Q2 2026 EchoStar Corp Earnings Call

August 3, 2026

Operator 2: Greetings and welcome to the EchoStar Corporation Q2 2026 earnings conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow a formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce Jeff Blum, Acting Chief Legal Officer and Secretary. Thank you. You may begin.

Operator: Greetings and welcome to the EchoStar Corporation Q2 2026 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow a formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce Jeff Blum, Acting Chief Legal Officer and Secretary. Thank you. You may begin.

Speaker #1: If anyone should require operator assistance, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce Jeff Blum, Acting Chief Legal Officer and Secretary.

Speaker #1: Thank you. You may begin.

Jeff Blum: Good afternoon. I'm here with Charlie Ergen, Paul Orban, our CFO, and John Swieringa, our COO. We will begin with opening remarks from Charlie, followed by a question and answer session. We ask that any participant producing a report not identify other participants or their firms in such reports. We also do not allow audio recordings. All statements we make during this call, other than statements of historical fact, constitute forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provided by the Securities Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from historical results and from any future results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: Good afternoon. I'm here with Charlie Ergen and Paul Orban, our CFO, and John Swieringa, our COO. We will begin with opening remarks from Charlie, followed by a question-and-answer session.

Speaker #2: We ask that any participant producing a report not identify other participants or their firms in such reports. We also do not allow audio recordings.

Speaker #2: All statements we make during this call, other than statements of historical fact, constitute forward-looking statements made pursuant to the Safe Harbor provided by the Securities or Foreign Exchange Act of 1995.

Jeff Blum: These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from historical results and from any future results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. For a list of those factors and risks, please refer to our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 31 December 2025, our 10-Q filed today, and our subsequent filings made with the SEC.

Speaker #2: These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from historical results and from any future results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: For a list of those factors and risks, please refer to our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, our 10-Q filed today, and our subsequent filings made with the SEC. This information and supplemental materials relating to today's call will be posted on our Investor Relations website.

Jeff Blum: For a list of those factors and risks, please refer to our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 31 December 2025, our 10-Q filed today, and our subsequent filings made with the SEC. This information and supplemental materials relating to today's call will be posted on our investor relations website. All cautionary statements we make during the call should be understood as being applicable to any forward-looking statements we make wherever they appear. You should carefully consider the risks described in our reports and should not place any undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. We assume no responsibility for updating any forward-looking statements. We refer to OIBDA and free cash flow during this call.

Jeff Blum: This information and supplemental materials relating to today's call will be posted on our investor relations website. All cautionary statements we make during the call should be understood as being applicable to any forward-looking statements we make wherever they appear. You should carefully consider the risks described in our reports and should not place any undue reliance on any forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: All cautionary statements we make during the call should be understood as being applicable to any forward-looking statements we make, wherever they appear. You should carefully consider the risks described in our reports and should not place any undue reliance on any forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: We assume no responsibility for updating any forward-looking statements. We refer to OIBDA and free cash flow during this call. The comparable GAAP measure and a reconciliation for OIBDA is presented in our earnings release, and in the case of free cash flow, in our Form 10-Q as filed today with the SEC.

Jeff Blum: We assume no responsibility for updating any forward-looking statements. We refer to OIBDA and free cash flow during this call. The comparable GAAP measure and a reconciliation for OIBDA is presented in our earnings release, and in the case of free cash flow, in our Form 10-Q, as filed today with the SEC. With that, I'll turn it over to Charlie.

Jeff Blum: The comparable GAAP measure and a reconciliation for OIBDA is presented in our earnings release, and in the case of free cash flow, in our Form 10-Q, as filed today with the SEC. With that, I'll turn it over to Charlie.

Speaker #2: With that, I'll turn it over to Charlie.

Speaker #3: Thank you, Jeff. We're just going to take questions, but before we take questions, I just want to give a few opening comments. As you all know, August 1st we had a $1.5 billion bond maturity for a huge corporation.

Charles Ergen: Thank you, Jeff. We're just going to take questions. Before we take questions, I just want to give a few opening comments. As you all know, 1 August, we had a $1.5 billion bond maturity for Hughes Corporation. We had discussions with the bondholders. We weren't able to come up with a workable solution. We filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy this morning for Hughes. I want to make just a couple points on that. One is, this filing is strictly limited to the Hughes entities. It does not include EchoStar Corporation or other non-Hughes subsidiaries, or even Hughes international entities. Second, we have first day motions this afternoon in front of the court to ensure that Hughes continues to operate the normal course of business.

Charlie Ergen: Thank you, Jeff. We're just going to take questions. Before we take questions, I just want to give a few opening comments. As you all know, 1 August, we had a $1.5 billion bond maturity for Hughes Corporation. We had discussions with the bondholders. We weren't able to come up with a workable solution. We filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy this morning for Hughes. I want to make just a couple points on that.

Speaker #3: We had discussions with the bondholders, but weren't able to come up with a workable solution. So we filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy this morning. For Hughes, I want to make just a couple of points on that.

Charlie Ergen: One is, this filing is strictly limited to the Hughes entities. It does not include EchoStar Corporation or other non-Hughes subsidiaries, or even Hughes international entities. Second, we have first day motions this afternoon in front of the court to ensure that Hughes continues to operate the normal course of business. That means we're paying our employees, we're delivering for customers and channel partners as usual, and we expect to fulfill all ongoing forward commitments to our vendors. Third, we don't know how long bankruptcy will take before we can emerge restructured. As a result of the litigation that is expected in this, we won't take questions on Hughes. You are referred in our press release. There's a link to our filing that I think lays out the chapter and verse, the details there. With that, we'll take questions.

Speaker #3: One is, does filing strictly limit it to the Hughes entities? It does not include EchoStar Corporation or other non-Hughes subsidiaries. Are Hughes or even Hughes International entities?

Speaker #3: Second, we have first-aid motions. This afternoon, in front of the court, to ensure that Hughes continues to operate in the normal course of business. And that means we're paying our employees.

Charles Ergen: That means we're paying our employees, we're delivering for customers and channel partners as usual, and we expect to fulfill all ongoing forward commitments to our vendors. Third, we don't know how long bankruptcy will take before we can emerge restructured. As a result of the litigation that is expected in this, we won't take questions on Hughes. You are referred in our press release. There's a link to our filing that I think lays out the chapter and verse, the details there. With that, we'll take questions.

Speaker #3: We're delivering for customers and channel partners as usual, and we expect to fulfill all ongoing forward commitments to our vendors. And third, we don't know how long bankruptcy will take before we can emerge restructured.

Speaker #3: As a result of the litigation that is expected in this, we won't take questions on Hughes, but I would refer you—and we do refer—in a press release, there's a link to our filing that I think lays out, chapter and verse, the details there.

Speaker #3: So with that, we'll take questions.

Speaker #1: Thank you. And at this time, we will conduct the question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad.

Operator 2: Thank you. At this time, we will conduct the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate that your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. Your first question comes from David Barden with New Street Research. Please state your question.

Operator: Thank you. At this time, we will conduct the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate that your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. Your first question comes from David Barden with New Street Research. Please state your question.

Speaker #1: A confirmation tone will indicate that your line is in the question queue. You may press star two (*) if you would like to remove your question from the queue.

Speaker #1: For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. And your first question comes from David Barden with New Street Research.

Speaker #1: Please state your question.

David Barden: Hey, guys. Thanks so much for taking the questions. I guess I wanted to start with Charlie. No one probably knows better than you the discount to which EchoStar trades to its remaining portfolio of assets and SpaceX. Now that you've got the AT&T money, it would seem a logical thing to start buying back stock. If not, why not? What would be the priority for that capital next? Thank you.

Speaker #4: Hey, guys. Thanks so much for taking the questions. I guess I wanted to start with Charlie. No one probably knows better than you the discount to which EchoStar trades to its remaining portfolio of assets and SpaceX.

Speaker #4: Now that you've got the AT&T money, it would seem a logical thing to start buying back stock. And if it's not, why not? And what would be the priority for that capital next?

