AMENDMENT #4 TO S-1: CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Per Share

Public Offering Price

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after this Registration Statement becomes effective.

If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box. o

If this form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434, please check the following box. o

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until this Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state or jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

The shares of our Class A common stock offered hereby are shares that we will loan to Citigroup Global Markets Limited, as borrower, through Citigroup Global Markets Inc., as agent, pursuant to a share lending agreement.

Our Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “CHTR.” The last reported sale price of our Class A common stock on the Nasdaq National Market on July 7, 2005 was $1.26 per share.

Investing in our Class A common stock involves risks. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 10.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

Under the share lending agreement, we will receive a loan fee of $.001 for each share that we lend. We have been advised by Citigroup Global Markets Limited that it, or its affiliates, intend(s) to use the short sales of the shares of our Class A common stock offered pursuant to this prospectus to facilitate transactions by which investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 issued on November 22, 2004 will hedge their investments in the 5.875% convertible senior notes. See “Share Lending Agreement” and “Underwriting” on pages 173 and 178, respectively, of this prospectus. We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the shares of Class A common stock in this offering.

THE SHARES OFFERED HEREBY ARE NOT BEING OFFERED TO, AND MAY NOT BE PURCHASED BY, ANY PERSON WHO HOLDS AN OPEN SHORT POSITION IN OUR CLASS A COMMON STOCK, ANY PERSON WHO IS PURCHASING THE SHARES ON BEHALF OF OR FOR THE ACCOUNT OF SUCH A PERSON OR ANY PERSON WHO HAS AN ARRANGEMENT OR UNDERSTANDING TO RESELL, LEND OR OTHERWISE TRANSFER (DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY) THE SHARES TO SUCH A PERSON. PURCHASERS IN THIS OFFERING WILL BE REQUIRED TO CERTIFY THE FOREGOING IN WRITING. SEE “NOTICE TO INVESTORS” ON PAGE ii OF THIS PROSPECTUS.

The shares of our Class A common stock are being offered on a “best efforts” basis. “Best efforts” means that Citigroup Global Markets Limited is not under any obligation to borrow and sell any of the shares offered hereby. Citigroup Global Markets Limited has informed us that it will use its best efforts to sell the shares offered pursuant to this prospectus, provided that it intends to borrow and sell the shares offered hereby only to the extent there is interest by investors in the 5.875% convertible senior notes in establishing hedge positions and there is corresponding demand by purchasers for the shares. Accordingly, there is no assurance that all or any portion of the shares offered hereby will be sold.

The offering will be at a fixed price and will not be conducted on a continuous or delayed basis. The offering will terminate on or before , 2005, and the underwriter expects to deliver the shares to purchasers on or about , 2005.

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with information that is different from that contained in this prospectus. We are offering to sell shares of our common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are permitted. The information in this prospectus is complete and accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of shares.

This prospectus includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act, regarding, among other things, our plans, strategies and prospects, both business and financial. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus may be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “will,” “may,” “intend,” “estimated” and “potential,” among others. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements we make in


	•	our ability to sustain and grow revenues and cash flows from operating activities by offering video, high-speed data, telephony and other services and to maintain a stable customer base, particularly in the face of increasingly aggressive competition from other service providers;

	•	the availability of funds to meet interest payment obligations under our debt and to fund our operations and necessary capital expenditures, either through cash flows from operating activities, further borrowings or other sources;

	•	our ability to comply with all covenants in our indentures and credit facilities, any violation of which would result in a violation of the applicable facility or indenture and could trigger a default of other obligations under cross-default provisions;


	•	our ability to pay or refinance debt as it becomes due;


	•	our ability to obtain programming at reasonable prices or to pass programming cost increases on to our customers;

	•	general business conditions, economic uncertainty or slowdown; and


	•	the effects of governmental regulation, including but not limited to local franchise authorities, on our business.

All forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement.

We have filed with the SEC a registration statement on Form S-1 to register the sale of the securities covered by this prospectus. This prospectus, which forms part of that registration statement, does not contain all the information included in the registration statement. For further information about us and the securities described in this prospectus, you should refer to the registration statement and its exhibits.

Our Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “CHTR.” We file annual, quarterly and special reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. You may read and copy at prescribed rates any document we file at the SEC’s public reference room at Room 1200, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the public reference room. Our SEC filings are also available to the public at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

The shares offered hereby are not being offered to, and may not be purchased by, any person who has an open short position in Charter’s Class A common stock at the time of the sale, any person who is purchasing the shares on behalf of or for the account of such a person or any person who has an arrangement or understanding to resell, lend or otherwise transfer (directly or indirectly) the shares to such a person.

Each purchaser of Charter’s Class A common stock in this offering must execute and deliver the Investor Acknowledgement set forth on Annex A hereto to Citigroup by facsimile to (212) - .

SUMMARY

This summary contains a general discussion of our business, and summary financial information. It does not contain all the information that you should consider before making an investment decision regarding our Class A common stock. For a more complete understanding of an investment in our Class A common stock, you should read this entire prospectus. Unless otherwise noted, all business data in this summary is as of March 31, 2005.

Unless otherwise stated, the discussion in this prospectus of our business and operations includes the business and operations of Charter Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Charter Communications, Inc. and its direct and indirect subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. The term “Charter” refers to the issuer, Charter Communications, Inc.

Our Business

We are a broadband communications company operating in the United States, with approximately 6.23 million customers at March 31, 2005. Through our broadband network of coaxial and fiber optic cable, we offer our customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital, which we refer to as “video” service), high-speed cable Internet access (which we refer to as “high-speed data service”), advanced broadband cable services (such as video on demand (“VOD”), high definition television service, and interactive television) and, in some of our markets, we offer telephone service (which we refer to as “telephony”). See “Business — Products and Services” for further description of these terms, including “customers.”

At March 31, 2005, we served approximately 5.98 million analog video customers, of which approximately 2.69 million were also digital video customers. We also served approximately 1.98 million high-speed data customers (including approximately 229,400 who received only high-speed data services). We also provided telephony service to approximately 55,300 customers as of that date.

Our principal executive offices are located at Charter Plaza, 12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, Missouri 63131. Our telephone number is (314) 965-0555 and we have a website accessible at www.charter.com. The information posted or linked on our website is not part of this prospectus and you should rely solely on the information contained in this prospectus and the related documents to which we refer herein when deciding to make an investment in our Class A common stock.

Strategy

Our principal financial goal is to maximize our return on invested capital. To do so, we will focus on increasing revenues, growing our customer base, improving customer retention and enhancing customer satisfaction by providing reliable, high-quality service offerings, superior customer service and attractive bundled offerings.

Specifically, in the near term, we are focusing on:

• generating improvements in the overall customer experience in such critical areas as service delivery, customer care, and new product offerings;

• developing more sophisticated customer management capabilities through investment in our customer care and marketing infrastructure, including targeted marketing capabilities;

• executing growth strategies for new services, including digital simulcast, VOD, telephony, and digital video recorder service (“DVR”);

• managing our operating costs by exercising discipline in capital and operational spending; and

• identifying opportunities to continue to improve our balance sheet and liquidity.

culture throughout the company and to give those areas of our operations priority of resources for staffing levels, training budgets and financial incentives for employee performance in those areas.

We believe that our high-speed data service will continue to provide a substantial portion of our revenue growth in the near future. We also plan to continue to expand our marketing of high-speed data service to the business community, which we believe has shown an increasing interest in high-speed data service and private network services. Additionally, we plan to continue to prepare additional markets for telephony launches in 2005.

We believe we offer our customers an excellent choice of services through a variety of bundled packages, particularly with respect to our digital video and high-speed data services, as well as telephony in certain markets. Our digital platform enables us to offer a significant number and variety of channels, and we offer customers the opportunity to choose among groups of channel offerings, including premium channels, and to combine selected programming with other services such as high-speed data, high definition television (in selected markets) and VOD (in selected markets).

We continue to pursue opportunities to improve our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in the completion of a number of transactions in 2004, as follows:

• the December 2004 sale by our subsidiaries, CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., of $550 million of senior floating rate notes due 2010;

• the November 2004 sale of the $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009;

• the December 2004 redemption of all of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 ($588 million principal amount);

• the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second lien notes by our subsidiary, Charter Communications Operating, LLC (“Charter Operating”), together with the concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and

• the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to reduce indebtedness.

Recent Events


	Approval and Funding of Litigation Settlement

On June 30, 2005, the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri entered its final approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, as amended, of certain shareholder class action and derivative lawsuits filed against Charter which are more fully described in “Business — Legal Proceedings.” On July 8, 2005, Charter delivered to the claims administrator its portion of the settlement consideration under the Stipulation in the form of 13.4 million shares of Class A common stock and approximately $63 million in cash, and Charter expects to pay $4.5 million to its insurance carriers to satisfy certain outstanding claims in connection with the settlement. See “Business — Legal Proceedings.”


	Issuance of Charter Operating Notes in Exchange for Charter Holdings Notes; Repurchase of Convertible Notes

In June 2005, our subsidiary, Charter Operating, consummated exchange transactions with a small number of institutional holders of Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007 pursuant to which Charter Operating issued, in private placements, approximately $62 million principal amount of new notes with terms identical to Charter Operating’s 8.375% senior second lien notes due 2014 in exchange for approximately $62 million of the Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007. Since March 31, 2005, we repurchased, in private transactions from a small number of institutional holders, a total of $97 million principal amount of our 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006 leaving $25 million principal amount outstanding.


	Principal Management Changes

On January 17, 2005, Robert P. May was appointed as Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of Charter, replacing Carl E. Vogel who, effective on the same date, resigned his position as President, Chief Executive Officer, and a member of the board of directors of Charter and each of Charter’s subsidiaries for which Mr. Vogel served as a director and officer. Additionally, Mr. May was appointed to the Executive Committee of Charter’s board of directors and will continue to serve on the board’s Strategic Planning Committee. He was also appointed as an officer and director of Charter’s subsidiaries for which Mr. Vogel was a director and officer.

Charter’s board of directors has formed an Executive Search Committee to oversee Charter’s search for a permanent President and Chief Executive Officer.

In April 2005, Michael J. Lovett was appointed to the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Prior to that appointment, Mr. Lovett had been serving as Charter’s Executive Vice President, Operations and Customer Care. In April 2005, we also named Paul E. Martin Interim Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Martin had been serving as co-Interim Chief Financial Officer along with Derek Chang, our former Executive Vice President of Finance and Strategy. Mr. Chang resigned all positions with Charter effective April 15, 2005. Curtis S. Shaw, former Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, also resigned effective April 15, 2005.


	Sale of 5.875% Convertible Senior Notes and Redemption of 5.75% Convertible Senior Notes

On November 22, 2004, we issued and sold $862.5 million total principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, which are convertible into shares of our Class A common stock, par value $.001 per share, at a rate of 413.2231 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes (or approximately $2.42 per share), subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. At the time of the issuance of the notes, we agreed to file the registration statement containing this prospectus and also file a shelf registration statement covering resales of the notes and shares of Class A common stock issuable upon conversion of the notes. If less than 150,000,000 shares of Class A common stock are sold in this offering, pursuant to a registration rights agreement, Charter will be obligated to file, at Citigroup’s request, up to four additional registration statements with respect to these unsold shares until November 16, 2006.

On December 23, 2004, we used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the 5.875% convertible senior notes to redeem all of our outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 (total principal amount of $588 million). We also used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the notes to purchase certain U.S. government securities which were pledged as security for the notes and which we expect to use to fund the first six interest payments on the notes.

For additional terms of the notes and the arrangements governing the loan of shares of our Class A common stock covered by this prospectus, see “Share Lending Agreement” and “Description of Certain Indebtedness — Outstanding Notes — Charter Communications, Inc. Notes — 5.875% Convertible Senior Notes due 2009.”

