APPENDIX a 1. Bell Atlantic Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. Cal Wireless Systems, Inc. CNBC, America's Talking and Canal De N

Home , BellSouth, Cablevision (Canada), Channel America, Viewers Choice

APPENDIX A

List of Colilmenten

Comments

1. Bell Atlantic 2. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. 3. CAl Wireless Systems, Inc. 4. CNBC, America's Talking and Canal de Noticias 5. DIRECTV, Inc. 6. ESPN, Inc. 7. General Instrument Corporation 8. Group W Satellite Communications 9. GTE Service Corporation 10. Heartland Wueless Communications, Inc. 11 . Home Box Office 12. James Cable Partners. L.P. 13. Liberty Cable Company, Inc 14. Lifetime Television 15. METS Fans UDitcd/VqiDia Consumers for Cable Choice·aDd Fairfax County Citi.ze:Ds For Cable Competition 16. Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. 17. National Cable Television Association. Inc. 18. National Cable Television Cooperative, Inc. 19. National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative 20. National Telephone Cooperative Association 21. NYNEX Telephone Companies 22. OpTel, Inc. 23. Pay-Per·View Network, IDe. dlbla Viewer's Choice 24. Primestar ·partDers L.P. 25. PrimeTUDe24 26. Satellite BmadcastinaiDd Communications Association of America 27. Satellite Receivers, Ltd. 28. SBC CommUDicatioas, Inc. 29. Time Wamer Cable 30. Vermont Wueless Cooperative 31. Viacom Inc. 32. Video Dialtone Association 33. Wireless Cable Association International, Inc.

2159 Reply Comments

1. BeUSouth Telecommunications, Inc. 2. Cablevision Systems Corporation 3. Comcast Cable Communication, Inc. 4. DIRECTV, Inc. 5. ESPN, Inc. 6. GToup W Satellite Communications 7. GTE Service Corporation 8. Home Box Office 9. James Cable Partners, L.P. 10. Liberty Cable Company, Inc 11. Lifetime Television 12. National Cable Television Association, Inc. 13. National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative 14. Netlink USA 15. Next Level Communications 16. OpTel, Inc. 17. Pacific Bell and Pacific Telesis Video Services 18. Primestar Partners L.P. 19. Ridgebury Township, Pennsylvania, and the PcsmsylvaniaState Association of Township Supervisors · 20. Scripps Howard Cable TV Company 21. Small Cable BusiDess Association 22. State of Hawaii 23. Supasw Satellite Entataimnent 24. Tele-Communications, Inc. 25. Time Warner Cable 26. Turner Home Satellite, Inc. 27. United States Satellite Broadcasting Company, Inc. 28. ValueVision lnt.emational, Inc. 29. Viacom lqc. 30. Video DialtoDe Association 31. WU"elesa Cable Association International, Inc.

MisceUanequ !lllpp

1. Southwest Missouri Cable TV, Inc. (letter 7/31195)

2160 APPENDIXB

TABLE 1 Cable Television Industry Growth: 1989 • 1994 (in millions)

U.S. Television Homes Passed Basic Cable Households ("'TH") ("Hr) . subscribers c· suhs·> Chalp Chlnp TV ChlftF National u.s Yar·Ead Year·Eml From Yar·End From Households From Slllnlion Penetration Yut Subscribma TOCII Previous Tocal Previous TOCII Previous (HPITH) (Subs/HP) Yar Ye. Yar (SubsfTH)

1919 92.1 1.9% 12.1 7.3% 49.3 7.9% 19.9% S3.S% S9 . s ~. 1990 93.1 l.l% 16 3.9% 51 .7 4.9% 92.4% S5.S% 60.w. 1991 92.1 (-) -1.1% au 2.1% 53.4 3.3% 96.0% SI.O% 60 .4~. 1992 93.1 l.l% 19.7 1.5% 55.l 3.4% 96.3% 59.3% 61.S% 1993 94.l 1.2% 9U 1.0% 57.l 3.6% 96.2% 60.7% 63.1% 1994 9S.A 1.3% 91.6 1.1% 59.7 4.A% 96.0% 62.6% 65.2%

(•) Revised pe:necration ficure based on 1990 Census Sources: ·U.S. Television Households· A.C. NielscD Co. IS of JIDUir)' ~tbe foUowiD& year. Taken from Veronis. Suhler • As.tociMel, Ho.a Ptm«l by Cabk t11td 1~ of ~011, 1be VercaiJ. Suhler & Associates CommlllliCIIioas IDdulay Farecat, July l99S, a 14S. • Homes Paued • PllllK.Ipa Assoc., Inc., HUIOI'JI of Cabk t11td Pay-TY Sllbscrih.n t11td ~. Cable TV IDvestor, JUDe 30, 199S, aS. ·Basic Cable Subscribers- PluJ K.lpa Assoc.. IDe .. HistOI')I ofCable t11td Pay-TY Sllbscrlben and Rewnues, Cable TV IDvestor, Ju.·30, 199S, • S. TABLE% Premi1llll Cable Services: 1993 • 1994 (in milliou)

...... CibieS.W. PremiaiD Uaia Sablcillas Y•-&d a..pFrom Y•-EDd C.. From TOIII Prmoul Ye. TOCII PrmousY•

1919 23.6 s.&% 41.1 5.9% 1990 23.9 1.3% 41.5 1.0% 1991 l4 0.4% 39.9 -3.9% 1992 l4.7 2.9% 40.7 2.0% 1993 2U 6.9% 41.S 2.0% 1994 21.1 6.4% 4S 1.4%

Source: • Plul KlpD AllocUas, IDe., HistOI'JI ofCoble t11td Pay-TY Sllbsct-IWJ t11td ~.Cable TV lnvt110r, Juae 30, l99S, a S.

2161 TABLE3 Channel Capac:ity of C-able Systems: 1993 - 1994

1993• 1994• Number of Pm:cnt of Number of Pm:cnt of S)'S11:mS Syso:ms Sysrems Systems

154 Uld over 1,306 l:J.I% 1,435 14J'Yo Y.'r/ o 30 tD 53 6,364 64.oen 6,376 63.7'1. 0.2,... 20 tD 29 1,197 12.% 1,167 11.7'1. ·2.5% 13 tD 19 364 3.7"1. 356 3.6% ·:!.2% 6 ID 12 691 1.0'Y. 653 6.S% -6.3,... 5 or less 22 0.2% 17 0.2% ·22.7% Not available 1,210 1.212 Total 11,160 11.216

Sys~C~DS wid! CipCides of 30 7,670 77.1% 7,111 71.1% 1.14,... or more dlllmds Sys~C~DS wilb C411*11ies of ·3.12% l,liO 22.9% 2,193 21.9% feM:r diiD 30 c:hiiiDdl

• Figures are as ofNovember 1, 1993 md Oct.obcr 1, 1994. Sources: - 1993 -Warren Pub1ishiD&. IDe., Cht:lnlw/ CiJ:poclty of Existing Cabl• Sptau, Television & Cable FICtbook: Cable Volume No. 62. 1994 Edition. at F-3. - 1994 - Wam:a Publilbiq. IDe., Cht:lnlw/ O:lp«Jty ofB;d.sting Cllbl. ~. Television & Cable Faccbook: Cable Volume No. 63, 1995 Edidoa, at 1·77. TABLE.C Clwmd Capacity for Sabsaiben: 1993 - 1994 (iD miDiou)

Subsc:ribasIM• Pcrcat or II Subscribers1994' Ptrr:au or I L:1 II Subscribers Sublcribcrs 1 )4 lnCI over mYt Ja .•~ ~ .IT.l 41.3~ IU. I"• 30 1D S3 31.71 51.2% 3o.7S S.U% ·3.0% 201029 1.41 2.1% 1.37 2.5% •7.4% 13 10 19 .12 0.2% .11 0.2% -1.3% 610 12 - .26 0.5% .24 0.04% -7.7% sora.. .00 0.0% .00 0.0% 0.0% Noc ...... 64 .17 Tot~~ 55.12 56.36

. ;)~--~OI .W ortDOI'Cc::t..dl 53 77 S)'SiaDI willl If* i•ia of re- tllln 30 cUmcls ~-~-~--· ____7_ .:"_%__ ~11 ~-- _~.~______%_3 .·_,::___ 1 I ::: I

• Figures are as of November 1, 1993 and October 1, 1994. Sources: - 1993 - Warren Publishillg. IDe., Cltannel Capacity ofExisting Cable Systt!MS, Television 8t Cable Fadbook: Cable Volume No. 62, 1994 Edition. at F-3. - 1994 - Warren Publishing. Inc., Channel Capacity of Existing Cable Systelri.J, Television ct Cable Fac:tbook: Cable Volume No. 63, 199S Editioa, at I-77.

2162 TABLES Growth By Network Type: 1993 - 1994

1993 1994 Number of Pcn:eDt of Number of Pen:cnt of NctWOrta Netwotta NctWOrta NctWOrtcs c::J BasiCINo-CbarJc 10 79.21% 94 73.44% 11 . so-~ Premium 9 1.91% 20 15.63% 122.22% Pay Pet View 7 • 6.93% I 6.25% 14.29-/o Combinadon s ...9S% 6 4.69% 20.Go-/o ._lf_OCII____ _,I 1 101 1 1 121

Source: -National Cable Television Association, National Cable Yideo Networlu By~ of Service: 1976- 1994, Cable Television Developments, Spring 1995, at 7. ·

TABLE6 Cable IDdustry Revenue ud Cuh Flow: 1m - 1994

lWl lWJ ~~ %QIIIp %Qaap %0\qc Yar- Yar- Yaw- Frota Ftoa~ From EDd EDd EDd Prmoal Prmoas Previous TOCII Yaw Toal Yaw Toal Yaw IA \'Gill ! ~& I = ;;:. filii~ I 54.3 J I S6.2 • 3.S% I I SI.S 4.1% Jlneauc S4p t(d) R....-sTIIII Sll,436 SU,169 12.9% $15,164 0.0% PI)'Tias $4,910 S4.W -7.1% $4,.5%2 -2.2% AAhalilill& $1$2 S9l4 1S.s% $1,077 9.5% Ply.... Vilw S4CM $451 11.9% $414 7.1% S90 Sll3 25.6% S127 12.4%

JJNMII.ti .... SIJil $1,412 10.1% $1,412 0.0% TOCII ~ (alii.) S21,0U Sl2.755 1.1% Sl2.716 0.1% Rawaue ,. SUb $317.55 $4(M.J9 4.5% S319.SO -3.1% ICllb Flow (mil) I59.700 $10,100 4.1% $9,936 -1.6% Cllb Flow per s. :$171.64 S179.1l 0.1% $169.15 -S.S% ICIItl FIOW~aa. lirl% 1 44.4% -3.7% 1 143 .6% -1.1% 1

Sources: - PIUl K.lpD Alloc...lac., HlsiOIY ofCable and Pay.-71' SJdncrib.n and~. Cable TV Investor, June 30, 1995, • Sa PluJ Kapn Assoc., Inc., EstiiMUd Capi14J Fluws In Cable TY, The Cable' TV Finandal Dlllbook., July 1995, 1t 92.

2163 TABLE 7 Annual Revenue and Cash Flow foF Cable System Operaton: 1992- 1994'

1992 1993 1994 Cable Cable Cash Cable Cable Cash Cable Cable Cash Year End Yew End Operaror Revenue Flow Yur End Rev ue Flow Revenue Flow Subsribers Subsc:ribers (mil.) (mil.) Subscribers (m~) (mil.) (mil.) (mil.)

Tele..Communi~ns lD,l6S,OOO $3..574.0 Si,63?.0 10,672,000 $4,1 43.8 $1.169.1 11..593.000 S4.1 82.9 $1.834.7 Time Warner 5,600,000 $2,091.0 S977:0 s.soo.ooo $2,208.0 Sl,03S.O 6.000,000 $2.242.0 $919.0 Com east 2.S&3,000 S72S.7 S3S6.3 2.641.000 $1.092.7 SSS2.0 3.307,000 Sl.06S.3 SS J7.S Continel1tal 2,1S6,000 $1,113.5 S411.3 2,895,000 $1,177.2 S527.6 3,081,000 $1.198.0 SS2S.l Cox Comm. 1,722.007 $652.1 S275.l 1,714.337 S708.0 S29S.6 1,151.726 S736.J $268.5 Cablnision Sys1a!IS 1,262,000 SS72J $247.7 1.379,000 $667.7 Wl.l 1,761,000 $137.2 $334.0 TtmeS Minor 1.1WII S4l3.1 $16$.0 1,201.391 $470.4 $191.1 1,274,901 $497.7 S20S.I V*'om 1,116,000 $411.1 S190.S 1,049,000 S416_,Q_ $111.7 1,139,100 $406.2 $155.2 Cerdury Comm. 920,$00 S29U $172.0 939,$00 $311.2 SII IJ 1,022.SOO $321.7 $174.5 Cablcvisioa IMuaria 904,641 $364.0 sm.7 9S7JOI $397.0 $191.6 1,001,927 $401.3 $119..5 Adclpllil Comm. 145,640 $296.6 $169.9 161.195 $311.3 $177.7 957,954 $347.6 $114.4 Providence Joumal 722,000 $199.7 $11.0 731,000 Sll1.6 $114.1 771,000 S21S.O S1 12.0 Telecablc Cocp 690,000 S26U $116.4 71 7,000 $216.7 Sll3.1 751,000 $302.0 Sl31.0 EW Scrippl 673,100 S231.1 SIOI.l 701,000 $251.1 $105.3 739,100 SlS5.4 S97.1 KBLCOM 577,000 S23S.3 $95.0 605,000 $144.1 S9S.• 7 690,000 ws.a $99.7 Lczd'al Coalaa. 477,130 $166.1 $13.4 SS0,703 $197.6 SIOO.s 577.377 S212.1 $105.7 Washiqlaa Post 463,000 $174.1 S17.5 412.000 SIIS.7 $11.9 491,000 S11l.1 S80.5 TCA Cllblc TV lac 441)56 $141.9 $10.4 457,061 $154.9 $17.7 461,661 S166J $11.9 Multimedia lac 410,000 $144.4 S73.l 417,000 $164.6 SIS.S 432,000 $165.4 $14.1 c-TEC Cocp 211,000 SIS.3 $40.9 lSI.OOO $93.6 S4U 273,000 $95.1 $44.6 ~cable 131,274 $31.3 S20.0 141,323 SSl.l Sl6.1 m.73s $64.7 Sll.l Gaylord~ 16UOO S7U $32.0 175,100 Sll.l $32.9 112.100 $15.2 $35.5 SIIIIIIM Comm.. 150,400 SS9.6 $35.1 157,000 $61.2 $37.4 165,000 $62.9 $37.4 IDSiaJu Comm. 133,116 $47.0 S20J 142Jl7 S5l.O S24.S 153,.523 SSl.l Sl5.6 Mcrcom lac. 34,111 Sll.O $4.1 34,714 $12.6 SS.I 37.324 $12.9 SS.l Tocal for 0roup 34,453,370 Sl2.A07.l SS,703.5 J5,m.l66 S14,029.o $6,417..5 31,951,736 $14,441.6 $6.341.1

Tocal Per Subecri11cr ' 1374.75 $172.27 $399.51 $112.75 S31U7 $169.90 c.m Flow M11P 46.0% 45."' 44.0%

SS,lOO,OUO ~. 1 D.J54.411H,l00,000 RZ,4Sl.!l 110,270.11159,700.000 $l2.511.9 19.930.61 I• . . 3.6% IOJ% 9..1%. . 4.4% 0.1% -3.3%. Notes: • Operators n lisled in descending order by size according to 1994 year end susbscribers. ·The complfties listed include IS of the top 20 MSOs (According to Paul Kapn Assoc., Inc., Top 100 Cable System Op.raton, 1be Cable TV Financial Oalabook, July 1995, at 14) plus 9 of MSOs ranked 21st through SOtb. Of tbe five, top 20 MSOs exlcuded. three (Newhouse BI'Oidcasting. Sammons CommuniCIIioas, IDd CrowD Media) were excluded because they do not provide publicly available information md two (Joaes Imercable IDd Falcon Cable TV) were excluded becl&lse their corporate

1 The term cash flow is used in Tables 7 and. 9 to refer to the measurement of eaminp before accounting for interest payments, taxes. depreciation and amoniDtion ("EBilDA") .

2164 S1r\JCtUre make it difficult to find the necessary data. - Except 11 noced, all dlra are for fiscal years ending on Dec:ember 31 of each year. Century CommuniCidoas' ye. eod subscriber totals, md Adelphia Communic:ations' year end 1992 subscriber toca1s are esrimMect TCA Cable lV's reveoue and cub flow dD are for the 12 months ending Of\ Janwa')' 31 of ac:b yar. Century Communications's reveoue and casb flow data are for the 12 months endinc oo November 30 of each year. Adelphia Communications revenue and cash flow data are for the 12 months ending on December 31 of each year. - Wherever possible, subscriber totals include both wholly owned and consolidated cable subscribers. - Total for lndusuy estimates for revenue and cub flow were calculated by multiplying the Total for Group of each fipre by the ratio of avcraae indusay subscribers to average aroup subscribers.