Speaker #4: Thank you.

Speaker #3: Yeah. Thanks, Dave, for the question. I think, first of all, you will see in the 10-K or 10-Q, I guess, that we did increase the authorization.

Charles Ergen: Thanks, Dave, for the question. First of all, you will see in the 10-K, 10-Q, I guess, that we did increase the authorization. The board increased the authorization up to $5 billion of buyback. Obviously, one of the things that we look at based on our capital structure is, I would say first and foremost, we look at investing in our business. We'd look at our existing businesses to invest in and the opportunities there. EchoStar Capital, now under the leadership of Tom Cullen, we look at other things we can look at, which could include our own company. After that, if we can't find anything there, you could work all the way down to paying dividends.

Charlie Ergen: Thanks, Dave, for the question. First of all, you will see in the 10-K, 10-Q, I guess, that we did increase the authorization. The board increased the authorization up to $5 billion of buyback. Obviously, one of the things that we look at based on our capital structure is, I would say first and foremost, we look at investing in our business. We'd look at our existing businesses to invest in and the opportunities there. EchoStar Capital, now under the leadership of Tom Cullen, we look at other things we can look at, which could include our own company. After that, if we can't find anything there, you could work all the way down to paying dividends. We've been a good steward of capital for a lot of years, and I hope we'll continue to do that.

Speaker #3: The board increased the authorization from up to $5 billion of buyback. So it's obviously one of the things that we look at, based on our capital structure.

Speaker #3: It's one of the things we look at.

Speaker #2: Yeah.

Speaker #3: I would say, first and foremost, we look at investing in our business. So, we'd look at our existing businesses to invest in, and the opportunity is there.

Speaker #3: And then EchoStar Capital, now under the leadership of Tom Collin, we look at other things we can look at, which could include our own company.

Speaker #3: And then after that, if we can't find anything there, then you could work all the way down to paying dividends. So, we've been good stewards of capital.

Charles Ergen: We've been a good steward of capital for a lot of years, and I hope we'll continue to do that.

Speaker #3: For a lot of years, and I hope we'll continue to do that.

Speaker #4: I appreciate that, Charlie. Thank you.

David Barden: Appreciate that, Charlie. Thank you.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Brent Penter with Raymond James. Please state your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Brent Penter with Raymond James. Please state your question.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Brent Penter with Raymond James. Please state your question.

Brent Penter: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the questions. A couple from me. First, want to follow up on David's question. You mentioned EchoStar Capital, and that was folded under the corporate development arm. Does that represent any change in philosophy about how you're investing at EchoStar Capital and any change to the list of kind of opportunities you gave back in November last year?

Speaker #5: Hey guys, thanks for taking the questions. A couple from me. First, I want to follow up on David's question. You mentioned EchoStar Capital, and that was folded under the corporate development arm.

Speaker #5: Does that represent any change in philosophy about how you're investing at EchoStar Capital, and any change to the list of kind of opportunities you gave back in November last year?

Speaker #2: Yeah, Brent. No, really no change, other than it's probably a little bit more efficient since we're kind of under one roof, and we probably move a little bit faster just because we're literally in the same area in the company.

Charles Ergen: Yeah, Brent Penter, no. Really no change other than it's probably a little bit more efficient since we're kind of under one roof and probably move a little bit faster just because we're literally in the same area in the company. Obviously, Tom comes with a wealth of experience long-term in the industry, not just at EchoStar.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah, Brent Penter, no. Really no change other than it's probably a little bit more efficient since we're kind of under one roof and probably move a little bit faster just because we're literally in the same area in the company. Obviously, Tom comes with a wealth of experience long-term in the industry, not just at EchoStar.

Speaker #2: And obviously, Tom comes with a wealth of experience—a long term in the industry, not just at EchoStar.

Speaker #5: Okay, got it. And then on the SpaceX transactions, given where the SpaceX market cap is today compared to the $400 billion valuation it was when you signed the deals, the implied value is obviously much higher.

Brent Penter: Okay. Got it. On the SpaceX transactions, given where the SpaceX market cap is today compared to the $400 billion valuation it was when you signed the deals, the implied value is obviously much higher. How do you size the expected tax payment today? Are you doing any hedging on that, or have you all had any discussions with SpaceX about alternative ways that you could structure those deals to reduce or delay those taxes?

Speaker #5: How do you size the expected tax payment today? And then, are you doing any hedging on that, or have you had any discussions with SpaceX about alternative ways that you could structure those deals to reduce or delay those taxes?

Speaker #3: Yeah, Brent, those are all good questions. I guess the way I try to answer your question is we still are of the mind that the cost of finalizing the liquidation, the termination of our wireless network, and our tax liabilities are in that $5 to $7 billion range. We don't know the answer on where we're going to be there.

Charles Ergen: Yeah. Brent Penter, those are all good questions. I guess the way I'd try to answer your question is we still are of mind that the cost of finalizing the termination of our wireless network and our tax liability is in that $5 to $7 billion range. We don't know the answer on where we're going to be there. It could be a little higher, a little lower than that. Obviously, there's litigation on the termination of the network. We don't know where SpaceX will be in the future. We know that there's things like 1033 exchanges and things that can reduce tax liability. We're in that $5 to $7 billion range in terms of what we think it's going to be, but that includes our wireless network termination.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. Brent Penter, those are all good questions. I guess the way I'd try to answer your question is we still are of mind that the cost of finalizing the termination of our wireless network and our tax liability is in that $5 to 7 billion range. We don't know the answer on where we're going to be there. It could be a little higher, a little lower than that. Obviously, there's litigation on the termination of the network. We don't know where SpaceX will be in the future.

Speaker #3: It could be a little higher or a little lower than that. Obviously, there's litigation on the termination of the network, and there, obviously, we don't know where SpaceX will be in the future.

Speaker #3: But we know that, and we know that there are things like 1033 exchanges and things that can reduce tax liability. So we're in that $5 to $7 billion range in terms of what we think it's going to be, but that includes our wireless network termination.

Charlie Ergen: We know that there's things like 1033 exchanges and things that can reduce tax liability. We're in that $5 to 7 billion range in terms of what we think it's going to be, but that includes our wireless network termination. We're a good steward of capital, we're looking at everything and how we can make sure that we take care of capital the best way.

Speaker #3: So, that, but we're not—again, we're a good steward of capital. So we're looking at everything, and how we can make sure that we take care of capital the best way.

Charles Ergen: We're a good steward of capital, we're looking at everything and how we can make sure that we take care of capital the best way.

Speaker #5: Okay, got it. And then, how are you all thinking about Boost Mobile strategically? And if you wanted to engage in any kind of M&A or partnerships in that business, how restrictive are the NSA and MNSA contracts with T-Mobile and AT&T, and the change of control provisions there?

Brent Penter: Okay. Got it. How are you all thinking about Boost Mobile strategically? If you wanted to engage in any kind of M&A or partnerships in that business, how restrictive are the NSA and MNSA contracts with T-Mobile and AT&T and changing control provisions there?

Speaker #3: Well, I wouldn't get I can't get into the actual contracts. But I talked about Boost in general. One is we haven't as managed we haven't cracked the code on how to be successful in the to the level we'd like to in the wireless business.

Charles Ergen: Well, I can't get into the actual contracts. I'll talk about Boost in general. One is, as management, we haven't cracked the code on how to be successful to the level we'd like to in the wireless business. In general, we've treaded water for four years now. We were slightly cash positive in the quarter, we did lose subscribers. Having said that, we have new leadership with Robert Rupczynski, who joined us four or five months ago, he's certainly taken a fresh approach. We think we have some strategic initiatives going forward that will reinvigorate that part of our business. In general, all of our businesses have to run at a profit, long term, they have to have a right to exist because everybody's only as good as their last quarter. We like the business. We're disappointed that we haven't done better in it.

Charlie Ergen: Well, I can't get into the actual contracts. I'll talk about Boost in general. One is, as management, we haven't cracked the code on how to be successful to the level we'd like to in the wireless business. In general, we've treaded water for four years now. We were slightly cash positive in the quarter, we did lose subscribers. Having said that, we have new leadership with Robert Rupczynski, who joined us four or five months ago, he's certainly taken a fresh approach.

