital locations have been approved, by the FCC on a routine basis, but there can be no assurance that the FCC will continue to do so.

​

Opposition and Other Risks to our Licenses. Several third parties have opposed in the past, and we expect these or other parties to oppose in the future, some of our FCC satellite authorizations and pending and future requests to the FCC for extensions, modifications, waivers and approvals of our licenses. In addition, we must comply with numerous FCC reporting, filing and other requirements in connection with our satellite authorizations. Consequently, it is possible the FCC could revoke, terminate, condition or decline to extend or renew certain of our authorizations or licenses.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

4.5 Degree Spacing “Tweener” Satellites. The FCC has proposed to allow so-called “tweener” DBS operations – DBS satellites operating at orbital locations 4.5 degrees (half of the usual nine degrees) away from other DBS satellites. The FCC granted authorizations to EchoStar and Spectrum Five for tweener satellites at the 86.5 and 114.5 degree orbital locations, respectively. These authorizations were subsequently cancelled because the FCC determined that the licensees did not meet certain milestone requirements. Tweener operations close to our licensed orbital locations could cause harmful interference to our service and constrain our future operations. In September 2019, the FCC completed its 2006 rulemaking on the operating and service rules for tweener satellites. As a result, among other things, the FCC will now accept new applications for tweener slots, and the applicant must show that either no other U.S. DBS operations would be affected or that it has successfully coordinated with affected parties. We cannot predict whether any parties will file for tweener slots and whether we will face interference or other operational constraints as a result.

​

Interference from Other Services Sharing Satellite Spectrum. Non-geostationary orbit (“NGSO”) FSS satellites are permitted to operate on a co-primary basis in the same frequency band as our DBS and geostationary orbit (“GSO”) FSS satellites. The FCC has also authorized the use of multichannel video distribution and data service (“MVDDS”) licenses in the DBS band. MVDDS licenses were auctioned in 2004. MVDDS systems have been commercially deployed in a few markets. We have MVDDS licenses in 82 out of 214 geographical license areas, including Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and several other major metropolitan areas. Despite regulatory provisions intended to protect DBS and FSS operations from harmful interference, there can be no assurance that operations by other satellites or terrestrial communication services in the DBS and FSS bands will not interfere with our DBS and FSS operations and adversely affect our business. Space Exploration Corporation (“Spacex”), OneWeb LLC (“OneWeb”) and others have obtained FCC authority to launch and operate, or provide service from, NGSO satellite systems using a variety of spectrum bands, including the 12.2-12.7 GHz band, which we use for our DBS service, and where we also have certain licenses to provide one-way terrestrial MVDDS service. These systems are in the early stages of launch and deployment. If fully deployed by Spacex, OneWeb and others, there will be tens of thousands of NGSO satellites in orbit sharing our spectrum. There can be no assurance that they will not interfere with our DBS operations and adversely affect our business or that they will not hinder our ability to provide MVDDS service.

​

Satellite Competition from Additional Slots and Interference. DirecTV has obtained FCC authority to provide service to the United States from a Canadian DBS orbital slot, and we have obtained authority to provide service to the United States from a Canadian DBS orbital slot. The possibility that the FCC will allow service to the United States from additional foreign slots may permit additional competition against us from other satellite providers. It may also provide a means by which to increase our available satellite capacity in the United States. In addition, a number of administrations, such as Great Britain and the Netherlands, have requested authority to add orbital locations serving the United States close to our licensed slots. Such operations could cause harmful interference to our satellites and constrain our future operations.

​

Public Interest Requirements. The FCC imposes certain public interest obligations on our DBS licenses. These obligations require us to set aside four percent of our channel capacity exclusively for noncommercial programming for which we must charge programmers below-cost rates and for which we may not impose additional charges on subscribers. The Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010 (“STELA”) required the FCC to decrease this set-aside to 3.5 percent for satellite carriers who provide retransmission of state public affairs networks in 15 states and are otherwise qualified. The FCC, however, has not yet determined whether we qualify for this decrease in set-aside. The obligation to provide noncommercial programming may displace programming for which we could earn commercial rates and could adversely affect our financial results. We cannot be sure that, if the FCC were to review our methodology for processing public interest carriage requests, computing the channel capacity we must set aside or determining the rates that we charge public interest programmers, it would find them in compliance with the public interest requirements.