Sources: - Unless otherwise noted, all company data obtained from the companies' public ~lings at the United States Securities md Exc:hiDge Commission. -The subscriber totals for Telecable are from: Paul Kapn Assocs., Inc .• Top 100 Cable System ap.aton, The Cable lV Financial Databook. July 1995, ar 14; Paul KqiD Assocs,. lac., Top 100 Cabk Syst., Op.aton, The Cable lV FiniDcial Dlhbook. June 1994, ar 14; and Paul Kapn Assocs., ·lac., Top 100 Cable Sptat Op.aton, 1be Cable lV Finlncial Der:abook, June 1993, ar 12. - ln order to adjust for Tel..CommuniCidons, Inc.'s DBS boldinp. its revenue md cub flow data for 1993 md 1994 are from: Ricbanl Bilotti. Tei..COIItlfnlltic«ION • TCl GN1IIp ~ and Op.razing Co.Jit Fll1W COIIIptZI'iiON, Morpn StiD.ley, Cable Televisioa MetaDoipbosis • lbe Arrival of DBS and RBOC Compllitioa. September IS, 1995, ar61. • Tocal for IDdusay sublcn'bcrs 1rc Dan: Plu1 Kapn Assoes., lnc., Hiltary ofCilble and Pay-TY s~ tllld ~. Cable 'IV Investor, JUDe 30.-1995, • s.

2165 TABLE 8 Quarterly Revenue for Cable System Operaton: 1993 - 1995 ($ in million) 1993 tst 2nd 3rd 4th II,...... ;.lst--2-nd~ji'I'II§941'1'J"""3-rd--4-d!__,, ~ II Qua1Ur Qua1Ur Quaner Quarter Quarter Quan.ct Quarter ~r ~ Tele-Communic:alions 1~1.018.0 $1,042.0 11,044.0 $1.049.0 $1,060.0 Sl.Oil.O S1 .072.0 Sl.lOS.O s 1.169.0 s 1.262.0 lime Wlr'!lel' Inc SS46.0 SS60.0 S55l.o $551.0 SSSI.O $560.0 $552.0 SS79.0 SS71.0 $760.0 Com cast $271.6 $278.9 $272.1 $269.3 $260.6 $267.0 S26S.6 $272.0 $347.0 $362.5 Cox CommuniQ!ions S21S.2 S29S.4 $296.1 $302.6 $304.3 $307.4 S303.S $319.1 $313.1 $321.1 Continencal C&blevision S2&7.S S297.2 $295.5 $296.9 $294.4 Sl9S.O $296.2 $312.4 $318.6 S33 1.S Cablevision SystemS $157.0 $168.2 $169.6 Spl.O $176.1 $192.1 $223.5 S24S.S S24S.4 $263.7 Adelphia Comm. $19.3 $19.1 $19.4 $19.9 $10.1 $14.0 $90.1 $92.7 $94.0 $96.9 C&blevisioa IDduslries $91.5 $100,4 $100.5 J91.6 SIOO.D $101.7 $103.0 $103.7 $103.6 $106.4 Viacom SJ04.5 SJ07.S $103.7 SJOO.J $100.1 $103..5 $100.4 $101.6 $106.0 SllO.O Ccmury Comm. $74.3 $71.3 $71.5 $11.1 $71.6 $10.3 $19.9 Sll.l $14.2 $14.5 EW Scripps $63.2 $63.7 $61.6 S6l.J $62.4 $63.3 $63.9 $65.1 $61.0 $69.1 TCA Clbk 1V IDe $37.1 $31.3 $39.5 $39.3 $39.1 $41.1 $42.1 $43.3 $44.0 S49.1 Mullimccl.ia IDe $41.0 $41.5 $41 .0 $41.1 $41.2 $41.0 $40.9 S41.3 S41.9 S43.6 Mlrcus cable SJ2.7-SI3.3 Sl3.1 $13.2 $13.2 $12.1 Sl7.7 $20.9 $37.0 S31.S Summit Coam. SIS. I $15.3 SU.J $15..5 SU.6 SJS.I $15.6 Sl5.9 $16.2 SO.D IJisi&bl Coam. Sll.7 Sll.l Sll.l $12.7 su.o $13.1 $13.2 SI3.S $13.1 $14.3 TOCII for Group IS3.103.S $3,191.5 $3,175.4 $3,114.7 $3,111.0 S3,l60.1 S3,210.4 $3,414.5 S3,571.7 $3,920.1 TOCII for IJidus1ry 15,512.0 15,667.9 15,639.7 15,.654.4 15,5'70.3 15,599.4 sj.Q6.9 15.114.9 15.113.9 $6,113.3 %a.pFrvm 1.1% ·1.2% .0.2% 1.1% 10.4% Prmoal Yws Qalrtlr '·"' Nota: - 0penrors are lisrecl ill delceDdiq order by size -=cotdiu& to: PluJ K.lpa Assoc.. Inc.. Top 100 Cable Symm Operalon a1 of.huw JO, 199$, Clble 1V lnvat«, Aupst 31, 1995, at 9. -The compaies lisced iaclude 12 oftbe top 20 MSOs (Acconlina to PluJ KapD Assoc., Inc., Top 100 Cab/eSyst#!ltl Op.aton, 1be Cable tv FinaDcial o.rabook.July 199S, at 14) plus four ofMSOs ranked 21st tbroup SOdL Oftbe eiJbt. top 20 MSOs exlc:uded, six (Newbouse Broadcastinc. Sammons Communic:ltioas, Crown Media, tbe Providence Joumal, Telecable Corp, IDCl Lellfest Communications) were excluded bec:a11se tbey do DOC provide publicly availlble quartaiy informltioa md two (Jones Intereable llld Falc:aD Clble 1V) were excluded bec:lule their corponte strvc::ture make it difficult to find the neCealry dl&a. -Except as iioced. all diD n for quarters eadillc Mm:h 31, June 30, Sepcember 30, llld December 31. TCA Clble tv's meaae llld c:asb flow dlta are for qUIIUn eadiq April 30, July 31, October 31 , and Jaou.wy 31. CAiary Cammanic:ltioas's revenue lad c:asb flow data we for qu1rters ending February 21, May 31, August 31, IDd November 30. - Total for IDdalay esrimces for revenue md cub flow were c:alculaled by multiplying the TotaJ for Group of eiiCb 6pre by 1be ratio of the total subscribers for the industry to the toW subscribers for lhe group (not shown). -Cox Communic:ltioo's data are pro fonna data combining Cox Communic:ltions and Times Mirror's cable revenue and cash flow. - Tele-Communic:ltioas, Inc.'s revenue and cash flow data from the second quarter of 1994 to the second qwater of 1995 are for TCI CommUDic:ltioas, Inc.. Sources: - All comp~~~y data obcaiDed from the c:ompmies public filings • the United Stares Securities and Exc:bloce c~ioo. ·

2166 TABLE 9 Quarterly Cub Flow for Cable System Operaton: 1993- 1995 ($ in·million)

1995 1st 2nd Quarter Quancr

TC $467.0 S4n.o $464.0 $449.0 S4SO.O S4S2.0 $423.0 $410.0 $491.0 $5 110 Tunc Wwnerln<: $255.0 $270.0 $261.0 $242.0 $244.0 $256.0 $242.0 $247.0 $2560 $3190 Comcast $136.1 $142.0 $137.5 S13S.7 $127.0 $130.0 $1 29.0 $131.9 $165.0 $1126 Cox CommUiliclciofts $123.0 $129.4 $125.1 $129.0 $121.1 $123.4 $109.3 $119.0 $1 22.1 $125 s Continental Cable S129.S $135.2 $130.2 $132.6 $133.2 $121.1 $127.7 SI3S.4 $136.5 S13U Cablevision Sys~a~~.S $63.1 $67.2 $61.7 $52.6 $75.9 $10.9 $93.5 Sl3.7 S96.4 $17.9 Adelphia Cornm. $44.2 $44.5 $44.4 ,5;44.5 $42.2 $44.4 $49.0 $41.7 S41.9 $51 .5 Cablcvilloft lDdusvies $47.3 $41.9 $49.5 $45.9 $47.4 S47.S $41.2 $46.4 $41.0 $49.7 Vi.Kom $41.9 $49.4 $44.1 $39.3 $40.2 $40.1 S36.S $37.7 $42.3 S4S.O CCDUy Ccalm. $41.9 $46.4 $46.4 $46.1 $46.9 $44.2 S4t.s S4l.9 $39.1 SJI.J EW Scripps $21.0 $27.2 $24.9 $25.1 $24.3 $23.1 $24.3 $25.5 S27.l S29.0 TCA c.blc 1V Inc $19.6 $19.4 $19.1 $19.5 $19.1 $20.2 $20.1 $21.1 $21.1 $24.1 Muldmcdia IDe $21.3 $21.3 S2l.l $21.6 $21.3 S21.S $20.2 $21.2 $20.1 $22.6 Mlrcal c.blc S6.S $7.0 su S6.S S6.S $5.1 sa.s $10.4 $11.4 $19.3 SllllllllitCcalm. $9.3 $9.4 $93 $9.4 $10.7 $9.4 $9.2 $1..1 $9.7 so.o 1llliiM CoaiiL $6.0 $5.9 $6.1 S6.S J6.3 S6.l $6.4 $6.7 S6.7 $7.0

TCICII b~ $1,447.9 $1,495.2 Sl,46S.S Sl,406.l Sl,4t6.7 $1,434.2 S1,319.l SI,46S.4 S1.SSI.l $1,651.9 TCICIIb~ Sl.S71.6 12,655.4 s:l,6Q2..7 $2.496.6 $2.4'73.1 S2.46l.l s2.JIU S2.49S.S $2.561.9 $2.614.6

"o-.Fn. -3.1% -1~ ...~ 0.0% 3.6" 6.1% Prmoas Y•'s ~ Notes: - Openron ce Usaed in deacendin& Older by size KCOnlin& to: Plul Kapn ~ . In~.• Top 100 Cab/~ System Op.t:lton as of .!tiM JO, /99S, Cable 1V Investor, Aupst 31, 1995, 11 9. - The complllics lisledlre tbe sae MSOs described in Table 8 above. - Except a ooced, all cilia 11'0 for quilteD eDdiq M.-cb 31, June 30, Sepcanbcr 30, md December 31. TCA Cable 1V's nvenue IDd CISb flow cilia are for~ eucliD& April 30, July 31, October 31, and JmUir)' 31. Cemury CommuDicllioas's reYCDue lad cash flow data are for quarters ending Februlry 18, May 31, AupR 31, IDd November 30. - TOIIJ for ladullry eMimMa for revame IDd cash flow were calcul.red by multiplying the Total for Group of eKb fipn by die nlio of tbe tocal subscribers for tbe iDdusuy to the tDial subscribers for the lfOUP <•~bon). -Cox C ••eM:IdaD"s cilia from the first qum1er of 1993 to the first quarter of 1995 are pro fonna dlla OOIIJ.tl'nma Cox CommlmicC~ and TUDes Mirror's c:able revenue IDd cash flow. -Tel~ Inc.'s revenue and cash flow data from tbe second quarter of 1994 to the · sec:ond qUIIU!r of 199$ 11'0 for TCI Com.mwlic:ations. Inc.. Sources: - All company data obtwiDed from the companies public filinp 11 the United Stares Securities and Exchlnge CmmissiOD.

2167 TABLE 10 Acquisition and Disposition of Capital: 1988 • 1994 ($ in million)

Tow Capilai !Wsed Privm Ddlt Public: Debt Prinre Equity Public: Equity From FiiWICin& Soun:c:s Sum 'Ye of Sum %of Sum %of Sum %of Raised TOCII Raised TOCII R.iscd Tolal Raised TOCII 1911 SS,071 61% $1,719 ll% $671 9% S61 1% S7.613 1919 $6,<494 10% $140 10% m' 9% $101 1% $1.1 68 1990 $4,637 II% $490 9% $597 10% so 0% SS.724 1991 S619 16% $912 22% $1,290 30% SIJSO 32% S4.241 1992 ($1,762) -69% $2,400 93% $1,710 67% mo 9% $2,.561 1993 ($3,513) ·116% S$,210 274% S62 3% $165 9% $1,924 1994 $4,772 71% $1,019 16% $409 6% $461 1% $6,731

TOCII: 1911 $16,325 $12,100 :72 $36,969 Slllre of 7 Y• 44% JS% 6% 100% TOCII Avenp Railed S2,332 $1,129 [;]S339 $5,211 PuY•

Sources: - 1911- PIUl KapD Assoc., IDe., E.ltilt&at«J Capillll Flf!W$ ill CAb!. 7;Y, 1be Cable lV Financial Oltabook, June 1992, at 11. i - 1989 - Paul Kapil Assoc., Inc., E.rtilruzted Capil4l FltTWS in Cabk. TY. The Cable 1V Finmcial Dlrabook. June 1993, • 86. - 1990. Paul Kapa Assoc., IDe., E.rtilruzted Ct:tpil4l FltTWS ill CAb!. TY. 1be Cable 1V rUliDcial Dmbook, JUDe' l994, . 92. - 1991 to 1994 • PIUl Kapa Assoc., Inc., Estiltwt«J Capil4l FIDWI ill Cable TY, The Cable 1V Financial D1rabook. July 1995, at 92. TABLE 11 System Tru.sactiou: 1993 • 1994 1993 1 1 tM 1 1 Im eo 7195 1 ma e&liiC !AlmotS,_ SOU ~~~~' I &a I I U -lll% ITCIIII ..... Of§' .... 94.1% Aftlllll S,._ sa. 192.2% &U% 113.2% 6&.5% 152.1%

0oU. Value...... Per Sablcriber ,-"'c.b Flow Malliplc Soutce: PIUl KapD Assoc., IDe., Y«r-To-Date Cable Spum Sak SfiiiJIIUITY, Cable lV Investor, JIIUUir)' 31, 1995,. 8.

2168 APPENDIX C- 1: Status of LEC Entry Status of LEC Entry Since the 1994 Report

21 AppHcatlona ,_.:a,..,,......

...... IP..... ,_.='""'• r ._.... ""' ..... , .....v..- ~·

• The cities listed above represent the markets the LECs were planning to enter as VDT operators at the time of the /994 Report; for some, current plans 1re different. The table on the following page lists the swus of each LEC's plan in regard to the above applications. •• Four additional permanent VDT applications were filed by US West since the /994 Report. All were dismissed without prejudice to refile (due to lack of information) and arc ignored a~v~. APPENDIX C-2: Status of LEC Entry

Company Location of VDT Status of VDT AppUeations Mode or Entry: Homes Applications Passed in Current Plan

Bell Atlantic: Dover Township, NJ Approv~ : System construction near completion; openation VDT: 38,000 to beain before end of year. NYNEX Rl; Eastern MA Apprond: Pl11111ing or just beginning VDT system VDT: 397,000 consuuctioft; pliMlng to use wireless toc:bnoloay for video delivay In near term. PAC BELL San fran., Orlnge Count•• Approved: Will c:omplete San fran. VDT construction in VDT: 490,000 in San Fran.by L.A .• San Dieao, CA 1996. Slowina wire based build out in other 3 mutets, to 1996; to pass another S10 ,000 in be completed In 1997. Will use wireless for video delivery other 3 areas by 1997 (total of I in ne. term. million, down from 1.3 million in applic:ations). Wireless: Pass as many as S million by 1996...... N -.....! OTE Manassas, VA; Pinellas/Pasco, Approved: PIIMinl or just beJiMing system construc:tion. VDT: 1,041 ,000 0 FL; Ventura, CA; Honolulu, HI Ametitcch Detroit, Ml; Cbic:ago, IL; Approved: Abandoned anntecl wJU:Mions. Siped c:able VDT: None; under withdrawn lndian1p01is, IN; Milwaukee, frlncbise .,-eements in Plymouth and Canton Townships, applic:ations, Ameritech was WI; Columbus/Ciev., OH Northville, and Plymouth, Ml; Columbus, OH; and Ole;r.le approved to pass 1,256,000. Hclahts, IL. Punuingldditional midwest c:able francbi . Cable: Unknown.

Bell Atlll'ltic Mid-Atl~ntic; Wash., D.C. WltWrawa: Pllllllinato use 'Vlrelas for video delivery in VDT: None; under withdrawn LATA northeast and mid-Atlmtlc ll\lrkeu in ne. tam while applications, Bell Atlantic proposed studyina wire biSed options. to pass 3.2 million. Wireless; 4,038,000.

US West Denver, CO; Portland, OR; Suspeaded at Rcq•at of Applkaat: Studying wire based VDT: Suspended applications Minn.-St. Paul, MN; Boise, ID; options ll'ld awaiting results from Omaha, NE trial. sought approval to pass 1,126,000. Salt Lake City, UT

Bell Atlantic Florham Park, NJ Pendlaa. VDT: 11,700 SNET CT Peodlaa. VDT: 1,541 ,000 APP~IXD

Local Exchange Carrier Proposals

Date Telepho~ Location Homes Ty~of Status First Company Pas.s«i Proposal Fi/«1 .