Speaker #3: In general, we've treaded water for four years now. We were slightly cash positive in the quarter, but we did lose subscribers. That being said, we have new leadership with Bob Rachinski.

Speaker #3: He joined us four or five months ago, and he's certainly taken a fresh approach. We think we have some strategic initiatives going forward that will reinvigorate that part of our business.

Charlie Ergen: We think we have some strategic initiatives going forward that will reinvigorate that part of our business. In general, all of our businesses have to run at a profit, long term, they have to have a right to exist because everybody's only as good as their last quarter. We like the business. We're disappointed that we haven't done better in it. It's a great challenge for us, it's strategically important for us, we do have a fair amount of flexibility contractually to, whether it be M&A or partnering with people we'll continue to see if we can figure out how to be productive there.

Speaker #3: In general, not all of our businesses have to run at a profit long-term, but they have to have a right to exist. And because everybody's only as good as their last quarter.

Speaker #3: So we like the business. We're disappointed that we haven't done better in it. It's a great challenge for us. But as strategically, important for us and we do have a fair amount of flexibility in our contractually to whether it be M&A or our partnering with people and we'll continue to see if we can figure out how to be productive there.

Charles Ergen: It's a great challenge for us, it's strategically important for us, we do have a fair amount of flexibility contractually to, whether it be M&A or partnering with people we'll continue to see if we can figure out how to be productive there.

Speaker #5: All right. Great. Thanks, Charlie.

Brent Penter: All right. Great. Thanks, Charlie.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Sebastiano Petty with JPMorgan. Please state your question.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Sebastiano Petti with JPMorgan. Please state your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Sebastiano Petti with JPMorgan. Please state your question.

Sebastiano Petti: Hi, thanks for taking the question. Charlie, just maybe going back to David Barden's question, just why increase the buyback from two to three billion but yet be out of the market? Is there anything that is precluding EchoStar from buying back stock currently in the market? Maybe just a follow-up, thinking about the remaining assets, particularly AWS-3, how are you thinking about that now on the other side of the auction, and perhaps maybe timeline and, I think, would there be any debt that would need to be paid off from the sale of the AWS-3 spectrum at this point? Thank you.

Speaker #4: Hi, thanks for taking the question. Charlie, just maybe going back to David Barton's question—why increase the buyback from $2 billion to $3 billion, but yet be out of the market?

Speaker #4: I mean, is there anything that is precluding EchoStar from buying back stock currently in the market? And then maybe just a follow-up, thinking about the remaining assets, particularly AWS-3.

Speaker #4: I mean, how are you thinking about that now, on the other side of the auction—and perhaps the timeline? And, I think, would there be any debt that would need to be paid off from the sale of the AWS-3 spectrum at this point?

Speaker #4: Thank you.

Charles Ergen: Yeah. We do have some restrictions on buying back stock in our bond indentures. I don't know how public those are, but we do have some restrictions.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. We do have some restrictions on buying back stock in our bond indentures. I don't know how public those are, but we do have some restrictions.

Speaker #2: Yeah, we do have some restrictions on buying back stock in our bond indentures. So I don't know how public those are, but we do have some restrictions.

Sebastiano Petti: All right.

Speaker #2: The way I would look, Sebastiano, the way I'd look at EchoStar, or the way I look at it—or I think the way we look at it—is that having closed the AT&T transaction, right, and putting $2.4 billion into an escrow for the closing down of our network, as mandated by the FCC.

Charles Ergen: Sebastiano, the way I'd look at EchoStar, or the way I look at it, or I think the way we look at it, is that having closed the AT&T transaction, and putting $2.4 billion into an escrow for the closing down of our network, as mandated by the FCC, and put that $2.4 billion aside, when you look at the total company, we have about $14 or $15 billion in cash. We have that $5 to $7 billion liability, in our opinion, going forward, which includes the $2.4 billion. We have Boost, which is certainly a valuable company or potentially a valuable company. Our traditional video business, which continues to throw off cash. In addition to that, we have 261.8 million shares of SpaceX, and obviously you can figure out at least publicly what the value of that is.

Charlie Ergen: Sebastiano, the way I'd look at EchoStar, or the way I look at it, or I think the way we look at it, is that having closed the AT&T transaction, and putting $2.4 billion into an escrow for the closing down of our network, as mandated by the FCC, and put that $2.4 billion aside, when you look at the total company, we have about $14 or $15 billion in cash. We have that $5 to $7 billion liability, in our opinion, going forward, which includes the $2.4 billion. We have Boost, which is certainly a valuable company or potentially a valuable company.

Speaker #2: And put that 2.4 billion dollars aside, we have about when you look at the total company, we have about 14 or 15 billion dollars in cash.

Speaker #2: We have that 5 to 7 billion dollar liability in our opinion going forward, which includes the 2.4 billion. And then we have a still have a we have Boost, which we haven't shown we can it's certainly a valuable company or potentially a valuable company.

Speaker #2: And we have our traditional video business, which was a contingency, though, off cash. And then, in addition to that, we have 261.8 million shares of SpaceX.

Charlie Ergen: Our traditional video business, which continues to throw off cash. In addition to that, we have 261.8 million shares of SpaceX, and obviously you can figure out at least publicly what the value of that is. We have spectrum, still a solid spectrum position of AWS-3, CBRS, 700 MHz, et cetera, that you can take a stab at in terms of valuation. Excluding Hughes, which is obviously in the restructuring process today and which will ultimately get sorted out, we have about $5 billion of debt. We have another almost $8 billion of debt that SpaceX transaction will pay at closing.

Speaker #2: And obviously, you can figure out at least publicly what the value of that is. And then we have Spectrum—still a solid Spectrum position of AWS-3, CBRS, 700 megahertz, etc.

Charles Ergen: We have spectrum, still a solid spectrum position of AWS-3, CBRS, 700 MHz, et cetera, that you can take a stab at in terms of valuation. Excluding Hughes, which is obviously in the restructuring process today and which will ultimately get sorted out, we have about $5 billion of debt. We have another almost $8 billion of debt that SpaceX transaction will pay at closing. We have $1 billion and $9 of convert debt that at this point is in the money would convert. You end up with a company that's cash rich, not much debt. We're pretty easy to look at the value, and then obviously, the conglomerate discount that people give to the marketplace or the lack of confidence in management or whatever the discount rate is, that's how you value the company.

Speaker #2: That you could take a stab at in terms of valuation. And we have—excluding Hughes, which is obviously in a restructuring process today, and which will ultimately get sorted out.

Speaker #2: We have about $5 billion of cash— I mean, of debt. And we have another almost $8 billion of debt that the SpaceX transaction will pay at closing.

Speaker #2: And then we have $1.9 billion of convert debt that, at this point, is in the money with the convert. So you end up with a company that's cash-rich, not much debt, and it's pretty easy to look at the value. And then, obviously, the conglomerate discount that people give in the marketplace, or the lack of confidence in management, or whatever the discount rate is—that's how you value the company.

Charlie Ergen: We have $1 billion and $9 of convert debt that at this point is in the money would convert. You end up with a company that's cash rich, not much debt. We're pretty easy to look at the value, and then obviously, the conglomerate discount that people give to the marketplace or the lack of confidence in management or whatever the discount rate is, that's how you value the company.

Speaker #2: And then, going forward, we’re going to, as we always have, look for opportunity and manage the business in a respectable fashion. This year is interesting because, unfortunately, a lot of focus is really just cleaning up the network shutdown, and now cleaning some of that up through the courts, just because we had no other choice but to do that.

Charles Ergen: Going forward, we're going to, as we always have, look for opportunity and manage the business in a respectable fashion. This year is interesting because unfortunately, a lot of focus is really just cleaning up the network shutdown and now cleaning some of that up through the courts just because we had no other choice but to do that. Getting into the position to focus our company on moving forward with all the opportunities that we have. In addition to that pivot to an asset, a cash-rich company, every company's going through the pivot to AI and how it affects your business, Our company wasn't built for AI. We didn't know anything about it years ago.

