SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-K
| x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
OR
| ¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 0-13716
North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| Pennsylvania | 25-1485389 | |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
4008 Gibsonia Road, Gibsonia, Pennsylvania 15044-9311
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code: 724/443-9600
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, par value $.15625 per share
(and associated Preferred Stock Purchase Rights)
(Title of Class)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES x NO ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x
The number of shares of the registrants Common Stock (par value $.15625 per share) outstanding as of March 14, 2005 was 15,005,000.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES x NO ¨
Based on the average of the bid and asked prices at the close of the market on June 30, 2004, the last business day of the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $269,937,000. For purpose of making this calculation only, the registrant has defined affiliates to include all directors and officers (who directly or beneficially owned as a group 1,498,005 shares of Common Stock on June 30, 2004).
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The information for Item 10, Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant; Item 11, Executive Compensation; Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters; Item 13, Certain Relationships and Related Transactions; and Item 14, Principal Accountant Fees and Services, has been incorporated into Part III of this Form 10-K by reference to registrants Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2004.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| Page | ||||
| 1 | ||||
| PART I |
||||
| Item 1. |
1 | |||
| Item 2. |
9 | |||
| Item 3. |
9 | |||
| Item 4. |
9 | |||
| 10 | ||||
| PART II |
||||
| Item 5. |
12 | |||
| Item 6. |
13 | |||
| Item 7. |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
14 | ||
| Item 7A. |
35 | |||
| Item 8. |
35 | |||
| Item 9. |
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
35 | ||
| Item 9A. |
35 | |||
| Item 9B. |
35 | |||
| PART III |
||||
| Item 10. |
36 | |||
| Item 11. |
36 | |||
| Item 12. |
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
36 | ||
| Item 13. |
36 | |||
| Item 14. |
36 | |||
| Item 15. |
36 | |||
| 39 | ||||
Cautionary Language Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
In addition to historical information, this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 (Section 27A) and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Section 21E) regarding events, financial trends and critical accounting policies that may affect our future operating results, financial position and cash flows. We intend that such forward-looking statements be subject to the safe harbors within Section 27A and Section 21E as provided by the Private Securities Litigation Act of 1995.
Forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by words such as believes, anticipates, expects, estimates, intends or similar words or expressions. Such statements are based on our assumptions and estimates and are subject to risks and uncertainties. You should understand that various factors, including (but not limited to) those items discussed below and elsewhere in this document, could cause our actual results to differ materially from the results expressed in or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which are current only as of the date of this filing. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
While the below list of risks and uncertainties is not exhaustive, some factors, in addition to those contained throughout this document, that could affect future operating results, financial position and cash flows and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by the forward-looking statements are:
| | a change in economic conditions in the markets in which we operate; |
| | government and regulatory policies, at both the federal and state levels; |
| | unanticipated higher capital spending for, or delays in, the deployment of new technologies; |
| | the pricing and availability of equipment, materials and inventories; |
| | changes in the competitive environment in which we operate, including the intensity of competitive activity, pricing pressures and new and/or alternative product offerings; |
| | our ability to continue to successfully penetrate our edge-out markets. |
We also refer you to the section titled Factors Affecting Our Prospects under Item 1 in this Form 10-K for additional discussions concerning items which pose risks and uncertainties that could affect our future results.
PART I
| Item 1. | Business |
General
North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. (the Registrant, the Company, we, us or our), organized May 31, 1985, is a holding company and has no operating function. Its predecessor, North Pittsburgh Telephone Company (North Pittsburgh or NPTC), a telephone public utility incorporated in 1906, became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant on May 31, 1985. Penn Telecom, Inc. (Penn Telecom or PTI) became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant on January 30, 1988. Prior to this date, Penn Telecom was a wholly-owned subsidiary of North Pittsburgh. Penn Telecom is certificated as a Competitive Access Provider (CAP), a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) and an Interexchange Carrier (IXC) and has entered into these businesses. Pinnatech, Inc. (Pinnatech), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant, was formed in 1995 and principally provides Internet and broadband related services. The Registrant, North Pittsburgh, Penn Telecom and Pinnatech operate under the provisions of the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law. No significant changes in the mode of conducting
1
business by the Registrant or its subsidiaries have occurred since the beginning of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.