​

Retransmission Consent. The Copyright Act generally gives satellite companies a statutory copyright license to retransmit local broadcast channels by satellite back into the market from which they originated, subject to obtaining the retransmission consent of local network stations that do not elect “must carry” status, as required by the Communications Act. If we fail to reach retransmission consent agreements with such broadcasters, we cannot carry their signals. This could have an adverse effect on our strategy to compete with cable and other satellite companies that provide local signals. While we have been able to reach retransmission consent agreements with most of these local network stations, from time to time, there are stations with which we have not been able to reach an agreement. We cannot be sure that we will secure these agreements or that we will secure new agreements on acceptable terms, or at all, upon the expiration of our current retransmission consent agreements, some of which are short-term.

​

Table of Contents

​

In recent years, the rates we are charged for retransmitting local channels have been increasing substantially and may exceed our ability to increase our prices to our customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The broadcast stations’ demands for higher rates have resulted in more frequent negotiating impasses and programming interruptions. During these programming interruptions, our subscribers in the affected markets lack access to popular programming and may switch to another multichannel distributor that may be able to provide them with such programming. In addition, the national broadcasters have used their ownership of certain local broadcast stations to require us to carry additional cable programming in exchange for retransmission consent of their local broadcast stations. These requirements may place constraints on available capacity on our satellites for other programming.

​

The STELA Reauthorization Act of 2014 (“STELAR”) prohibits television stations from coordinating or engaging in joint retransmission consent negotiations with any other local television stations, unless the stations are “directly or indirectly under common de jure control,” expanding a previous FCC ruling prohibiting joint negotiations only among the top four stations in a market. In addition, STELAR prohibits a local television station from limiting an MVPD’s ability to carry other television signals that have been deemed by the FCC to be “significantly viewed” or to carry any other television signal the MVPD is otherwise entitled to carry under the Communications Act, unless such stations are “directly or indirectly under common de jure control” pursuant to FCC regulations. We cannot predict if these restrictions on broadcasters will result in more effective retransmission consent negotiations.

​

ATSC 3.0. In April 2016, the broadcast industry petitioned the FCC to authorize the use of the “Next Generation TV” broadcast television standard, ATSC 3.0.  In November 2017, the FCC authorized television broadcasters to deploy the ATSC 3.0 standard on a voluntary basis. We cannot predict the effect that supporting this new standard could have on equipment costs, carriage obligations or the retransmission consent process. 

​

Media Ownership Rules. Also in 2016, the broadcast industry petitioned the FCC to relax its media ownership rules, which, among other things, limit the number of commonly owned TV stations per market and restrict newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership and radio/TV cross-ownership. In November 2017, the FCC voted to: (i) eliminate the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule; (ii) eliminate the radio/television cross-ownership rule; (iii) relax the local television ownership rules to eliminate certain restrictions and modify others; and (iv) eliminate the attribution rule for television joint-sales agreements (collectively, the “2017 Order”). Additionally, in December 2017, the FCC initiated a rulemaking proceeding seeking comment on changes to the national television multiple-ownership rule, including changes that could relax or eliminate the current limits that prevent entities from owning or controlling television stations that, in the aggregate, reach more than 39 percent of the television households in the country.  If the FCC were to relax or eliminate some or all of the national television multiple-ownership rule, it could increase the negotiating leverage that broadcasters hold in retransmission consent negotiations. In December 2018, the FCC initiated a rulemaking proceeding to commence its periodic review of media ownership rules. We cannot predict whether the FCC will change any of its media ownership rules or the effect that any changes to the media ownership rules could have on our future retransmission consent negotiations. In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the 2017 Order. Pursuant to this decision in Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC, on December 20, 2019, the FCC amended its rules to reverse the 2017 Order and reinstate the rules as they existed prior to the 2017 Order. The FCC, though, petitioned for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States (the “Supreme Court”) to reverse the Third Circuit’s decision. On April 1, 2021, in FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project, the Supreme Court reversed the Third Circuit, finding that “the FCC’s analysis was reasonable and reasonably explained for purposes of the APA’s deferential arbitrary and capricious standard.” On June 4, 2021, the FCC released an Order reinstating the rule changes from the 2017 Order. On the same day, the FCC also asked for public comment to refresh the record in its 2018 quadrennial proceeding reviewing its media ownership rules in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. We cannot predict how the FCC may address media ownership issues going forward, either through the imposition of new rules or the relaxation of remaining ownership restrictions.