Charlie Ergen: Going forward, we're going to, as we always have, look for opportunity and manage the business in a respectable fashion. This year is interesting because unfortunately, a lot of focus is really just cleaning up the network shutdown and now cleaning some of that up through the courts just because we had no other choice but to do that. Getting into the position to focus our company on moving forward with all the opportunities that we have.

Speaker #2: And then getting in a position to focus our company on moving forward with all the opportunities that we have. And then, in addition to that, that pivot to an asset and cash-rich company—there’s a pivot every company is going through: the pivot to AI and how it affects your business. And our company wasn’t built for AI.

Charlie Ergen: In addition to that pivot to an asset, a cash-rich company, every company's going through the pivot to AI and how it affects your business, Our company wasn't built for AI. We didn't know anything about it years ago. We have to pivot, in a funny sort of way, there's a restructuring going on within EchoStar to say, how do we take advantage of that paradigm shift of how AI changes businesses and the way businesses operate. I think a lot of our success in the future will be dependent on how well we do with that, and it's certainly way too early to tell how we're going to do with that. Culturally, our team's excited about it and very focused on it.

Speaker #2: We didn't know anything about it years ago, and so we have to pivot. In a funny sort of way, there's a restructuring going on within EchoStar to say, how do we take advantage of that paradigm shift—of how AI changes businesses and the way businesses operate.

Charles Ergen: We have to pivot, in a funny sort of way, there's a restructuring going on within EchoStar to say, how do we take advantage of that paradigm shift of how AI changes businesses and the way businesses operate. I think a lot of our success in the future will be dependent on how well we do with that, and it's certainly way too early to tell how we're going to do with that. Culturally, our team's excited about it and very focused on it.

Speaker #2: And I think a lot of our success in the future will be dependent on how well we do with that. And it's certainly way too early to tell how we're going to do with that.

Speaker #2: But culturally, our team's excited about it and very focused on it.

Speaker #4: Thanks.

Sebastiano Petti: Thanks.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Walter Payacik with LightShed. Please state your question.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Walter Piecyk with LightShed. Please state your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Walter Piecyk with LightShed. Please state your question.

Speaker #4: Thanks. Just a question on the DBS prepackaged proceedings. I know bidders could still obviously potentially emerge during this process, but assuming that you end up being the stalking horse bidder and the winner, although it's assets, just thoughts on what you do with the radios?

Walter Piecyk: Thanks. Just a question on the DBS prepackaged proceedings. I know bidders could still obviously potentially emerge during this process, assuming that you end up being the kind of stalking horse bidder and the winner of those assets, just thoughts on what you do with the radios. Has there been any appetite in the market for the redeployment of those radios for a wholesale fourth network? Any other assets that you might end up effectively still owning at the end of that reorg?

Speaker #4: Has there been any appetite in the market for the redeployment of those radios for a wholesale fourth network? And any other assets that you might end up effectively still owning at the end of that reorg?

Speaker #2: Yeah. It would be, well, it would be way premature to speculate on that. I mean, I think that—you can see our stalking horse bid, I think, was potentially $300 million, somewhat less than that because of cash on hand.

Charles Ergen: Walt, it'd be way premature to speculate on that. You can see our stalking horse bid, I think, was potentially $300 million, somewhat less than that because of cash on hand. You can hypothesize that, at least in our opinion, there's not a lot of liquidation value there. I think it's relatively immaterial in the scheme of things when you look at the other assets that we have.

Charlie Ergen: Walt, it'd be way premature to speculate on that. You can see our stalking horse bid, I think, was potentially $300 million, somewhat less than that because of cash on hand. You can hypothesize that, at least in our opinion, there's not a lot of liquidation value there. I think it's relatively immaterial in the scheme of things when you look at the other assets that we have.

Speaker #2: So you can hypothesize that there's not, at least in our opinion, a lot of liquidation value there. So I think it's relatively immaterial in the scheme of things when you look at the other assets that we have.

Walter Piecyk: Got it.

Speaker #4: Got it.

Speaker #2: I think and Walt, if I cut you off there, I think the more important thing the way I would look at it is we're a unique company in the sense that and we're in the sense that we have mobility through Boost.

Charles Ergen: Walt, just to cut you off there. I think the more important thing, the way I would look at it, is that we're a unique company, in the sense that we have mobility through Boost. We have a lot of broadband relationships, not the least of which is through SpaceX, and we have video. We know connectivity pretty well, and connectivity is going to take a lot of different shapes for customers, but most customers are going to need Wi-Fi, broadband, whether that be through a cable or satellite, maybe some people with both. People still have video needs, and we're uniquely positioned to do that.

Charlie Ergen: Walt, just to cut you off there. I think the more important thing, the way I would look at it, is that we're a unique company, in the sense that we have mobility through Boost. We have a lot of broadband relationships, not the least of which is through SpaceX, and we have video. We know connectivity pretty well, and connectivity is going to take a lot of different shapes for customers, but most customers are going to need Wi-Fi, broadband, whether that be through a cable or satellite, maybe some people with both. People still have video needs, and we're uniquely positioned to do that.

Speaker #2: We have a lot of broadband relationships, not the least of which is through SpaceX. And we have video. And so we know connectivity pretty well.

Speaker #2: And connectivity is going to take a lot of different shapes for customers, but most customers are going to need Wi-Fi, broadband—whether that be through a cable or satellite—probably, maybe some people with both.

Speaker #2: People still have video needs, and we're uniquely positioned to do that. Because it looks to me like, in terms of an actual network, the big three networks have done a good job of building a pretty big moat.

Charles Ergen: It looks to me like in terms of an actual network, the big three network have done a good job of building a pretty big moat around their businesses, and we kind of play with one foot in that business as well. The real key is the knowledge base we have, the fact that we play in a lot of different places in the connectivity field, I think will be helpful for us going forward. We have to prove it, of course.

Charlie Ergen: It looks to me like in terms of an actual network, the big three network have done a good job of building a pretty big moat around their businesses, and we kind of play with one foot in that business as well. The real key is the knowledge base we have, the fact that we play in a lot of different places in the connectivity field, I think will be helpful for us going forward. We have to prove it, of course.

Speaker #2: Around their businesses, and we kind of play with one foot in that business as well. So the real key is the knowledge base we have, the fact that we play in a lot of different places, and the connectivity field.

Speaker #2: I think it will be helpful for us going forward. We have to prove it, of course.

Walter Piecyk: You bid also in the re-auction of the DE stuff. Do you have plans to bid in the upcoming C-band auction? Does any deal that you have with the FCC, where obviously you've committed to sell your existing spectrum, does that prohibit you from bidding in upcoming auctions or even secondary market transactions for spectrum?

Speaker #4: You did also in the reauction of the DE stuff. Do you have plans to bid in the upcoming C-band auction? And, or, does anything—do you have any deal that you have with the FCC where, obviously, you've committed to sell your existing spectrum? Does that prohibit you from bidding in upcoming auctions, or even secondary market transactions for spectrum?

Speaker #2: Yeah. The auction rules aren't out for the CBAN auction, but we would anticipate that we would not be prevented from participating. And we've participated, I think, in every auction since the first one.

Charles Ergen: Yeah. The auction rules aren't out for the C-band auction, but we would anticipate that we would not be prevented from participating. We've participated, I think, in every auction since the first one. Actually, the first one was a satellite auction we participated, but the first terrestrial one, we did not participate in, but we participated in ones after that. I don't think we'll be prevented. Whether it would make any sense for us to participate given where we are, that's a whole different question, and we certainly haven't analyzed that. Secondary market transactions, if there was something that we thought was strategic important that would enhance the value of our company, we would look at it.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. The auction rules aren't out for the C-band auction, but we would anticipate that we would not be prevented from participating. We've participated, I think, in every auction since the first one. Actually, the first one was a satellite auction we participated, but the first terrestrial one, we did not participate in, but we participated in ones after that. I don't think we'll be prevented. Whether it would make any sense for us to participate given where we are, that's a whole different question, and we certainly haven't analyzed that. Secondary market transactions, if there was something that we thought was strategic important that would enhance the value of our company, we would look at it.