The Offering



Total shares of Class A common stock offered by us hereby		150,000,000 shares

Approximate number of shares of Class A common stock to be outstanding after the offering, assuming Citigroup sells all shares offered hereby.		455 million shares (including the 150,000,000 shares offered hereby)

Nasdaq National Market Symbol		CHTR

The shares of our Class A common stock offered hereby are shares that we have loaned to Citigroup Global Markets Limited pursuant to a share lending agreement, dated as of November 22, 2004, which we refer to as the “share lending agreement.” Under the share lending agreement, we will receive a loan fee of $.001 per share. We will not receive any proceeds from this offering. See “Share Lending Agreement” and “Underwriting.”

PURCHASERS IN THE OFFERING WILL BE REQUIRED TO CERTIFY THE FOREGOING IN WRITING. SEE “NOTICE TO INVESTORS” ON PAGE ii AND FORM OF INVESTOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON PAGE A-1.

Risk Factors

Investing in our Class A common stock involves substantial risk. See the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus for a description of certain of the risks you should consider before investing in our Class A common stock.

Organizational Structure

The chart below sets forth the organizational structure of Charter and its principal direct and indirect subsidiaries. The equity ownership, voting percentages and indebtedness amounts shown below are approximations as of March 31, 2005 on the pro forma basis described in “Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements” (including giving effect to the issuance of the shares offered hereby) and do not give effect to any exercise, conversion or exchange of then outstanding options, preferred stock, convertible notes and other convertible or exchangeable securities.

(ORGANIZATIONAL FLOW CHART)

(1) Charter acts as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its direct and indirect limited liability company subsidiaries. Charter’s certificate of incorporation requires that its principal assets be securities of Charter Holdco, the terms of which mirror the terms of securities issued by Charter. See “Description of Capital Stock and Membership Units.” Since March 31, 2005 Charter repurchased $97 million in principal amount of the convertible notes then outstanding.

(2) These membership units are held by Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Cable III Inc., each of which is 100% owned by Paul G. Allen, our Chairman and controlling shareholder. They are exchangeable at any time on a one-for-one basis for shares of Charter Class A common stock.

(3) The percentages shown in this table reflect the issuance of the 150 million shares of Class A common stock offered hereby and the corresponding issuance of an equal number of mirror membership units by Charter Holdco to Charter. However, for accounting purposes, Charter’s common equity interest in Charter Holdco will remain at 47%, and Paul G. Allen’s ownership of Charter Holdco will remain at 53%. These percentages exclude the 150 million mirror membership units issued to Charter due

Summary Consolidated Financial Data

Charter is a holding company whose principal assets are a controlling common equity interest in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and “mirror” notes that are payable by Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC to Charter which have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes. Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC is a holding company whose primary assets are equity interests in our cable operating subsidiaries and intercompany loan receivables. Charter consolidates Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC on the basis of voting control. Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s limited liability agreement provides that so long as Charter’s Class B common stock retains its special voting rights, Charter will maintain 100% voting interest in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC. Voting control gives Charter full authority and control over the operations of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC.

The following table presents summary financial and other data for Charter and its subsidiaries and has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the three years ended December 31, 2004 and the unaudited consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004. The consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the years ended December 31, 2002 to 2004 have been audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The pro forma data set forth below represent our unaudited pro forma consolidated financial statements after giving effect to the following transactions as if they occurred on January 1 of the respective period for the statement of operations data and other financial data and as of the last day of the respective period for the operating data and balance sheet data:

      (1) the disposition of certain assets in March and April 2004 and the use of proceeds in each case to pay down credit facilities;

      (2) the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004 and the Charter Operating senior second lien notes in April 2004;

      (3) an increase in amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit facilities in April 2004 and the use of such funds, together with the proceeds from the sale of the Charter Operating senior second lien notes, to refinance amounts outstanding under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and Falcon;

      (4) the repayment of $530 million of borrowings under the Charter Operating revolving credit facility with net proceeds from the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004, which were included in our cash balance at December 31, 2004;

      (5) the redemption of all of CC V Holdings’ outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 with cash on hand;

      (6) the issuance and sale of $863 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes in November 2004 with proceeds used for (i) the purchase of certain U.S. government securities pledged as security for the 5.875% convertible senior notes (and which we expect to use to fund the first six interest payments thereon), (ii) redemption of the outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 and (iii) general corporate purposes; and

      (7) the issuance of the shares offered hereby pursuant to a share lending agreement, the sole effect of which is to increase common shares issued and outstanding. See “Share Lending Agreement.”

The following information should be read in conjunction with “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data,” “Capitalization,” “Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” “Share Lending Agreement” and the historical consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.



															Three Months Ended
			Year Ended December 31,												March 31,

			2002			2003			2004			2004			2004			2005
			Actual			Actual			Actual			Pro Forma(a)			Pro Forma(a)			Actual


			(Dollars in millions, except per share, share and customer data)
Statement of Operations Data:
Revenues:
	Video		$	3,420		$	3,461		$	3,373		$	3,352		$	828		$	842
	High-speed data			337			556			741			738			165			215
	Advertising sales			302			263			289			288			58			64
	Commercial			161			204			238			236			54			65
	Other			346			335			336			334			80			85

		Total revenues		4,566			4,819			4,977			4,948	(b)		1,185			1,271

Costs and Expenses:
	Operating (excluding depreciation and amortization)			1,807			1,952			2,080			2,068			500			559
	Selling, general and administrative			963			940			971			967			235			237
	Depreciation and amortization			1,436			1,453			1,495			1,489			364			381
	Impairment of franchises			4,638			—			2,433			2,433			—			—
	Asset impairment charges			—			—			—			—			—			31
	(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net			3			5			(86	)		19			(1	)		4
	Option compensation expense (income), net			5			4			31			31			14			4
	Special charges, net			36			21			104			104			10			4
	Unfavorable contracts and other settlements			—			(72	)		(5	)		(5	)		—			—

		Total costs and expenses		8,888			4,303			7,023			7,106			1,122			1,220

Income (loss) from operations				(4,322	)		516			(2,046	)		(2,158	)		63			51
Interest expense, net				(1,503	)		(1,557	)		(1,670	)		(1,709	)		(422	)		(420	)
Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net				(115	)		65			69			69			(7	)		27
Loss on debt to equity conversions				—			—			(23	)		(23	)		(8	)		—
Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt				—			267			(31	)		—			—			7
Other, net				(4	)		(16	)		3			3			(2	)		1

Loss before minority interest, income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting change				(5,944	)		(725	)		(3,698	)		(3,818	)		(376	)		(334	)
Minority interest(c)				3,176			377			19			19			(4	)		(3	)

Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting change				(2,768	)		(348	)		(3,679	)		(3,799	)		(380	)		(337	)
Income tax benefit (expense)				460			110			103			117			(40	)		(15	)

Loss before cumulative effect of accounting change			$	(2,308	)	$	(238	)	$	(3,576	)	$	(3,682	)	$	(420	)	$	(352	)

Loss per common share, basic and diluted(d)			$	(7.85	)	$	(0.82	)	$	(11.92	)	$	(12.27	)	$	(1.43	)	$	(1.16	)

Weighted-average common shares outstanding, basic and diluted				294,440,261			294,597,519			300,291,877			300,291,877			295,106,077			303,308,880

Other Financial Data:
	Capital expenditures		$	2,167		$	854		$	924		$	922		$	188		$	211
	Deficiencies of earnings to cover fixed charges(e)		$	5,944		$	725		$	3,698		$	3,818		$	376		$	334



		December 31,						March 31,

		2003		2003		2004		2004		2005
		Actual		Pro Forma		Actual		Actual		Actual

Operating Data (end of period)(f):
	Analog video customers		6,431,300		6,200,500		5,991,500		6,192,000		5,984,800
	Digital video customers		2,671,900		2,588,600		2,674,700		2,657,400		2,694,600
	Residential high-speed data customers		1,565,600		1,527,800		1,884,400		1,653,000		1,978,400
	Telephony customers		24,900		24,900		45,400		26,300		55,300


		Actual
		As of March 31,
		2005

		(Dollars in millions)
Balance Sheet Data (end of period):
	Cash and cash equivalents	$	32
	Total assets		16,794
	Accounts payable and accrued expenses		1,256
	Long-term debt		18,929
	Other long-term liabilities		635
	Minority interest(c)		656
	Shareholders’ deficit		(4,751	)


(a)		Actual revenues exceeded pro forma revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 and the three months ended March 31, 2004 by $29 million and $29 million, respectively. Pro forma loss before cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax exceeded actual loss before cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax by $106 million and $127 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 and the three months ended March 31, 2004, respectively. The unaudited pro forma financial information required allocation of certain revenues and expenses and such information has been presented for comparative purposes and is not intended (a) to provide any indication of what our actual financial position or results of operations would have been had the transactions described above been completed on the dates indicated or (b) to project our results of operations for any future date.

(b)		Pro forma 2004 revenue by quarter is as follows:


		2004
		Pro Forma
		Revenue

		(In millions)
1st Quarter		$	1,185
2nd Quarter			1,239
3rd Quarter			1,248
4th Quarter			1,276

	Total pro forma revenue	$	4,948


(c)		Minority interest represents the percentage of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC not owned by Charter, plus preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of Charter Holdco. Paul G. Allen indirectly holds the preferred membership units in CC VIII, LLC as a result of the exercise of a put right originally granted in connection with the Bresnan transaction in 2000. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII, LLC membership interests following the consummation of the Bresnan put transaction on June 6, 2003. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.” Effective January 1, 2005, Charter ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII, LLC for financial reporting purposes until such time as the resolution of the issue is determinable or certain other events occur. Reported losses allocated to minority interest on the statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC. Because minority interest in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in 2004, Charter absorbs substantially all losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest. This resulted in an approximate additional $2.0 billion of loss before cumulative effect of accounting change for the year ended December 31, 2004. Under our existing capital structure, Charter will absorb substantially all future losses.

(d)		Loss per common share, basic and diluted, assumes none of the membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC are exchanged for Charter common stock and none of the outstanding options to purchase membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC that are automatically exchanged for Charter common stock are exercised. Basic loss per share equals loss before cumulative effect of accounting change less dividends on preferred stock-redeemable divided by weighted average shares outstanding. If the membership units were exchanged or options exercised, the effects would be antidilutive. Therefore, basic and diluted loss per common share is the same.

(e)		Earnings include net loss plus fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of interest expense and an estimated interest component of rent expense.

(f)		See “Business — Products and Services” for definitions of the terms contained in this section.

An investment in our Class A common stock entails the following risks. You should carefully consider these risk factors, as well as the other information contained in this prospectus, before making a decision to invest in our Class A common stock.

Charter and its subsidiaries have a significant amount of debt and may (subject to applicable restrictions in their debt instruments) incur additional debt in the future. As of March 31, 2005, our total debt was approximately $18.9 billion, and our shareholders’ deficit was approximately $4.8 billion. The deficiency of earnings to cover fixed charges for the three month period ended March 31, 2005 was approximately $334 million. In 2006 and beyond, significant amounts will become due under our remaining long-term debt obligations. For instance, in 2009 $5.0 billion of our debt matures. The maturities of these obligations are set forth in “Description of Certain Indebtedness.”

We believe that as a result of our significant levels of debt and operating performance, our access to the debt markets could be limited. If our business does not generate sufficient cash flow from operating activities, and sufficient funds are not available to us from borrowings under our credit facilities or from other sources, we may not be able to repay our debt, fund our other liquidity and capital needs, grow our business or respond to competitive challenges. Further, if we are unable to repay or refinance our debt, as it becomes due, we could be forced to restructure our obligations or seek protection under the bankruptcy laws. If we were to raise capital through the issuance of additional equity or to engage in a recapitalization or other similar transaction, our shareholders could suffer significant dilution and our noteholders might not receive principal and interest payments to which they are contractually entitled on a timely basis or at all.