10/21/92 Bell Atlmti~- Northern VA 2,000 technic:all approved, 3/25/93; VA market' expanded, 1/20/95

10/30/92 NYNEX New York, NY 2,500 tedmical approved, 6/29/93 11/16/92 New Jersey Florham Park, NJ . 11,700 pennanent pending Bell 12/15/92 New Jersey Dover Township, NJ 38,000 pcrmaamt approved, 7/18194 Bell

4127193 SNET West Hartford. CT 1,600 tecbDica1l approved, 11/12/93 IDirbt 6/11193 Rod1ester Rocbester, NY 120 teclmicall lppi"'Ved, J/25/94 TelepboDe IDirbt

6f22/93 US West Omlba, NE 2,500 . tedrnjcall. . apptowd_ 12122/93 or IDirbt 60,00()2

12/15/93 SNET Hartford .t Stmlfonf, 150,000 tecbaicall lppl oved, 11/22194 (ameaded)· CT nurbt e:xpiDiiOD

12/16/93 Bell Atllatic W~D.C . LATA 300,000 pii'IDIMilt ,. 6/16194 filing

12120193 PKific Bell ar.pCo.,CA 210,000 penDIIHilt IIJPI'Oved. 7/19/95

12120193 PKifi~ Bell So. SID Frllldsco Bay, 490,000 periDIDeDt lppi"'ved, 7/19/95 .. CA

12120193 hcific Bell Lol Aqeles, CA 360,000 permllllllt lppi'Oved, 7/ 19/95

12120/93 Plciftc Bell SID Diqo, CA 250,000 penDIMilt lppi"'ved, 719/95

1 A technical trial tests the technical feasibility of a VDT network. usually without charging customers for access to the network. A market trial charges either programmer customers. end-user subscribers, or both for access, and is designed to test customer ~gness to pay for that access. Both types of trials may be combined into one.

2 The technical phase of the trial was authorized to pass 2,500 homes; the market phase of the trial expanded the technical trial ll;ld is authorized to pass 60,000 homes (thus far. U S West repons servins 5,000 homes).

2171 Date Telephone Localion Homes Type of Status First Compatry Passed Proposal Filed 1/10/94 US West Denver, CO 357,000 permanent suspended by applicant. S/31195 1/19/94 US West Portland, OR 162,000 permanent suspended by applicant, 5/31/95 1/19/94 US West Minneapolis/ St. Paul, 357,000 permanent suspended by applicant, MN 5/31/95 1/31/94 Amcritedl Detroit, MI 232,000 permanent approved, 1/4/95; abandoned by applicant, June 27, 1995

1131/94 Amcritecb Columbus & 262,000 pennanent approved, 1/4/95; Clcvelmd. OH abandoned by applicant, June 27, - 1995

1/31/94 Amcritedl lndiiiUipOlis, IN 115,000 pcrmaneDt approved, 1/4/95; abandoned by applicant, June 27, 1995

1/31/94 Ameritcc:h Chie~~o, n. 501,000 penDIDCDt approved. 1/4/95; abandoned by applicant, June 27, 1995

1/31/94 Amcritech Milwlukeo, WI 146,000 pammmt approved, 1/4/95; abandoned by appliCIDt, June 27. 1995 3/16194 US West Boise, m 90,000 permanent suspended by applicant, S/31195

3/16/94 USWCII Salt Lib City, UT 160,000 penDIDCDt suspended by applicant, 5131195

4113/94 PuatD IUco Paeno Rico lj0 tec:bnical approved. 1215/94 Tel. Co.

5123194 GTE- Coatel Mlaasu, VA 109,000 permaDc:nt approved, S/2195 of VA

5123/94 GTE FL Inc. Pinella md Pasco Co., 476,000 pcrmlllCDt approved, S/2195 FL S/23194 GTE CA Inc Ventura Co., CA 122,000 pcrmment approved, 512195

5123194 GTE HI Tel. Honolulu, HI 334,000 penDIDCDt · approved, S/2195 Co.

2172 Date Teiqltofw Loaztion Homes Type of Srarus Fint COIIfJXII"Y Ptmed Proposal Filed

6/ 16/94 Bell Atlantic Wash., D.C. LATA 1.2 m il. permanent suspended by applicant. (amended) 4/25/95 ; withdrawn. S/24195

6/16/94 Bell Atlantic Mid-Atlantic 2 mil. permanent suspended by applicant. 4125195; withdrawn, 5124195

6121194 BellSouth Chamblee & DeK.alb 12,000 technical/ approved, 218/95 Co.,GA market

118194 NYNEX IU 63,000 permanent approved, 3/6/95

118194 NYNEX MA 334,000 permanent approved. 3/6/95 9/9194 Sprint/ Wake Forest, NC 1,000 technical/ approved, 12128194 Carolina Tel m.ket & Tel. Co.

11/16194 US West Cedlr lllpids. lA 63,000 pcrmmmt dismissed 11/16194 US West Colondo SpriDas. co 161,000 .,.,.... _ dismissed 11/16194 US Wilt 0. MoiDes, lA 120,000" penna.. . dismissed

11/16194 US West Albuquerque, NM 214,000 penDIIMilt dismissed

4121195 SNET CT 1.5 miL pcrmiDCIJt pen din&

2173 APPENDIX E

Status of VDT Tecbaical aad Market Trials

I. This Appendix summarizes the various LEC filings concerning VDT technical and market trials. These filings include trial applications, trial compliance reports. permanent applications, and tariffs. Since the 1994 Report, there have been filed with the Commission two more six-month trial reports, three one-year reports, and four additional tariffs. including Bell Atlantic's tariff for permanent commercial service in Dover Township, New Jersey.

Applications aad Tariffs for Technical and Market Triab

2. Bell Atlantic - Northern Virginia Technical and Market Trial. Authority for the first technical VDT trial was granted on March 25, 1993, to Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone of Virginia (now, Bell Atlantic- Virginia) for a one-year technical trial with up to 400 (employee) subscribers in Arlingto~ Virginia, to test Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line ("ADSL") technology. 1 Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virginia, 8 FCC Red 2313 (1993). Bell Atlantic bas filed two six-month reports on its technical trials, as required by its authorization.

3. The first six-month report covers the fiist phase of t,be technical trial, during which equipment was installed in a limited number of 'Bell Atlantic employee homes ( 6 I) in order to test technical viability and integration of the network. Some problems were experienced with the prototype video decoder, but all such problems were resolved by September 15, 1993. Six Monlh Compliance Report of Bell Atl. Co., Bell Atl. . No. Va. VDT Applicalion, File No: WPC-6834 (filed September 23, 1993).

4. The second six-month report covers phase two of the technical trial. During this phase, 268 Bell Atlantic employees participated in the trial, which tested the participants' reactions to the service and the technical feasibility of the service in a variety of network environments. Second Six Monlh Compliance Report of Bell Atl. Co., Bell All. No. Va. VDT Application, File·:No. WPC-6834 (filed October 24, 1994). Bell Atlantic reports that participants averaged 2.6 hours of use of the service per week. It also reports that the number of problems reported iDcreased with the increased number of participants in the trial. However, the report indicates that participants believe that the service is better than comparable media (cable, VCR., and broadcast) and is easy to use. In addition, Bell Atlantic states that the number of teclmical problems will be reduced with new software and hardware, and with better training of installation technicians. Over the course of the trial, Bell Atlantic

1 ADSL permits Motion Picture Experts Group One ("MPEG-1 ") compressed digital video signals to be transmitted on an on-demand basis over existing copper loops. Customer· programmers will have a 1.5 Megabits per second ("Mbps") channel downstream and a 16 Kilobits per second ("Kbps") channel upstream. Bell Atlantic Tariff FCC No. 10, Transmittal No. 742, at 1.0.

2174 was able to reduce by two-thirds the number.of problems reported by participants. !d.

5. Subsequent to the technical trial grant, Bell Atlantic requested and was granted (on January 20, 1995) permission to extend the technical trial into a market trial and to • expand the market trial to 2,000 subscribers. See Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virginia ("Bell Atlantic No. Va. VDT Application"), 10 FCC Red 2975 (1 995). For the market phase of this trial, Bell Atlantic filed a tariff with the Commission on January 27, 1995. Bell Atlantic TariffFCC No. ·10, Transmittal No. 742. The tariff repons that the market trial will last for six months, subject to possible extension, and is designed to test ADSL, the costs associated with it, and the willingness of both customer-programmers and end-user subscribers to pay for it. Month-to-month and non-recurring charges for customer programmers and for end-user subscribers are reported.2

6. NXNEX - Manhattan Technical TriaJ. Authority for the second technical trial was granted to New York Telephone ("NYNEX") on June 29, 1993, for a one-year trial to test an HFC network. video switching technologies and methods for storing and delivering video programming in three multiple-dwelling unit ("MDU") buildings serving 2,500 subscribers in New York City. New York TelephoM Co. for Section 214 Auth. to Provide VDT Servs. in New York City ("NYNEX New York VDT Application"), 8 FCC Red 4325 (1993).

7. NYNEX has submitted two six-month reports to tbe·FCC as required by its authorization. The first one reports "spirited competition" between its customer-programmers, particularly Liberty Cable and Tune Warner Cable. Si:% Month Complianu Report of NYNEX. NYNEX New York VDT Applit:Dtio~ File No. WPC 6836 (filed July 15, 1994). The sec:ond report states that the VDT platform was successful at delivering programming from customer programmers to end-user subscribers, consisting of switched-access for delivering live video programming, and analog stored video for interactive programming. Analog stored video allows end-user subscribers to fast-forward, rewind, pause, and stop. Second Six Month Compliance Report ofNYNEX. NYNEX New York VDT Appliclltion, File No. WPC 6836 (filed February 10, 1995). NYNEX blames its continued holdup in adding digital capacity to its system on equipment delays. NYNEX hopes to test digital equipment sometime this year. /Gl ·•

8. SNET - West Hartford and Stamford Args Technical and Market Trial. Southern New EnaJanc1 Telephone Company ("SNET") was granted authorization on November 12, 1993, for a tedmicalaDd market trial to serve between 200 and 1,600 customers in West Hartford, Connecticut and to test Fiber to the Node ("FlTNj architecture with coaxial facilities from the node to individual subscribers. Southern New England Telephone Co. for Section 2/4 Auth. to Provide CDT Servs. in West Hartford, Conn. ("SNET

2 For instance, customer-programmers pay a $12.00 monthly connection fee, and end-user subscribers pay $7.50. Bell Atlantic is waiving all non-recurring charges (such as a $70.00 end-user subscriber charge) during the IDI:fket trial service period. /Gl at 7.5.

2175 West Hartford YDT Application"), 9 FCC Red 1019 (1993).

9. Shortly after gaining approval for the technical and market trial, SNET requested an authorization to expand the trial to pass 151 ,000 homes (Southern New England Telephone Company, Order and Authorization, 9 FCC Red 7715 (1994)), which was approved on November 22, 1994. A tariff was filed because SNET intends to charge subscribers and customer-programmers for the service to test interest and willingness to pay for services available from the VDT platform. Southern New England Telephone .Company. Tariff F. C C No. 40, Transmi"al No. 641 (filed June 27, 1995).

10. According to the tariff, SNE"r intends to provide video service to two service areas, northern Connecticut (passing 76,000 1;1omes in the cities of West Hartford, New Britain, Farmington, and Hartford) and soutltem Connecticut (passing 75,000 homes in the cities of Stamford, Norwalk, Darien, Westport, and Fairfield).. Customer-programmers will be able to request service in either area or both, and will be charged monthly according to the average number of subscribers each month times the Broadcast Connect Rate per 6MHz channel. 3 At first, SNET plans to offer 53 analog channels and 23 channels of analog Enhanced Pay-per-View ("EPPV"). In addition, in the nortbem service area, SNET proposes to provide Video-On-Demand ("VOD"), which will become available to both service areas when the digital upgrade is deployed. SNET's projec:Pon for digital services predicts zero digital channels in year one, 40 digital channels in Yart two, and 2·00 digital channels in year three and beyond. SNET plans to file a digital tariff during the third quarter of 1995. ld

11. Despite the authorization to build out the system further, SNET's two six- month trial reports indicate that SNET has not yet expanded the VDT system. First Six Month Compliance Report ofSNET, SNET West Hartford YDT Application, File No. WPC 6858 (filed December 22, 1994), Second Six Month CompliDnce Report ofSNET, SNET West Hartford VDT Application, File No. WPC 6858 (filed JuDe 1, 1995). Both report that the system is a Hybrid Fiber-Coaxial ("HFCj network which offers VOD, pay-per-view, and aggregated channel services to 1,250 homes. ld As ofMardl31, 1995, 58 video information providers were supplying programming, and 340 end-user subscribers were connected to tbe S)'stem. SNET reports that it is pleased with the operation of the system and that the trial demonstrates that it is feasible to deliver video signals over an advanced telecommunicatioas network. Second Six Month Compliance Report of SNET, SNET West Hartford_VDT Appliclltion, File No. \YPC 6858 (filed June 1, 1995).

12. US West- OmM& NE Technical and Market Trial. On December 22, 1993, U S West was granted an authorization for technical and market trials in Omaha, Nebraska. The technical trial lasted six months and passed 2,500 homes. US West Communications,

3 The Broadcast Connect Rate per 6 MHz channel is $0.1 0. Customer-programmers using less bandwidth will be charged according to a pro rata share of the 6 MHz. Southern New England Telepho~ Company, Tariff F.C.C. No. 40, Transmittal No. 641 (filed June 27, 1995).

2176 Inc. for &ction 214 Auth. to Provide VDT Servs. in Omaha. Neb., 9 FCC Red 184 (1993). The market trial will last for the twelve months following the technical trial and will pass 50,000 homes. U S West will use an advanced fiber-to-the-curb/coaxial cable network capable of providing 77 channels of analog video with forward-path-only signaling, and up to 800 channels of digital video with forward- and/or reverse-path signalling capability. Sixty four analog channels will have interdiction capabilities, which means that the customer programmers can use them to provide pay-per-view services. US West Communications. Tariff FCC No. 5, Transmittal No. 657 (filed August 8, 1995), at Section 1.3. U S West will also allow customer-programmers to offOT digital VOD services. /d. at Section 1.5.6. US West estimates a residential penetration rate of 28% for the trial. ld at Section 2.1.2.~

13. Rochester Telephone- Rochester Technical Trial. Authority for the fifth authorized trial was granted on March 25, 1994, to Rochester Telephone Co., for six months, to conduct a tariffed field test to serve up to· 120 subscribers using two architectures: a fiber coax system within multi-unit and single-unit dwellings, and an ADSL system utilizing Discrete Multi-Tone technology within a defined two-mile area. Rochester Tel. Corp. for Section 214 Auth. to Provide VDT Servs. in Rochester N.Y. ("Rochester Tel. VDT Application"), 9 FCC Red 2285 (1994). Rochester Telephone filed a tariff prior to commencement of its trial because it inteDded to charge both customer-programmers and end user subscribers for its VDT service. Rochester Telephone Corporation, Tariff FCC No. 3, Transmittal No. 224 (filed May 17, 1994).'

14. Rochester Telephone also filed, on March 1, 1995, a compliance repon on the status of the trial. Six Month Compliance Report of Rochester Telephone, Rochester Tel. VDT Application, File No. WPC 6867 (filed March 1, 1995). Rochester Telephone reponed that, although it bad received pro joi7Nl autborization to extend its trial for an additional three month period until June 30, 1995,6 it and its sole customer-programmer, USA Video, had decided that continuation of tbe trial did not make financial sense. Thus, in January 1995, USA Video ceased providing service to end-user customers, but the VDT platform remained available for service until the tariff expired. /d Rochester Telephone also stated that, due to

• US West submiUed an attacbmcnt to its Omaha tariff that reported the results of surveys in tbe a.jor cities that US Vfest serves. These surveys indicate " ... that in a scenario in which two video providers offered comparable service offerings, S1% of households with access to the two providers would subscribe to the local cable TV provider•s offering and 23% would be customers of U S West' s video services offerings. Overall, cable penetration of homes with access to two providers would increase from approximately 600/o today to 74%." US West Omaha Tariff, Exhibit A., at page 2 .

.' The tariff expired on June 30, 1995.

6 See Letter from James D. Schlichting to Michael J. Shanley, ill and Charles A. Zielinski (Oct. 11, 1994).

2177 technical constraints. it never performed the .ADSL portion of its trial.' Despite these difficulties, Rochester reported that the trial was a success in technical tenns, and that it had gained substantial knowledge from the trial. !d.

15. Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Telephone Company- Technical Trial. Authorization for the sixth authorized trial was granted, on December 5, 1994, to the Puerto Rico Telephone Company for a one-year technical trial authorization to serve 250 homes using Fiber-to-the Curb ("FTTC") and 18 schools and 12 bp.siness offices using ADSL network architecture. Puerto Rico Telephone Co .. , File No. WPC-6949 (1994). The trial proposed initial deployment of 64 analog video channels over the me system, with future enhancement through digital compression to 384 channels.

16. BellSouth -- DeKalb County and Cbamblee. Qeoraia Technical Trial. Authorization for the seventh trial was granted, on February 8, 1995, to BellSouth for an IS month trial to pass 12,000 homes in DeKalb County and Chamblee, Georgia for the purpose of testing an HFC network offering both traditional channel service with 60 analog channels and a digital VDT platform with approximately 300 channels utilizing both digital multi-cast and digital point-cast. Bel/Smdh, File No. WPC-6977 (1995). Digital multi-cast entails distribution of a digital video signal to everyone who subscribes, while digital point-cast is switched digital distribution. BellSouth reported to the Commission, in an April 28, 1995 letter, that 14 customer-programmers bad requested ~rechannels than the platform's planned 70 analog broadcast channels, 160 digital broadcast channels, and 480 digital switched channels. BellSouth bad tentatively decided, instead of expanding the capacity of the platform, to allocate clumnels to all applicants on a proportional basis and file a tariff for such allocation. &e Letter from Michael A. Tanner to Katblecn M. H. Waltman (April 28, 1995).

17. Carolim Telephone and Telegraph Company- Wake Forest, North Carolina Technical and Market Trial. Autbori.zation for tbe eighth trial was granted on December 28, 1994 to Carolina Telepbone and Telegraph Company for a two-year technical and market trial to 1,000 homes in Wake Forest, North Carolina. Carolina TelephoM and Telegraph Co .• File No. WPC-6999 (1994). In a subsequent letter, Carolina Telephone and Telegraph Company informed the Commission tbat three customer-programmers had requested more than the initial 75 analog Channel capcity of the system, but that the customer-programmers were satisfied with divictiDa 1be 75 channels. See Letter from Warren D. Hannah to Kathleen M. H. Wallmao (May 2, 1995).

7 Rochester Telephone required ADSL technology that was capable of transporting a 6 Mps signal, which was still in its prototype stage at the time of the trial. ADSL technology caPable of transmitting 1.5 Mps was commercially available (and was used in Bell Atlantic•s Northern Virginia trial, stt para. 1, above), but was insufficient for Rochester Telephone's needs. Siz Month Compliance Report of Rochester TelephoM, Rochester Tel. VDT Application, File No. WPC 6867 (filed MJrch 1, 1995).

2178 APPENDIXF

Top 20 SMATv Openton (ranked by number of units passed*)

Rank Company Number of Units hopntiG Pt1$$~d

1 Interactive L:able systems 700 230,000 2 OpTel 350 110,000 3 Telesat•• 65 81.200 4 Cable Plus••• 170 61,291 5 ACS 225 54,000 6 Apollo 160 50,600 7 Mid-Atlantic Cable 74 47,176 8 Interface Communic:atioas 60 35,000 9 Eastern Cable Necworb (formerly AMSA1)•••• 70 34,000 10 Liberty Cable 17S 30,000 11 Prefemd EDtatliDmeal 190 30,000 12 Ed Rose ct SoDS 50 26,000 13 Funare COlDID1IIlic:lti 46 20,000 14 MultiTedmolOIY Services 65 1S.SOO 15 Telecom Satellite so 17,SOO 16 WJreless Cable of Atllata 30 12,000 17 Superior Cable 26 10,736 18 SUDSbiDe 'IV F.atertlimDeDt 8 10,000 19 Novner EtdaaaiM 23 7,000 20 Coaxial Commllllic:llioas 22 5,800 TtiMI :J,SSf lf(J,I(JJ

Notes: • Cblrt does DOt iDc:lude cilia for hospitals, botela IDd priloal. •• Includel ftladlised Clble subscribers. • • • Inc:lqdee MSE c.ble. • • •• II aaw abo a wirelea cable licensee.

Source: PIUIIC.Ipa AIIOCI. IDe.. PrivMe Cable Investor, Dec. 31, 1994, • S.

2179 APPENDIXG

TABLE 1 Assessment Of Competing Technologies*

Subscribers Technology Used l~'J[ l'J'J:Z 19'/J 19'14 SepL 19'15 TV Households (1) 92,100,000 93,100,000 94,200,000 95,400,000 95,900,000 Pet. Change 1.09% 1.18% 1.27% 0.52%

MVPD Households (l)** 55,309,000 51,530,000 60,283,000 63,936,620 67,475,350 Pet. Change 4.02% 4.790.4 6.06% 5.53% Pet of Households 60.0S% 61.790A 63.990A 67.02% 70.36% Cable Subs. (3) 53,400,000 55,200,000 51,200,000 59,100,000 61,700,000 Pet. Change 3.37% 3.62-.4 4.37% 3.35% Pet. of MYPD TO/QJ 96.SS% 9S.9S% 94.89% 93.37% 91.44%

MMDS Subs. (4) 180,000 323,000 397,000 600,000 800,000 Pet. Change 79.44% 22.91% 51.13% 33.33% Pet. of MYPD Total 0.33% O.S4" 0.66% 0.94% 1 . 1~

SMATV Subs. (5)*** 965,000 914,000 1,004-.000 850,000 950,000 Pet. Chanae 1.97% 2.03% -15.34% 11.76% Pet. of MYPD TO/QJ 1.74% 1.71" 1.6"" 1.33% /.4/%

HSDs Subs. (6) 764,000 1,023,000 1,612,000 2,178,000 2.341,000 Pet. Cbmac 33.90% 51.58% 35.11% 7.48% Pet. ofMYPD TO/QJ 1.3~ 1 . 7~ 2.6"" 3.41% 3.47%

DBS Sabs. ('7) < 70,000 602,000 1,675,000 Pet. Cblqe 160.00% 178.24% Pet. of MYPD Totlll 0.12% 0.94% 2.48%

VDT (I) Subs. • ~ Sites•••• 6,620 9.350 Pet. Cbqe 4/.24% PeL of MYPD Totill 0.0/% 0.01% Subs. • Ptm:taDmt Sbel 0 0

Notes: • TOCIJa far 1991~ 1n y.--ead totals unless odJerwise indiaad. Fiaures for the earlier years which apparecl in the 1994 Report have been revised. Some numbers have been rounded. •• lbe total of MVPD Households is likely somewblt lower tblll the given figure due to households subsc:ribiD& to the services of more thaD one MVPD. See e:g. 1994 Report, 9 FCC R~ . at 7480, Para. 74. The number of sucb households is likely low, however, so the given total can be seen as a reasonable esnm.se of the number of MVPD households. ••• The SMATV subsc:ri'ber COUDt was revised downward to reflect revisect toeals produced by changes iD the methodology used by PIUl Kapn Associltes, Inc. Plu.l ~ did Dot revise back for earlier years. •••• Total for Oet. 1994.

2180 Sources: (1) United Stiles television households: .1991-94 from A.C. Nielsen Co. u of January of the followina yar cited by Veronis. SuhJe:r A A.ssoci.r.es. HotMS Pass«/ by Cable and l~idena of S&~bscription. The Veronis, Suhle:r A Associates Communications Industry Forecast. July 1995, at l4S; 199S esrimce from Nielsen Media Research as c:ited in Broadcasting & Cable. Oc:t. 23. 1995, at 62. The 1995 figure is for September.

(2) Total MVPO households were calculated by summing the total numbeT of subscribers listed under each of tbe categories of tbe various technoiOJies. Because there are no permanent VOT subscribers, the trial VDT subscribU totals were used.

(3) Cable subscribers: 1991·94 from Paul KlgaD Associates, Inc:., History of Cable and Pay-TV S&lbscriben and~. Cable TV Investor, June 30, 1995, at 5; and 1995 from Paul Kagan Associates. Inc:., Palll Kagan's 10-Yem Cable TY /ndllstry Proj.ctions, July 1995, at 7. The 1995 figure is for December.

(4) MMDS subscribers: 1991 from Wireless Cable Investor, June 30, 1994, ·az 1; 1992-94 from Paul K.apn A.ssoeiates, Inc., Win/as Cable lltdJutry Proj.ctlons, 1992-2002, The 1995 Wireless Cable Datebook. Jm. 1995, at 23; md 1995 from WCAI Commeats, It 2. The 1995 figure is for June.

(5) SMATV subscribers: 1991·94 from Cab/• cl Pay TV c.,.,.,.,-~. Marketing New Media, Dec. 19, 1994, at 4 ; IDd 1995 from Jolm Mmlell, PriVIIC Cable InvestOr, Oct 19, 1995. Tbe 1995 ftprc ia for Scpcember.

(6) HSD sublcriben: 1991-92 from the sty1'REN8s reMirCb auf! IDd tbe DUmber of Gcuera1 lDsaumelll 1111bod:.uDoal for receipt of ICIIIDblecl piop~tnmina; 1993 from SMbscrlption Dmafrom Gcuralllr.Jtnl1lwlrl (Olin), styR.EPORT, Oct. 1994, at 21; 1994 from 1994 N~ Alllhorltatioru (Clan), styR.EPORT, Peb. 1995, at 9; IDd 1995 f.rolllDTB ~ . SkyREPORT, Oct. 1995, at 6. HSD IUblcriber fipra wae reduced by 1~to ICCOUDl for tbe estimmd number of CanwU'O IUblcriben. 1be 1995 fta1n il for Scpcealber.

(7) DBS aubecriben: 1993 fftlal Lll tlw Galer Bqi1l. styREPORT, May 1994, at 2; 1994 from Kem Gibbom, DIJS: W•'n WG/J'brt 1M Walk. Mwtk:hanad Newa, Jan. 16, 1995, at 3, 52; and 1995 fromD171 ~. styREPORT, Ocl.1995, 116. Tbe 1995 ftpze is for September.

(8) VDT Triall ftpra flom SectioD 214 Applicadaas, ex pane leaen IDd aaociated filings with FCC. 1be 1~ IDd 1995 fiaura are for October.

2181 TABLE l

1995 Cable MSO Borizoatal Coaceatntioa Natioawide1

CompanY Pet. of Subs .~

1 TCI 25.87 2 Time Warner 16.21 3 Continental Cablevision 6.85 4 Com cast 5.66

Top 4 54.59

s Cox Cable 5.3 3

Top 5 59.92

6 Cablevision Systems 4.40 7 Adelphia 2.48 8 Cablevision Industries 2.32 9 Jones Intacable 2.20 10 Viacom 1.90

Top 10 73.22

Top25 88.48

Top 50 95.21

HHI

' Calculaed by lpplyilla lbe Commiaioa's aaribution rules to IICCOUDl for mmet sh.-cs as of October 31 , 1995, based on sublc:ribertaells • o(Marc:b 31, 1995, 1r1d reported in Paul Kapn Assoe., Inc.. Top 100 Cab/~ Systor Op.aton t11 of Alttlrdt Jl. 1995, cable 1V lnveuor, June 30, 1995 (Insert).

1 The total number of industry subscribers used to calculate the HHls is 60,400,000, which was obtained by projec:tin& forward from tbe cod-of-yew total for 1994. Paul Kapn Assocs., Inc., Pay TY Swbscr~ber Hutory, cable 1V Financial Dltlbook 12 (1995). lbe projection was ln'ived • by multiplyin& by a growth rate factor of 1.025% for tbe first tbree IDOGdas of 1995, based on a reponed 4.1% muual poWib rate posted by the industry over the ftrst six IDOIIIbl of 1995. Jolm M. Higins .t Ria.d KMz, It's Basic: MSOs Having a Strong YIGP', MWtic:baDDel News, July 17, 1995 • 110.

, lbe HHI is calc:ulaed OD tbe bllis of mftlt sbnl for cbt top SO comp~nies. Because all of the remainin& MSOs have very small sbnl of lbe nurtcet. 11'1 HHI calculation dw included all cable symm openton oould only be sllcbdy hi&htr (no mon thaD 2·3 points) thlft the &iven HHJ.

2182 TABLE 3

Nationwide Concentration After Proposed Transactions1

Company Pet. of Subs. 2

1 TCI 29.00 2 Time Warner 18.37 3 Continental 7.05 4 Comcast 6.89

Top 4 61.3/

s Cox 5.33

Top 5 66.64

6 Cablevision Systems 4.40 7 Adelphia 2.68 8 Jones Intercable 2.33 9 Marcus 2.11 10 Falcon 1.74

Top 10 79.89

Top 25 91.13

Top 50 96.62

HHI

1 Calcullted by ..,.,ayiDa tbe Commiss1on's aaribution Nles to ICCOUilt for market shares if all transactions announced IS of Oc:lober 31, 1995, were coommmltf.d The numbers of subscribers used to perform the caJQIJaboas n repon.d iD Pial KlpD Assocs., Inc .. Top 100 Cable System Operalon as of March 31. 1995, Cable TV Investor, JuDe 30, 1995 (Insert).

1 The total number of iDclustry subscribers used to calculate the HHJs is 60,400,000, which was obtained by projecting forward from the cud-of-yar total for 1994. Paul Kapn Assocs., Inc., Pay TY SubsCI'iber History. Cable TV Financial Oatabook 12 (1995). lbe projection was arrived ll by muJtiptyins by a growth rate factor of 1.025% for the first three IDOlUbs of 1995, based on a reported 4.1% 11mual powtb rile posted by the industry over the first six months of 1995. Jobn M. Higins ct Ricbarcl Katz. It 's BaJic: MSOs Having a Strong Yeczr, Multichmnel News, JuJy 17, 1995, • 110.

l The HHI is calcuJited on the basis of market shares for the top SO c:omp~nies. Because all of the remainin& MSOs have very small shii'CS of the muket, an HHI c:alculllion that included all cable system operators could only be slightly higher (no more than 2-3 points) than the aiven HHI.

2183 TABLE 4

Changes In Concentration Of The Cable Industry Based On Total Sub5cribers

Post 1990 1921 1922 1993 1994 1295 Merger Top Share 24.0 24.5 25.2· 24.3 24.8 25.9 28.8 Top 2 Share 36.7 37.1 37.9 36.9 37.3 42.1 47.4 Top 3 Share 42.0 42.3 43.2 42.3 42.4 48.9 54.4 Top 4 Share 45.6 46.0 48.2 47.2 47.2 54.6 61.3 Top 5 Share 48.8 48.9 51.9 50.9 51.0 59.9 66.6 Top 10 Share61.6 61.4 64.6 63.2 63.3 73.2 79.9 Top 25 Share80.8 80.2 84.5 83.1 83.4 88.5 91.3 Top 50 Share91.2 90.9 94.5 93.1 92.4 95.2 96.6

RBI 866 872 928 880 898 1098 1355

Data for 1995 taken from, supra, Appendix G, Tables 2-3. Data for 1990 through 1994 were calc:ulated from information contained in Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Cable TV Finoncial Databook 14 (1991); Paul Kagan Assocs., ~ ·· Pay TV ~ubscriber History, Cable TV Financial Databook 12 (1992); Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Pay_ TV Subscriber History, Cable TV Financial Databook 12 (1993); and Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Pay TV Subscriber History, Cable TV Financial Databook 14 (1994). The data for the years 1990-94 have been recalculated after discussions with Paul Kagan Associates personnel concerning that company's methodology for including consoli~ non-consolidated and international subscribers. International subscribers have been deducted from TCI's subscriber totals in 1991-93 and the estimate of TCI' s subscribers in 1994 was similarly modified assuming continuation of historical trends. The figure for TCI's subscribersh.ip in 1990 based on infonnation contained in TeleCommunications, Inc., Form 10-~ Dec. 31, 1990, at 1-2 to l-4.