North Pittsburgh Telephone Company
North Pittsburgh, our incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC), was founded in 1906 and operates in an approximately 285 square mile territory in Western Pennsylvania, which includes portions of Allegheny, Armstrong, Butler and Westmoreland Counties. We provide service to approximately 72,300 business and residential access lines in our ILEC territory. Over the past decade, our ILEC territory has experienced very robust population growth due to the continued expansion of suburban communities into our serving area, with the southernmost point of our territory only 12 miles from the City of Pittsburgh. According to the most recent census, the population in our ILEC service territory grew 14.3% from 1990 to 2000. Although no formal census has been published since 2000, business and new home growth has remained robust in our territory over the last several years and census estimates, which are published on a yearly basis, continue to show population growth.
We operate a 100% digital switching network, comprised of nine central offices and 85 carrier serving areas (CSAs). The core of the network consists of two main host switches, a Nortel DMS 500 and a Nortel DMS 100. The current CSA architecture, in which nearly all loop lengths are kept to 12,000 feet or less, has enabled us to provide digital subscriber line (DSL) service to over 99% of our access lines. In addition, we have deployed fiber optic cable extensively throughout the network, resulting in a 100% Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) that supports all of the inter-office and host-remote links as well as the majority of business parks within our ILEC serving area. We believe that our network is built for the future, in which our ability to satisfy the growing customer demand for broadband and multi-megabit services will be a key critical success factor.
Penn Telecom
Penn Telecom furnishes telecommunication and broadband services south of North Pittsburghs territory to customers in Pittsburgh and its surrounding suburbs as well as north of North Pittsburghs territory in the City of Butler and its surrounding areas. Verizon is the ILEC in the Pittsburgh area, while Sprint is the ILEC in the City of Butler and its surrounding areas. Our CLEC operation follows a true edge-out strategy, in which it has leveraged North Pittsburghs network, human capital skills and reputation in the surrounding markets.
We operate an extensive SONET optical network with over 300 route miles of fiber optic facilities in the Pittsburgh metropolitan market. We have physical collocation in 27 Verizon central offices and one Sprint central office and primarily serve our customers using unbundled network element (UNE) loops. Twenty-seven of these collocations are connected to our SONET using a combination of leased and owned fiber optic facilities. We have also deployed a next-generation switching system to support our Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) primary rate interface (PRI) service, achieving significant cost reductions over traditional switching systems. In the Pittsburgh market, a carrier hotel that we operate serves as the hub for the fiber optic network. In addition, we also offer space in the carrier hotel to internet service providers (ISPs), IXCs, other CLECs and other customers who need a carrier-class location to house voice and data equipment as well as gain access to a number of networks, including ours. In the City of Butler, we have overbuilt a portion of the Sprint distribution plant in the central business district and continue to expand these facilities as we increase our penetration of the Butler area business market.
Our sales strategy in our edge-out markets has been to focus on small to mid-sized business customers (defined as 5 to 500 lines), educational institutions and healthcare facilities, offering local and long distance voice services as well as broadband services. Our fiber based network, comprised of multiple rings, enables us to compete against Verizon and other CAPs to offer high capacity special access circuits (from DS-1s up to OC-48s) to IXCs, ISPs and even other CLECs.
In addition to the CLEC operations, Penn Telecom also provides long distance services and maintains an enterprise equipment business providing traditional key and private branch exchange (PBX) systems to business
2
customers. Prior to our CLEC operations, the majority of our long distance customers resided in our ILEC market. However, with the growth of our CLEC customer base and the effective bundling of toll with local dial tone services, we have been able to greatly expand this service offering throughout Western Pennsylvania.
Pinnatech
Pinnatech, an ISP doing business under the Nauticom name, furnishes Internet access and broadband services in Western Pennsylvania. We serve the majority of our DSL and other broadband customers over our ILEC and CLEC networks with Pinnatech serving as the ISP providing a gateway to the Internet. In addition, Pinnatech also provides virtual hosting services, web page design and e-commerce enabling technologies to customers.
Principal Services Rendered
The principal categories of service that we render are as follows:
Local Network Services. We provide local (dial tone), custom calling features and local private line services to residential and business customers in Western Pennsylvania.
Network Access Services. We provide IXCs, cellular mobile radio service (CMRS) providers and other local exchange carriers (LECs) with access to our switched access facilities for the completion of interstate and intrastate long distance toll calls and also extended area service (EAS) calls. In addition, we provide IXCs, CMRS providers, ISPs, other LECs and end-user customers access to private line network facilities for use in transporting voice and data services. These private line data services are referred to as special access and utilize a variety of technologies such as Digital Data Services, Frame Relay, Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM), SONET, DS-1, DS-3, OC-3, multi-megabit and gigabit Ethernet and others.