​

Digital HD Carry-One, Carry-All Requirement. To provide any full-power local broadcast signal in any market, we are required to retransmit all qualifying broadcast signals in that market (“carry-one, carry-all”), including the carriage of full-power broadcasters’ HD signals in markets in which we elect to provide local channels in HD. The carriage of additional HD signals on our DISH TV services could cause us to experience significant capacity constraints and prevent us from carrying additional popular national channels and/or carrying those national channels in HD.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

Distant Signals. Pursuant to STELA, we obtained a waiver of a court injunction that previously prevented us from retransmitting certain distant network signals under a statutory copyright license. Because of that waiver, we may provide distant network signals to eligible subscribers. To qualify for that waiver, we are required to provide local service in all 210 local markets in the United States on an ongoing basis. This condition poses a significant strain on our capacity. Moreover, we may lose that waiver if we are found to have failed to provide local service in any of the 210 local markets. If we lose the waiver, the injunction could be reinstated. Furthermore, depending on the severity of the failure, we may also be subject to other sanctions, which may include, among other things, damages.

​

Cable Act and Program Access. We purchase a large percentage of our programming from cable-affiliated programmers. Pursuant to the Cable Act, cable providers had been prohibited from entering into exclusive contracts with cable-affiliated programmers. On October 5, 2012, the FCC allowed this prohibition to expire. As a result of the expiration of this prohibition on exclusivity, we may be limited in our ability to obtain access on nondiscriminatory terms, or at all, to programming from programmers that are affiliated with cable system operators. In addition, any other changes in the Cable Act, and/or the FCC’s rules that implement the Cable Act, that currently limit the ability of cable-affiliated programmers to discriminate against competing businesses such as ours, could adversely affect our ability to acquire cable-affiliated programming at all or to acquire programming on nondiscriminatory terms. In addition, affiliates of certain cable providers have denied us access to sports programming that they supply to their cable systems terrestrially, rather than by satellite. The FCC has held that new denials of such service are unfair if they have the purpose or effect of significantly hindering us from providing programming to consumers. However, we cannot be sure that we can prevail in a complaint related to such programming and gain access to it. Our continuing failure to access such programming could materially and adversely affect our ability to compete in regions serviced by these cable providers.

​

Open Internet (also known as “Net Neutrality”). In 2015, the FCC adopted Open Internet rules, which applied to both fixed and mobile broadband access providers and prohibited them, among other things, from blocking or throttling traffic, from paid prioritization, and from unreasonably interfering with, or disadvantaging, consumers’ or content providers’ access to the Internet. In addition, because the FCC reclassified broadband access providers as common carriers, these providers were subject to the general common carrier requirements of reasonableness and nondiscrimination. The rules were affirmed by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. A number of broadband access providers and their associations have filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. In December 2017, the FCC reversed course and voted to reclassify broadband access providers as information service providers, instead of common carriers. The FCC also voted to eliminate the majority of the Open Internet rules, leaving only certain ISP transparency requirements in place. In October 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the FCC’s authority to eliminate certain Open Internet protections, while vacating the FCC’s attempt to preempt state or local Open Internet protections and remanding on three other issues. We cannot be certain whether the FCC will reinstate any Open Internet protections in the future, or whether it will make further attempts to preempt state or local authority to adopt Open Internet laws or regulations.

​

To the extent that network operators implement usage-based pricing, including, but not limited to, meaningful bandwidth caps, or otherwise try to monetize access to their networks by data providers, we could incur greater operating expenses and our Pay TV subscriber count could be negatively impacted. Furthermore, to the extent network operators create tiers of Internet access service and either charge us for or prohibit us from being available through these tiers, our Pay TV business could be negatively impacted. We cannot predict with any certainty the impact to our Pay TV business resulting from changes in how network operators handle and charge for access to data that travels across their networks.