2184 TABLE 5 Cable System Transactions in Prlaciple That Have Beea Announced: September 1994- Nove•ber 1995

r ustenng Sub• . PA..-.cdMSO $90.00 6).100 $1,411 9.6

Oliao .t Glcodora. CA $51.90 26,600 $1,951 1.0

Groac PoiMc Cable $31.00 16,600 S1,9ll 10.7 Acquired remaining 7S% or cable (Graue PoiMc Twp.) systun. Oct-94 Flk:on Comm1111icatlons lAs& Hilb ~ c.a•aa, CA Sl.70 1.200 Sl,I9S 11.9 Oct-94 TCI ·Heritaac Communlcllioas PA..-cd MSO Sl90.30 114.200 $1,576 I.S (Comeall hll ·~ ownership Oct·94 WT Acquisition Corp. Tunc W~mtr tdoolclancl • sus 6.200 $1,417 I .S N Woodw•d. OK; Nlxoa 00 .t Flalonia, TX -V1 Nov·94 Adclpbia C1c.v Cblnncls Cable lV, KiliiMin&. PA Boca $111.30 69.200 $1,767 I. I West Palm Bcach/Doca lUton syslem RlfldniWB c•lc RlloniWcst Pllm BNch, adds to Adelphia's cxistina FL systems Assoclllion,Bcnjamin fL;HcndcnoniYMCIC wilh 300,000 subs. Tcny fnily Co.,NC Nov-94 Century Communlcllloas ML Media Plftnerl Anlheim, Faitflclcl, $116.00 135,000 Sl,ll9 IO.S System.s increase Century's subs. to 1.1 Hcrroosa million BeadiiManhaaln Budl .t Rohnert Pllt, CA Nov·94 Chll1er Communications BUo Cablevislon SIOdlbridlc a Henry ,S.SO 2,500 $1,201 II.S Acquired system adds to Chllkr's County, GA Atlanta cluster Nov-94 Continental Providence Joumal Cable MN; RJ ; MA; Ft. Myer1 $1,400.00 775,000 $1,106 11.1 Systcnu add 10 Cundncntal's dusters in (Colony Communications)- a Milmi, FL; Lot MN; Providcnc:c, Rll11oston, MA; Ft. partncr1hlp with Kelso .t An1etcs, Palm Sprinp, Myers .t Miami, Fl., I.A, Palm Co. systems llso sold Riverside County, CA; Sprin&s. Sacramento & Riverside Co., Clbklll Mounllins, NY CA; & Catskill Mtns , NV. Nov-94 Cox American Cable 1V Ncwpon Ncwa, VA $122 00 41,000 S2,S42 9.0 System adds to Cox's llillnpton Roads lnvesiOIS, LP (PilUS 4 .t clusu:t .. J97,000 subs in Norfulk, S).·TCI M&m~. Portsmouth, & VA !leach e er uatenng

Ill !CCV Communlct&ions AL Nov-94 NUSHAGAK Tclepllonc Dill..._ Clblcvlsioft Dillin&bn, AK S0.40 400 SI,OOO 6.0 Nov-94 Providence Journal Kill c.llll (SO%) CA, WA. a ID-tlucd S265.00 124,300 $2,132 11.7 l)'sta'nS Dec·94 CCT Holdinp (CIIIdu ()aylld~ llvusidc CouAty a S370.00 175,000 $2,114 9.7 Communlcldon (O.ylord~) P...... CA;NC,a Corp.JKclso Co. jolat SCYc4 ayAmll VerMin) Dec-94 Galaxy Telecom, LP Olluy cablcvisioa, LP IL a KY-tlacd MSO Sll.40 14,900 Sl.ll5 1.1 Dec-94

Jan·95 ContincnlaJ Clblcvlsion or O.ica&o Coot a DuP11c S11l.OO 16,000 Sl,OOO 11.1 Acquired syslems ldd co edstin& N_. eo-da, IL Chica&o clus~tr; Contincnllll will have 00 140,000 subs. in II Chiea&o suburbs. 0'1 Jan-95 ContincnlaJ Cablcvlsion or JKbonvlllc Bnldbd, Clay, a Dla 34,000 nla nla NMalu eo-tic~. fL Jan-9S FinCh Convnunications SllllmOIU Coounuaic.ldoRs Jo~~Mtowo, GlovusvUic ~!~~' 21,500 $1,500 11 .4 a~NY Jan·9S Galaxy Manaaemcnt Chutwcll <»1c or co L1rtmcr a Wcl4 ala llS ala nla Counties, CO Jan-9S Galaxy Telecom, LP Yis&a Communlc1llions AL, OA, FL. LA, A rt/1 10,000 ala nla MS~s)'Siems Jan-9S MKican tluntcr Cable Cable TV NJ (Amold Ieney City, NJ rtf• 11,000 ala n/a MacLean lluntcr now has 100% of (10% ownership) McKin1106'SimiiCI sysw:m. DeLuca-·20% owacnhip) Jan:9S Multimedia TCI Wldlila, KS S90.63 50,400 $1,791 10.6 System acquired through Italic of ll .t OK syslems with 40,600 subs. Jan-95 OpTcl, lnc. lntemationll Ridley PK. AZ, CA, a TX-basect SI7.SO 17,500 $1,000 8.6 Cable systems Jan-95 Robert McMillan Teme Warner Faycacvillc, ct al., AR $65.00 34,)00 Sl,I9S 10.1 Jan-9S TCI Multimedia, Inc:. IL a OK·bascd syslems Sl2.60 40,600 S2,0JS 9.9 Systems acquired lhmur.h uade of Wic:hila, KS system w1th S0,400 subs e er

. <:qUISlllOIIS to une amer s lndusttics subsldilly) lX; Minneapolis, MN; existin& c:lustcrs-249,000 subs in Ponlllld, OR; Orenae Houston; San Antonio & Laredo, lX; County, CA; P1111oa Mlnnnpoli.s, MN; Ponland, OR; A Systems(+ 50% Orance Co., CA. owncnhlp)-AZ, CA, FL. ME, NH, NM, NY, OR.& 1X Feb-95 C-TEC Hlalns Like Clblc, Inc. Hlgbts lAke, Ml S4.70 3,200 $1,469 nla Fcb-95 Oalrlcfhouse Group Clown Medii KY, NC, A SC-based $112.00 63,000 Sl,711 ola Systems inclease 0.111erhousc to l)'l&emt 161,000 subs. Fcb-95 Conlcast (ICqUimt 10% O~rclenSCIIe NJ-Baed MSO $27.50 19,461 $1,413 9.1 Comc:ast now owns SOO/o of Ouclen lnlaat) State. Fcb-95 Grcalc County Putncn, lnterMedia PIIWII (TCI Ccnii'IIIL·bascd aystems nla nla nla n/a Inc affiliaac) Fcb-95 Greene County Partners', United Video Ccnii'IIIL-based sysacms nla nla nla n/a Inc Fcb-95 lnltiMedil PlltiiUS (TCI TCI Alhcns, OA; AsllvUic, $16334 15,970 $1,900 1.7 Acquired systems lhrough track of N_. alliliate) NC; Clcvelllld, 'TN -systems in Santa Clara, Mountain View ct al., CA wilh 70,000 subs. 00 ...... Feb-95 Joftcs lntercable Cable TV Fund 12·8 LP AuJIISII, OA $141.72 66,000 $2,147 9.7 System will form cluster wilh exislln& adjac:ent system in norlhcm 0eOr&iiiAUJUSta. Feb-95 Lenkst Convnunic:atiofts Ollclen Stile NJ-Based MSO 127.50 19,461 $1,413 9.1 Len fest now owns SOO/o of O~rdcn (TCI so-~ ownership) State. (acquired I o-~ Interest) Fcb-95 TCA Cable Time W1111C1 RusaellvUie, AR $26.99 14,994 $1,100 10.) Feb-95 TCA Cable Time Wuner fayeacvllle, AR $37.10 19,)06 $1,922 10.4 Feb-95 TCI lnterMedl1 PIIWII (TCI Senta Cln. Mountaift SJl9.09 70,000 $1,917 1.9 Acquired systems lhrougb llade of Affiliate) VIew et II., CA Alhens & MilledceYille, GA; Ashville, NC; lt. Clevel,nd, TN systems with 16,000 subs Fdl'-95 Time Warner Cllblc:vision Industries (CI) NY·based MSO $2,719.00 J,l9S,7SO $1,941 9.9 Acquired systcms add to Tirne Warner's c:xistin& clustcrs·..CI has 250,000 subs. ln'NY Ntc, 131,000 subs in Ralc:ich/Grecnsbrlro, NC, 20,000 subs. in Orlanc:t.lfhmfll, J=J., 9~ .000 subs in San Fernando Valley, CA. & 92,000 subs in ( 'ulumhia, SC. e er Subs.

CA; OllnniloA" A Tctluridc. CO; Coeur cl' Alene. Moscow A 8oMas fe.Yy,IO; L~,.-T;fdc11y, VVA M•-9S Classk Cable .u.atc. C.WC Ealaprilc MO, KS, 01., A TX· SIJJO 9,100 Sl,l62 I .S Miceli)'.... M•-9S Fadt Cotnmualcldau l..eoalld Conlin llllicllloal 8ulltie, fcnldey, $11.17 12,100 $1,419 1.4 ...... o.u.~e. Sk:lly ...... LA; ~u Mll·95 Jones lntcrclble Cablcvbion or MIUISII M.....,,M-..s S71 .00 26,000 $2,731 9.0 Acquired systems add to Jones (Bcndlmalt Pill. a Prila ww- lntcr~ 's 125,000 subs. in Baltimore- Communiclllons) eou..y, VA VVashin110n, DC cluster. MII-9S Len(est Communiutions Sammons ~ PA-t.c41.,.aa. SS33.26 293,000 $1,120 10.6 Smunons' PA systems not acquired by (TCI SO% ownership) MIICUS. Mll-95 lconltd Fanc:h Communlcldou KS A LA~ syAeiM 117.20 12,100 Sl,750 1.4 N Comtnunic:ations ~ Mar-9S M11cus Cable S1111mons Communiclliofts CA. TX. IN, A I l Olhct S96HO 650,000 $1,411 9.S Acquisitions add II systems 10 00 00 .... MIICIIS's 2 TX systems, lncluclin& 140,000 subs In Dallas-t-'1. Worth; a s systems 10 M11cus's 2 ll sys1ems; Marcus larccst duster is 66 sySiems in VVI; rcmainina Sammons systems sc.Hcrtd in I) Ofbcr slaleS. Mll-95 Olympus Tclc,.. Clblcvbion Lee..... Cllrus, SI27.SO SO,OOO Sl,SSO nil Adds 460,000 subs to Adelphia's Communic:ations LP ~o..p.a systems, mostly in Miami It Palm (Adelphia V3 ownership; Orceotl Coullliea, FL Beach. Flodda Power A Upa Ill ownership) MII-9S Rock Associates, Inc. Calluly Colamwdcelloas CA, CO, 10, .-T A $14.00 47,000 $1,717 9.7 VVA-t.c4syDtml M11·95 TCA Cable Marcus Clblc San An&do, Alldlcwa, $65.10 12,100 11 ,915 10.) Adds 1o l<:A 's San Angelo clusler: Baltiapf,Miks,A TCA now has 540,000 subs VVInKrs, TX; M•-95 TCilTKR of llouslon Cabk/Net Communicllion Lupe Ciey. TX Sl.61 1,690 SI,S4l 9S M•-95 TKR Cable!TCI (joint S1111mons Communlcllions NJ-bascd systems S267.S4 147,000 $1,120 10.3 Systems arc 111use ol Sammnns nol veniUtc) ~cquircd by Marcus Apr-9S Adelphia (So-/e) St Mary's TV fo•. Rid&eway, .t l~lk $1.92 l,l.SO $1,169 77 Councy, PA ustenng

...... II

$3.55 3,Sl5 $1,004 8.0 Ollaxy Telecom, lP ewax, eawev•~o~t. LP CIIMIOft.lX Apr·95 A,_.AYort· $16.10 11,150 $1,300 10.4 Apr-95 OS CclmmuAicllionl PAa-icCaWe Coulliel, PA 7.2 Fa. Pienle. n suo 173 SIOO Apr·95 TCI of Florida NAKinMtricl,lac. 9.0 Pma,IA $0.60 700 $967 Apr·95 Telmd of PrtAoa V. Mlllu Clllritlllle Tnllt 10.4 c.noiiDil A Dublin, OA SlUl 11,140 $1,995 May-95 C1alrtcf ComrnuDicallall Pcadllnc Clllle TV O...,EqloriaA $69.11 32,500 Sl,ISO 9.9 May-95 Classic Clblc TtmeW..cr lndll IR ¢rncc, KS; Olll6codlc. KUid. A Mlnbiii,MO KS A MO-besed sys&cmS $65.10 31,000 Sl,IOO 9.8 May-95 Classic Cable WK Communleatlons MN, MO, MS. A WI· $3.36 3,100 $1,050 &.4 May-95 Flll\cll Communicalions Lcon11d Comm1111icltiofts .,...,... N (MIItt Twain (Della Clblcvlslon I) ..a Cablevision, LP) 8.4 00 Cripple emt. $0.41 400 $1,030 U) FinCh Communicalions Oold Counlly Clblcvlslon co May-95 Espinola, NM; CO, MN, $21.53 l7,l00 $1,045 8.s May-95 FMTC Mta. (FUKh . Mlltt Twain Clblnlsioft, • totO-bllcd &yllemS Communicallons) LP 10.1 K...... DI s6i.60' 31,100 $1,9&1 May·95 lnletMcclil Partners (fCI Time WIIIICf nffililfc) 9.5 Acquired syslems add 1u 125,000 subs Dille City ca al., VA Slll.OO 50,000 $2,460 Jones lnwenble Columbillnlemltionnl, 10 Jones's Baltimorc-Washin&ton, DC May-95 (Prillcc William County) Inc. wea cluster. $1,922 9.9 Snlan. NJ Sl4.l2 7,400 May-95 Lenfest Communie~tions Time Warner (TCI 5G-.4 ownership) $0.76 125 $91& 8.2 May-95 Mlltt Twain Cablcvision Della Communlcaion, Inc. Alma, BuiTalo, It: Codnne, WI Cox ~equircd Oullhead. A/ sysrem in lP Bullhead Cily A Mohave $20.00 13,000 SI,Sll 10.1 Mny-95 News-Press Gazelle Co. Cox Feb. 1995 l "imcs Mirror ('able deal. Co.,AZ 6.0 Dallas, TX $2.47 4,000 $618 OpTel, Inc. Aclion Cable TV 7.6 May-9S Galena It: Scales Mound, $0.12 700 $1,02) May-9S lllpid Communicalions Galena Cablcvlsion IL P11111crs, LP 49 Casey, Uncoln cl al .. so.a5 1,440 $587 May-95 lllpid Communicauons Green River Cable KV Plllners, lP nfa AR. KV. It: MO·bastd n/a 4,600 nfa Rapid Communicauons Renaissance CATV May-9S systems PIIIJI(rs. LP er ustenng ....

.... ' . May·95 VOlt Clblc: T-.w.... Rlntia, MS $2.66 1,650 $1,611 9.1 lta-95 AdclphitJOI)IIIIplll f ...... FL. PA, a New $171.90 101,000 $1,647 1.1 Acquired systems lldd 10 Adelpbla Commun~ Corp. Cam •lcllloM, EMiml Eaa&-cl.fiMc.d I)ISicms clusters-Olympus Communlcl&lons TdcoMt, ltoeiiMocl Clble (AdclpbiaiFPL joint venture) owns TV,~Iaa systems. c.oiiM C.W.TV (New ~ 1118·95 Conlinenlll c..olidlled,....., Clllle Rcc41cy, CA $15.20 11,2to $1,252 1.4 Jws-95 M•cusc.ble ecncom or Allblnll. LP BinD...... , FaycacvUic $151.00 13,610 $1,106 9.2 etll., AL J•-95 TCI Ctvonldc Publllllilll c-tllo, Coaconl, $565.00 lli,OOO $1,723 1.6 Acquired CA systems add 10 Tel's (Western Commulllclliou) Hand, ~y 1,000,000 su~s . Sin •·rancisco cluster ~n.o..d (includes affilialu--l.cnfcst's 111,094 o.ts, So. San Francbc:o subs. a lnterMedia Partners' 66,910 ....N a VCIIU1I Olullly, CA; subs.). I.D La Cnalel, NM; a to 0 J•-95 TCI Columbia Aaocilles, LP NV,()R.WA...- $304.00 147,000 $2,061 10.0 Columbia's 7S,OOO subs in I 1 Portlllld, .,.... OR suburbs add 10 TCI 's Portland cluster. J•-95 Torrcace Cablcvlslon Realonll Cllllc TV USA AL a MS-bascd l)'stellll . SUI 1,400 SS7S 1.0 USA Jul-95 Clblc USA (HH c.ble) Classic Clblc Axldl et II., NE $1.70 1,300 $1,262 I .S Jul-95 Olarlcr Communications United Video Clblcvlslon St. Louis Co., MO; $90.00 45,300 SI.91S 9.0 Acquired St. l..ouls Co. system adds to Naslloba Valky .-ca. Charter's MO cluster. MA Jui-9S Oannca Co., Inc. Multimedia, Inc. KS, IL. IN, NC. a OK- Sui.OO 4SO,OOO $1,913 9.2 ~l)lllems Jui-9S lnterMedia Partners (TCI TCI Nashville, TN $255.20 141,000 SI,IIO 9.2 Acquired system edds 10 lnlc:rMedia affilialc) 200,000 subs cluster in eastern TN . (dell follows lCINiacnm mercer) Jui-9S PA Educatlonll Adclpbia (7S% ownership) PA-bascd MSO $100.00 1,630 nla Employees/ Spectrum "'' f.quity (Trust Fund) (2S% ownership) Jui-9S Sunshine: Stile: Wildwood PlrlnCrs Wildwood, Fl. S0.40 400 $936 1.2 Clblesystems II Jui-CJS TCI Juumal World, n1c: fl Collins, CO SS9.60 30,000 $1,917 102 er Sub.