Our significant amount of debt could have other important consequences to you. For example, the debt will or could:


	•	require us to dedicate a significant portion of our cash flow from operating activities to payments on our debt, which will reduce our funds available for working capital, capital expenditures and other general corporate expenses;

	•	limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business, the cable and telecommunications industries and the economy at large;

	•	place us at a disadvantage as compared to our competitors that have proportionately less debt;

	•	make us vulnerable to interest rate increases, because a significant amount of our borrowings are, and will continue to be, at variable rates of interest;

	•	expose us to increased interest expense as we refinance our existing lower interest rate instruments;

	•	adversely affect our relationship with customers and suppliers;

	•	limit our ability to borrow additional funds in the future, due to applicable financial and restrictive covenants in our debt; and

	•	make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations to the holders of our notes and for our subsidiaries to satisfy their obligations to their lenders under their credit facilities and to their bondholders.

Due to our significant amount of debt, we did not pay dividends on our preferred stock at March 31, 2005, because our Board of Directors was unable to conclude with sufficient certainty that we had surplus under Delaware law with which to pay such a dividend.

A default by one of our subsidiaries under its debt obligations could result in the acceleration of those obligations, the obligations of our other subsidiaries and our obligations under our convertible notes. If current debt levels increase, the related risks that we and you now face will intensify.

The Charter Operating credit facilities and the indentures governing our and our subsidiaries’ other debt contain a number of significant covenants that could adversely affect our ability to operate our business, and therefore could adversely affect our results of operations and the price of our Class A common stock. These covenants restrict our and our subsidiaries’ ability to:


	•	incur additional debt;

	•	repurchase or redeem equity interests and debt;

	•	issue equity;

	•	make certain investments or acquisitions;

	•	pay dividends or make other distributions;

	•	receive distributions from our subsidiaries;

	•	dispose of assets or merge;

	•	enter into related party transactions;

	•	grant liens; and

	•	pledge assets.

Furthermore, the Charter Operating credit facilities require us to, among other things, maintain specified financial ratios, meet specified financial tests and provide audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from our independent auditors. See “Description of Certain Indebtedness” for details on our debt covenants. Charter Operating’s ability to comply with these provisions may be affected by events beyond our control.

The breach of any covenants or obligations in the foregoing indentures or credit facilities, not otherwise waived or amended, could result in a default under the applicable debt agreement or instrument and could trigger acceleration of the related debt, which in turn could trigger defaults under other agreements governing our long-term indebtedness. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources.” In addition, the secured lenders under the Charter Operating credit facilities and the holders of the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes could foreclose on their collateral, which includes equity interests in our subsidiaries, and exercise other rights of secured creditors. Any default under those credit facilities, the indentures governing our convertible notes or our subsidiaries’ debt could adversely affect our growth, our financial condition and our results of operations and our ability to make payments on our notes and Charter Operating’s credit facilities and other debt of our subsidiaries. See “Description of Certain Indebtedness.”

Our ability to service our debt and our subsidiaries’ debt and to fund our and our subsidiaries’ planned capital expenditures and ongoing operations will depend on our and our subsidiaries’ ability to generate cash flow. Our ability to generate cash flow is dependent on many factors, including:


	•	our future operating performance;

	•	the demand for our products and services;

	•	general economic conditions and conditions affecting customer and advertiser spending;

	•	competition and our ability to stabilize customer losses; and

	•	legal and regulatory factors affecting our business.

Some of these factors are beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow, we may not be able to service and repay our debt, operate our business, respond to competitive challenges or fund our other liquidity and capital needs. Cash flows from operating activities and amounts available under our credit facilities may not be sufficient to permit us to fund our operations and satisfy our principal repayment obligations that come due in 2006 and, we believe, such amounts will not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy such repayment obligations thereafter.

Additionally, franchise valuations performed in accordance with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, are based on the projected cash flows derived by selling products and services to new customers in future periods. Declines in future cash flows could result in lower valuations which in turn may result in impairments to the franchise assets in our financial statements.

Our subsidiaries have historically relied on access to credit facilities in order to fund operations and to service parent company debt, and we expect such reliance to continue in the future. Unused availability under the Charter Operating credit facilities was approximately $1.2 billion as of March 31, 2005. However, Charter Operating’s access to these funds is subject to its satisfaction of the covenants and conditions to borrowing in those facilities.

An event of default under the credit facilities or indentures, if not waived, could result in the acceleration of those debt obligations and, consequently, other debt obligations. Such acceleration could result in the exercise of remedies by our creditors and could force us to seek the protection of the bankruptcy laws, which could materially adversely impact our ability to operate our business and to make payments under our debt instruments. In addition, an event of default under the credit facilities, such as the failure to maintain the applicable required financial ratios, would prevent additional borrowing under our subsidiary credit facilities, which could materially adversely affect our ability to operate our business and to make payments under our debt instruments.

We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to fulfill our obligations under our convertible senior notes and our subsidiaries’ senior notes, senior discount notes, senior floating rate notes and credit facilities following a change of control. Under the indentures governing our convertible senior notes, upon the occurrence of specified change of control events, including certain specified dispositions of stock by Mr. Allen, we are required to offer to repurchase all of our outstanding convertible senior notes. However, Charter may not have sufficient funds at the time of the change of control event to make the

required repurchase of its convertible senior notes, and our subsidiaries are limited in their ability to make distributions or other payments to us to fund any required repurchase. In addition, a change of control under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities and indentures governing our subsidiaries’ notes would require the repayment of borrowings totaling $18.0 billion at March 31, 2005 under those credit facilities and indentures. Because such credit facilities and notes are obligations of our subsidiaries, the credit facilities and our subsidiaries’ notes would have to be repaid by our subsidiaries before their assets could be available to us to repurchase our convertible senior notes. Additionally, our subsidiaries may not have sufficient funds at the time of the change of control to make the required repurchases or repayments. Our failure to make or complete a change of control offer would place us in default under our convertible senior notes. The failure of our subsidiaries to make a change of control offer or repay the amounts outstanding under their credit facilities would place them in default under these agreements and could result in a default under the indentures governing our convertible senior notes and our subsidiaries’ credit facilities and notes.

Paul G. Allen and his affiliates have purchased equity, contributed funds and provided other financial support to Charter and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (“Charter Holdco”) in the past. However, Mr. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated to purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to us or any of our subsidiaries in the future.

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, easier access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater brand name recognition and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation in the cable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules may provide additional benefits to certain of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources or efficiencies of scale.

Our principal competitor for video services throughout our territory is direct broadcast satellite television services, also known as DBS. Competition from DBS, including intensive marketing efforts, aggressive pricing and the ability of DBS to provide certain services that we are in the process of developing, has had an adverse impact on our ability to retain customers. DBS has grown rapidly over the last several years and continues to do so. The cable industry, including Charter, has lost a significant number of subscribers to DBS competition, and we face serious challenges in this area in the future. We believe that competition from DBS service providers may present greater challenges in areas of lower population density, and that our systems service a higher concentration of such areas than those of other major cable service providers.

Local telephone companies and electric utilities can offer video and other services in competition with us and they increasingly may do so in the future. Certain telephone companies have begun more extensive deployment of fiber in their networks that will enable them to begin providing video services, as well as telephony and high-bandwidth Internet access services, to residential and business customers. Some of these telephone companies have obtained, and are now seeking, franchises or operating authorizations that are less burdensome than existing Charter franchises. The subscription television industry also faces competition from free broadcast television and from other communications and entertainment media.

Further loss of customers to DBS or other alternative video and data services could have a material negative impact on the value of our business and its performance.

With respect to our Internet access services, we face competition, including intensive marketing efforts and aggressive pricing, from “dial-up” and digital subscriber line (“DSL”). DSL service is competitive with high-speed data service over cable systems. Telephone companies (which already have telephone lines into the household, an existing customer base and other operational functions in place) and other companies offer DSL service. In addition, DBS providers have entered into joint marketing arrangements with Internet access providers to offer bundled video and Internet service, which competes with our ability to provide bundled services to our customers.

In order to attract new customers, from time to time we make promotional offers, including offers of temporarily reduced-price or free service. These promotional programs result in significant advertising, programming and operating expenses, and also require us to make capital expenditures to acquire additional digital set-top terminals. Customers who subscribe to our services as a result of these offerings may not remain customers for any significant period of time following the end of the promotional period. A failure to retain existing customers and customers added through promotional offerings or to collect the amounts they owe us could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results.

Mergers, joint ventures and alliances among franchised, wireless or private cable operators, satellite television providers, local exchange carriers and others may provide additional benefits to some of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources or efficiencies of scale, or the ability to provide multiple services in direct competition with us.

We cannot assure you that our cable systems will allow us to compete effectively. Additionally, as we expand our offerings to include other telecommunications services, and to introduce new and enhanced services, we will be subject to competition from other providers of the services we offer. We cannot predict the extent to which competition may affect our business and operations in the future. See “Business — Competition.”

As part of our acquisition of the cable systems owned by Bresnan Communications Company Limited Partnership in February 2000, CC VIII, LLC, our indirect limited liability company subsidiary, issued, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership units (which we refer to collectively as the CC VIII interest) with a value and an initial capital account of approximately $630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (which we refer to as the Comcast sellers). Our controlling shareholder, Paul G. Allen, granted the Comcast sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII interest for approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest annually from February 2000 (which we refer to as the Comcast put right). In April 2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right in full, and this transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003. Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the holder of the CC VIII interest, indirectly through an affiliate.

We are in a dispute with Mr. Allen as to whether he is entitled to retain the CC VIII interest, or whether he must exchange that interest for units of our subsidiary, Charter Holdco. The dispute concerns whether the documentation for the Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following consummation of the Comcast put right. The law firm that prepared the documents for the Bresnan transaction brought this matter to the attention of Charter and representatives of Mr. Allen in 2002. After subsequently conducting an investigation of the relevant facts and circumstances, a Special Committee of Charter’s Board of Directors determined that a “scrivener’s error” had occurred in February 2000 in connection with the preparation of the Bresnan transaction documents, resulting in the inadvertent deletion of a provision that would have required an automatic exchange of the CC VIII interest for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units if the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right and sold the CC VIII interest to Mr. Allen or his affiliates. Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committee’s determinations and contends that the transaction is accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures. If the Special

Committee and Mr. Allen are unable to reach a resolution through an ongoing mediation process or to agree on an alternative dispute resolution process, the Special Committee intends to seek resolution of this dispute through judicial proceedings in an action that would be commenced, after appropriate notice, in the Delaware Court of Chancery against Mr. Allen and his affiliates seeking contract reformation, declaratory relief as to the respective rights of the parties regarding this dispute and alternative forms of legal and equitable relief. This dispute and related matters (including certain issues associated with the ultimate disposition of the interest in CC VIII) are more fully described in “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”

If it is determined that Mr. Allen is entitled to retain the CC VIII interest, then our indirect interest in CC VIII would continue to exclude the value of Mr. Allen’s interest in CC VIII, consistent with our current treatment of the CC VIII interest in our financial statements. As a result, the amounts available for repayment of our creditors, including creditors of our subsidiaries, would not include the value represented by Mr. Allen’s CC VIII interest, and the value of our Class A common stock similarly would not reflect any value attributable to Mr. Allen’s CC VIII interest. Further, such retained interest in CC VIII could reduce our borrowing capacity (due to a portion of the equity interest being held by a party other than Charter or a Charter subsidiary) or make it more difficult for us to secure financing for our CC VIII subsidiary due to concerns as to possible claims that could be asserted by Mr. Allen as the holder of a minority interest in CC VIII. In addition, if it is determined that Mr. Allen is entitled to retain the CC VIII interest, such retention could complicate efforts to sell our CC VIII subsidiary or its assets to a third party, and Mr. Allen could be entitled to receive a portion of the proceeds of such a sale, thereby reducing the amount of such proceeds that would otherwise be available to us and our security holders.