​

Charter/Time Warner Cable. In May 2016, the FCC and the Department of Justice approved a merger transaction between Charter, Time Warner Cable, and Advance/Newhouse Partnership.  The FCC conditioned its approval on, among other things, Charter not imposing data caps or usage-based pricing for its residential broadband service and a requirement that Charter provide settlement-free interconnection.  These conditions last for seven years, with Charter having the option after four years to petition to shorten the term to five years.  It is uncertain how these conditions may be interpreted or enforced by the FCC; therefore, we cannot predict the practical effect of these conditions.  In addition, as these conditions are currently set to expire in May 2023, we will not be able to rely on these protections beyond that date. We cannot predict with any certainty the impact to our Pay TV business resulting from changes in how network operators handle and charge for access to data that travels across their networks

​

Table of Contents

​

​

Definition of MVPD. In December 2014, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the definition of an MVPD. Among other things, the FCC is considering whether the definition of an MVPD should apply to Internet-based streaming services, thus making such services subject to the same regulations as an MVPD. The FCC is also considering the appropriate treatment of purely Internet-based linear video programming services that cable operators and DBS providers offer in addition to their traditional video services. We cannot predict the timing or outcome of this rulemaking or other related rulemaking proceedings.

​

Federal Trade Commission. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and other federal agencies also have jurisdiction over some consumer protection and elimination and prevention of anticompetitive business practices.

​

State and Local Regulation

​

We are also regulated by state and local authorities. While the FCC has preempted many state and local regulations that impair the installation and use of towers for wireless operations and consumer satellite dishes, our business nonetheless may be subject to state and local regulation, including, among others, zoning regulations that affect the ability to install consumer satellite antennas or build out wireless telecommunications networks.

​

International Regulation

​

We are subject to regulation by the International Telecommunication Union (“ITU”). The orbital location and frequencies for certain of our satellites are subject to the frequency registration and coordination process of the ITU. The ITU Radio Regulations define the international rules, regulations, and rights for a satellite and associated earth stations to use specific radio frequencies at a specific orbital location. These rules, which include deadlines for the bringing of satellite networks into use, differ depending on the type of service to be provided and the frequencies to be used by the satellite. On our behalf, various countries have made and may in the future make additional filings for the frequency assignments at particular orbital locations that are used or to be used by our current satellite networks and potential future satellite networks we may build or acquire.

​

Our satellite services also must conform to the ITU service plans for Region 2 (which includes the United States). If any of our operations are not consistent with this plan, the ITU will only provide authorization on a non-interference basis pending successful modification of the plan or the agreement of all affected administrations to the non-conforming operations. Certain of our satellites are not presently entitled to any interference protection from other satellites that are in conformance with the plan. Accordingly, unless and until the ITU modifies its service plans to include the technical parameters of our non-conforming operations, our non-conforming satellites, along with those of other non-conforming satellite operators, must not cause harmful electrical interference with other assignments that are in conformance with the ITU service plans.

​

The ITU also endeavors to standardize frequency allocations globally, which has led it to work on standards for terrestrial services as well as satellite operations. Combined with the work of international industry-led standards bodies such as 3GPP, these efforts could have a significant effect on the development of our Wireless services.

​

Registration in the UN Registry of Space Objects

​

The United States and other jurisdictions in which we license satellites are parties to the United Nations (“UN”) Convention on the Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (“The UN Convention”). The UN Convention requires a satellite’s launching state to register the satellite as a space object with an UN Registry of Space Objects. The act of registration carries liability for the registering country in the event that the satellite causes third-party damage. Administrations may place certain requirements on satellite licensees in order to procure the necessary launch or operational authorizations that accompany registration of the satellite. In some jurisdictions, these authorizations are separate and distinct, with unique requirements, from the authorization to use a set of frequencies to provide satellite services. There is no guarantee that we will be able to procure such authorizations even if we already possess a frequency authorization.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

Export Control Regulation

​

The delivery of satellites and related technical information for purposes of launch by foreign launch service providers is subject to export control and prior approval requirements. We are required to obtain import and export licenses from the United States government to receive and deliver certain components of direct-to-home satellite television systems. In addition, the delivery of satellites and the supply of certain related ground control equipment, technical services and data, and satellite communication/control services to destinations outside the United States are subject to export control and prior approval requirements from the United States government (including prohibitions on the sharing of certain satellite-related goods and services with China). There are also instances where export control regulations could apply to our Wireless operations.