Long Distance Toll Service. We provide intraLATA, intrastate, interstate and international toll service to business and residential customers throughout Western Pennsylvania.
Internet Access Service. We provide broadband DSL and multi-megabit Ethernet services to end-user customers and ISPs on both a wholesale and retail basis, mostly through the use of our own facilities. We also provide access to the Internet to end-users utilizing dial-up and other broadband facilities such as Frame Relay and ATM. In addition, we provide virtual hosting services, web page design and creation and e-commerce enabling technologies to customers. Internet access service revenues, including revenues recognized for DSL service, are classified within Other Operating Revenues on our Consolidated Statement of Income.
Directory Advertising, Billing and Other Services. We receive revenues from the sale of advertising space in telephone directories and from billing and collection activities. Billing and collection services are provided to various IXCs.
Telecommunications Equipment. We sell and service telecommunications equipment to customers generally in the Western Pennsylvania area.
Operating Revenues. The respective amounts of operating revenues contributed by local network services, long distance and access services, telecommunications equipment sales, directory advertising and billing and collection services and other operating revenues during each of the last three fiscal years are set forth in the Financial Statements and Schedules provided in response to Item 8 and are incorporated herein by reference.
Other Services
North Pittsburgh and Alltel Cellular Association of South Carolina, L.P. are limited partners, with a partnership interest of 3.6 percent each, and Cellco Partnership, d.b.a. Verizon Wireless, is both a general and a
3
limited partner with partnership interests of 40.0 and 52.8 percent, respectively, in the Pittsburgh SMSA Limited Partnership, which provides wireless service in and around the Pittsburgh Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) as authorized by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
North Pittsburgh, Centennial Cellular Telephone Company of Lawrence (Centennial) and Venus Cellular Telephone Company, Inc. (Venus) are limited partners, each with a partnership interest of 14.29 percent, and Cellco Partnership, d.b.a. Verizon Wireless, is the general partner with a partnership interest of 57.13 percent, in Pennsylvania RSA 6(I) Limited Partnership, which provides wireless service in a Rural Service Area (RSA) consisting of Clarion and Lawrence Counties and the Northern portions of Armstrong and Butler Counties. Verizon Wireless purchased its 57.13 percent interest from Alltel Communications, Inc. (Alltel) on December 31, 2002.
North Pittsburgh and Venus are limited partners with partnership interests of 23.67 and 16.67 percent, respectively, and Cellco Partnership, d.b.a. Verizon Wireless, is the general partner with a partnership interest of 59.66 percent, in Pennsylvania RSA 6(II) Limited Partnership, which provides wireless service in an RSA consisting of the Southern portions of Armstrong and Butler Counties.
Boulevard Communications, L.L.P. (Boulevard) is a Pennsylvania limited liability partnership CAP equally owned by the Company and a company in the Armstrong Holdings, Inc. group of companies (Armstrong Group). Boulevard provides point-to-point data services to businesses in Western Pennsylvania, including access to ISPs, connections to IXCs and high-speed data transmission.
Competitive Environment
Since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the 1996 Act), the telecommunications industry has undergone significant change. The goal of the 1996 Act was to encourage the rapid development of new telecommunications technologies and to promote new competition in the hope that customers would benefit from lower prices, higher quality services and greater choices of services and providers.
More specifically, the 1996 Act includes requirements that ILECs negotiate rates, terms and conditions with carriers regarding interconnection, the provisioning of UNEs, compensation terms for local calls, the resale of telecommunication services and the physical collocation of competitors equipment in the ILECs facilities. As described in greater detail in the Regulatory Environment section of Item 7, North Pittsburghs designation as a Rural carrier under the 1996 Act has exempted it from many of the above-mentioned provisions. A competitor may petition the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PA PUC) for the removal of North Pittsburghs exemption (although the prospective competitor must prove its proposal is not unduly economically burdensome to North Pittsburgh, is technically feasible and is consistent with the universal service provisions of the 1996 Act). Although no competitor has yet formally sought the removal of North Pittsburghs rural exemption, there is a reasonable risk that some of the barriers to a competitors entry into our ILEC territory will be either limited or removed in the future.