A number of putative federal class action lawsuits, which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against us and certain of our former and present officers and directors alleging violations of securities laws, and were consolidated for pretrial purposes. In addition, a number of shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed against us in the same and other jurisdictions. A shareholders derivative suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against us and our then current directors. Also, three shareholder derivative suits were filed in Missouri state court against us, our then current directors and our former independent auditor. These state court actions were consolidated. The federal shareholder derivative suit and the consolidated derivative suit each alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties.

Charter entered into Stipulations of Settlement setting forth proposed terms of settlement for the above-described class actions and derivative suits. On May 23, 2005 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri conducted the final fairness hearing for the actions, and it issued its final order approving the settlement on June 30, 2005. Members of the class have 30 days from the issuance of that order to file an appeal challenging the approval. There can be no assurance that there will be no such appeal, or that any such appeal, if made, would not be successful. See “Business — Legal Proceedings.”

In October 2001, two customers, Nikki Nicholls and Geraldine M. Barber, filed a class action suit against Charter Holdco in South Carolina state court purportedly on behalf of a class of Charter Holdco’s customers, alleging, among other things, that Charter Holdco improperly charged them a wire maintenance fee without request or permission. They also claimed that Charter Holdco improperly required them to rent analog and/or digital set-top terminals even though their television sets were “cable ready.” A substantively identical case was filed in the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia by Emma S. Tobar on March 26, 2002, alleging a nationwide class for these claims. Following mediation the parties reached a tentative settlement, subject to final documentation and court approval. On November 10, 2004, the court granted final approval of the settlement, rejecting the positions advanced by two objectors to the settlement. On December 13, 2004, the court entered a written order formally approving that settlement. On January 11, 2005, certain class members appealed the order entered by the Georgia court. Those objectors voluntarily dismissed their appeal with prejudice on February 8, 2005. On

Furthermore, we are also a party to, or otherwise involved in, other lawsuits, claims, proceedings and legal matters that have arisen in the ordinary course of conducting our business, certain of which are described in “Business — Legal Proceedings.” In addition, our restatement of our 2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements could lead to additional or expanded claims or investigations.

We cannot predict with certainty the ultimate outcome of any of the lawsuits, claims, proceedings and other legal matters to which we are a party to, or otherwise involved in, due to, among other things, (i) the inherent uncertainties of litigation and legal matters generally, (ii) the remaining conditions to the finalization of the settlements and resolutions described above, (iii) the possibility of appeals and objections to the settlements described above, and (iv) the need for us to comply with, and/or otherwise implement, certain covenants, conditions, undertakings, procedures and other obligations that would be, or have been, imposed under the terms of the settlements and resolutions described above.

The termination of the settlements described above, an unfavorable outcome in any of the lawsuits pending against us, or in any other legal matter, including those described above, or our failure to comply with or properly implement the terms of the settlements described above, could result in substantial potential liabilities and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial condition and results of operations, in our liquidity, our operations, and/or our ability to comply with any debt covenants. Further, these legal matters, and our actions in response to them, could result in substantial potential liabilities, additional defense and other costs, increase our indemnification obligations, divert management’s attention, and/or adversely affect our ability to execute our business and financial strategies.

See “Business — Legal Proceedings” for additional information concerning these and other litigation matters.

We have had a history of net losses and expect to continue to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses are principally attributable to insufficient revenue to cover the interest costs we incur because of our high level of debt, the depreciation expenses that we incur resulting from the capital investments we have made in our cable properties, and the amortization and impairment of our franchise intangibles. We expect that these expenses (other than amortization and impairment of franchises) will remain significant, and we expect to continue to report net losses for the foreseeable future. We reported losses before cumulative effect of accounting change of $2.3 billion for 2002, $238 million for 2003 and $3.6 billion for 2004 and $293 million and $352 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2005, respectively. Continued losses would reduce our cash available from operations to service our indebtedness, as well as limit our ability to finance our operations.

Programming has been, and is expected to continue to be, our largest operating expense item. In recent years, the cable industry has experienced a rapid escalation in the cost of programming, particularly sports programming. We expect programming costs to continue to increase because of a variety of factors, including inflationary or negotiated annual increases, additional programming being provided to customers and increased costs to purchase programming. The inability to fully pass these programming cost increases on to our customers would have an adverse impact on our cash flow and operating margins. As measured by programming costs, and excluding premium services (substantially all of which were renegotiated and

During the three months ended March 31, 2005, we spent approximately $211 million on capital expenditures. During 2005, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately $1 billion. The actual amount of our capital expenditures depends on the level of growth in high-speed data customers and in the delivery of other advanced services, as well as the cost of introducing any new services. We may need additional capital if there is accelerated growth in high-speed data customers or in the delivery of other advanced services. If we cannot obtain such capital from increases in our cash flow from operating activities, additional borrowings or other sources, our growth, financial condition and results of operations could suffer materially.

Our business is characterized by rapid technological change and the introduction of new products and services. We cannot assure you that we will be able to fund the capital expenditures necessary to keep pace with unanticipated technological developments, or that we will successfully anticipate the demand of our customers for products and services requiring new technology. Our inability to maintain and expand our upgraded systems and provide advanced services in a timely manner, or to anticipate the demands of the marketplace, could materially adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers. Consequently, our growth, financial condition and results of operations could suffer materially.

In prior years, we experienced rapid growth through acquisitions of a number of cable operators and the rapid rebuild and rollout of advanced services. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to standardize and streamline our operations. The failure to implement a consistent corporate culture and management, operating or financial systems or procedures necessary to standardize and streamline our operations and effectively operate our enterprise could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Since August 2004, we have experienced a number of changes in our senior management, including changes in our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Executive Vice President of Finance and Strategy and Interim co-Chief Financial Officer and our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary. Further, the individuals currently serving as Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel are serving in an interim capacity. These senior management changes could disrupt our ability to manage our business as we transition to and integrate a new management team, and any such disruption could adversely affect our operations, growth, financial condition and results of operations.

Our high-speed data customers utilize our network to access the Internet and, as a consequence, we or they may become victim to common malicious and abusive Internet activities, such as unsolicited mass advertising (or spam) and dissemination of viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software. These activities could have adverse consequences on our network and our customers, including degradation of service, excessive call volume to call centers and damage to our or our customers’ equipment and data. Significant incidents could lead to customer dissatisfaction and, ultimately, loss of customers or revenue, in addition to increased costs to us to service our customers and protect our network. Any significant loss of high-speed data customers or revenue or significant increase in costs of serving those customers could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations.

Our principal assets are our equity interests in Charter Holdco and certain indebtedness of Charter Holdco. If our membership interest in Charter Holdco were to constitute less than 50% of the voting securities issued by Charter Holdco, then our interest in Charter Holdco could be deemed an “investment security” for purposes of the Investment Company Act. This may occur, for example, if a court determines that the Class B common stock is no longer entitled to special voting rights and, in accordance with the terms of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement, our membership units in Charter Holdco were to lose their special voting privileges. A determination that such interest was an investment security could cause us to be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act, unless an exemption from registration were available or we were to obtain an order of the Securities and Exchange Commission excluding or exempting us from registration under the Investment Company Act.

If anything were to happen which would cause us to be deemed an investment company, the Investment Company Act would impose significant restrictions on us, including severe limitations on our ability to borrow money, to issue additional capital stock and to transact business with affiliates. In addition, because our operations are very different from those of the typical registered investment company, regulation under the Investment Company Act could affect us in other ways that are extremely difficult to predict. In sum, if we were deemed to be an investment company it could become impractical for us to continue our business as currently conducted and our growth, our financial condition and our results of operations could suffer materially.

If a court determines that the Class B common stock is no longer entitled to special voting rights, Charter would no longer have a controlling voting interest in, and would lose its right to manage, Charter Holdco. If this were to occur:


	•	we would retain our proportional equity interest in Charter Holdco but would lose all of our powers to direct the management and affairs of Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries; and

	•	we would become strictly a passive investment vehicle and would be treated under the Investment Company Act as an investment company.

This result, as well as the impact of being treated under the Investment Company Act as an investment company, could materially adversely impact:


	•	the liquidity of the Class A common stock;

	•	how the Class A common stock trades in the marketplace;


	•	the price that purchasers would be willing to pay for the Class A common stock in a change of control transaction or otherwise; and

	•	the market price of the Class A common stock.

Uncertainties that may arise with respect to the nature of our management role and voting power and organizational documents as a result of any challenge to the special voting rights of the Class B common stock, including legal actions or proceedings relating thereto, may also materially adversely impact the value of the Class A common stock.

The Charter Operating credit facilities provide that the failure by Mr. Allen to maintain a 35% direct or indirect voting interest in the applicable borrower would result in a change of control default. Such a default could result in the acceleration of repayment of our and our subsidiaries’ indebtedness, including borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities. See “— Risks Related to Significant Indebtedness of Us and Our Subsidiaries — All of our and our subsidiaries’ outstanding debt is subject to change of control provisions. We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to fulfill our obligations under our indebtedness following a change of control, which would place us in default under the applicable debt instruments.”

Mr. Allen has the ability to control us. Through his control of approximately 93% of the voting power of our capital stock, Mr. Allen, as sole Class B shareholder, is entitled to elect all but one of our board members and effectively has the voting power to elect the remaining board member as well since he controls more than the majority of the vote of the Class A and Class B shareholders voting together as a class. By virtue of Mr. Allen’s control of the voting power of Charter, we are a “controlled company” under Nasdaq rule 4350(c)(5) and are not subject to requirements that a majority of our directors be “independent” (as defined in Nasdaq’s rules) or that there be a nominating committee of Charter’s board. Charter does not have a nominating committee. Mr. Allen thus has the ability to control fundamental corporate transactions requiring equity holder approval, including, but not limited to, the election of all of our directors, approval of merger transactions involving us and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets.

Mr. Allen is not restricted from investing in, and has invested and engaged in, other businesses involving or related to the operation of cable television systems, video programming, high-speed data service, telephony or business and financial transactions conducted through broadband interactivity and Internet services. Mr. Allen may also engage in other businesses that compete or may in the future compete with us.

Mr. Allen’s control over our management and affairs could create conflicts of interest if he is faced with decisions that could have different implications for him, us and the holders of our Class A common stock. Further, Mr. Allen could effectively cause us to enter into contracts with another entity in which he owns an interest or to decline a transaction into which he (or another entity in which he owns an interest) ultimately enters.

Current and future agreements between us and either Mr. Allen or his affiliates may not be the result of arm’s-length negotiations. Consequently, such agreements may be less favorable to us than agreements that we could otherwise have entered into with unaffiliated third parties. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.”

Our certificate of incorporation and Charter Holdco’s limited liability company agreement provide that Charter and Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries, cannot engage in any business activity outside the cable transmission business except for specified businesses. This will be the case unless we first offer the opportunity to pursue the particular business activity to Mr. Allen, he decides not to pursue it and he consents to our engaging in the business activity. The cable transmission business means the business of transmitting video, audio (including telephone services), and data over cable television systems owned, operated or managed by us from time to time. These provisions may limit our ability to take advantage of attractive business opportunities.

Mr. Allen is Chairman of our board of directors and provides strategic guidance and other services to us. If we were to lose his services, our growth, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely impacted.