​

Regulations Governing our Wireless Operations

​

The FCC regulates many aspects of our Wireless operations. Generally, the FCC has jurisdiction over the construction, operation, acquisition and transfer of wireless communications systems. All wireless services require use of radio frequency spectrum, the assignment and distribution of which is subject to FCC oversight. The FCC can also determine what services can be offered and how they can be offered over certain frequency bands. For more information regarding our FCC Licenses, see discussion above and Note 15 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Additionally, the FCC and the Federal Aviation Administration regulate the siting, lighting and construction of transmitter towers and antennae. Tower siting and construction are also subject to, among other things, state and local zoning, as well as federal statutes regarding environmental and historic preservation. The future costs to comply with all relevant regulations are to some extent unknown and changes to regulations, or the applicability of regulations, could result in higher operating and capital expenses, or reduced revenues in the future. Furthermore, the FCC has also imposed certain specific mandates on wireless carriers, including, but not limited to, construction and geographic coverage requirements, technical operating standards, provision of enhanced 911 services, roaming obligations and requirements for wireless tower and antenna facilities.

​

The FTC and other federal agencies also have jurisdiction over some consumer protection and elimination and prevention of anticompetitive business practices with respect to the provision of non-common carrier services.

​

Meanwhile, our 5G Network Deployment will involve significant deployment of certain equipment and therefore increase the need for local permitting processes that allow for the placement of equipment on reasonable timelines and terms. While the Communications Act generally preempts state and local governments from regulating the entry of, or the rates charged by, wireless communications services providers, certain state and local governments regulate other terms and conditions of wireless service, including, but not limited to, billing, termination of service arrangements and the imposition of early termination fees, advertising, network outages, the use of devices while driving, zoning and land use. The Communications Act also does not prohibit states from regulating the other “terms and conditions” of wireless service. For example, some states attempt to regulate wireless customer billing matters and impose reporting requirements. Several states also have laws or regulations that address safety issues (e.g., use of wireless handsets while driving) and taxation matters. In addition, wireless tower and antenna facilities are often subject to state and local zoning and land use regulation, and securing approvals for new or modified facilities is often a lengthy and expensive process.

​

PATENTS AND OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

​

Many entities, including, but not limited to, some of our competitors, have or may in the future obtain patents and other intellectual property rights that cover or affect products or services that we offer or that we may offer in the future. In general, if a court determines that one or more of our products or services infringe intellectual property rights held by others, we may be required to cease developing or marketing those products or services, to obtain licenses from the holders of the intellectual property rights at a material cost, or to redesign those products or services in such a way as to avoid infringing any patent claims. If those intellectual property rights are held by a competitor, we may be unable to obtain the intellectual property rights at any price, which could adversely affect our competitive position.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

We may not be aware of all intellectual property rights that our products or services may potentially infringe. In addition, patent applications in the United States are confidential until the Patent and Trademark Office either publishes the application or issues a patent (whichever arises first) and, accordingly, our products may infringe claims contained in pending patent applications of which we are not aware. Further, the process of determining definitively whether a claim of infringement is valid often involves expensive and protracted litigation, even if we are ultimately successful on the merits.

​

We cannot estimate the extent to which we may be required in the future to obtain intellectual property licenses or the availability and cost of any such licenses. Those costs, and their impact on our results of operations, could be material. Damages in patent infringement cases can be substantial, and in certain circumstances can be trebled. To the extent that we are required to pay unanticipated royalties to third parties, these increased costs of doing business could negatively affect our liquidity and operating results. We are currently defending multiple patent infringement actions. We cannot be certain the courts will conclude these companies do not own the rights they claim, that our products do not infringe on these rights and/or that these rights are not valid. Furthermore, we cannot be certain that we would be able to obtain licenses from these persons on commercially reasonable terms or, if we were unable to obtain such licenses, that we would be able to redesign our products to avoid infringement.

​

ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS

​

We are subject to the requirements of federal, state, local and foreign environmental and occupational safety and health laws and regulations. These include, among others, laws regulating air emissions, water discharge and waste management. We attempt to maintain compliance with all such requirements. We do not expect capital or other expenditures for environmental compliance to be material in 2023 or 2024. Environmental requirements are complex, change frequently and have become more stringent over time. Accordingly, we cannot provide assurance that these requirements will not change or become more stringent in the future in a manner that could have a material adverse effect on our business.

​

SEGMENT REPORTING DATA AND GEOGRAPHIC AREA DATA

​

For segment reporting data and principal geographic area data for 2022, 2021 and 2020, see Note 16 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

HUMAN CAPITAL

​

We believe that our future success will depend to a significant extent upon the performance of Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman, and certain other executives. The loss of Mr. Ergen or of certain other key executives could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Although all of our executives have executed agreements with certain non-competition restrictions that apply if they leave us, we do not have employment agreements with any of them.