. systems 10 n- Inc. (TCI) OH-IIascd ayAa~aS 311,000 subs. In S1111 fr111cisco (90% o subs.); Suale (90% of subs.); PonllllldiSikm, OR (60•!. of subs.); Nasllville, TN; a Dayton, 011. Jul-95 Uaivmal CIWe C.... VIdeo~ MO. OK. a TX-I!Mecl $16.00 11,100 Sl,lll 1.5 CGmmunicl&ioM ayslans Aua-95 BmuA c .....lcadool Bye c.wc c.o.y,MH $1.90 1,000 $1,440 1.) Aua·95 C-TEC Men:lacn MSOsystcma $6.90 ala nla nla Aua-95 Ca11ury Coa!Mua~ c.c..ry YcMift Corp. Colando Spriftp Cl .... $155.00 100,000 SI,5SO 9.7 Ac:quind systems ldd 10 Cenlury's (TIIIIeW~ co Colorldo ciUSIU; lllded sysrems 1ft ~joill MUwlllkcc, WI ;

~------.... Aua-9s Post-Newsweek BiloxiiOccan Sprinp, $19.00 63,100 $1,410 1.2 Systems acquired throu&h llade of MS; Mooctlud, MN; Burtin&lllle A Union City, CA .t nonh OK-bescd systans Cblcl&o, ll sublllban systems with 39,400 subs. Auc·9S Post·Ncwswcdt Tlnle wIIIICf Prescott, AZ; Cleveland, $70.00 41,000 Sl,707 10.2 MS Aua·9S TCA Clblc Sllr c.wc Allocladoft Winllon·SIIem, NC; SI76.SO 29,000 $6,016 10.1 eo..w..sc Aua-95 TCACibte Time w.... AlexMdril .t PlnevUle, $61.00 29,000 S2,10l 10.5 Acquired systems add to adjacent LA NIIChifodlesiRusiOn, I.A system cluster; traded Winslon..Salem, NC .t Columbi' SC systems with 29,000 subs. Aua-95 TCI Col1011 Clblcvislon Colfoa,CA Sll.90 7,300 Sl,645 9.7 N (American C.WC 1V ~ lnvesiOfS, lP) \0 N Aua-95 TCI Post-Newsweek Burlinpme .t Union $19.00 39,400 Sl.259 10.6 Systems acquired throu&h llade of City, CA; IIORh Cll~, BUoxiiOccan Sprinas. MS; Moorehead, IL ...... MN; .t OK. systems with 63,100 subs. Aua-95 Time Warner Jon« lniUCible T....-. FL; o..taebwa Sl12~ · 93,000 Sl,l59 9.4 Acquired systems increase Time Warner .t Cordov' SC; Boone, clusten 10 700,000 subs. in Tampa; Hlmileoa, HIIICOCl. .t 145,000 subs in Oran&cbura, SC; It Mldisoe Counliu, IN 111,000 subs. in Indianapolis, IN; lfadcd Pr. Oeor&e's Co, MD It Reston, VA systems with IS ,OOO subs. Aua-95 Time Warner TCA Cable Winsfon·Salem, NC; S59:10 29,000 Sl,Oll 10.1 Part of Time Warner's acquisition of 3 ColumWa. sc Summh systell)S, which adds 160,000 subs to Time Warner's Winston-Salem .t Atlanll clusters; uaded systems in Alexanckia It Pineville, I .A with 29,000 subs. Aua·95 Time Warner American Cable 1V HI-based system S21.70 17,000 $1,611 9.1 IIIVUiofS, lP Scp-9S C-TE(' Twin COUIIIy Tnas·Yideo AllelliOwniBethlehcm, SI00.50 74,000 SI,JSI 10 Acqui11:d syst.:ms add tn ('-'liT's PA PA (ldlip Vlllley ~~ea) It NJ dustc1~ Sep-9S CATV Service, Inc. Universal~ While Deer e1 al., PA S0.60 600 SI,OOO IO.S ofPA er ustenng

C:QUIIC system to 011 S eJUSiilll Providence •ea; «raded system in Williamsport, PA with 24,SOO subs. Scp-95 Cox 'Ia Bcllcvucll.aVIstl, NE; SS90.00 295,600 Sl,961 10.0 Acquired systems IIC contiguous 10 Olcslpcltc, Cox's exislina dusters- add S7,000 VA;Scollldllc, AZ; subs. in l'tloeni11, 17,000 subs. in New N.AtlellorofT....,.,, Ortcans, .t 127,000 subs. in MA .t RJ; MA;Uncola, traded systems in PA, WA, It, MI . .t IU;St.Baurd, LA;.t lA with 319,200 subs. Council Blur&, lA; Sep·9S E. w. scrws (Scripps Mlci-T.-- CATV Kaoxvllle .t S62.SO 34,000 Sl,lll 9.0 Acquired systems increase eastern TN liow11d) Qaaanoop. nl·blsecl cluster 10 264,000 subs. sylleaiS Sep·9S Jones lntercablc Jones Spacclink/ c.blc TV Wl.t OH-bucd systems SSI.SO 31,100 SI,6S9 9.4 Sep-95 Jones lntcrcable Time Warner SaviiMih, OA Sl30.00 63,500 SI,91S 10.1 Acquired system through ttade of syste.ms in WI, IU, 1t. Oil with 77,500 subs. · Sep·9S "local opcrllOr" Airvicw CATV, Inc. YOft County, PA Sl.IO 2,000 SI,SSO 9.6 N Willllmsport. PA $36.40 24,500 $1,414 9-.0 · · Co11 acquired Williamsport, PA system . ~ Sep·9S Susquehanna Cable Cox \.0 In Time-Minor Cable takeover; traded w system in East Providence, Rl with I S,SOO subs. Sep-9S TCI All Points Association Kin& Coullcy, WA SS.lO 1,900 S 1,.3 IS 9.9 Scp·9S TC1 Cox Plasbwah. PA; Spokane, sm:cio 319.100 Sl,l36 10.0 Systems acquired through trade orNE, WA; Spriaalicld., IL; VA, AZ, MA, Rl, LA, lt. lA systems S~&lnaw, Ml; Ccd• with 295,600 subs. lJpkk .t Quad Cilics, IA·IL Sep-9!1 Tunc: Wamcr Jones lntcrcabk Kuoshl, Lake Geneva, ·Sl30.00 77,SOO Sl,677 8.) Acquired systems increase Time Mlftilowoc .t Ripon, Wamcr's existina dusters to 290,000 WI; Hllo, HI; .t Lodi, subs in Milwaukee; 13S, 000 subs. in OH ApplcsonKireen Bay; 300,000 subs on Isle or llawaii; lt. 22S,OOO subs in NE Ollio; traded system in Savannah,

. creer s not to omcast TN, AWY exist ina duSlcn (mljor Scripps I low•d clustcn--230,000 subs. in S~~eramento, CA; 251,000 subs. in KnoKvilleiChattanooea. TN: lk. smaller clusters in CO, Ft., GA , IN, KV, SC, A VA 11c nol near Comcast's major clusters). Oct-95 Coniine Rial Columblllntcf'Didoall, Ann Artlor A BripiOn, Sl55.00 74,000 $2,095 11 .4 Adds 16 communities to Continental's Inc. MJ MJ ciUSief. Oct-95 Olobal Acqulsillon Clble 'IV fund 11·8 Ll LlacasiU, NY $14.00 39,000 S2,154 11 .5 Pll1nal, LP (Adelphll) (JoMs lnlerciiWc) Oct-9S Prime Clblc Interface CommunJcatlons 1M Yeau. NY Sl.60 1,300 Sl.lll 1.2 Ocl-9S Rlpict Communications CUmballlld IUYcr c.blc Whklcy A Knox Sl.OO 90S Sl,07S 7.0 P111nm, LP Countics, KV Oct-9S Rays&ay Co. Mid-South Cable Batclcy Co., WY $4.60 2.100 Sl,60 9.2 Oct·9S TCI Prlmr Cable FL Bcod, TX (Houston) $230.00 125,000 SI,UO 10.0 Acquired systems ~ 10 uistine TCI's 200,000 subs. cluster in llouston N btetroplcx (Fl. Bend lk. tfanis ....& Countks). \.0 ~ Nov·9S Charter Communlutlons Mineral Area Clblcvlsloa South Ccnlrll MO nla 5,700 n/a nla Acquisition alves Charter 200,000 subs: (Omtaa Communkal.lou In MO. subsidi.vy) Nov-95 Ch.ur Communic11ions Omtaa SL Louis, MO suo · 5,700 $1.291 6.1 Nov-95 Media Ooc(US West) Nlllonal Cable Sysccms Adlnla, OA $220 2,900 $763 6.0 Associllion Nov-95 Summit Communicllions Cascade Clblcvisloa Lakebay, WA SI.IO 900 $1,241 10 Nov-95 TCI Woodlands Woodllllds, TX Sli.OO 7,000 Sl,SIO 10.0 TCI acquired remaining SO% or Communlc.lliofts (SO%) Woodlands system Nov-9S Time Warner Hawaiian Cablcvision Maul, HI SlUCJ 10,100 Sl,244 11 .0

Sources: -Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Cable TV Finance: First-Half /995 Anounced/Proposed Cable System Sales Ranked By Price, Jul. 3 I, 1995, at 4-5; Oct 17, 1995, at 10. ' - Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Cable 1V Investor: The /994 M&A March: Jlisions of the Late-'80s, Sept. 30, 1994, at 6; Amwunc·e(VProposed Cable System Sales, Ocl. 31, 1994, at 7; Jones /ntercable, Space/inA Amend Merger Terms, Nov. 28, 1994, at 4; Cable Deals Gammg .\jJ<•ed Toward the New Year, Dec. IS, 1994, aJ 9; Cable System Sales: /994 was 2nd-Best Year; 1995 Could Brealc Record, Jan. 3 I, 1995, at 8. Cable System Su/es: The Momemum Builds, reb. 28,1995, at 8; Cable System Sales: Brealllhrough To Come, Mar. 24, at 5; Cuble System Sales SH 75 ll1l in l.ft Quarter, Apr. 30, 1995, at 8; Cable Deal Flow Quickens in June, Jun. 30, 1995, at 8; TCVJiiucom: lfow Shrewd f'immnen <'milt' a Wm-Wm Deal, Jul. 31, 1995, at 4; Cable System Sale.s: Record lsi Half; LooA: What 's Next, Jul. 31, 1995, at 6; C-Tec Swallows Mercom in Below-Market Bite:r, Aug. 31, 1995, at 5-6; MSOs Swapping Their Way to AD/ Dotninance, Sept. II, 1995, at4; Swap Happy MSOs Lead $2.2 Billion Month, Oct. 17, 1995, at 10; AnnotmeM'Proposed Cable System Sale.s, Nov. 22, 1995, at 13. ·Paul Kagan Assou., Inc:., Cable TY System Salu 1994, The Cable 1V Financial Databook, Jul. 1995, at 139-143. -Pad Kagan Assocs., Inc:., Media Meracrs A Acquisitions: feb. 21, 1995, at 4; Mar. 31 , 1995, at 4; Apr. 30, 1995, at 4; Jun. 30, 1995, at 4; Jul. 31, 1995, at 4; Sept. 30, 1995, at 7, 10. - Broadcasting & Clble: C.. .. S..meT of Major League Clustering, Cable, Oct. 2, 1995, at 46-47; Comcast Buying Scripps System for $1.6 Billion, Nov. 6, 1995, II 91; Canlltwlrtai/Col..,bla Deal Done, Oc:t. 23, 1995, at60; TCI Prima for More Growth, Oct. 30, 1995, at 5S. - Time Warner and CO¥ to &II J Cable Systems, Wall Stted Journal, Aug. 9, 1995, at B S. - Post Co. to Pay 1110 Million for 17rrt~t~ Cable TY Systems, The Washington Post, Aug. 9, 1995, at F 2. - 1994 Competition Report, Table 10, M C-1. - TimeWarnet Cable Preas Releaes: Aq. I, 1995; Aug. 14, 1995; Sept. 6, 1995; Oct. 4, 1995. - Communications Dally, Oct. 4, 1994; Oct. 5, 199S; Oct. 14, 1994; Oct. 19, 1994; Oct. 26, 1994; Nov. 3, 1994; Nov. 7, 1994; Nov. 10, 1994; Nov. II, 1994; Nov. 22, 1994; Nov. 23, 1994; Nov. 25, 1994; Dec. S, 1994; Dec:. 9, 1994; Dec. IS, 1994; Dec. 21, 1994; Dec. 23, 1994; Dec. 27, 1994; Dec. 28, 1994; Dec. 30, 1994; Jan. 4, 1995; Jan. 12, 1995; Jan. 13, 1995; Jan. 17, 1995; Jan. 19, 1995; Jan. 20, 1995; Jan. 30, 1995; Jan. 31 , 199S; Feb. 3, 1995, Feb. 7~ 1995; Feb. I , 1995; Feb. 24, 1995; Feb. 27, 1995; Feb. 21, 1995; Mar. 2, 1995; Mar. 7, 1995; Mar. 14, 1995; Mar. 17, 1995; Mar. 24, 1995; Mar. 27, 1995; Mar. 21 , 1995; Mar. 24, 1995; Mar. 21, 1995; Mar. 31, 1995; Apr. 3, 1995; Apr. 4 .. 1995; Apr. 6, 1995; Apr. 19; Apr. 24, 1995; May 4, 199S; May I, 199S; May II, 199S; May 17, 199S; May II, 1995; May 19, 1995; May '23, 1995; May 31, 1995; Jun. 13, 1995; Jun. 21, 199S; Jun. 30, 1995; Jul. 3, 1995; Jul. 7, 199S; Jul. 20, 1995; Jul. 26, 199S; Jul..~ 1995; Jul. 31, 1995; Aug. 2 . 1995; ...... N 1.0 Aug. I, 1995; Aug. 9, 1995; Aug. 14, 1995; Aug. IS, 1995; Aug. 29, 1995; Aug. 30, 1995; Sept. I, 1995; Sept. 7, 1995; Sept. 8, 1995; ~ ept. 12, U1 1995; Sept. 18, 1995; Sept. 21, 1995; Sept. 26, 1995; Oct. 2, 1995; Oct. 3, 1995; Oct. 4, 1995; Oct. 10, 1995; Oct. 13, 1995; Oct. 23, l99S; Oct 24, 1995; Oct. 31, 1995; Nov. I, 1995; Nov. 2, 199S; Nov. 3, 1995. App~ndix H

TABLE 1

MSO Ownership in National Programming Services (Rank by Ownership Percentage)

Programmi.Dg Service Lauach Date Owaenhip Perceatage

Jones Computer Network 1/ Sept-94 Jones (100) Mind Extension University 1/ Nov-87 . Jones (100) Home & Garden 1/ Dec-94 Scripps-Howard (100) tv! Network 1/ Sept-94 TCI (100) Cinemax 11 Aug-80 Time Warner (l 00) HBO II Dec-75 Time Wm1cr (100) Flix! l/ Apr-91 ViiCOID (100)

The Movie Channel 1/ Dec:-79 Viaeom (100) . . M1V 11 Aq-81 Vaac:om (100) . ·

M1V Llrmo 11 Oct·93 Viacom (1 00)

Nick at Nite 11 Jui-IS Viacom (1 00)

Nickelodeon 11 Apr·79 ViiCOID (100)

VH-1 11 Jlll-&S Viacom (I 00)

Showtime 11 Jul.16 ViiCOID (1 00)

Encore 11 Apr·91 TCI (90) Encore Love Stories 11 Jul-94 TCI (90)

Encore Westems 1/ JuJ-94 TCI (90)

Encore Mysteries 1/ Jul-94 TCI (90)

Encore Action II sept-94 TCI (90)

Encore Tnae Stories IDd Drlllla 1/ Sept-94 TCI (90)

Encore WAM! Amcric:a•s Youtb Sept-94 TCI (90) Network l/

Home Shopping Network 11 Jul·IS TCI (80.4)

Home Shopping Network U 11 Sept-86 TCI (80.4)

AMC 1/ Oct-84 Cablevision SystemS (7S)

2196 ProcrammiD& Service Launch Date Ownenhip Percentage

QVC 11 Nov-86 Comcast (S7.4) TCI (42.6) Q2 1/ Sept-94 Comcast (S7.4) TCI (42.6) Bravo 1/ Feb-80 Cablevision Systems (50) Much Music USA 1/ Jul-94 Cablevision Systems (50)

GEMS Television 11 Apr~3 Cox (50) Catalog 1 11 Apr-94 Time Warner (SO) Comedy Central 11 Apr-91 Tune Warner (SO) Viacom (SO) All News Channel 1/ Nov-89 ·· Viacom (SO) Sci-Fi Channel II Sept-92 Viacom (SO) USA NetWork 11 Sept-80 Viecom (50) E! Entertainment 11 Jun-90 T1me W1mer (SO.O) Continental (10.3) Cauc:ast (10.3) Cox (10.3) TC1 (10.3) lndepaldcat Film Chllmel 1/ Sep-94 Cablevisioa Systems (SO)