Charter Holdco’s limited liability company agreement provided that through the end of 2003, net tax losses of Charter Holdco that would otherwise have been allocated to us based generally on our percentage ownership of outstanding common membership units of Charter Holdco would instead be allocated to the membership units held by Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. The purpose of these special tax allocation provisions was to allow Mr. Allen to take advantage for tax purposes of the losses generated by Charter Holdco. However, beginning in 2002, due to tax capital account limitations, certain net tax losses of Charter Holdco were allocated to us and have continued to be so allocated since that time. The limited liability company agreement further provides that beginning at the time that Charter Holdco generates net tax profits (as determined under the applicable federal income tax rules for determining book profits), the net tax profits that would otherwise have been allocated to us based generally on our percentage of outstanding common membership units of Charter Holdco will instead generally be allocated to membership units held by Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. In some situations, the special tax allocation provisions could result in our having to pay taxes in an amount that is more or less than if Charter Holdco had allocated net tax losses and net tax profits to its members based generally on the percentage of outstanding common membership units owned by such members from the time of the completion of the offering. See “Description of Capital Stock and Membership Units — Special Tax Allocation Provisions.” For further discussion on the details of the tax allocation provisions see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Income Taxes.”

As of March 31, 2005, Charter had approximately $5.4 billion of tax net operating losses (resulting in a gross deferred tax asset of approximately $2.1 billion), expiring in the years 2010 through 2025. Due to uncertainties in projected future taxable income, valuation allowances have been established against the gross deferred tax assets for book accounting purposes except for deferred benefits available to offset certain deferred tax liabilities. Currently, such tax net operating losses can accumulate and be used to

offset any future taxable income of Charter. An “ownership change” as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, would place significant limitations, on an annual basis, on the use of such net operating losses to offset any future taxable income we may generate. Such limitations, in conjunction with the net operating loss expiration provisions, could effectively eliminate our ability to use a substantial portion of our net operating losses to offset future taxable income. The shares issued hereby are being issued pursuant to a share lending agreement. See “Share Lending Agreement.” While the tax treatment of the issuance of shares offered hereby pursuant to a borrowing transaction under the share lending agreement is uncertain, we do not believe that this issuance would result in our experiencing an ownership change. However, future transactions and the timing of such transactions could cause an ownership change. Such transactions include additional issuances of common stock by us (including but not limited to issuances upon future conversion of our 5.875% convertible senior notes or as contemplated in the proposed settlement of derivative class action litigation), reacquisitions of the borrowed shares by us, or acquisitions or sales of shares by certain holders of our shares, including persons who have held, currently hold, or accumulate in the future five percent or more of our outstanding stock (including upon an exchange by Paul Allen or his affiliates, directly or indirectly, of membership units of Charter Holdco into our Class A common stock). Many of the foregoing transactions are beyond our control.

Regulation of the cable industry has increased cable operators’ administrative and operational expenses and limited their revenues. Cable operators are subject to, among other things:


	•	rules governing the provision of cable equipment and compatibility with new digital technologies;

	•	rules and regulations relating to subscriber privacy;

	•	limited rate regulation;


	•	requirements governing when a cable system must carry a particular broadcast station and when it must first obtain consent to carry a broadcast station;


	•	rules for franchise renewals and transfers; and

	•	other requirements covering a variety of operational areas such as equal employment opportunity, technical standards and customer service requirements.

Additionally, many aspects of these regulations are currently the subject of judicial proceedings and administrative or legislative proposals. There are also ongoing efforts to amend or expand the federal, state and local regulation of some of our cable systems, which may compound the regulatory risks we already face. Certain states and localities are considering new telecommunications taxes that could increase operating expenses.

Our cable systems generally operate pursuant to franchises, permits and similar authorizations issued by a state or local governmental authority controlling the public rights-of-way. Many franchises establish comprehensive facilities and service requirements, as well as specific customer service standards and monetary penalties for non-compliance. In many cases, franchises are terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with significant provisions set forth in the franchise agreement governing system operations. Franchises are generally granted for fixed terms and must be periodically renewed. Local franchising authorities may resist granting a renewal if either past performance or the prospective operating proposal is considered inadequate. Franchise authorities often demand concessions or other commitments as a condition to renewal. In some instances, franchises have not been renewed at expiration, and we have operated and are operating under either temporary operating agreements or without a license while

We cannot assure you that we will be able to comply with all significant provisions of our franchise agreements and certain of our franchisors have from time to time alleged that we have not complied with these agreements. Additionally, although historically we have renewed our franchises without incurring significant costs, we cannot assure you that we will be able to renew, or to renew as favorably, our franchises in the future. A termination of and/or a sustained failure to renew a franchise in one or more key markets could adversely affect our business in the affected geographic area.

Our cable systems are operated under non-exclusive franchises granted by local franchising authorities. Consequently, local franchising authorities can grant additional franchises to competitors in the same geographic area or operate their own cable systems. In addition, certain telephone companies are seeking authority to operate in local communities without first obtaining a local franchise. As a result, competing operators may build systems in areas in which we hold franchises. In some cases municipal utilities may legally compete with us without obtaining a franchise from the local franchising authority. The existence of more than one cable system operating in the same territory is referred to as an overbuild. These overbuilds could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations by creating or increasing competition. As of March 31, 2005, we are aware of overbuild situations impacting approximately 5% of our estimated homes passed, and potential overbuild situations in areas servicing approximately 1% of our estimated homes passed. Additional overbuild situations may occur in other systems.

In addition to the franchise agreement, cable authorities in some jurisdictions have adopted cable regulatory ordinances that further regulate the operation of cable systems. This additional regulation increases the cost of operating our business. We cannot assure you that the local franchising authorities will not impose new and more restrictive requirements. Local franchising authorities also have the power to reduce rates and order refunds on the rates charged for basic services.

Currently, rate regulation is strictly limited to the basic service tier and associated equipment and installation activities. However, the Federal Communications Commission (or FCC) and the U.S. Congress continue to be concerned that cable rate increases are exceeding inflation. It is possible that either the FCC or the U.S. Congress will again restrict the ability of cable system operators to implement rate increases. Should this occur, it would impede our ability to raise our rates. If we are unable to raise our rates in response to increasing costs, our losses would increase.

There has been considerable legislative interest recently in requiring cable operators to offer historically bundled programming services on an á la carte basis. Although the FCC recently made a recommendation to Congress against the imposition of an á la carte mandate, it is still possible that new marketing restrictions could be adopted in the future. Such restrictions could adversely affect our operations.

Pole attachments are cable wires that are attached to poles. Cable system attachments to public utility poles historically have been regulated at the federal or state level, generally resulting in favorable pole attachment rates for attachments used to provide cable service. The FCC clarified that a cable operator’s favorable pole rates are not endangered by the provision of Internet access, and that approach ultimately was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Despite the existing regulatory regime, utility pole owners in many areas are attempting to raise pole attachment fees and impose additional costs on cable operators and others. In addition, the favorable pole attachment rates afforded cable operators under federal law can be increased by utility companies if the operator provides telecommunications services, as well as cable service, over cable wires attached to utility poles. Any significant increased costs could have a material adverse impact on our profitability and discourage system upgrades and the introduction of new products and services.

A number of companies, including independent Internet service providers, or ISPs, have requested local authorities and the FCC to require cable operators to provide non-discriminatory access to cable’s broadband infrastructure, so that these companies may deliver Internet services directly to customers over cable facilities. In a June 2005 ruling, commonly referred to as Brand X, the Supreme Court upheld an FCC decision (and overruled a conflicting Ninth Circuit opinion) making it much less likely that any non-discriminatory “open access” requirements (which are generally associated with common carrier regulation of “telecommunications services”) will be imposed on the cable industry by local, state or federal authorities. The Supreme Court held that the FCC was correct in classifying cable provided Internet service as an “information service,” rather than a “telecommunications service.” This favorable regulatory classification limits the ability of various governmental authorities to impose open access requirements on cable-provided Internet service. Given the recency of the Brand X decision, however, the nature of any legislative or regulatory response remains uncertain. The imposition of open access requirements could materially affect our business.

If we were required to allocate a portion of our bandwidth capacity to other Internet service providers, we believe that it would impair our ability to use our bandwidth in ways that would generate maximum revenues.

Cable operators also face significant regulation of their channel carriage. They currently can be required to devote substantial capacity to the carriage of programming that they would not carry voluntarily, including certain local broadcast signals, local public, educational and government access programming, and unaffiliated commercial leased access programming. This carriage burden could increase in the future, particularly if cable systems were required to carry both the analog and digital versions of local broadcast signals (dual carriage) or to carry multiple program streams included with a single digital broadcast transmission (multicast carriage). Additional government-mandated broadcast carriage obligations could disrupt existing programming commitments, interfere with our preferred use of limited channel capacity and limit our ability to offer services that would maximize customer appeal and revenue potential. Although the FCC issued a decision in February 2005, confirming an earlier ruling against mandating either dual carriage or multicast carriage, that decision has been appealed. In addition, the FCC could reverse its own ruling or Congress could legislate additional carriage obligations.

In 2002, we began to offer voice communications services on a limited basis over our broadband network. We continue to explore development and deployment of VOIP services. The regulatory requirements applicable to VOIP service are unclear although the FCC has declared that certain VOIP services are not subject to traditional state public utility regulation. The full extent of the FCC preemption of VOIP services is not yet clear. Expanding our offering of these services may require us to obtain certain authorizations, including federal, state and local licenses. We may not be able to obtain such authorizations in a timely manner, or conditions could be imposed upon such licenses or authorizations that may not be favorable to us. Furthermore, telecommunications companies generally are subject to significant regulation, including payments to the Federal Universal Service Fund and the intercarrier compensation regime, and it may be difficult or costly for us to comply with such regulations, were it to be determined that they applied to VOIP offerings such as ours. In addition, pole attachment rates are higher for providers of telecommunications services than for providers of cable service. If there were to be a final legal determination by the FCC, a state Public Utility Commission, or appropriate court that VOIP services are subject to these higher rates, our pole attachment costs could increase significantly, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

It is impossible to predict whether the price of our Class A common stock will rise or fall. Trading prices of our Class A common stock will be influenced by our operating results and prospects and by economic, financial, regulatory and other factors. In addition, general market conditions, including the level of, and fluctuations in, the trading prices of stocks generally, and sales of substantial amounts of our Class A common stock by us in the market after this offering, or the perception that such sales may occur, could affect the price of our Class A common stock.

The price of our Class A common stock also could be affected by any sales of our Class A common stock by investors who view our recently issued 5.875% convertible senior notes as a more attractive means of equity participation in our company. Some investors in our Class A common stock may decide to sell some or all of their shares and purchase our 5.875% convertible senior notes instead. Such sales of our Class A common stock could cause the trading price to decline. The hedging or arbitrage trading activity that has developed and could further develop with respect to our Class A common stock as a result of the November 2004 issuance of our 5.875% convertible senior notes could also cause a decline or retard any increase in the trading price of our Class A common stock since investors in the convertible senior notes may sell short our Class A common stock in order to establish initial hedge positions, and may increase those positions, particularly as the trading price of our Class A common stock increases, in order to hedge their 5.875% convertible senior notes. See “Share Lending Agreement.”

We understand that many holders of our 5.875% convertible senior notes have been able to borrow shares of our Class A common stock for the purpose of establishing short positions in the stock. To the extent that those same holders seek to establish short positions with Citigroup through private hedging transactions in connection with this offering, we believe such holders are likely to seek to close out their existing share borrow arrangements using shares purchased in the open market. Such purchases could cause extreme volatility in the trading price of our Class A common stock, including temporary increases in the price as short term demand increases.