Our local wireline operations in our ILEC territory have already been experiencing increased competition over the past several years from various sources, including, but not limited to, larger end-users installing their own networks, IXCs, satellite transmission services, wireless communication providers, cable companies, radio-based personal communications companies, CAPs, ISPs and other systems capable of completely or partially bypassing local telephone facilities.
We are currently addressing potential competition by reducing costs, increasing efficiency, restructuring rates, examining new and bundled product offerings and increasing our focus on customer satisfaction.
At the same time, the 1996 Act has enabled us to expand outside of our franchised ILEC territory through our CLEC operations. With our ILEC territory being adjacent to the greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area, we
4
have been able to selectively enter attractive markets through a CLEC edge-out strategy. As of December 31, 2004, we served 37,311 dial tone access lines and 21,183 access line equivalents1, for a grand total of 58,494 equivalent access lines2 served in our CLEC edge-out markets.3
The telecommunications market within Pittsburgh and its surrounding areas is very competitive. We compete against not only the area ILEC (Verizon) but also many of the larger national and regional CLECs. The market north of our ILECs territory in the City of Butler and its surrounding areas is currently relatively less competitive, as our only main competitor is the area ILEC (Sprint). Due to the higher Sprint UNE charges and lack of proximity to the physical points of presence of many CLECs, this region is currently more isolated from competition. However, we expect that the competitive nature of this market will increase in the future. The incumbent cable company in this market has begun to offer telephony services utilizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology. We have been able to effectively compete in this region by leveraging North Pittsburghs reputation and network to reduce the overall cost of providing service, thereby attracting several of the largest business and municipal customers. Due to our success in the area, we have overbuilt a portion of the Sprint distribution plant, which will further increase our competitive advantage as well as decrease the long-term cost of providing service.
Other Products/Services
The toll market is very competitive. All the major IXCs are present in the markets in which we offer service. Wireless carriers also pose a competitive threat to our toll services, especially for those customers who are heavy users and have the flexibility to adapt their calling patterns to take advantage of the bundled packages offered by many of the wireless carriers. In addition, cable companies have begun providing local dial tone and toll services and VoIP companies have begun offering unlimited calling plans for those customers that utilize broadband connections. As has become evident over the past several years through wireless and now VoIP pricing methodologies, the actual market for per minute of use toll calling will decrease over time and eventually disappear for all practical purposes. There will remain implicit amounts within the pricing of the customers overall calling plan for what is today considered to be toll (or out of local area calling). However, the effective rate realized on a per minute of use basis from the flat rated calling plans will be much lower than historical rates realized from the traditional per minute of use rated plans. We have developed over the last few years, and continue to modify, our toll calling plans (including the introduction of unlimited calling plans). In addition, we have been able to expand our customer base through our CLECs overall growth in access lines and success in bundling toll with local dial tone service. As of December 31, 2004, 78% of our customers in our edge-out markets subscribed to one or another of our toll packages.
The market for Internet and broadband services is also highly competitive. Our DSL product experiences competition from cable modem services, other ILECs and CLECs and, to a lesser extent, wireless and satellite
| 1 | Access line equivalents represent a conversion of data circuits to an access line basis and are presented for comparability purposes. Equivalents are calculated by converting data circuits (basic rate interface (BRI), PRI, DSL, DS-1 and DS-3) and SONET-based (optical) services (OC-3 and OC-48) to the equivalent of an access line. While the revenues generated by access line equivalents have a directional relationship with these counts, growth rates cannot be compared on an equivalent basis. |
| 2 | Equivalent access lines include dial tone access lines and access line equivalents. |
| 3 | In the Companys previous periodic report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (its quarterly report for the period ended September 30, 2004), it was disclosed that we served 37,295 dial tone access lines and 21,422 access line equivalents, for a grand total of 58,717 equivalent access lines served in our CLEC edge-out markets as of September 30, 2004. Due to the conversion in the third quarter of 2004 of our system that reports our access line and equivalent counts, an overstatement of 1,065 dial tone access lines occurred. As of September 30, 2004, we served 36,230 dial tone access lines and 21,422 access line equivalents, for a grand total of 57,652 equivalent access lines. No other reported figures from dates prior to September 30, 2004 were affected. |
5
broadband products. We also face competition in the dial-up market from most of the national and regional competitors. Many of our broadband and dial-up competitors have significantly greater market presence, advertising budgets and brand recognition. We compete based on our knowledge of the local area, the quality of our product and the high level of service that we provide, especially our responsiveness to the needs of small to medium sized businesses.