Sun! 41 F~94 "{CI (49.9) The Oisc:overy Cblnnel 2/ Jun-85 TCJ (49) Cox (24.7) Faith 4 Values 41 JUD-84 Tel (49) The Lamina Chllmel 21 Nov-10 TCI (49) Cox (24.7) The lntei'DiliODil ChlaDel 41 JuJ-90 TCI (4.5) Outdoor Life Cbllmel 21 Jul-95 Cox (45)Continerual (22.5) Comeast (22.S) Request TtleviliOD 41 Nov-15 TCI (40) Request 2 41 Jul·ll TCI (40) Request 3·5 41 Sept-93 TCI (40) Prime Sports CbiDDel 21 Jan-19 TCI (34) Cableviaioa Systems (25)

CourtlV 2/ Jul-91 TCI (33.3) T'1me W~mer (33.3) Continencal (33.3) Sep CblaDel 21 Oee-94 TCI (33) Time Waoner (33)

Newsport 41 F~94 CablevisiOD Systems (25) Cartoon NetWork 3/ Oct-92 TCI (22.6) Time Warner (18.6) Comcast t•> Continental (•)

CNN 3/ Jun-80 TCI (22.6) Time Wuner ( 18 .6) Comcast (• ) CootiDcmal ( •)

2197 Programming Service Launch· Date Chvnership Percentage

CNN Intema1ional 3/ Jan-95 TCI (22.6) Time Warner (18.6) Comcast (*) Continental (•) Headline News 31 Jan-82 TCI (22.6) Time Warner ( 18.6) Com cast ( • ) Continental (•)

TNT 3/ Oct-88 TCI (22.6) Time Warner ( 18.6) Comcast ( • ) Continental (• ) Turner Classic Movies 3/ Apr-94 TCI (22.6) Time Warner (18.6) Comcast (•) Continental (•)

Viewers Choice 21 Nov-85 Cox (20) Ttme Warner ( 17) Continental ( 12) Comcast (11) Viacom ( 11) TCI (I 0) Viewers Choice: Continuous Feb-93 Cox (20) Time Warner (17) Continental (12) Hits 1,2,3 21 Comcast (11) Viacom (II) TCI (10)

Viewers Choice: Hot Choice 21 Jun-86 Cox (20) Time Warner (17) Continental (12) Comc:ut (11) Viacom (11) TCI (10)

Cable Health Club 4/ Oct-93 TCI (18.6) The Fma.ily Ch.mDd 41 Apr-77 TCI (11.6)

Action Pay-Per-View 3/ Sept-90 TCI (17.5) TDDe Warner (IS) BET 3/ Jan-10 TCI (17.S) lune Warner (IS)

The Box 41 Dec· IS TCI (S.S) The Golf Channel Jan-9S Continental, Comcast, Cablevision Systems. Adelphia, Cablevision Industries (••)

Product Informldoa Network Apr-94 Cox, Jones (••) Television Food Necwott Nov-83 Continental, Adelphia, Cablcvision Industries, Scripps-Howvd. C-TEC (••)

• Denotes owncnbip pen:enmp of less than 5%. •• Owncnbip perc.ea~~&e DOt avmlablc. 11 Service is OWDed by a MSO that holds a 504'/o or greater interest. 21 Service is owned by multiple MSOs ·whose combined interests are SO% or greater. 3/ Service is OWDed by multiple MSOs whose combined interests are less than 5o-'lo. 4/ Service is OWDed by a siDgle MSO whose interests arc less than so-;..

Sowyes: Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Cable Nerworlc OwMnhip, Cable TV Programming, Oct. 25, 1995 at 4; Rich Brown. The Tele-Commrmicatiom Inc. Empire: The Long reach ofJohn Maione and TCI, Broadcasting & Cable, Oct. 16, 1995, at 38-45.

2198 TABLE2

Existing National Prognnnming Services Without A Cable Operator Holding An Ownership Interest

Programming Service Launch Date National Access Television Network, Inc. Mar-94 Adam & Eve Channel Feb-94 A&E Television Network Feb-84 America's Talking Jul-94 Asian American Satellite TV Jan-92 Cable Video Store Apr-86 Canal de Noticias NBC Mar-93 Canal Sm Aug-91 Channel America Television Network ~~88 CineLatino Dec-94 (in U.S.) Classic Sports Network May-95 Classic Arts Showcase May-94 CMT: Country Music Television Mar-83 CNBC Apr-89 C-SPAN• Mar-79 C-SPAN 2• Jun-86 Consumer ·Resource Network Dec-94 The Crime Chalmel Jul-93 Deep Dilb Jan-86 Disney Channel Apr-83 Employment Cban:oel Feb-92 ESPN Scp-79

2199 Procrammillg Service Launch Date ESPN2 Oct-93 EWfN: The Catholic Network Aug-81 The Filipino Channel Apr-94 Foxnet Jul-91 fx Jun-94 FXM Oct-94 Oalavision Oct-79 The Game Show Network Dec-94 The History Channel Jan-9S The Inspirational Network (INSP) Apr-78 Jewish Television Network Jan-81 Kaleidoscope: America's Disability Juit;-90 Network (incorporating the Silent Network) Lifetime Television Fe\>.84 Mor Music TV Aug-92

~ASA Television Jul-91 NET· Political NewsTalk Network (formerly National Empowerment Dec-93 Television)

~etworkODe Dec-93 ~ewsTalk Television (formerly The Talk CbanDel) Oct-94 ~ewsworld lntemaUonal Sep-94 The 90s Clwmel Nov-89· Nostalgia Channel Fe\>.85 Playboy Network (formerly Playboy Nov-82 Channel) Prevue Feb-88

2200 PropuallliD& Service Launch Date SCOLA Aug-87 Single Vision Jun-94 Spice May-89 Tel em undo Jan-87 TNN: The Nashville Network Mar-83 The Travel Channel Feb-87 Trinity Broadcasting Network Apr-78 Trio Sep-94 TV Asia Apr-93 TV-Japan Jul-91 UNetwork Oct-89 Univisioa Sejt-76 ValueVisioa Oct-91 Via TV Network Aug-93 Video Catalog Clwmel Oct-91 The Weather Chaanel May-82 Worship Network Sep-92 Z Music Mar-93

• Curreatly, there • ao MSO CJWDCISbip inceresu in C-SPAN IDd C-SPAN 2. Howewr, several MSOs support C.SPAN IDd n aepa..ad oa 1be bolrd of ctirec:ton IS votinc members. /994 &pon, 9 FCC Red at 7S21 1 171; s• tiUo ld. a 7599, AppeDdix G, Table 7 n.l.

Sowgs: NCTA CMI•Mit, June 30, 199S, Appendix E. Table 4; Paul K.apn Assocs., Inc:., Cable Networlc Owtwnltip. Tbe &c.am.ics of Basic Cable Naworks:l994, Nov. 1994, It 42-43.

2201 TABLEJ

Plamled National Programming Services With Ownenhip Interests Held by a Cable Operator'

Programming Service Expected Launch Date

Animal Planet 199S Applause Networks 1996 BET on Jazz Jan-96 Jones Health Network 1996 Jones Laoguaae Network 'TBA LiviD I 1995 The Pmals ChamJe1 1996 PliDet Central TV 1st Quancr 1996 Quat! NIA . Rommce Classics 1996 1be Siqles Network 1996 Speedvisioo 1996 Sundance Film Cblanel 1996 Tel/Microsoft CbiDDel 1996 Televisioa SboppiDa Mall 1996 TV Mlcy's 1996 WCIIDCil'S Spans Networlt (TX) 'TBA World Afticaa Network 1996

N/A - Not Avdlble

Sours:es: NCTA Cwnuwmu, Appmdix E, Table S, June 30, l99S; Cablevisioa. A WJto 's Wlto of New Nets, New Network Handbook: A Compn:bmsivc Guide to Tomorrow's Cable Prop~mmina, Apr. 199S, at 33A-47A; Clto1uwl SIITjing- (Able's N,., Nets, Bro.dclsring & Cable, Nov. 27, 1995, It 76-~; Database: Announced Services, Cablevision, Aug. 21, 1995, at 60.

1 "Ownership interest" refers to a 5% or greater interest in the programming service.

2202 TABLE 4 Plamled National Programming Senices Without A Cable Operator Holding AD Ownenhip Interest

Procramminc Service Expected Launch Date Action America TBA American lndependent Network N/A American West Network 199S America's Health Network 199S

Art & Craft Network 3rdl4th Quarter 1996

Arts & Antiques Network 0 1996 The Auto Channel 1996 Automotive Televisioa Network/Alll 1996 Benefit Network 1997 Boolmet •• Career & Educ:atiOil ()ppoltmlity Network 4tb Qulner 1996 . CaW ope 1996 CEO CbiDnel 1996 Channel SOO 1111-96

Childral's Cable Necwork 199S CHOP TV TBA Classic Music ChiDDII 1996 Collectors ci.mel 1996

Coaservlliw T~ Ncwadc 1996 daVinci TilDe A SpK.e 2ndl3rd Qulrter 1996 The EcoJoay Ouanel 1996 The Enricbmeat Cbllmel TBA Entatainmcnt Prosperity fDsiabt Chalmel 1996

FAD TV (Fashioa ~ Desip CblnDcl) 199S Fuhioa & Style Network 1996

2203 PJ'Oiralllllilll Senice Espected Launch Date Fitness 8l. Interactive Television (formerly FX1V Fimess and Exercise Television) 4th Quarter 1996 Gaming Entertainment Television TBA

Global Entertainment Television 1995 Global Village Network . TBA Golden American Network 4th Quarter 1996

The Gospel Network 4th Quarter 1996 The Health Channel Postponed indefinitely Hip-Hop Television 2nd Quarter 1996 Hobby Craft Network 1996 Horimns Cable Network lst Quarter 1996

The Jackpot Chllmel Oct·96 Las Vega 1V Network NJA lbe Louery Cbllmel 199$ lbe Love Network 1996 MBC Movie Network 'IBA Merchandise Entertainment Television N/A National 8l. lntcmlbon.al Sincles Television 1995 Network New Scicace Netwark 1997 ORBlV 1995 Ovadoa 1995 PlreDt TelevisfoD 1995 P•entiq Sllellite 1V Necwortc 1st Quilter 1996 1he Pet Tllmliaa Nerwodt May96 Popcom CblaDel J99S

Premiere Horse Network I st Quarter 1996 Prime Life NetWork I st Quartet 1996 Real £stale 1V Network 1995 Recovery Net/The Wellness Channel 1996

2204 Procrnl•'-1 s.mce Espected Laaacb Date The Seminlr Cbllulel 1996

Sewina & Needles Ans Network 'mA

The Su~ess Channel 199S Talk 1V Network 1997

The TecbnoloiY Cbmnel 2nd Quaner 1996

Telecompras Sboppina Network 1995 1995 'mAX Television Network .. 1V 5 1995 Women's Spons Network (NY) mA .

N/A • Not Availlble

Sowgs: NCTA CcwmrMIIb., Appendix E, T_.. 5; .4 W1lo 's W1lo of Nn~ Nm, Cablevision. Apr. 1995, 1t 33A· 47a; C,_,. Swfbtg. c:«H.'s Nrt~~ N.u, Bn.Wo esrinaiDd Cable, Nov. 27, 1995, ll 76-16; l>tzlabau: ~ S.VU:C, ClblevisiaG Aua. 21, 1995. ll 60.

2205 TABLE 5

Major MSO Ownenbip in NaCional Programming MSO Rank in Order by Subacriben

l1lllnrlllen TCI.... n .. Cablevlsloa C•blevlsloa Scnka .. -.,(Ia Wanu Coallulltal Ce•eac C.a SJIU•• Addp.ll lldlltlria Jonu Vlaco• Actioft hy..fet-VIcw V 7.0 17.5% 15.0%

AUNcwso.-1 • SO.O% AMC 55.0 75.0%

BET 43.0 17.5% 15.0%

lkBox . 11.7 5.5%

Bravo 2U 50.0% .. : .. N 4.9 11.6% N Cable Helllh Oub 0 ~ c.tooft )/ 20.3 22.6% 11.6% X X

Clilllot I • 50.0% Cincnw 1.1 lOG%

CNN 31 66.2 22.0% 11.6% X X

CNNI...... ,3/ • 22.6% 11.6% X X

Comedy Calrll 35.9 50.0% SO.O%

Court 1V 23.1 33.3% 31.3% 33.3%

Dis<:overy II 6S.4 49.0% 24.7%

E!Entmllnmeftt 33.0 10.3% 50.0% 10.3% 10.3% 10.3%

Encocc so 90.0% Eneorc Love SIOfies • 90.0% St1btcrlbtn TCI n.e Cebltvbl011 Ce bkvlslon Stnku (II Werau C011llttt1tll Coacut Co• Sy1ttaa Adelphia l•diUiritt Jonts Vlaco• MII!Mu) Encore Westerns • 90.0% Encore Myslerles • 90.0% Encore Action • . to.O% Encore True SIOrles A • 90.0.. Dnma Encore WAMI Amera•a • 90.0.. YOUib Netwolk l Flilb A Vlluea a..od 14.1 49.0..

The F1111Uy ChaMcl 61.7 11.6" Flbcl ll.J@

OEMS Television 3.1 SO.O% N .. N ...... ,0 The Ootr a..nnct 41 • 41 41 41 4/ HBO 19.2 100.0% 100.0% Headline News 3/ su 11.6" "·'" • ll IISN 40.9 10.4% 4/

HSNII 21.9 10.4%

lnclcpcndciiC FUm ChiiMCI 3.0 SO.O%

lntunlllonal Channel 7.2 4S.IM

Jones Compllta Nctwort 1.2

Lumina Channel 40.0 49.0% 14.6% Mind Execnslon 15.9 Univcnlly

Movie Olenncl 11.2@ too.cw. - S•hcrlbtn TCI n .. Cablnlslee Cablnb... Senlett (Ia Wti'MI' c.. tt.eetal c.. cut c•• Srate•• Addfllla ...... "" Joan Vlato• MIIIHa)

MTV 61 .0 100.0% MTV l..aalno • 100.0%

MIIChM~&~ic .,., 50.0% • ' NcWipOfl • 25.0% Nlct • Nile 61 6).6 100.0% Nlc:tdodcoft 61 6U 100.0% Outdoor Life 1.0 22.5% 21.5% 45.0%

Prllne Spada 0...1 41 .S )4.0% 15.0%

Prodlta lefonMtion Net • 11 11 QVC S).O 42.6% 57.4% N .. N Ql 11 .9 41.6% S7.~ 0 00 Rcqycat Ttlcvl.slocl 24.S 40.0% RcqiiCIIl • 40.0% .. RcqiiCII l·S • 40.0% Sd-Fia.-1 24.6 50.0% StpOinnd • ]).0% UO% .,.._ ll.l@ IOO.o-1.