​

We believe that our Wireless business, including our ability to complete our 5G Network Deployment, is dependent on our ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate, and retain a team of highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry.  Our Wireless business will be adversely affected if we fail to effectively identify, hire, develop, motivate, and retain highly skilled personnel with knowledge of the wireless industry.

​

We had approximately 14,200 employees at December 31, 2022, most of whom were located in the United States.  We generally consider relations with our employees to be good.  Approximately 35 employees in one of our field offices have voted to have a union represent them in their employment relations with DISH Network.  In June of 2022, we signed a collective bargaining agreement with the union. The agreement is effective from February 21, 2022 to February 20, 2024. The current number of union employees at the site is 8.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

​

We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and accordingly file our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. As an electronic filer, our public filings are also maintained on the SEC’s Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that website is http://www.sec.gov.

​

WEBSITE ACCESS

​

Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act also may be accessed free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we have electronically filed such material with, or furnished it to, the SEC. The address of that website is https://ir.dish.com/.

​

We have adopted a written code of ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers and employees, including our principal executive officer and senior financial officers, in accordance with Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules of the SEC promulgated thereunder. Our code of ethics is available on our corporate website at https://ir.dish.com/. In the event that we make changes in, or provide waivers of, the provisions of this code of ethics that the SEC requires us to disclose, we intend to disclose these events on our website.

​

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

(furnished in accordance with Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K, pursuant to General Instruction G(3) of Form 10-K)

​

The following table and information below sets forth the name, age and position with DISH Network of each of our executive officers, the period during which each executive officer has served as such, and each executive officer’s business experience during the past five years:

​

​

Charles W. Ergen. Mr. Ergen is executive Chairman and has been Chairman of the Board of Directors of DISH Network since its formation and, during the past five years, has held executive officer and director positions with DISH Network. Mr. Ergen also serves as executive Chairman and Chairman of the Board of Directors of EchoStar. Mr. Ergen co-founded DISH Network with his future spouse, Cantey Ergen, and James DeFranco, in 1980.

​

W. Erik Carlson. Mr. Carlson has served as President and Chief Executive Officer since December 2017. Mr. Carlson has served as a member of the Board of Directors of DISH Network beginning December 31, 2021. Mr. Carlson is a DISH Network veteran of more than two decades, and has held numerous roles throughout the company. Most recently, Mr. Carlson served as President and Chief Operating Officer. In this role, Mr. Carlson oversaw the company’s day-to-day operations including Human Resources, Operations and Information Technology, Media Sales, Marketing, Programming, Product Management, Acquisition and Retention, and Finance and Accounting organizations. Prior to that, Mr. Carlson managed DISH Network’s In-Home Services, Customer Service Centers, Customer Billing, and Information Technology organizations, as well as Manufacturing, which consists of equipment retrieval and refurbishment operations. Mr. Carlson also served as Senior Vice President of Retail Services and Sales where he managed the company’s indirect sales operations.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

Thomas A. Cullen. Mr. Cullen has served as Executive Vice President, Corporate Development for DISH Network since July 2011. Mr. Cullen previously served as our Executive Vice President, Sales, Marketing and Programming from April 2009 to July 2011 and as our Executive Vice President, Corporate Development from December 2006 to April 2009. Before joining DISH Network, Mr. Cullen held various executive positions in the telecommunications, cable and wireless industries.

​

Narayan R. Iyengar. Mr. Iyengar has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since March 2022 and is responsible for all operational aspects of DISH Network’s consumer businesses, including, Customer Experience Operations, In-Home Services, Billing and Credit, Manufacturing and Distribution, and overall Digital Transformation. Since November 2021, Mr. Iyengar has served on the board of directors, audit committee and executive compensation committee of Build-A-Bear Workshop, Inc. Prior to DISH Network, Mr. Iyengar served as Senior Vice President, Digital and E-Commerce at Albertsons Companies Inc. from 2017 to 2020. Prior to that, from 2013 to 2017, he served as Vice President, E-Commerce and Digital Analytics of The Walt Disney Company.