As of March 31, 2005, 304,763,192 shares of Class A common stock were issued and outstanding, and 50,000 shares of Class B common stock were issued and outstanding. An additional 339,132,031 shares of

Class A common stock were issuable upon conversion of outstanding units of Charter Holdco (increasing by 24,273,943 shares if Mr. Allen is required to contribute his CC VIII membership interest to Charter Holdco), and 29,067,828 shares were issuable upon the exercise of outstanding options under our option plans. Also, approximately 356 million shares are now issuable upon conversion of our recently issued 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009. Furthermore, additional shares and warrants to acquire shares may be issuable in connection with the settlement of certain outstanding litigation matters, as more fully described in “Business — Legal Proceedings.” In addition, to the extent that we elect to satisfy our obligations under the settlement agreement by issuing securities rather than paying cash, any decrease in the price of our Class A common stock as a result of this offering (even if only temporary) would increase the number of shares and warrants issuable under the applicable Stipulations of Settlement. The shares and warrants are expected to be available for immediate resale. The shares issuable upon exercise of the warrants are expected to be issued pursuant to a registration statement and therefore available for immediate resale, if and when issued. All of the 339,132,031 shares of Class A common stock issuable upon exchange of Charter Holdco membership units and all shares of the Class A common stock issuable upon conversion of shares of our Class B common stock will have “demand” and/or “piggyback” registration rights attached to them. All of the 356 million shares issuable upon conversion of the 5.875% convertible senior notes are expected to be eligible for resale pursuant to a shelf registration statement. If less than 150,000,000 shares of Class A common stock are sold in this offering, pursuant to a registration rights agreement, Citigroup will have the right under the share lending agreement to borrow the unsold portion of those shares in the future, and Charter will be obligated to file, at Citigroup’s request, up to four additional registration statements with respect to these unsold shares until November 16, 2006. The sale of a substantial number of shares of Class A common stock or the perception that such sales could occur could adversely affect the market price for the Class A common stock because the sale could cause the amount of the Class A common stock available for sale in the market to exceed the demand for the Class A common stock and could also make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities or equity-related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate. This could adversely affect our ability to fund our current and future obligations. See “Shares Eligible for Future Sale.”

In order to retain our listing on the Nasdaq National Market we are required to maintain a minimum bid price of $1.00 per share. Although, as of July 7, 2005, the trading price of our Class A common stock was $1.26 per share, our stock has traded below this $1.00 minimum within the past month. If the bid price falls below the $1.00 minimum for more than 30 consecutive trading days, we will have 180 days to satisfy the $1.00 minimum bid price for a period of at least 10 trading days. If we are unable to take action to increase the bid price per share (either by reverse stock split or otherwise), we could be subject to delisting from the Nasdaq National Market.

The failure to maintain our listing on the Nasdaq National Market would harm the liquidity of our Class A common stock and would have adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. If the stock were to trade it would likely trade on the OTC “pink sheets,” which provide significantly less liquidity than does Nasdaq. As a result, the liquidity of our common stock would be impaired, not only in the number of shares which could be bought and sold, but also through delays in the timing of transactions, reduction in security analysts’ and news media’s coverage and lower prices for our common stock than might otherwise be attained. In addition, our common stock would become subject to the low-priced security or so-called “penny stock” rules that impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell such securities.

We have agreed pursuant to a share lending agreement to lend to Citigroup Global Markets Limited the 150 million shares of our common stock that are being offered pursuant to this prospectus. In addition, in November 2004, we sold $862.5 million original aggregate principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, which are currently convertible into approximately 356 million shares of our Class A common stock. We have been advised by Citigroup Global Markets Limited that it or an affiliate intends to facilitate the establishment by holders of those convertible notes of hedged positions in the convertible notes. While issuance of shares upon the conversion of the convertible notes may result in a reduction of an equal number in the outstanding borrowed shares under the share lending agreement, the increase in the number of shares of our Class A common stock issued or issuable pursuant to the share lending agreement or upon conversion of the 5.875% convertible senior notes could have a negative effect on the market price of our Class A common stock. Since there will be more shares sold or available for sale, the market price of our Class A common stock may decline or not increase as much as it might have without the availability of such shares. The market price of our Class A common stock also could decline as a result of other short sales of our Class A common stock by the purchasers of the 5.875% convertible senior notes to hedge their investment in the convertible notes. We understand that many investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes have already hedged their investment by selling additional shares of our Class A common stock short in order to establish initial hedge positions. This offering may result in establishment of hedged positions by other holders or in replacement of existing hedged position by those holders who are already hedged. We expect that all such hedged parties may increase those positions as the market price of the Class A common stock increases, since such price increases will increase the likelihood that such holders will convert their 5.875% convertible senior notes and receive Class A common stock. Therefore, such short sales could retard any increase in the market price of our Class A common stock or cause a decline. See “Business — Legal Proceedings,” “Share Lending Agreement” and “Underwriting.”

None of the proceeds from the sale of our Class A common stock offered by this prospectus will be received by us. However, pursuant to the share lending agreement, we will receive a loan fee of $0.001 for each share that we lend to Citigroup Global Markets Limited, which will be used for general corporate purposes. See “Share Lending Agreement.”

Our Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “CHTR.” The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the range of high and low last reported sale price per share of Class A common stock on the Nasdaq National Market. There is no established trading market for our Class B common stock.

As of March 31, 2005, there were 3,786 holders of record of our Class A common stock, one holder of our Class B common stock, and 10 holders of record of our Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock.

The last reported sale price of our Class A common stock on the Nasdaq National Market on July 7, 2005 was $1.26 per share.

We have never paid and do not expect to pay any cash dividends on our Class A common stock in the foreseeable future. Charter Holdco is required under certain circumstances to pay distributions pro rata to all its common members to the extent necessary for any common member to pay taxes incurred with respect to its share of taxable income attributed to Charter Holdco. Covenants in the indentures and credit agreements governing the debt of our subsidiaries restrict their ability to make distributions to us and, accordingly, limit our ability to declare or pay cash dividends. We intend to cause Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries to retain future earnings, if any, to finance the operation of the business of Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries. In addition, we may only pay dividends from legally available surplus under Delaware law. Charter elected not to declare the March 31 and June 30, 2005 dividends on its Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock because it was unable to conclude with certainty that it had such surplus. Under the Certificate of Designation governing the Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock, we may not pay dividends on our common stock unless and until the full cumulative dividends on all outstanding shares of the Series A Preferred Stock have been paid for all past dividend periods and sufficient funds shall have been set aside for payment of the dividend on the Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock for the then current dividend period.

The following table sets forth as of March 31, 2005, on a consolidated basis the actual (historical) capitalization of Charter.

The following information should be read in conjunction with “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data,” “Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the historical consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial statements are based on the historical consolidated financial statements of Charter, adjusted on a pro forma basis to reflect the following transactions as if they had occurred on January 1, 2004 (for the unaudited pro forma consolidated statement of operations):


	(1) the disposition of certain assets in March and April 2004, with proceeds used to pay down credit facilities;


	(2) the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004 and the Charter Operating senior second lien notes in April 2004;


	(3) an increase in amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit facilities in April 2004 and the use of such funds, together with the proceeds from the sale of the Charter Operating senior second lien notes, to refinance amounts outstanding under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and Falcon;

	(4) the repayment of $530 million of borrowings under the Charter Operating revolving credit facility with net proceeds from the issuance and sale of the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes in December 2004, which were included in our cash balance at December 31, 2004;

	(5) the redemption of all of CC V Holdings’ outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 with cash on hand;

	(6) the issuance and sale of $863 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes in November 2004 with proceeds used for (i) the purchase of certain U.S. government securities pledged as security for the 5.875% convertible senior notes (and which we expect to use to fund the first six interest payments thereon), (ii) redemption of outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 and (iii) general corporate purposes; and

	(7) the issuance of the shares offered hereby pursuant to a share lending agreement, the sole effect of which is to increase common shares issued and outstanding. See “Share Lending Agreement.”

The unaudited pro forma adjustments are based on information available to us as of the date of this prospectus and certain assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances. The Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements required allocation of certain revenues and expenses and such information has been presented for comparative purposes and is not intended (a) to provide any indication of what our actual financial position or results of operations would have been had the transactions described above been completed on the dates indicated or (b) to project our results of operations for any future date.

The unaudited pro forma balance sheet as of March 31, 2005 and an unaudited pro forma statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005 are not provided as pro forma adjustments are not significant for that period.

Note A: Represents the elimination of operating results related to the disposition of certain assets in March and April 2004 and a reduction of interest expense related to the use of the net proceeds from such sales to repay a portion of our subsidiaries’ credit facilities.

Note B: Represents adjustment to interest expense associated with the completion of the financing transactions discussed in pro forma assumptions two through five (in millions):

Note C: Represents the increase in interest expense from the issuance of $863 million of convertible senior notes due 2009 with a stated interest rate of 5.875% and the amortization of deferred debt issuance cost associated with such issuance, reduced by the use of proceeds to retire $588 million of our then outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 and the interest on the $144 million of securities purchased and pledged as security for interest payments on such debt (in millions):

Note D: Loss per common share, basic and diluted assumes none of the membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC are exchanged for Charter common stock and none of the outstanding options to purchase membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC that are automatically exchanged for Charter common stock are exercised. Basic loss per share equals loss before cumulative effect of accounting change less dividends on preferred stock-redeemable divided by weighted average shares outstanding. If the membership units were exchanged or options exercised, the effects would be antidilutive. Therefore, basic and diluted loss per common share is the same. Although the shares offered by this prospectus will be considered issued and outstanding, we do not expect they will impact our earnings per share under current accounting literature. See “Share Lending Agreement” for further discussion related to the accounting of the share lending agreement.

Note B: Represents adjustment to interest expense associated with the completion of the financing transactions discussed in pro forma assumptions two through five (in millions):

Adjustment to loss on extinguishment of debt represents the elimination of the write-off of deferred financing fees and third party costs related to the Charter Operating refinancing in April 2004.

Adjustment to loss on extinguishment of debt represents the elimination of the premium paid to retire the 5.75% convertible senior notes and the write-off of the related deferred financing fees.

The following table presents summary financial and other data for Charter and its subsidiaries and has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the five years ended December 31, 2004 and the unaudited consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2005. The consolidated financial statements of Charter and its subsidiaries for the years ended December 31, 2000 to 2004 have been audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The following information should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the historical consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

The following tables present quarterly financial data for the periods presented on the consolidated statements of operations (Dollars in millions, except share and per share amounts):

Reference is made to “Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” which describes important factors that could cause actual results to differ from expectations and non-historical information contained herein. In addition, the following discussion should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements of Charter Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of and for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 and the unaudited consolidated financial statements of Charter Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

In 2004 and the first quarter of 2005, we completed several transactions that improved our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in the completion of a number of transactions in 2004, as follows:


	•	the December 2004 sale by our subsidiaries, CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., of $550 million of senior floating rate notes due 2010;

	•	the November 2004 sale by Charter of $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009;

	•	the December 2004 redemption of all of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 ($588 million principal amount);

	•	the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second-lien notes by our subsidiary, Charter Operating, together with the concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities;


	•	the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to reduce indebtedness; and


	•	the March 2005 issuance of Charter Operating notes in exchange for Charter Holdings notes.

During the years 1999 through 2001, we grew significantly, principally through acquisitions of other cable businesses financed by debt and, to a lesser extent, equity. We have no current plans to pursue any significant acquisitions. However, we may pursue exchanges of non-strategic assets or divestitures, such as the sale of cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC discussed under “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Sale of Assets,” below. We therefore do not believe that our historical growth rates are accurate indicators of future growth.

The industry’s and our most significant operational challenges in 2004 and 2003 included competition from DBS providers and DSL service providers. See “Business — Competition.” We believe that competition from DBS has resulted in net analog video customer losses and decreased growth rates for digital video customers. Competition from DSL providers combined with limited opportunities to expand our customer base now that approximately 28% of our analog video customers subscribe to our high-speed data services has resulted in decreased growth rates for high-speed data customers. In the recent past, we have grown revenues by offsetting video customer losses with price increases and sales of incremental advanced services such as high-speed data, video on demand, digital video recorders and high definition television. We expect to continue to grow revenues through continued growth in high-speed data and incremental new services including VOIP telephony, high definition television, VOD and DVR service.