We also derive a small percentage of our revenues from directory advertising, telecommunications equipment sales, virtual hosting, web page design, e-commerce enabling technologies and other services, all of which are competitive in nature.
Factors Affecting Our Prospects
A number of factors, which affect our future prospects, are important to an overall understanding of our Company and business. The following items are particularly noteworthy, although we do not represent that the list captures every possible existing or foreseeable factor or risk.
The communications industry is becoming increasingly competitive, and this competition has resulted and most likely will continue to result in pricing pressures on our service offerings.
As discussed in more detail in the preceding Competitive Environment section, the markets in which we operate are growing increasingly competitive. We still maintain a level of protection in our ILEC territory against intra-modal competition, and currently no non-facilities based CLECs are operating in our territory. We are, however, starting to face a high level of inter-modal competition from wireless carriers and cable companies. Although historically existing more as a competitor in the toll market, wireless carriers are now competing more aggressively against our secondary and even primary lines. In addition, cable companies that operate in our markets have begun to deploy telephony offerings, mostly using VoIP platforms.
The toll market has continued to be extremely competitive and we would expect this trend to continue into the foreseeable future, especially driven by bundled pricing in the wireless industry and new VoIP competitors. The broadband market is also very competitive, with cable companies having offerings which compete very aggressively with our DSL and higher broadband circuits. Wireless carriers are also continuing to upgrade their networks and have just begun to offer broadband products in certain areas of the geographical markets in which we operate that could compete with our DSL product.
Many of our competitors are major communications companies that have more extensive resources.
We compete in our various markets with telephone companies such as Verizon, Sprint and other national CLECs (in our edge-out markets), cable companies that include Comcast and Armstrong, and all the major wireless and interexchange carriers. All of these companies have substantially greater financial and marketing resources as well as greater name recognition. In addition, given their financial resources and scale, these companies may be able to devote more capital to newer technologies and/or use their cost advantages to reduce prices for an extended period of time.
We are subject to a complex and uncertain regulatory environment.
The amounts that we charge for most of our services are subject to regulatory oversight at both the federal and state levels. Our business plans are also greatly affected by complex (and highly litigated) laws and regulations pertaining to competitive requirements in the markets in which we operate, such as regulatory barriers to entry in our ILEC territory and rules relating to both the availability and pricing of leased network elements in our edge-out territories. We expect that the competitive barriers to entry in our ILEC territory will continue to be reduced, although we do not know to what degree and when. With regard to the network elements that we utilize in our edge-out territories, any material negative changes in the availability or pricing of such network elements could have a material impact on our financial condition and future business plans.
6
Approximately 31% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 came from charges paid to us from other carriers for services which we performed in originating and terminating toll and local traffic (access revenues) and from proceeds which we received from universal service funds. Our access rates are subject to regulation and reviews at both the federal and state levels. There are currently a number of formal and informal proceedings reviewing both the current access compensation structure as well as the current rules regarding the contribution methodology and eligibility requirements of the universal service funds. One of the proposals being developed by some of the larger companies in the communications industry, which would seek a migration to a bill and keep intercarrier compensation mechanism, could have a material negative impact on our financial results and condition if adequate carve-outs are not made for rural carriers to support the high cost of providing services in rural communities. In addition, any substantive modifications to the availability of, or ability to recover costs from, federal and state universal service funds could have a material negative impact on our financial results and condition.
As a result of the expansion of our customer base in our CLEC edge-out markets, the increases experienced in broadband revenues, and several revenue neutral rate rebalancings that our ILEC has made in the past two years which have increased end-user charges while decreasing access rates, the percentage of our consolidated revenues which we receive from the above mentioned access charges and universal service funds (31% for 2004) has decreased from 34% and 35% of our consolidated revenues for 2003 and 2002, respectively. Although our exposure to these revenue sources has declined over the past several years, those revenue sources still constitute a material percentage of our overall revenues and operating margins.
In addition, newer technologies, such as VoIP, have been introduced since the passage of the 1996 Act. Many of these new technologies do not readily fit into the legacy telecommunications regulatory framework and are causing regulators to reconsider many of the basic assumptions in regard to public policy and regulation of telecommunications industry at both the federal and state levels. The FCC has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proceeding to examine the regulatory treatment of VoIP. In the interim, the FCC and individual states have been ruling on narrow issues concerning VoIP and other access issues on a case-by-case basis. No comprehensive regulatory framework has yet to be established. The FCCs final rules, or an extended period of regulatory uncertainty during which carriers might refuse to pay portions of their applicable access charges, might detrimentally affect our future access revenues.