​

Timothy A. Messner. Mr. Messner has served as Executive Vice President, General Counsel since November 2017 and is responsible for all legal affairs for DISH Network. Since joining DISH Network in August 2004, Mr. Messner has held various positions of increasing responsibility in DISH Network’s legal department. Most recently, Mr. Messner served as Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel for DISH Network.

​

Paul W. Orban. Mr. Orban has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since July 2019 and is responsible for all aspects of DISH Network’s finance, accounting, tax, treasury, internal audit and supply chain departments.  Mr. Orban served as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer from December 2015 to July 2019, Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller from September 2006 to December 2015 and as Vice President and Corporate Controller from September 2003 to September 2006. He also served as EchoStar’s Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller from 2008 to 2012 pursuant to a management services agreement between DISH Network and EchoStar. Since joining DISH Network in 1996, Mr. Orban has held various other positions of increasing responsibility in our accounting department. Prior to DISH Network, Mr. Orban was an auditor with Arthur Andersen LLP.

​

David A. Scott. Mr. Scott has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer of DISH Network since February 2018 and is responsible for the recruiting, benefits administration, compensation, and leadership and organizational development for DISH Network.  Prior to DISH Network, Mr. Scott held various positions at Walmart Inc. from 1997 to 2018, including, among others, Senior Vice President, Talent and Organizational Effectiveness from 2016 to 2018, Senior Vice President, Human Resources from 2014 to 2016, and Vice President, Human Resources from 2011 to 2014.

​

John W. Swieringa. Mr. Swieringa has served as President and Chief Operating Officer of DISH Network’s Wireless business segment since January 2022 and is responsible for all operational aspects of DISH Network’s Wireless business segment. Mr. Swieringa previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of DISH Network since December 2017 and as Group President, Retail Wireless since July 2020 and has had responsibility for all aspects of DISH Network’s Retail Wireless business unit. Mr. Swieringa previously served as Executive Vice President, Operations from December 2015 to December 2017, as Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer from March 2014 to December 2015 and as Vice President of Information Technology Customer Applications from March 2010 to March 2014.  Mr. Swieringa joined DISH Network in December 2007 serving in our finance department. 

​

There are no arrangements or understandings between any executive officer and any other person pursuant to which any executive officer was selected as such. Pursuant to the Bylaws of DISH Network, executive officers serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

Item 1A. RISK FACTORS

​

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. We may face other risks described from time to time in periodic and current reports we file with the SEC. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

​

Competition and Economic Risks

​

We face intense and increasing competition from providers of video, broadband and/or wireless services, which may require us to further increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn.

​

Our Pay-TV business faces substantial competition from established pay-TV providers and broadband service providers and increasing competition from companies providing/facilitating the delivery of video content via the Internet to computers, televisions, and other streaming and mobile devices, including, but not limited to, wireless service providers. In recent years, the traditional pay-TV industry has matured, and industry consolidation and convergence have created competitors with greater scale and multiple product/service offerings. Some of these services charge nominal or no fees for access to their content, which could adversely affect demand for our Pay-TV services. Moreover, new technologies have been, and will likely continue to be, developed that further increase the number of competitors we face with respect to video services, including, but not limited to, competition from piracy-based video offerings. These developments, among others, have contributed to intense and increasing competition, which we expect to continue.

​

We face increasing competition from content providers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet. These content providers and other companies, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunication companies, are rapidly increasing their Internet-based video offerings. See “Item 1. Business – Overview – Competition” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Trends in our Pay-TV Segment” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

Mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and alliances among cable television providers, telecommunications companies, programming providers and others may result in, among other things, greater scale and financial leverage and increase the availability of offerings from providers capable of bundling video, broadband and/or wireless services in competition with our services, and may exacerbate the risks described herein. Such providers may be able to, among other things, utilize their increased leverage over third-party content owners and programmers to withhold online rights from us and reduce the price they pay for programming at the expense of other MVPDs, including us; thwart our ability to compete in the wireless market, by, among other things, refusing to enter into data roaming agreements with us; underutilize key orbital spectrum resources that could be more efficiently used by us; foreclose or degrade our online video offerings at various points in the broadband pipe; and impose data caps on consumers who access our online video offerings. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Trends in our Pay-TV Segment – Programming” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.