Historically, our ability to fund operations and investing activities has depended on our continued access to credit under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities. We expect we will continue to borrow under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities from time to time to fund cash needs. The occurrence of an event of default under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities could result in borrowings from these facilities being unavailable to us and could, in the event of a payment default or acceleration, trigger events of default under our notes and our subsidiaries’ outstanding notes and would have a material adverse effect on us. Approximately $23 million of indebtedness under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities is scheduled to mature during the remainder of 2005. We expect to fund payment of such indebtedness through borrowings under our subsidiaries’ revolving credit facilities.

The following table sets forth information regarding our significant acquisitions from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2002 (none in 2003, 2004 or 2005):

All acquisitions were accounted for under the purchase method of accounting and results of operations were included in our consolidated financial statements from their respective dates of acquisition.

We have no current plans to pursue any significant acquisitions. However, we will continue to evaluate opportunities to consolidate our operations through the sale of cable systems to, or exchange of like-kind assets with, other cable operators as such opportunities arise, and on a very limited basis, consider strategic new acquisitions. Our primary criteria in considering these opportunities are the rationalization of our operations into geographic clusters and the potential financial benefits we expect to ultimately realize as a result of the sale, exchange, or acquisition.

Approximately 87% and 86% of our revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and for the year ended December 31, 2004, respectively, are attributable to monthly subscription fees charged to customers for our video, high-speed data, telephone and commercial services provided by our cable systems. Generally, these customer subscriptions may be discontinued by the customer at any time. The remaining 13% and 14%, respectively, of revenue is derived primarily from advertising revenues, franchise fee revenues, which are collected by us but then paid to local franchising authorities, pay-per-view and VOD programming where users are charged a fee for individual programs viewed, installation or reconnection fees charged to customers to commence or reinstate service, and commissions related to the sale of merchandise by home shopping services. We have increased revenues during the past three years, primarily through the sale of digital video and high-speed data services to new and existing customers and price increases on video services offset in part by dispositions of systems. Going forward, our goal is to increase revenues by stabilizing our analog video customer base, implementing price increases on certain services and packages and increasing the number of our customers who purchase high-speed data services, digital video and new products and services such as VOIP telephony, VOD, high definition television and DVR service. To accomplish this, we are increasing prices for certain services and we are offering new bundling of services combining digital video and our advanced services (such as high-speed data service and high definition television) at what we believe are attractive price points. See “Business — Sales and Marketing” for more details.

Our success in our efforts to grow revenues and improve margins will be impacted by our ability to compete against companies with often fewer regulatory burdens, easier access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater brand name recognition and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Additionally, controlling our cost of operations is critical, particularly cable programming costs, which have historically increased at rates in excess of inflation and are expected to continue to increase. See “Business — Programming” for more details. We are attempting to control our costs of operations by maintaining strict controls on expenses. More specifically, we are focused on managing our cost structure by renegotiating programming agreements to reduce the rate of historical increases in programming cost, managing our workforce to control increases and improve productivity, and leveraging our size in purchasing activities.

Our expenses primarily consist of operating costs, selling, general and administrative expenses, depreciation and amortization expense and interest expense. Operating costs primarily include programming costs, the cost of our workforce, cable service related expenses, advertising sales costs, franchise fees and expenses related to customer billings. Our income from operations decreased from $175 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $51 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. We had a positive operating margin (defined as income (loss) from operations divided by revenues) of 4% and 14% for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The decline in income from operations and operating margin for the three months ended March 31, 2005 is principally due to the one-time gain as a result of the sale of certain cable systems in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC of approximately $108 million, recognized in the three months ended March 31, 2004 and asset impairment charges of $31 million recognized in the three months ended March 31, 2005. For the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2002, loss from operations was $2.0 billion and $4.3 billion, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2003, income from operations was $516 million. Operating margin was 11% for the year ended December 31, 2003, whereas for the years ending December 31, 2004 and 2002, we had negative operating margin of 41% and 95%, respectively. The improvement in income from operations and operating margin from 2002 to 2003 was principally due to a $4.6 billion franchise impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2002 which did not recur in 2003 and the recognition of gains in 2003 of $93 million related to unfavorable contracts and other settlements and gain on sale of systems. Although we do not expect charges for impairment in the future of comparable magnitude, potential charges could occur due to changes in market conditions.

high level of debt, the depreciation expenses that we incur resulting from the capital investments we have made in our cable properties and the amortization and impairment of our franchise intangibles. We expect that these expenses (other than impairment of franchises) will remain significant, and we therefore expect to continue to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Additionally, because minority interest in Charter Holdco was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in the first quarter of 2004, we began to absorb substantially all future losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest. This resulted in an additional $2.4 billion of net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004. Under our existing capital structure, future losses will continue to be absorbed by Charter. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII, LLC for financial reporting purposes until the dispute between Charter and Mr. Allen regarding the preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC is determinable or other events occur.

Certain of our accounting policies require our management to make difficult, subjective or complex judgments. Management has discussed these policies with the Audit Committee of Charter’s board of directors and the Audit Committee has reviewed the following disclosure. We consider the following policies to be the most critical in understanding the estimates, assumptions and judgments that are involved in preparing our financial statements and the uncertainties that could affect our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows:


	•	Capitalization of labor and overhead costs;

	•	Useful lives of property, plant and equipment;

	•	Impairment of property, plant, and equipment, franchises, and goodwill;

	•	Income taxes; and

	•	Litigation.

In addition, there are other items within our financial statements that require estimates or judgment but are not deemed critical, such as the allowance for doubtful accounts, but changes in judgment, or estimates in these other items could also have a material impact on our financial statements.

Capitalization of labor and overhead costs. The cable industry is capital intensive, and a large portion of our resources are spent on capital activities associated with extending, rebuilding, and upgrading our cable network. As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and 2003, the net carrying amount of our property, plant and equipment (consisting primarily of cable network assets) was approximately $6.1 billion (representing 36% of total assets), $6.3 billion (representing 36% of total assets) and $7.0 billion (representing 33% of total assets), respectively. Total capital expenditures for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were approximately $211 million, $924 million, $854 million and $2.2 billion, respectively.

Costs associated with network construction, initial customer installations, installation refurbishments and the addition of network equipment necessary to provide advanced services are capitalized. Costs capitalized as part of initial customer installations include materials, direct labor, and certain indirect costs. These indirect costs are associated with the activities of personnel who assist in connecting and activating the new service and consist of compensation and overhead costs associated with these support functions. The costs of disconnecting service at a customer’s dwelling or reconnecting service to a previously installed dwelling are charged to operating expense in the period incurred. Costs for repairs and maintenance are charged to operating expense as incurred, while equipment replacement and betterments, including replacement of cable drops from the pole to the dwelling, are capitalized.

We make judgments regarding the installation and construction activities to be capitalized. We capitalize direct labor and certain indirect costs (“overhead”) using standards developed from actual costs and applicable operational data. We calculate standards for items such as the labor rates, overhead rates and the actual amount of time required to perform a capitalizable activity. For example, the standard

Labor costs directly associated with capital projects are capitalized. We capitalize direct labor costs associated with personnel based upon the specific time devoted to network construction and customer installation activities. Capitalizable activities performed in connection with customer installations include such activities as:


	•	Scheduling a “truck roll” to the customer’s dwelling for service connection;

	•	Verification of serviceability to the customer’s dwelling (i.e., determining whether the customer’s dwelling is capable of receiving service by our cable network and/or receiving advanced or data services);

	•	Customer premise activities performed by in-house field technicians and third-party contractors in connection with customer installations, installation of network equipment in connection with the installation of expanded services and equipment replacement and betterment; and

	•	Verifying the integrity of the customer’s network connection by initiating test signals downstream from the headend to the customer’s digital set-top terminal.

Judgment is required to determine the extent to which overhead is incurred as a result of specific capital activities, and therefore should be capitalized. The primary costs that are included in the determination of the overhead rate are (i) employee benefits and payroll taxes associated with capitalized direct labor, (ii) direct variable costs associated with capitalizable activities, consisting primarily of installation and construction vehicle costs, (iii) the cost of support personnel, such as dispatch, that directly assist with capitalizable installation activities, and (iv) indirect costs directly attributable to capitalizable activities.

While we believe our existing capitalization policies are appropriate, a significant change in the nature or extent of our system activities could affect management’s judgment about the extent to which we should capitalize direct labor or overhead in the future. We monitor the appropriateness of our capitalization policies, and perform updates to our internal studies on an ongoing basis to determine whether facts or circumstances warrant a change to our capitalization policies. We capitalized direct labor and overhead of $45 million, $164 million, $174 million and $335 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Capitalized internal direct labor and overhead costs significantly decreased in 2004 and 2003 compared to 2002 primarily due to the substantial completion of the upgrade of our systems and a decrease in the amount of capitalizable installation costs.

Useful lives of property, plant and equipment. We evaluate the appropriateness of estimated useful lives assigned to our property, plant and equipment, based on annual studies of such useful lives, and revise such lives to the extent warranted by changing facts and circumstances. Any changes in estimated useful lives as a result of these studies, which were not significant in the periods presented, will be reflected prospectively beginning in the period in which the study is completed. The effect of a one-year decrease in the weighted average remaining useful life of our property, plant and equipment would be an increase in depreciation expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 of approximately $296 million. The effect of a one-year increase in the weighted average useful life of our property, plant and equipment would be a decrease in depreciation expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 of approximately $198 million.

Depreciation expense related to property, plant and equipment totaled $379 million, $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion and $1.4 billion, representing approximately 31%, 21%, 34% and 16% of costs and expenses, for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,

Impairment of property, plant and equipment, franchises and goodwill. As discussed above, the net carrying value of our property, plant and equipment is significant. We also have recorded a significant amount of cost related to franchises, pursuant to which we are granted the right to operate our cable distribution network throughout our service areas. The net carrying value of franchises as of March 31, 2005, December 31, 2004 and 2003 was approximately $9.8 billion (representing 59% of total assets), $9.9 billion (representing 56% of total assets) and $13.7 billion (representing 64% of total assets), respectively. Furthermore, our non-current assets included approximately $52 million of goodwill.

We adopted SFAS No. 142 on January 1, 2002. SFAS No. 142 requires that franchise intangible assets that meet specified indefinite-life criteria no longer be amortized against earnings, but instead must be tested for impairment annually based on valuations, or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances. In determining whether our franchises have an indefinite-life, we considered the exclusivity of the franchise, the expected costs of franchise renewals, and the technological state of the associated cable systems with a view to whether or not we are in compliance with any technology upgrading requirements. We have concluded that as of December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 more than 99% of our franchises qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142, and that less than one percent of our franchises do not qualify for indefinite-life treatment due to technological or operational factors that limit their lives. Costs of finite-lived franchises, along with costs associated with franchise renewals, are amortized on a straight-line basis over 10 years, which represents management’s best estimate of the average remaining useful lives of such franchises. Franchise amortization expense was $1 million and $4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and for the year ended December 31, 2004, respectively, and $9 million for each of the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. We expect that amortization expense on franchise assets will be approximately $3 million annually for each of the next five years. Actual amortization expense in future periods could differ from these estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors. Our goodwill is also deemed to have an indefinite life under SFAS No. 142.