Speaker #2: I don't think actually the first one was a satellite auction. We participated, but the first terrestrial one, we did not participate in, but we participated in ones after that.

Speaker #2: So, I don't think we'll be prevented. Whether it would make any sense for us to participate, given where we are, that's a whole different question.

Speaker #2: And we certainly haven't analyzed that. Secondary market transactions—if there was something that we thought was strategically important that would enhance the value of our company, we would look at it.

Walter Piecyk: Just one last question. This EchoStar Capital, the last time this topic was discussed, I think the way Hamid, at the time, had answered it made it seem like the top priority was finding new investments and taking all this capital that you're getting from the spectrum sales and finding new stuff. It sounds a little different in terms of the tone where you're saying, obviously, invest in what you already have, right? Then share repurchase and dividends. I know it was mentioned, kind of new initiatives, but is that kind of deprioritized in terms of the use of capital when all this cash starts flowing in from the spectrum sales?

Speaker #4: Just one last question. This EchoStar capital—the last time this topic was discussed, I think the way Hamid at the time had answered it made it seem like the top priority was finding new investments and taking all this capital that you're getting from the spectrum sales and finding new stuff.

Speaker #4: It sounds a little different in terms of the tone, where you're saying, obviously, invest in what you already have, right? And then share repurchase and dividends.

Speaker #4: And I know it was mentioned—kind of new initiatives—but is that kind of deprioritized in terms of the use of capital when all this cash starts flowing in from the spectrum sales?

Charles Ergen: Yeah. No, I think I would say it a different way. I think obviously investing in our core businesses today where we have opportunities. The second thing we'd look at is the opportunities that Hamid has already identified. He identified quite a few, and quite a few relationships, some of which we already had. I think we would look at returns there. Then as part of that, as a subset of that, you would look at your own company, right? It just depends on how you would evaluate those opportunities. I guess I'd say a cautionary note, we're going to be patient. I mean, the market is pretty frothy. We're not going to rush out to do something and overpay for something just because we have money.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. No, I think I would say it a different way. I think obviously investing in our core businesses today where we have opportunities. The second thing we'd look at is the opportunities that Hamid has already identified. He identified quite a few, and quite a few relationships, some of which we already had. I think we would look at returns there. Then as part of that, as a subset of that, you would look at your own company, right? It just depends on how you would evaluate those opportunities.

Speaker #2: Yeah. No, I think I would say it a different way. I think, obviously, investing in the core businesses today, where we have opportunities. But secondly, the second thing we'd look at is the opportunities that Hamid has already identified.

Speaker #2: He identified quite a few—and quite a few relationships, some of which we already had. So, I think we would look at returns there.

Speaker #2: And then, as part of that—as a subset of that—you would look at your own company, right? It just depends on how you would evaluate those opportunities.

Speaker #2: But we're—and I guess I'd say as a cautionary note—we're going to be patient. I mean, the market is pretty frothy. We're not going to rush out to do something and overpay for something just because we have money.

Charlie Ergen: I guess I'd say a cautionary note, we're going to be patient. I mean, the market is pretty frothy. We're not going to rush out to do something and overpay for something just because we have money. I can only tell you from playing poker, you can win a few big hands and you're still going to bet the same way, right? It's still, I'm playing the odds. It's pretty frothy right now, so we probably will be more cautious than some.

Speaker #2: So, I can only tell you from playing poker, you can win a few big hands and you're still going to bet the same way.

Charles Ergen: I can only tell you from playing poker, you can win a few big hands and you're still going to bet the same way, right? It's still, I'm playing the odds. It's pretty frothy right now, so we probably will be more cautious than some.

Speaker #2: Right? It's still—I'm playing the odds. And it's pretty frothy right now, so we probably are more cautious—we probably would be more cautious than some.

Speaker #4: Okay. Thank you.

Walter Piecyk: Okay. Thank you.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Michael Rollins with Citi. Please go ahead with your question.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Michael Rollins with Citi. Please go ahead with your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Michael Rollins with Citi. Please go ahead with your question.

Michael Rollins: Thanks. Good afternoon. Just curious, Charlie, if I could ask a follow-up to that, then a second question. The follow-up, when you discuss being more cautious than some, does that also apply to the value of EchoStar, or is that specifically relating to other investments or new investment opportunities? Then, secondly, just if you're able to clarify, did I read correctly that you're still waiting on a waiver from the FCC with respect to holding on your spectrum without a network? And is there any outstanding risk that the FCC could take back remaining licenses that you still control and own that may preclude you from monetizing the spectrum you discussed earlier, the AWS-3, the CBRS, the 700 MHz? Thanks.

Speaker #5: Thanks, and good afternoon. Just curious, Charlie, if I could ask a follow-up to that and then a second question. So, the follow-up—when you discuss being more cautious than some, does that also apply to the value of EchoStar, or is that specifically relating to other investments or new investment opportunities?

Speaker #5: And then secondly, just if you're able to clarify, did I read correctly that you're still waiting on a waiver from the FCC with respect to holding on to your spectrum without a network?

Speaker #5: And is there any outstanding risk that the FCC could take back remaining licenses that you still control and own that may preclude you from monetizing the spectrum you discussed earlier—the AWS-3, the CBRS, the 700 megahertz?

Speaker #5: Thanks.

Speaker #2: Okay, I'll take the first part, and then Jeff, I'll let you take the second part. We're cautious about it. We're cautious about everything—that includes EchoStar.

Charles Ergen: Okay. I'll take the first part and then Jeff will take the second part. We're cautious about everything. That includes EchoStar. We're just cautious on the marketplace in terms of a lot of our value is based on SpaceX. We're just cautious. We're not pessimistic, we're just cautious because things are at historical highs on almost every metric, that's all. That may be stupid, that may be smart, we don't know.

Charlie Ergen: Okay. I'll take the first part and then Jeff will take the second part. We're cautious about everything. That includes EchoStar. We're just cautious on the marketplace in terms of a lot of our value is based on SpaceX. We're just cautious. We're not pessimistic, we're just cautious because things are at historical highs on almost every metric, that's all. That may be stupid, that may be smart, we don't know.

Speaker #2: We're just cautious on the marketplace in terms of a lot of our value is based on SpaceX. So we're just cautious—we're not pessimistic.

Speaker #2: We're just cautious because things are at historical highs in almost every metric, and that's all. That may be stupid; that may be smart. We don't know.

Speaker #3: In terms of spectrum, in September, as you know, the FCC, through the chairman, confirmed that we had met our build-outs—we had met our commitments.

Jeff Blum: In terms of spectrum, in September, as you know, the FCC, from the Chairman, confirmed that we had met our build-outs, we had met our commitments. That is sort of the last official statement from the FCC. As you mentioned, we have filed a waiver for our remaining spectrum licenses to sell those for fair value in exchange for an extension of building out the network. We're awaiting that. It makes sense now that we don't have a network any longer for that to be granted. We hope the FCC will rule on that in the near term.

Speaker #3: So, that is sort of the last official statement from the FCC. As you mentioned, we have filed a waiver for our remaining spectrum licenses to sell those for fair value.

Speaker #3: In exchange for an extension of building out the network, we're awaiting that. It makes sense now, since we don't have a network any longer, for that to be granted.

Speaker #3: So, we hope the FCC will rule on that in the near term.

Speaker #5: Thank you.

Michael Rollins: Thank you.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Brian Craft with Deutsche Bank. Please state your question.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Bryan Kraft with Deutsche Bank. Please state your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Bryan Kraft with Deutsche Bank. Please state your question.

Speaker #4: Oh, hi. Thank you. I have a few, if I could—mostly follow-ups. I guess first, just going back to the buybacks, will UBC gain an amendment to the covenant that's restricting the share repurchases?