​

We believe that the availability and extent of programming, including, but not limited to, unique programming services such as foreign language, sports programming and original content, and other value-added services such as access to video via mobile devices, continue to be significant factors in consumers’ choice among pay-TV providers. Other pay-TV providers may have more successfully marketed and promoted their programming packages and value-added services and may also be better equipped and have greater resources to increase their programming offerings and value-added services to respond to increasing consumer demand. We may be required to make substantial additional investments in infrastructure to respond to competitive pressure to deliver enhanced programming and other value-added services, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to compete effectively with offerings from other pay-TV providers.

​

Table of Contents

​

Furthermore, this increasingly competitive environment may require us to increase subscriber acquisition and retention spending or accept lower subscriber activations and higher subscriber churn.  Increasingly, we must seek to attract a greater proportion of new subscribers from our competitors’ existing subscriber bases rather than from first-time purchasers of pay-TV services. In addition, because other pay-TV providers may be seeking to attract a greater proportion of their new subscribers from our existing subscriber base, we may be required to increase retention spending and/or provide greater discounts or credits to acquire and retain subscribers who may spend less on our services. Our SLING TV subscribers on average purchase lower-priced programming services than do DISH TV subscribers. Accordingly, an increase in SLING TV subscribers has a negative impact on our Pay-TV average monthly revenue per subscriber (“Pay-TV ARPU”). If our Pay-TV ARPU decreases or does not increase commensurate with increases in programming or other costs, our margins may be reduced and the long-term value of a subscriber would then decrease and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

In addition, as a result of this increased competitive environment and the maturation of the pay-TV industry, future growth opportunities of our DISH TV business may be limited and our margins may be reduced, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations continue to be negatively impacted by stricter subscriber acquisition policies (including a focus on attaining higher quality subscribers) and increased competitive pressures, including, but not limited to, aggressive marketing, more aggressive retention efforts, bundled discount offers combining broadband, video and/or wireless services and other discounted promotional offers. In addition, we face increased competitive pressures from content providers and other companies who distribute video directly to consumers over the Internet. These content providers and other companies, as well as traditional satellite television providers, cable companies and large telecommunication companies, are rapidly increasing their Internet-based video offerings. There can be no assurance that our gross new DISH TV subscriber activations, net DISH TV subscriber additions, and DISH TV churn rate will not continue to be negatively impacted and that the pace of such negative impact will not accelerate. In the event that our DISH TV subscriber base continues to decline, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

Changing consumer behavior and new technologies in our Pay-TV business may reduce our subscriber activations and may cause our subscribers to purchase fewer services from us or to cancel our services altogether, resulting in less revenue to us.

​

New technologies, products and services are driving rapid changes in consumer behavior as consumers seek more control over when, where and how they consume content and access communications services. In particular, through technological advancements and with the large increase in the number of consumers with broadband service, a significant amount of video content has become available through online content providers for users to stream and view on their personal computers, televisions, phones, tablets, videogame consoles and other devices, in some cases without a fee required to access the content. While our subscribers can use their traditional video subscription to access mobile programming, an increasing number of subscribers are also using mobile devices as the sole means of viewing video, and an increasing number of non-traditional video providers is developing content and technologies to satisfy that demand. For example, these technological advancements, changes in consumer behavior, and the increasing number of choices available to consumers regarding the means by which consumers obtain video content may cause DISH TV subscribers to disconnect our services (“cord cutting”), downgrade to smaller, less expensive programming packages (“cord shaving”) or elect to purchase through online content providers a certain portion of the services that they would have historically purchased from us. These technological advancements and changes in consumer behavior and/or our failure to effectively anticipate or adapt to such changes, could reduce our gross new Pay-TV subscriber activations and increase our subscriber churn rate and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

New technologies could also create new competitors for us. For instance, we face increasing consumer demand for the delivery of digital video services via the Internet. We expect to continue to face increased competition from companies who use the Internet to deliver digital video services as the speed and quality of broadband and wireless networks continue to improve.

​

Table of Contents

​

​

We face certain risks competing in the wireless services industry and operating a facilities-based wireless services business.

​

As a result of the Boost Mobile, Ting Mobile and Republic Wireless acquisitions, among others, we have entered the retail wireless business. We have made substantial investments to acquire certain wireless spectrum licenses. We plan to commercialize our Wireless spectrum licenses through the completion of our 5G Network Deployment. A Wireless services business presents certain risks. Any of the following risks, among others, may have a material adverse effect on our future business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

​