Our ability to grow will require investments in markets and products that may not achieve our desired returns.
With the increased competition in our existing markets and pressures on profit margins, we may have to invest in markets and products that most likely will not generate the margins we have traditionally experienced in our core access line business in our ILEC territory. Access lines in our edge-out markets carry lower margins, mainly due to pricing discounts we offer from the incumbents rates, incremental costs we incur to lease some of the facilities we use and overall lower access rates that we charge to carriers using our network. In addition, some of the products which we have deployed over the last several years, such as DSL, have been introduced into already competitive environments that have lower overall margins than our traditional ILEC access lines. Some of these products, although producing a new source of revenue, have had detrimental impacts on other existing revenue streams (such as second lines which can be rendered redundant by DSL). Although we believe that we can continue to penetrate our current edge-out markets (which mostly encompass Pittsburgh and its surrounding communities), potential expansion into further markets, which may be needed to grow revenues, will most likely carry greater risk as our brand recognition will not be as strong and our network efficiencies may not be as great as we are currently experiencing in our existing edge-out markets.
A lack of parity between us and our competitors concerning regulatory fees and assessments as well as taxation laws could adversely impact our ability to profitably compete.
The telecommunications industry is one of the most heavily taxed in our country. While serving as monopolies in the past, both federal and state agencies have used telephone companies to assess onto individuals
7
and businesses a multitude of taxes and regulatory assessments, including, but not limited to, federal excise taxes, gross receipts taxes, 911 recovery fees, universal service assessments, Pennsylvania relay service charges and state and local sales taxes (where applicable). Typically, such assessments and taxes can constitute 10-20% of the gross amount of a telephone bill, dependent upon the types of services purchased. We recognize no margin on these fees and taxes but rather serve as the pass through entity responsible for charging and collecting the fees and taxes from our end-user customers and remitting the monies collected to the taxing and regulatory authorities. As inter-modal competition continues to develop, companies which do not meet the traditional definitions of telecommunications carriers and/or offer services which do not neatly fit into the outdated definitions of such terms as communication services (that is, for example, a service that may instead be deemed an informational service) have claimed and may continue to claim that they are not subject to some or all of the above-mentioned taxes and assessments. Unless regulators and taxing authorities change or clarify their rules and regulations to include such companies and services as being subject to such taxes and assessments or deregulate and exclude us from being subject to such taxes and assessments, the lack of parity could adversely impact our ability to effectively compete on price.
Employees
At December 31, 2004, the Company, through all of its subsidiaries, employed 398 persons. Approximately 31% of our employees are covered under collective bargaining agreements. In October 2004, North Pittsburghs bargaining employees ratified a new labor contract with the Communications Workers of America (CWA) that will remain in effect until September 30, 2007. Also, in September 2002, Penn Telecoms bargaining employees ratified a new labor contract with the CWA that will remain in effect until August 31, 2005.
Other Matters
The majority of the services we provide are repetitive and recurring in nature and, as a result, backlog orders and seasonality are not significant factors. In addition, there are no specific special practices relating to working capital.
No material part of our overall business is dependent upon a single or few end-user customers, the loss of any one or more of whom would have a materially adverse effect on our business. We do provide access services to major IXCs and other telecommunications companies, with revenues received from several carriers individually exceeding five percent of consolidated revenues.
We have not encountered, nor do we anticipate, any difficulty in obtaining a ready supply of telecommunications equipment from manufacturer suppliers. Although certain individual suppliers may each supply more than 10 percent of our equipment requirements, we are not primarily dependent upon any one supplier and alternative suppliers of telecommunications equipment are readily available.
North Pittsburgh holds valid, continuing and subsisting rights, certificates, franchises, licenses and renewable permits adequate for the conduct of its business in the territory it serves, none of which contains any burdensome restrictions. We also have FCC licenses to operate a private operational telephone maintenance radio service station (call sign WIK 838) expiring on March 20, 2011 and a non-commercial private license for our own maintenance radio service and other purposes (call sign WPCD 845) expiring on April 29, 2013. We have not encountered in the past, nor do we anticipate in the future, any difficulty in maintaining or renewing these licenses.