Bryan Kraft: Oh, hi. Thank you. I have a few, if I could, mostly follow-ups. I guess first, just going back to the buybacks, will you be seeking an amendment to the covenant that's restricting the share repurchases? Also related to that, would you consider buying back the converts in the open market, which I don't believe would need an authorization? On the investing side, I was just wondering if you could elaborate on the change in strategic direction that was alluded to in the 8-K announcing Hamid's resignation, and what that really meant. Just going to the topic of DBS consolidation, which obviously there's a carve-out for in the covenants in the pre-pack. One of the worries that investors have is that DISH could end up being the buyer in that scenario. I know the last time, obviously DirecTV was the buyer.

Speaker #4: And then, also related to that, would you consider buying back the converts in the open market, which I don't believe would need an authorization?

Speaker #4: And then on the investing side, I was just wondering if you could elaborate on the change in strategic direction that was alluded to in the 8-K announcing Hamid's resignation.

Speaker #4: And what did that really mean? And then, just going to the topic of DBS consolidation, which obviously there's a carve-out for in the covenants and the prepack.

Speaker #4: One of the worries that investors have is that DISH could end up being the buyer in that scenario. I know the last time, obviously, DirecTV was the buyer.

Speaker #4: So, just curious how you're thinking about it at this point. If there were going to be a combination—I know that's not a guarantee.

Bryan Kraft: just curious how you're thinking about, at this point, if there were going to be a combination, I know that's not a guarantee, is it more likely that it would be similar to the September 2024 merger agreement where DirecTV was the buyer, or would you be open to being the buyer? And then just the last one, I just wanted to sort of do a reality check with you on just maybe what the risk is on the timeline for the DISH Wireless and DISH DBS bankruptcies, just given the opposition from the infrastructure companies. Thank you.

Speaker #4: Is it more likely that it would be similar to the September 2024 merger agreement where DirecTV was the buyer, or would you be open to being the buyer?

Speaker #4: And then just the last one—I just wanted to sort of do a reality check with you, and ask what the risk is on the timeline for the DISH Wireless and DISH DBS bankruptcies, just given the opposition from the infrastructure companies.

Speaker #4: Thank you.

Speaker #2: Yeah. I'm going to I'll take that last one, the timeline of DISH Wireless first. I think our confirmation hearing, it's a confirmation hearing, is set for October 13th.

Charles Ergen: Yeah. I'll take that last one, the timeline of DISH Wireless. First, I think our confirmation hearing, it's a confirmation hearing, is set for 13 October. I think our expectation today is that this wireless bankruptcy could be wrapped up in Q4 of this year. To go back to your first question, buybacks, we do have some restrictions on buyback. To the extent we ever wanted to buy something back, we'd look at whether that was even possible, and if it wasn't, what we would do. We look at everything, right? The converts, it's my understanding that we don't have any restrictions on buying converts, but whether that would make sense for us is a whole other question. Change in investing, Hamid had done a lot of work on that side.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. I'll take that last one, the timeline of DISH Wireless. First, I think our confirmation hearing, it's a confirmation hearing, is set for 13 October. I think our expectation today is that this wireless bankruptcy could be wrapped up in Q4 of this year. To go back to your first question, buybacks, we do have some restrictions on buyback. To the extent we ever wanted to buy something back, we'd look at whether that was even possible, and if it wasn't, what we would do. We look at everything, right? The converts, it's my understanding that we don't have any restrictions on buying converts, but whether that would make sense for us is a whole other question. Change in investing, Hamid had done a lot of work on that side.

Speaker #2: So I think our expectation today is that that's going to happen, that the DISH Wireless bankruptcy could be wrapped up in the fourth quarter of this year.

Speaker #2: Now, I'll go back to your first question. Buybacks—I mean, we do have some restrictions on buybacks. And to the extent we ever wanted to buy something back, we'd look at whether that was even possible, and if it wasn't, what you would do.

Speaker #2: But we look at everything, right? The converts—it's my understanding that we don't have any restrictions on buying converts. But whether that would make sense for us is a whole other question.

Speaker #2: Changing investing, Hamid had done a lot of work on that side. And again, a lot of things that he put in place, he's kind of handed off to Tom.

Charles Ergen: Again, a lot of things that he put in place, he's kind of handed off to Tom, and I don't see a change in that strategy other than because we're all kind of at one place now, and we're all kind of daily conversations so that just communication's a little bit better. I think we look at our core businesses first, and Tom is heavily involved in that. He had additional things going on that Hamid didn't have going on. That's all combined, the priorities are still pretty much the same. Look at our business, look at other opportunities, and if we can't find anything, use our capital, whether it be stock buybacks or dividends. Good management's going to find opportunity.

Charlie Ergen: Again, a lot of things that he put in place, he's kind of handed off to Tom, and I don't see a change in that strategy other than because we're all kind of at one place now, and we're all kind of daily conversations so that just communication's a little bit better. I think we look at our core businesses first, and Tom is heavily involved in that. He had additional things going on that Hamid didn't have going on.

Speaker #2: And I don't see a change in that strategy, other than we—first, other than we—because we're all kind of in one place now and we're all kind of in daily conversations.

Speaker #2: So, just communication’s a little bit better. But I think we look at our core businesses first, and Tom is heavily involved in that. So he had additional things going on that Hamid didn’t have going on.

Speaker #2: Now, that's all combined, and so the priorities are still pretty much the same: look at our business, look at other opportunities, and if we can't find anything, use our capital—whether it be stock buybacks or dividends.

Charlie Ergen: That's all combined, the priorities are still pretty much the same. Look at our business, look at other opportunities, and if we can't find anything, use our capital, whether it be stock buybacks or dividends. Good management's going to find opportunity. Because things are frothy, I think opportunities are a little bit harder because there's a lot of cash on the sidelines and some pretty interesting valuations out there.

Speaker #2: So, good management's going to find opportunity. But because things are frothy, I think opportunities are a little bit harder because there's a lot of cash on the sidelines and some pretty interesting valuations out there.

Charles Ergen: Because things are frothy, I think opportunities are a little bit harder because there's a lot of cash on the sidelines and some pretty interesting valuations out there.

Bryan Kraft: Am I hearing you correctly?

Speaker #4: Am I hearing you correctly? Oh, yeah. Sorry.

Jeff Blum: DirecTV question.

Charles Ergen: Oh, DirecTV.

Charlie Ergen: Oh, DirecTV.

Bryan Kraft: Oh, yeah. Sorry.

Speaker #3: The.

Charles Ergen: I've always said it's inevitable to put the companies together. We've probably squandered some opportunity to do that because obviously there's still synergies there, but they're obviously not as high as they would've been before. I think we would look at it. We have no preconceived notions. If there was a willingness on DIRECTV's part to do something with the companies and what that might look like, buyer, seller joint, we have no preconceived notions of that. The question would be, is there something at the right value? We think we're playing a little bit longer-term game at DISH. We are investing in that business. We're investing in how we approach the customer, the customer relationships. In the short term, that's kind of a negative to OIBDA or EBITDA, right?

Charlie Ergen: I've always said it's inevitable to put the companies together. We've probably squandered some opportunity to do that because obviously there's still synergies there, but they're obviously not as high as they would've been before. I think we would look at it. We have no preconceived notions. If there was a willingness on DIRECTV's part to do something with the companies and what that might look like, buyer, seller joint, we have no preconceived notions of that.

Speaker #2: I've always said it's inevitable to put the companies together. We've probably squandered some opportunity to do that, because obviously the synergies—there are still synergies there, but they're obviously not as high as they would have been before.

Speaker #2: But I think we would look at it. We have no preconceived notions if there was a willingness on DirecTV's part to do something with the companies, and what that might look like—buy, sell, or joint.

Speaker #2: We have no preconceived notions of that. The question would be, is there something that's the right value? We think we're playing a little bit longer-term game at DISH.

Charlie Ergen: The question would be, is there something at the right value? We think we're playing a little bit longer-term game at DISH. We are investing in that business. We're investing in how we approach the customer, the customer relationships. In the short term, that's kind of a negative to OIBDA or EBITDA, right? You could have a shorter-term approach and make those numbers go up.