S.ZI 1.1 49.9%

TV food Nctwortt SJ 1).) SJ Sf S/ TNT ll 64.7 22.6% 11.6% • • Tllllltf Movie Classic ll 5.6 22.6% 11.6% • • tvl Nctwoftl 5/ • 100.% S•blcrlbtn TCI nae CablevWoa Cablcvisloa St~a (ill Waner Coatlaeetal C..UII Col Systeas Adtlp~la lad111strlt1 Jonu Vlecoa Mllleea)

USA 65.7 SO.O%

VH·I Sl.O 100.0%

Viewers ClOke 14.2 tO:CW. 17.0% 12.0% 11.0% 20.0% ll.O% Viewcn Qolce: • 10.0% 17.0% 12.CW. ll.CW. 20.0% 11.0% Continuous Hill I, l, 3 Viewers Ololcc: Hot • IO.CM 17.0% 12.0% 11.0% 20.0% ll.O% Choke

Sources: Subscriber count was oblained from: Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc:., NeJWOI'k Cen.Jau: July Jist, Cable 1V Programming, Aug. 31, 1995, at 12. Ownership percentaaes were obtained from: MSO public: filings at the Securities and Exc:hange Commission; Mega Media Top I J, Broadcasting and Cable, Aug. 7, 199S, at 6; Rich Brown, The Tele-CommunicatloiU Inc. Empire: 17te Long Reach ofJonhn Malone and TCI, Broadcasting & Cable, Aug. 16, 199S, at .4S; Paul Kagan Assocs., Inc., Cable NeJWOI'l Ownership, The Economics of Buic Cable Networks: 1994, Nov. 1994, at 42-4). ·Ownership interests reported for earlier periods may not renec:t current ownership. N N 0 \0 @ Subscribers include Movie Channel. F/lx, and Showllme. • Indicates subscriber amount is not available. I/ Newhouse Broadcasting interest in the Discovery have been consigned to Time Warner. 21 A programming service of BET Holdin&s, Inc:. See BET Holdings, Inc., 7131194' Annual Report at 34. 3/ A programming service of Turner Broadcasting System. Interests marked by an "x" represent other cable companies having S% or less ownership interest in Turner. See NCTA Comments, Appendix E, Table I. 4/ Official ownership percentages in 17te Golf Channel are not available. However, according to Cablevision, A Who's Who of New Nets, New Network Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Tomorrow's Cable Proanmming, April 24, 1995 at 38-A, Adelphia Communications, Cablevision Industries, · Comcast, Continental, and Cablevision Systems hold ownership interests in The ·GOlfChannel. Sl Voting partners in Television Food NeJworl A percentaaes of ownership include Saipps Howard (13.17%) and Landmark (12.00%). Others having less than.S% interest are: Cablevision Industries, Adelphia Communications, Times Mirror, and C-TEC. Perc:entages provided by Mr. John Davis of Wiley Rein, Scp 21, 1995. 61 Subscriber counts for Nic~lodeon and Nlcl at Nile are not available separately. 11 Percentage of ownership is not available. TABLE6

Vertical Integration: TQp 25 Programming Senices by Subscribership1

Number of ProgralllllliDg Networ:k MSO Ownership Subscribers (Top 25) Interest in Network Rank (Millions)••

I ESPN 66.8 None 2 CNN .. 66.6 TCI, Time Warner, & others with 5% or less

3 TBS• 66.5 TCI, Time Warner. & others with 5% or less

4 USA Nerwork 65.8 Viacom 5 Discovery 65.8 TCI & Cox 6 TNT 65.2 TCI. Tune Warner, & .. othas with 5% or less 7 C-sPAN 64.3 II 8 Nicblodeaa/Nidt • Nite 63.6 Viacom 9 TNN (1be Nasbville Network) 63.4 None 10 1be Fllllily CblaDel 63.2 TCI 11 Lifetime 62.6 None 12 Arts & EDtenliDmeat 62.4 None 13 M1V 61.0 Viacom 14 1ba. WCIIber Chlmel 58.8 None IS Heldlille News 58.6 TCl, Tune Warner. & others with 5% or less

16 CNBC 55.2 None

17 AMC (~ Movie Cbllmel) ss.o Cablevision Systems 18 QVC 53.5 Comcast & TCI 19 VH-1 52.0 Viacom 20 BET 43.2 TCI & Time Warner

• See Table S for ownersbip pen:entaaes

2210 Number of ProcrammiD& Network MSO OwDenhip Subscriben Interest in Network Rmk (Top 2S) (Millions)• •

21 The Leamina Channel (TLC) 41.1 TCI 1r. Cox 23 HSN 40.9 TCI 24 Prewe Channel 40.8 None

25 WGN• 38.9 None

Sources: MSO public filings It the Securities and Exchanae Commission; Paul Kapn Assoc:s., Inc., Cable Nerworlc Ownenhip, The Economics of Basic Cable Networks:. 1994, Nov. 1994, at 42-43; Mega Media Top JJ. Broadcasting lr. Cable, Aua. 7, 1995, at 6-7.

• Although Paul KJaan's analysis of A.C. Nielsen data rate supersw:ions TBS & WGN as cable networks for the purpose of filings. they n. iD KlU&lity, broadcast licensees. •• For services offered oa a per cb11111el or per proaram biSis. the number of subscribers are the number of uniu pl)'ina for the iDdividual prop•nmiDa service. For other pr'OIJ'IIIUDina services, the number of subscribers represent me number of cable sublcriben to wbom the service is available oa a pojiiiDWinl tier.

1/ Cable aftililtes provide 95% of fimdiD& but have no ownership or P"'i*IDl ccotrollin& interests.

2211 TABLE 7

Verticallntegratioa: Top Fifteea Programmiag Services By Prime Time lUting

Rank Programmin1 Service MSO wttb Ownership Interest' 1 USA Network . Viacom 2 TBS TCI, Time Warner (others have S% or less) 3 TNT TCI. Time Warner (others have so;. or less) 4 Lifetime None ' s ESPN None 6 Cartoon Network TCI. Tune Warner (others have S% or less) 7 CNN TCI. TUDe Warner (ochers with 5% or less) a Discovery TCI. Cox 9 Ans A EatenaiDmeDt Noae 10 The Fllllily CblaDel TC1 11 1'NN (lbe Nllbville Network) Noae .

12 BET TCI. TUDe W~mer 13 Sci-Fi ChlaDel VIKOID 14 ne LamiDa CblaDel TCI, Cox

lS E! EDtcnaiDmcDt Tune W~mer, TCI, Continattal, Comcast, Cox

Soyrces: NCTA Commeatst June 30, 1995, Appeadix E. Tlble I; Paul Klpn Assocs., IDe-. PriMe-Time <ittp, .My /99$, Cable 1V Proar*""'in& Aua- 31, 1995, It 10.

1 See Table S for ownership percentages

2212 APPENDIX I

Comments on Program Access Issues

1. Expansion of Program Access Rules to Non-Vertically Integrated Programming Providers. Several satellite packagers support expansion of the program access rules to non-vertically integrated programming providers. Satellite Receivers. Ltd.• ("SRL") states that programmers have engaged mprice discrimination against HSD systems and submits that the Commission must provide a remedy for violations of the program access rules, such as permitting recovery of unjustified overpayments. 1 Satellite service providers argue in favor of extending the program access rules to non-vertically integrated programming providers as the only way independent HSD. distributors will have fair access to all programming.2 ·

2. The MMDS industry also supports expansion of the program access rules to non-vertically integrated programming providers. W'ueless Cable Association International. Inc., ("WCAI"}, argues in favor of extending the program access rules to non-vertically integrated programming providers because "the power that wired cable exerts over programmers stems not only from vertical integration, but also from its status as the current local distribution monopoly. "3 WCAI states that several non-vertically integrated programmers charge wireless cable systems higher nilies than simil~ly situated franchised cable systems, conduct which they argue would be unlawful by vertically-integrated programmers. WCAI includes an attachment to its comments an article by David Waterman, Vertical Integration and Program Access in the Cable Television Indu.rtry, which concludes that the program access rules should apply equally to all program suppliers, because both vertically integrated 8Dd non-integrated firms tend to engage in the same pattern of behavior with respect to proaram pricing and availability.•

3. The National Cable Television Association, ("NCTA"}, opposes expansion of the program access rules to non-vertically integrated programmers and believes that these rules have already establisbed the ability of MVPDs to compete in the market with cable

•..

I SRL Comments at 1-2.

2 SRL Comments at 5; see also PrimeTime 24 Comments at 5-6.

3 WCAI Comments at 17; see also ~CAl Reply Comments at 3-6.

• David Waterman, Vertical Integration and Program Access in the Cable Television Industry, 47 Federal Communications Law Journal 511, 514-15 (1994). Waterman argues that Coogress focused on the potentially anticompetitive effects of vertical relationships in cable without also considering the horizontal market power that exists at the MSO leve4 whether affiliated or not. Id at 531.

2213 television.' NCTA calls expanding the program access rules "proposing a solution in search of a problem. "6 NCT A argues that the 1992.Cable Act's legislative history indicates that Congress only intended to apply the program access rules to vertically integrated cable • systems, 7 that there is no evidence that non-vertically integrated programmers have failed to provide access to MVPDs at reasonable, marketplace rates, and that the Commission and Congress have stressed their preference for marketplace solutions rather than government regulation.8 . 4. However, the National cable Television Cooperative, Inc., ("NCTC"), a buying cooperative of small cable operators, differs with NCT A, arguing that there is little distinction between the competitive impact of discrimination by vertically and non-vertically integrated program providers. Accordingly, NCTC ~rts that several non-vertically integrated video programming providers charge NCTC's sn1all system operators a rate "meaningfully higher" · than rates charged to larger MSO's.9 The Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association of American ("SCBA") agrees, arguing that "[t]he unjustified price discrimination by non-vertically integrated programming providers refusing to deal with NCTC remains a seriOUS impediment to small Operators (sic] ability tO COmpete. "10

S. Programmers generally oppose extending the program access rules to non- vertically integrated programmers. 11 They argue that doing so would needlessly burden independent programmers, 12 that "there is no evidenQe. that non-cable [MVPDs] have been denied access to programming by non-vertically integiated progrimmers," 13 and that the rationale for the program access rules - limiting the perceived ability of cable operators to

5 NCTA Comments at 33-39; NCTA Reply Comments at 11-15.

6 NCTA Comments at 35.

7 NCTA Comments at 36; NCTA Reply Comments at 12.

1 NCT A ~mments at 38.

9 NCTC Comments at 6. &e also SCBA Reply Comments at 6-8.

10 SCBA Reply Comments at 3:

11 Lifetime Television ("Lifetime") Comments at 1; Viacom Comments at 1-2; ESPN Comments at 1-2; Group W Satellite Communications ("GWSC") Comments at 3-5; CNBC, America's Talking and Canal de Noticias ("CNBC") Comments at 7; ESPN Reply Comments at S-8; Viacom Reply Comments at 2-7.

12 Lifetime Comments at 6.

13 ESPN Comments at 2; see also GWSC Comments at 3.

2214 impede competitors by withholding access~ programming by programming services they control - does not apply in this circumstance. 14 ESPN argues that the Commission bas no administrative record or legislative history to support an extension of the program access l1lles to non-vertically integrated programmers.15 Indeed, ESPN believes that the Commission should look for a way to limit the intrusiveness of the current program access rules and should recommend to Congress that they be "eliminated entirely."16 HBO, however, argues that while government regulation of program access is unnecessary, as long as such regulation exists, it should apply equally to all program suppliers, regardless of their affiliation with cable operators.17 HBO does not see a legitimate distinction between vertically integrated and non-vertically integrated programmers.•• It also believes that "[i]f there continues to be a concern that cable operator-owned programmers could discriminate against non-cable MVPDs, the same logic would compel the applicatiop of similar program access rules to the LEC/program.mer ownership arrangements."19

6. Expansion ofthe Program Access Rules to Non-Sale/lite Delivered Programming. Liberty Cable argues that as the major MSOs cluster their systems and escalate their use of fiber optic network to virtually unlimited transmission capacity, it is no longer necessary to rely upon satellites to deliver video signals. Thus, argues Liberty Cable, "as satellites become an increasingly inefficient means to deliver video signals, the current program access provisions . . . will lose their effectiyeness. "20 WCAI also supports expansion of the program access rules to non·satellittfdelivered prppmming and submits that the Commission should recommeDd that Congress "exteDd the prosram access provisions of the 1992 Cable Act so that they are applicable to DOt only satellite-distributed programming services, but all programming services regardless of tbc mams of distribution. "21 In contrast, Time Warner argues against applying tbc program access rules to non-satellite delivered

14 Viacom Comments at 3-6; VI8COJD Reply Comments at 4; see also Lifetime Reply Comments at 2·3.

15 ESPN Comments at 4-7; see also Lifetime Reply Comments at 2·3; Viacom Reply Comments at 3-4:

16 ESPN Reply Com~~W.Uts at 8.

17 HBO Comnents at 23·24; HBO Reply Comments at S-6.

11 HBO Comments at 24.

19 ld

20 Liberty Cable Comments at 12; su also Section D.E. supra regarding SMATV and private cable.

21 WCAI Comments at 18.

2215 programming.n

7. Application ofthe Program Access Rules to Customer-Programmers ofLEC Facilities and to Programming Affiliates of LECs. Commenters raise two concerns about the potential application of the program access rules to LEC activities and affiliates. The first concern is whether the program access regime extends to non-LEC affiliated programmers who provide service over a VDT platform.

8. Two LECs strongly supp6rt the application of the program access rules to VDT platforms. Bell Atlantic argues that packagers offering programming over a VDT system should be entitled to the benefit of the program access rules. 23 Bell Atlantic points out that this issue is currently the subject of a pending program access complaint24 Similarly, GTE urges the Commission to aggressively enfoi~e its existing program access rules in order to protect alternative programming providers. 25

9. The second concern is whether the program access regime should apply to programming of LEC affiliates that provide programming over VDT platforms. NYNEX argues that since in its view Title VI does not apply when programming is provided by an affiliate of a common carrier VDT provider, the program access rules, which are part of Title VI, do not apply.26 NYNEX states that when aLEC is a cable operator, the program access rules would apply. 27 This issue is the subject of a p;nding Commiaion proceedina.za Viacom specifically opposes exteDdiDg the program ~ rules to LECs, arguing among other things that it would discourage LEC investment in programming.19 GTE also opposes expansion of the program access rules to LEC affiliated c::ontcnt providers.30 Comcast Cable

22 TWC Reply Comments at 14-17; see also Section ll.E. supra regarding SMATV and private cable; NCTA Reply Comments at 12-13.

23 Bell Atlantic Comments at 14-16.

24 See CAI-:!_Virelus Systems Inc. and Connecticut Choice Television, Inc. v. Cablevision Systems Inc. et ill.. File No. CSR 4479-P (filed Feb. 28, 1995).

25 GTE Reply Comments at S.

26 NYNEX Comments at 10-11: ·

27 ldat 11.

21 Fourth Notice of Proposed Rulemalring, 10 FCC Red 4617 (1995).

29 Viacom Comments at S; see also Lifetime Reply Comments at 4-S.

30 GTE Reply Comments at 4-6.

2216 Communicaticms ("Comcastj argues to the contrary, that when LECs provide video programmina, they should not be relieved of the rules that apply to cable operators and that "tileR is no basis for requiring cable operators, pursuant to the program access rules, to make their program services available to telco distributors of video programming while allowing the. telcos to deny their own programming to competing cable operators. "31

11 Comcut Reply Comments at 13-.14.

2217 SEPARATE STATEMENT

COMMISSIONER ANDREW C. BARRETT

Re: Annual Assessment of the Status oi Competition in the Market .for the Delivery of Video Programming [CS Docket No. 95-61]

In accordance with its obligation pursuant to Section 628(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,' the Commission has adopted its annual repon on the status of competition in the market for the delivery of video programming ("Competition Report"). Numerous conclusions are reached in the Competition Repon regarding the extent of competition among multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) and the status of competition in the multichannel video programming marketplace. While I agree that cable television operators remain significant players i1Hbis arena, I believe that the level of competition has, in fact, increased such that reevaluation of the effective competition standard set forth in the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 ("Cable Act of 1992")2 may be warranted in order to tnlly assess the need for the imP.Jementation .of rate regulation.

In this Report, the Commission, among other thinp, evaluates the growth of MVPDs since the submission of its 1994 Competition Repon to Congress. Direct Broadcast Satellite subscribership has increased from 600,000 households in 1994 to 1. 7 million households in 1995. Moreover, local exchange carriers have entered the MVPD market by way of video dialtone, multichannel multipoint distribution service (MMDS) and cable television facilities. Yet, the reaction by the cable industry to the ensuing competition, as well as the benefits to subscribers must not be ignored.

The Report cites examples of the cable operators' responses to competition from MVPDs. For instance, Colt Communications, Inc. recently aD.DOUDCed that it will offer free basic cable service in~ Nebraska, where a video dialtone market trial was initiated by U.S. West. 3 Jones Intercable, IDe. bas begun connecting its subscribers to an upgrade system not only to offer increased progr•nming optioDS, but also to expand its service offerings to include telephony and

1 Communications Act of 1934, as amended§ 628(g), 47 U.S.C. § 548(g).

l 47 u.s.c. § 543(/)(1).

3 "Cox Offered Free Service Cable Tier to Omaha Customers as US West Looms", Comm. Daily, Aug. 30, 1995, at 1.

2218 Internet aecess.4 Moreover, in recent mo• the Commission has entered into "social contracts" with cable operatOrs that would not only allow them to resolve outstanding rate complaints. but would give these operators a level of certainty with respect to subscriber rates to upgrade ·their facilities to accommodate additional service offerings.' Even the Commission has recognized that the initiation of permanent commercial video dialtone service in a local market may justify the waiver of certain rate regulation rules for the cable programming service tiers.6

The effective competition standarCi was adopted at a time when there were fewer MVPDs in the marketplace. Though cable television remains a dominant player in certain markets. the proliferation of other MVPDs, on both national and local levels, has .created a different competitive environment which, I would argue, may not be accurately reflected by the current regulatory framework. To that end, I am enca\lraged by the Commission's acknowledgement th~t robust market-based competition by MVPDs, and not the reliance on rate regulation based on the inflexible definition of effective competition under the Cable Act of 1992, may be the more appropriate basis for ensuring cable programming service rates that are not unreasonable.

4 Information Access Co. ~ "U.S. Cities Turning into Battle Grounds for Telecom Competition: Northern Virginia, Omaha, Nebraska, Subs See Plenty of Video Choices", 3 Interactive Video News No. 2 (1995).

' ~ Social Contract for Continental Cablevisio~ FCC 95-335 (released August 3, 1995); see also. Social Contract for Time Warner~ FCC 95-478 (released November 30, 1995).

6 ~Waiver of the Commission's Rules Regulating Rates for Cable Services, FCC 95-455 (Nov. 6, 1995). In this instance, the Commission has inquired whether the introduction of video dialtone service by Bell Atlantic in Dover Township, New Jersey, will ensure that incumbent cable operators' rates for cable programming services will not be unreasonable despite the absence of effective competition as defined by statute.

2219