Available Information
We maintain a website with the address www.northpittsburgh.com. We are not including the information contained on our website as a part of, or incorporating it by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We make available free of charge through our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
8
We have adopted a written code of ethics that applies to all directors, officers, employees and agents of the Company, including our principal executive officer and senior financial officers, in accordance with Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules of the SEC promulgated thereunder. The code of ethics, which we call North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. Code of Ethics For Executive Management, Directors and All Other Employees and Agents, is available on our website. In the event that we make changes in, or provide waivers from, the provisions of this code of ethics that the SEC requires us to disclose, we intend to disclose these events on our website.
| Item 2. | Properties |
The Registrant owns in fee an office building, which houses a portion of the operations of Penn Telecom. Penn Telecom also owns an office/warehouse building.
The materially important physical properties of North Pittsburgh, all owned in fee (except some rights-of-way) and most of which are held subject to certain mortgage and security agreements executed in connection with loans through the Rural Utilities Service (RUS), consist generally of any and all property required to operate a modern telecommunications network and include principally land, buildings, central office equipment, long distance switching facilities, transmission facilities, pole lines, aerial cable, underground cable, aerial wire, buried cable, buried wire, distribution wire, underground conduit, furniture, office and computer equipment, garage facilities, vehicles and work equipment. Such facilities are fully utilized except that improvement and expansion of those facilities are, to the extent possible, made in anticipation of the demand for service. All of the foregoing properties are located within Allegheny, Armstrong, Butler and Westmoreland Counties in Western Pennsylvania.
| Item 3. | Legal Proceedings |
As of the date hereof, except for regulatory matters before the PA PUC and FCC, including matters which could result in the expansion of competition, there were no material pending legal or governmental proceedings directly involving the Company or its subsidiaries, other than ordinary routine litigation and ordinary routine utility matters incidental to the business.
| Item 4. | Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
No matter was submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.
9
ADDITIONAL ITEM FOR PART I
Executive Officers Of The Registrant
Information regarding the Registrants Executive Officers and Chairman of the Board of Directors is provided below. In addition to the positions and business experience related to the Registrant, additional information related to North Pittsburgh Telephone Company, the Registrants predecessor, is also presented.
Executive Officers of the Registrant
| Name and Business Experience |
Age |
Positions and Offices with | ||
| Charles E. Thomas, Jr. |
61 | Chairman, Board of Directors | ||
| Registrant and North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Chairman of the Board of Directors since 1998; Director since 1993. Partner in the law firm of Thomas, Thomas, Armstrong & Niesen, Harrisburg, PA, which has been retained as general counsel to the Registrant since the formation of this firm in 1991; Partner in the law firm of Thomas & Thomas from 1977 to 1990. |
||||
| Harry R. Brown |
68 | Director, President and Chief Executive Officer | ||
| Registrant: Director since 1989; President since 1998; formally designated Chief Executive Officer on October 23, 2002; Vice President from 1992 to 1998. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Director since 1989; President and General Manager since 1998; Vice PresidentOperations from 1987 to 1998; Assistant Vice PresidentOperations from 1986 to 1987; Network Engineering Manager from 1984 to 1986; Equipment Supervisor from 1975 to 1984. |
||||
| Allen P. Kimble |
58 | Director, Vice President, | ||
| Registrant: Director since 1998; Vice President since 1989; Treasurer since incorporation in 1985; formally designated Chief Financial and Accounting Officer on October 23, 2002; Secretary from 1993 to 1998. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Director since 1998; Vice President since 1989; Treasurer since 1979; Secretary from 1993 to 1998; Assistant Vice President from 1987 to 1989; Assistant Secretary from 1979 to 1993; Assistant SecretaryTreasurer from 1977 to 1979. |
||||
| N. William Barthlow |
50 | Vice President and Secretary | ||