Speaker #2: We are investing in that business. We're investing in how we approach the customer and the customer relationships. It doesn't exactly help in the short term; that's kind of a negative.

Speaker #2: Obadiah or Ibadah, right? You could have a shorter-term approach and make those numbers go up, but we have to look at it from a holistic perspective and say we know the business well.

Charles Ergen: You could have a shorter-term approach and make those numbers go up. We have to look at it from a holistic perspective and say, we know the business well, we know the industry well, and I think we have pretty good ideas of valuations. If there was something where people could agree on valuations or agree on incentives going forward, when I say invest in our businesses, that's one of those things where you would invest in it. If somebody made the right offer, it's not a critical component of what we have to have going forward. We like that business.

Charlie Ergen: We have to look at it from a holistic perspective and say, we know the business well, we know the industry well, and I think we have pretty good ideas of valuations. If there was something where people could agree on valuations or agree on incentives going forward, when I say invest in our businesses, that's one of those things where you would invest in it. If somebody made the right offer, it's not a critical component of what we have to have going forward. We like that business.

Speaker #2: We know the industry well, and I think we have pretty good ideas of valuations if there was something where people could agree on valuations or agree on incentives going forward.

Speaker #2: And that would be, when I say invest in our businesses, that's one of those things where you would invest in. But if somebody made the right offer, it's not a critical component of what we have to have going forward.

Speaker #2: But we like that business, so.

Speaker #4: And just on the buyback—I mean, Charlie, it sounds like you don't have any real plan to buy back stock, and maybe you're even a little cautious on the valuation of EchoStar because of the valuation of SpaceX, even though your stock is trading at, like, a 50% discount to NAV.

Bryan Kraft: Just on the buyback, Charlie, it sounds like you don't have any real plan to buy back stock, and maybe you're even a little cautious on the valuation of EchoStar because of the valuation of SpaceX, even though your stock is trading at a 50% discount to NAV and you're increasing the authorization to $5 billion. I think we're all kind of struggling to understand what the real message is here and why you increased the authorization while you sound like you don't really have any plans to buy back stock. Is there something that we're missing here, or can you maybe shed a little more light on that?

Speaker #4: And you're increasing the authorization to $5 billion. I think we're all kind of struggling to understand what the real message is here—and why you increased the authorization while you sound like you don't really have any plans to buy back stock.

Speaker #4: Is there something that we're missing here, or can you maybe shed a little more light on that?

Speaker #2: Yeah. I mean, yes, you're missing the fact that, A, good management gets themselves in position to have flexibility. So obviously, a larger buyback doesn't require us to buy anything back, but should the marketplace be displaced or we see an opportunity because we don't have other opportunities, then we're positioned to do something if we want to.

Charles Ergen: Yes, you're missing the fact that, A, good management gets themselves in position to have flexibility. Obviously, a larger buyback doesn't require us to buy anything back. Should the marketplace be displaced or we see an opportunity because we don't have other opportunities, then we're positioned to do something if we want to. I think also missing that, I know you got to write reports and you got to analyze things, but again, this is a company that's got a 46-year track record of managing capital and running a relatively successful business despite massive changes sometimes in our future over those 46 years.

Charlie Ergen: Yes, you're missing the fact that, A, good management gets themselves in position to have flexibility. Obviously, a larger buyback doesn't require us to buy anything back. Should the marketplace be displaced or we see an opportunity because we don't have other opportunities, then we're positioned to do something if we want to. I think also missing that, I know you got to write reports and you got to analyze things, but again, this is a company that's got a 46-year track record of managing capital and running a relatively successful business despite massive changes sometimes in our future over those 46 years.

Speaker #2: I think also, missing that, I know you have to write reports and you have to analyze things. But again, this is a company that has a 46-year track record of managing capital and running a relatively successful business.

Speaker #2: Despite massive changes sometimes in our future over those 46 years. So, I don't think we fit into the normal box of professional management—multiple of Ibadah—come to conferences and talk about how great you're going to do, and get to the end of the quarter and do unhealthy long-term things to make a particular number.

Charles Ergen: I don't think we fit into the normal box of professional management, multiple of EBITDA, come to conferences and talk about how great you're going to do, and get to the end of the quarter and do unhealthy long-term things to make a particular number. We think about it long term. We think about growing value for our shareholders long term. We try to make the best decisions. We're making decisions that an owner would make, right? An owner that believes in building long-term value, and it doesn't fit into the normal box of what you might do. As a result of that, I'm not trying to be evasive, we don't know what we'll do with our capital other than we believe that with our capital, it will be prudent.

Charlie Ergen: I don't think we fit into the normal box of professional management, multiple of EBITDA, come to conferences and talk about how great you're going to do, and get to the end of the quarter and do unhealthy long-term things to make a particular number. We think about it long term. We think about growing value for our shareholders long term. We try to make the best decisions. We're making decisions that an owner would make, right? An owner that believes in building long-term value, and it doesn't fit into the normal box of what you might do.

Speaker #2: I mean, we think about it long-term. We think about growing value for our shareholders—long-term. And we try to make the best decisions; we're making decisions that an owner would make.

Speaker #2: Right? An owner that believes in building long-term value. And it doesn't fit into the normal box of what you might do. So, as a result of that, I'm not trying to be evasive.

Charlie Ergen: As a result of that, I'm not trying to be evasive, we don't know what we'll do with our capital other than we believe that with our capital, it will be prudent. We probably have some mix of risk in terms of some things we take a relative risk on, and some places we're conservative. We're generally conservative as a company, right? It's rare that we take a big risk. We've had to do it a few times. Most of the time, it's turned out successful, but we're generally a conservative company.

Speaker #2: We don't know what we'll do with our capital, other than we believe that with our capital, it will be prudent. And it will probably have some mix of risk, in terms of some things we take relative risk on and some places we're conservative.

Charles Ergen: We probably have some mix of risk in terms of some things we take a relative risk on, and some places we're conservative. We're generally conservative as a company, right? It's rare that we take a big risk. We've had to do it a few times. Most of the time, it's turned out successful, but we're generally a conservative company.

Speaker #2: But we're generally conservative as a company, right? It's rare that we take a big risk. We've had to do it a few times. Most of the time, it's turned out successful, but we're generally a conservative company.

Bryan Kraft: I certainly appreciate that, and thank you for the answer. I do think there's a big opportunity to create long-term value, though, because of that NAV discount, and that was more the nature of the question. Thank you.

Speaker #4: I certainly appreciate that. And thank you for the answer. I do think there's a big opportunity to create long-term value, though, because of that NAV discount.

Speaker #4: That was more the nature of the question. But thank you.

Speaker #2: Yeah. I mean, yeah, I think it's Captain Obvious.

Charles Ergen: Yeah. I think it's Captain Obvious.

Charlie Ergen: Yeah. I think it's Captain Obvious.

Speaker #1: Thank you. And a reminder to the audience: if you'd like to ask a question, please press star one on your phone. To remove yourself from the queue, press star two.

Operator 2: Thank you. A reminder to the audience, if you'd like to ask a question, press star one on your phone. To remove yourself from the queue, press star two. Your next question comes from Mark Dunbar with JPMorgan. Please state your question.

Operator: Thank you. A reminder to the audience, if you'd like to ask a question, press star one on your phone. To remove yourself from the queue, press star two. Your next question comes from Mark Dunbar with JPMorgan. Please state your question.

Speaker #1: Your next question comes from Mark Dunbar with JP Morgan. Please state your question.

Mark Dunbar: Hey, Charlie, appreciate you taking the question. Just given all the various lawsuits and machinations over the past year, just wondering how you think about access to the capital markets going forward. Obviously, you have a lot of cash. Would like to just get your thoughts on that.

Speaker #4: Hey, Charlie, appreciate you taking the question. Just given all the various lawsuits and machinations over the past year, just wondering how you think about access to the capital markets going forward.

Speaker #4: Obviously, you have a lot of cash. I would like to just get your thoughts on that.

Speaker #2: Well, A, I don't think we need access to the capital markets today, so we're not really thinking about that. But I do think it's important to try to work with our bondholders to get to a good solution.

Charles Ergen: Well, A, I don't think we need access to the capital markets today, so we're not really thinking about that. I do think it's important to try to work with our bondholders to get to a good solution. I include vendors in that. The tower companies did a good job for us. On the other hand, they made a lot of money on us, and they're going to lease out their capacity to others. The way I look at it, to do things professionally and realistically and unemotionally, and that's what we'll try to do. I've said this many times, that it's unfortunate that particularly the tower companies instituted litigation because it stopped the communication. I have lawyers on both sides. Lawyers make money by litigating.

Charlie Ergen: Well, A, I don't think we need access to the capital markets today, so we're not really thinking about that. I do think it's important to try to work with our bondholders to get to a good solution. I include vendors in that. The tower companies did a good job for us. On the other hand, they made a lot of money on us, and they're going to lease out their capacity to others.

Speaker #2: And I include vendors in that. I mean, the tower companies did a good job for us, but on the other hand, they made a lot of money off us.

Speaker #2: And they're going to lease out their capacity to others. So, the way I look at it, I look at it to do things professionally, realistically, and unemotionally, and that's what we'll try to do.

Charlie Ergen: The way I look at it, to do things professionally and realistically and unemotionally, and that's what we'll try to do. I've said this many times, that it's unfortunate that particularly the tower companies instituted litigation because it stopped the communication. I have lawyers on both sides. Lawyers make money by litigating. They have no incentive to try to get clients together, and you end up going through attorneys, and it takes a while. It takes much longer to get to the right answers, which normally ordinary people who are realistic and want to get to a solution that's better than not having a solution, it just takes longer time.

Speaker #2: I've said this many times. It's unfortunate that, particularly, the tower companies instituted litigation because it stopped the communication. I have lawyers on both sides; lawyers make money by litigating.

Charles Ergen: They have no incentive to try to get clients together, and you end up going through attorneys, and it takes a while. It takes much longer to get to the right answers, which normally ordinary people who are realistic and want to get to a solution that's better than not having a solution, it just takes longer time. It's unfortunate that the litigation happened, but I knew as soon as that started getting litigated, that that was going to lead to a much longer procedure. Now we have a third party, which is a judge in bankruptcy, and the third party's going to make decisions for us, which one side or the other may like or not like. My experience has been I'd rather make that decision myself in negotiation, but it takes two to tango.

Speaker #2: They have no incentive to try to get clients together. And you end up going through attorneys, and it takes a while. It takes much longer to get to the right answers—which two normally ordinary people who are realistic and want to get to a solution that’s better than not having a solution—it just takes a longer time.

Speaker #2: So it's unfortunate that the litigation happened. But I knew as soon as that started getting litigated that it was going to lead to a much longer procedure.

Charlie Ergen: It's unfortunate that the litigation happened, but I knew as soon as that started getting litigated, that that was going to lead to a much longer procedure. Now we have a third party, which is a judge in bankruptcy, and the third party's going to make decisions for us, which one side or the other may like or not like. My experience has been I'd rather make that decision myself in negotiation, but it takes two to tango.

Speaker #2: Now, we have a third party, which is a judge in bankruptcy, and the third party is going to make decisions for us, which one side or the other may like or not like.

Speaker #2: My experience has been, I'd rather make that decision myself and then negotiate. But it takes two to tango.

Speaker #4: Okay. Makes sense. Thanks.

Mark Dunbar: Okay. Makes sense. Thanks.

Speaker #1: And your next question comes from Michael DeMarco with Helix Partners. Please state your question.

Operator 2: Your next question comes from Michael Abatemarco with Helix Partners. Please state your question.

Operator: Your next question comes from Michael Abatemarco with Helix Partners. Please state your question.

Speaker #5: Hey, Charlie. Thanks for taking the call and the questions. I just was wondering if you'd be able to clarify the $5 to $7 billion liability.

Michael Abatemarco: Hey, Charlie. Thanks for taking the call and the questions. I just was wondering if you'd be able to clarify the $5 to 7 billion liability, as relates to the SpaceX taxes. Does that also include the kind of appreciation in value in SpaceX? Does that include any kind of 1033 dynamics?

Speaker #5: As it relates to the SpaceX taxes, does that also include the kind of appreciation in value in SpaceX? And does that include any kind of 1033 dynamics?

Speaker #2: It really the answer is it's taken all the those variables into account. And again, it's our best guess. But it could be it could be a little higher or a little lower.

Charles Ergen: The answer is, it's taken all those variables into account, and against our best guess. It could be a little higher or a little lower. It's just we're trying to give you some indication of where it might be. If you take the high end of that, take $7 billion and said, Here's where we think it's going to be, you probably got a model that's realistic for what we know today. We're trying to give you some guidance, but we don't normally give guidance, and I guess don't even take this guidance as guidance, but it's our best guess. What makes it difficult is there are a lot of variables because there could be 1033s, there could be other things that affect. We have litigation that's going to affect the shutdown cost of the network.

Charlie Ergen: The answer is, it's taken all those variables into account, and against our best guess. It could be a little higher or a little lower. It's just we're trying to give you some indication of where it might be. If you take the high end of that, take $7 billion and said, Here's where we think it's going to be, you probably got a model that's realistic for what we know today. We're trying to give you some guidance, but we don't normally give guidance, and I guess don't even take this guidance as guidance, but it's our best guess.

Speaker #2: It's just we're trying to give you some indication of where it might be. So if you took a take the high end of that, took seven billion dollars and said, "Here's where we think it's going to be," you probably got to you probably got to model this realistic for what we know today.

Speaker #2: So we're trying to give you some guidance, but we don't normally give guidance. And I guess, don't even take this guidance as guidance. But it's our best guess.

Speaker #2: And what makes it difficult is there are a lot of variables, because there could be 1033s, there could be other things that affect—we have litigation that's going to affect the shutdown cost of the network.

Charlie Ergen: What makes it difficult is there are a lot of variables because there could be 1033s, there could be other things that affect. We have litigation that's going to affect the shutdown cost of the network. Obviously, it could be higher, given where the tower companies think things should go. As of today, and then we'll let you know if things change, as of today, we still see things in that range. It's up to us as management, that it's going to take some work to get it to that range. We're certainly not there yet.

Speaker #2: We have, so obviously it could be higher, given where the tower companies think things should go. As of today—and we'll let you know if things change—but as of today, we still see things in that range.

Charles Ergen: Obviously, it could be higher, given where the tower companies think things should go. As of today, and then we'll let you know if things change, as of today, we still see things in that range. It's up to us as management, that it's going to take some work to get it to that range. We're certainly not there yet.

Speaker #2: And it's up to us as management, but it's going to take some work to get it to that range. We're certainly not there yet.

Speaker #3: All right, thank you very much. Have a good day.

Jeff Blum: All right. Thank you very much. Have a good day.

Michael Abatemarco: All right. Thank you very much. Have a good day.

Speaker #2: Thank you.

Charles Ergen: Thank you.

Charlie Ergen: Thank you.

Speaker #1: Thank you once again. To ask a question, press star one on your phone. We'll pause for a few moments while we poll for questions.

Operator 2: Thank you. Once again, to ask a question, press star one on your phone. We'll pause for a few moments while we pull for questions. Thank you. Once again, press star one to ask a question, press star two to remove yourself from the queue. All right. I'll now turn the floor back to management. One moment, please. With that, we will conclude today's call. Parties may disconnect. Have a good day.

Operator: Thank you. Once again, to ask a question, press star one on your phone. We'll pause for a few moments while we pull for questions. Thank you. Once again, press star one to ask a question, press star two to remove yourself from the queue. All right. I'll now turn the floor back to management. One moment, please. With that, we will conclude today's call. Parties may disconnect. Have a good day.

Speaker #1: Thank you. Once again, press star one to ask a question. Press star two to remove yourself from the queue. All right, I'll now turn the floor back to management.

Q2 2026 EchoStar Corp Earnings Call

Request DemoDemo

EchoStar

Earnings