| Registrant: Vice President since 1994; Secretary since 1998; Assistant Secretary from 1993 to 1998; Assistant Vice President from 1990 to 1994. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Vice PresidentMarketing and Service since 1999; Vice PresidentMarketing and Revenues from 1994 to 1999. Secretary since 1998; Assistant Secretary from 1993 to 1998; Assistant Vice PresidentRevenue Requirements from 1989 to 1994; Revenue Requirements Manager from 1987 to 1989. |
||||
10
| Name and Business Experience |
Age |
Positions and Offices with | ||
| Kevin J. Albaugh |
53 | Vice President | ||
| Registrant: Vice President since 1999. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Vice PresidentRegulatory Affairs since 1999; Manager and Assistant Vice PresidentRevenues from 1997 to 1998; Revenue Requirements Supervisor from 1993 to 1997. |
||||
| Frank A. Macefe |
56 | Vice President | ||
| Registrant: Vice President since 1999. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Vice PresidentSales since 1999; Assistant Vice PresidentMarketing from 1989 to 1998; Marketing Manager from 1979 to 1989; Marketing Supervisor from 1978 to 1979. |
||||
| Albert W. Weigand |
46 | Vice President | ||
| Registrant: Vice President since 1999. North Pittsburgh Telephone Company: Vice PresidentOperations since 1999; Assistant Vice PresidentOperations from 1997 to 1998; Senior Planning Engineer from 1995 to 1997; Planning Engineer from 1986 to 1995; Customer Equipment Supervisor from 1984 to 1986; Customer Equipment Engineer from 1979 to 1984. |
||||
| (1) | Directors. Messrs. Thomas, Brown and Kimble were elected as Directors at the 2004 Annual Meeting of Shareholders held May 21, 2004 to serve until the 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Messrs. Thomas, Brown and Kimble will be nominees for reelection as Directors at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 20, 2005. |
| (2) | Officers. All of the aforementioned officers were elected to their respective offices at a Board of Directors Organizational Meeting which followed the May 21, 2004 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Executive employment agreements with Messrs. Brown, Kimble, Barthlow, Albaugh, Macefe and Weigand set forth the terms and conditions of their employment. |
| (3) | Arrangements. There are no arrangements or understandings between any of the above executive officers and any other person pursuant to which they were elected as an officer. |
11
PART II
| Item 5. | Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
The Companys Common Stock is registered with the SEC pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and, effective January 10, 1997, the Companys Common Stock commenced trading on the Nasdaq National Market tier of the Nasdaq Stock Market under the Symbol NPSI. Prior thereto, the stock was not listed on any stock exchange and was considered as being traded on the OTC (Over-the-Counter) market. The Nasdaq high and low sales prices for the Companys Common Stock for each quarter of 2004 and 2003 are listed below:
| 2004 High |
2004 Low |
2003 High |
2003 Low | |||||||||
| First Quarter |
$ | 20.61 | $ | 16.94 | $ | 15.47 | $ | 13.15 | ||||
| Second Quarter |
20.40 | 17.55 | 15.95 | 13.20 | ||||||||
| Third Quarter |
21.59 | 18.00 | 18.74 | 14.62 | ||||||||
| Fourth Quarter |
26.24 | 19.55 | 19.84 | 16.89 | ||||||||
Calculated on the basis of the number of shareholder accounts, the Company had approximately 2,434 common shareholders on February 24, 2005.
Cash dividends per share, declared quarterly by the Company in 2004 and 2003, on the outstanding shares of Common Stock were as follows:
| 2004 |
2003 | |||||
| First Quarter |
$ | .18 | $ | .17 | ||
| Second Quarter |
.18 | .17 | ||||
| Third Quarter |
.18 | .17 | ||||
| Fourth Quarter |
.18 | .17 | ||||
| Total |
$ | .72 | $ | .68 | ||
The Company did not repurchase any of its securities during the fourth quarter of 2004.
12
| Item 6. | Selected Financial Data |
| (Amounts in Thousands Except Per Share Data) |
The following summary of Selected Financial Data for the years 2004 2000 should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this report.
| 2004 |
2003 |
2002 |
2001 |
2000 |
||||||||||||||||
| Operating revenues |
$ | 108,469 | $ | 105,756 | $ | 95,176 | $ | 90,723 | $ | 83,181 | ||||||||||
| Operating expenses |
81,341 | 82,503 | 72,429 | 70,678 | 70,471 | |||||||||||||||
| Net operating income |
27,128 | 23,253 | 22,747 | 20,045 | 12,710 | |||||||||||||||
| Interest expense |
(1,931 | ) | (2,126 | ) | (3,990 | ) | (3,733 | ) | (3,140 | ) | ||||||||||
| Interest income |
406 | 202 | 530 | 1,118 | 1,367 | |||||||||||||||
| Dividend income |
1,171 | 610 | 6 | 9 | 83 | |||||||||||||||
| Equity income of affiliated companies |
5,622 | 3,085 | 2,809 | 1,378 | 926 | |||||||||||||||
| Sundry income (expense), net |
(132 | ) | (153 | ) | (1,465 | ) | (981 | ) | 1,951 | |||||||||||