SFAS No. 144, Accounting for Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, requires that we evaluate the recoverability of our property, plant and equipment and franchise assets which did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 upon the occurrence of events or changes in circumstances which indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Such events or changes in circumstances could include such factors as the impairment of our indefinite life franchises under SFAS No. 142, changes in technological advances, fluctuations in the fair value of such assets, adverse changes in relationships with local franchise authorities, adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results. Under SFAS No. 144, a long-lived asset is deemed impaired when the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the projected undiscounted future cash flows associated with the asset. No impairments of long-lived assets were recorded in the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 or 2002. We were also required to evaluate the recoverability of our indefinite-life franchises, as well as goodwill, as of January 1, 2002 upon adoption of SFAS No. 142, and on an annual basis or more frequently as deemed necessary.

Under both SFAS No. 144 and SFAS No. 142, if an asset is determined to be impaired, it is required to be written down to its estimated fair market value. We determine fair market value based on estimated discounted future cash flows, using reasonable and appropriate assumptions that are consistent with internal forecasts. Our assumptions include these and other factors: penetration rates for analog and

Based on the guidance prescribed in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 02-7, Unit of Accounting for Testing of Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets, franchises were aggregated into essentially inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset groups generally represent geographic clustering of our cable systems into groups by which such systems are managed. Management believes such groupings represent the highest and best use of those assets. We determined that our franchises were impaired upon adoption of SFAS No. 142 on January 1, 2002 and as a result recorded the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle of $206 million (approximately $572 million before minority interest effects of $306 million and tax effects of $60 million). As required by SFAS No. 142, the standard has not been retroactively applied to results for the period prior to adoption.

Our valuations, which are based on the present value of projected after tax cash flows, result in a value of property, plant and equipment, franchises, customer relationships and our total entity value. The value of goodwill is the difference between the total entity value and amounts assigned to the other assets. The use of different valuation assumptions or definitions of franchises or customer relationships, such as our inclusion of the value of selling additional services to our current customers within customer relationships versus franchises, could significantly impact our valuations and any resulting impairment.

Franchises, for valuation purposes, are defined as the future economic benefits of the right to solicit and service potential customers (customer marketing rights), and the right to deploy and market new services such as interactivity and telephony to the potential customers (service marketing rights). Fair value is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows using assumptions consistent with internal forecasts. The franchise after-tax cash flow is calculated as the after-tax cash flow generated by the potential customers obtained and the new services added to those customers in future periods. The sum of the present value of the franchises’ after-tax cash flow in years 1 through 10 and the continuing value of the after-tax cash flow beyond year 10 yields the fair value of the franchise. Prior to the adoption of EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill, discussed below, we followed a residual method of valuing our franchise assets, which had the effect of including goodwill with the franchise assets.

We follow the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17, Recognition of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets Acquired in a Business Combination, in valuing customer relationships. Customer relationships, for valuation purposes, represent the value of the business relationship with our existing customers and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash flows from these customers including the right to deploy and market additional services such as interactivity and telephony to these customers. The present value of these after-tax cash flows yields the fair value of the customer relationships. Substantially all our acquisitions occurred prior to January 1, 2002. We did not record any value associated with the customer relationship intangibles related to those acquisitions. For acquisitions subsequent to January 1, 2002, we did assign a value to the customer relationship intangible, which is amortized over its estimated useful life.

In September 2004, EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill, was issued, which requires the direct method of separately valuing all intangible assets and does not permit goodwill to be included in franchise assets. We performed an impairment assessment as of September 30, 2004, and adopted Topic D-108 in that assessment resulting in a total franchise impairment of approximately $3.3 billion. We recorded a cumulative effect of accounting change of $765 million (approximately $875 million before tax effects of $91 million and minority interest effects of $19 million) for the year ended December 31, 2004 representing the portion of our total franchise impairment attributable to no longer including goodwill with franchise assets. The effect of the adoption was to increase net loss and loss per share by $765 million and $2.55 for the year ended December 31, 2004. The remaining $2.4 billion of the total franchise impairment was attributable to the use of lower projected growth rates and the resulting revised estimates of future cash flows in our valuation and was recorded as

The valuation completed at October 1, 2003 showed franchise values in excess of book value and thus resulted in no impairment. Our annual impairment assessment as of October 1, 2002, based on revised estimates from January 1, 2002 of future cash flows and projected long-term growth rates in our valuation, led to the recognition of a $4.6 billion impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2002.

The valuations used in our impairment assessments involve numerous assumptions as noted above. While economic conditions, applicable at the time of the valuation, indicate the combination of assumptions utilized in the valuations are reasonable, as market conditions change so will the assumptions with a resulting impact on the valuation and consequently the potential impairment charge.

Sensitivity Analysis. The effect on the impairment charge recognized in the third quarter of 2004 of the indicated increase/decrease in the selected assumptions is shown below:


(1)	Operating Cash Flow is defined as revenues less operating expenses and selling general and administrative expenses.

(2)	Long-Term Growth Rate is the rate of cash flow growth beyond year ten.

(3)	A percentage point change of one point equates to 100 basis points.

Income Taxes. All operations are held through Charter Holdco and its direct and indirect subsidiaries. Charter Holdco and the majority of its subsidiaries are not subject to income tax. However, certain of these subsidiaries are corporations and are subject to income tax. All of the taxable income, gains, losses, deductions and credits of Charter Holdco are passed through to its members: Charter, Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Cable III Inc. Charter is responsible for its share of taxable income or loss of Charter Holdco allocated to it in accordance with the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement (“LLC Agreement”) and partnership tax rules and regulations.

The LLC Agreement provided for certain special allocations of net tax profits and net tax losses (such net tax profits and net tax losses being determined under the applicable federal income tax rules for determining capital accounts). Under the LLC Agreement, through the end of 2003, net tax losses of Charter Holdco that would otherwise have been allocated to Charter based generally on its percentage ownership of outstanding common units were allocated instead to membership units held by Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. (the “Special Loss Allocations”) to the extent of their respective capital account balances. After 2003, under the LLC Agreement, net tax losses of Charter Holdco are allocated to Charter, Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. based generally on their respective percentage ownership of outstanding common units to the extent of their respective capital account balances. The LLC Agreement further provides that, beginning at the time Charter Holdco generates net tax profits, the net tax profits that would otherwise have been allocated to Charter based generally on its percentage ownership of outstanding common membership units will instead generally be allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. (the “Special Profit Allocations”). The Special Profit Allocations to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. will generally continue until the cumulative amount of the Special Profit Allocations offsets the cumulative amount of the Special

Because the respective capital account balance of each of Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. was reduced to zero by December 31, 2002, certain net tax losses of Charter Holdco that were to be allocated for 2002, 2003, 2004 and possibly later years, subject to resolution of the issue described in “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII,” to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. instead have been and will be allocated to Charter (the “Regulatory Allocations”). The LLC Agreement further provides that, to the extent possible, the effect of the Regulatory Allocations is to be offset over time pursuant to certain curative allocation provisions (the “Curative Allocation Provisions”) so that, after certain offsetting adjustments are made, each member’s capital account balance is equal to the capital account balance such member would have had if the Regulatory Allocations had not been part of the LLC Agreement. The cumulative amount of the actual tax losses allocated to Charter as a result of the Regulatory Allocations through the year ended December 31, 2004 is approximately $4.0 billion.

As a result of the Special Loss Allocations and the Regulatory Allocations referred to above, the cumulative amount of losses of Charter Holdco allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. is in excess of the amount that would have been allocated to such entities if the losses of Charter Holdco had been allocated among its members in proportion to their respective percentage ownership of Charter Holdco common membership units. The cumulative amount of such excess losses was approximately $2.1 billion through December 31, 2003 and $1.0 billion through December 31, 2004.

In certain situations, the Special Loss Allocations, Special Profit Allocations, Regulatory Allocations and Curative Allocation Provisions described above could result in Charter paying taxes in an amount that is more or less than if Charter Holdco had allocated net tax profits and net tax losses among its members based generally on the number of common membership units owned by such members. This could occur due to differences in (i) the character of the allocated income (e.g., ordinary versus capital), (ii) the allocated amount and timing of tax depreciation and tax amortization expense due to the application of section 704(c) under the Internal Revenue Code, (iii) the potential interaction between the Special Profit Allocations and the Curative Allocation Provisions, (iv) the amount and timing of alternative minimum taxes paid by Charter, if any, (v) the apportionment of the allocated income or loss among the states in which Charter Holdco does business, and (vi) future federal and state tax laws. Further, in the event of new capital contributions to Charter Holdco, it is possible that the tax effects of the Special Profit Allocations, Special Loss Allocations, Regulatory Allocations and Curative Allocation Provisions will change significantly pursuant to the provisions of the income tax regulations or the terms of a contribution agreement with respect to such contributions. Such change could defer the actual tax benefits to be derived by Charter with respect to the net tax losses allocated to it or accelerate the actual taxable income to Charter with respect to the net tax profits allocated to it. As a result, it is possible under certain circumstances, that Charter could receive future allocations of taxable income in excess of its currently allocated tax deductions and available tax loss carryforwards. The ability to utilize net operating loss carryforwards is potentially subject to certain limitations as discussed below.

In addition, under their exchange agreement with Charter, Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. may exchange some or all of their membership units in Charter Holdco for Charter’s Class B common stock, be merged with Charter, or be acquired by Charter in a non-taxable reorganization. If such an exchange were to take place prior to the date that the Special Profit Allocation provisions had fully offset the Special Loss Allocations, Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. could elect to cause Charter Holdco to make the remaining Special Profit Allocations to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. immediately prior to the consummation of the exchange. In the event Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. choose not to make such election or to the

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 and 2003, we have recorded net deferred income tax liabilities of $230 million, $216 million and $417 million, respectively. Additionally, as of March 31, 2005, December 31, 2004 and 2003, we have deferred tax assets of $3.7 billion, $3.5 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively, which primarily relate to financial and tax losses allocated to Charter from Charter Holdco. We are required to record a valuation allowance when it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred income tax assets will not be realized. Given the uncertainty surrounding our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets, these items have been offset with a corresponding valuation allowance of $3.3 billion, $3.2 billion and $1.3 billion at March 31, 2005, December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 2000, 2002 and 2003. Our results (excluding Charter and our indirect corporate subsidiaries) for these years are subject to this examination. Management does not expect the results of this examination to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our liquidity, including our ability to comply with our debt covenants.

Litigation. Legal contingencies have a high degree of uncertainty. When a loss from a contingency becomes estimable and probable, a reserve is established. The reserve reflects management’s best estimate of the probable cost of ultimate resolution of the matter and is revised accordingly as facts and circumstances change and, ultimately when the matter is brought to closure. We have established reserves for certain matters including those described in “Business — Legal Proceedings.” If any of the litigation matters described in “Business — Legal Proceedings” is resolved unfavorably resulting in payment obligations in excess of management’s best estimate of the outcome, such resolution could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our liquidity.

Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2004

The following table sets forth the percentages of revenues that items in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations constituted for the periods presented (dollars in millions, except per share and share data):

Revenues. Revenues increased by $57 million, or 5%, from $1.2 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $1.3 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2005. This increase is principally the result of an increase of 325,400 and 37,200 high-speed data and digital video customers, respectively, as well as price increases for video and high-speed data services, and is offset partially by a decrease of 207,200 analog video customers. The cable system sales to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, which closed in March and April 2004 (referred to in this section as the “System Sales”) reduced the increase in revenues by $29 million. Our goal is to increase revenues by improving customer service which we believe will stabilize our analog video

Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased to $70.75 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 from $65.31 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 primarily as a result of incremental revenues from advanced services and price increases. Average monthly revenue per analog video customer represents total annual revenue, divided by twelve, divided by the average number of analog video customers during the respective period.

Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers. Video revenues decreased by $7 million, or 1%, from $849 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $842 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Approximately $21 million of the decrease was the result of the System Sales and approximately an additional $24 million related to a decline in analog video customers. The decreases were offset by increases of approximately $33 million resulting from price increases and incremental video revenues from existing customers and approximately $5 million resulting from an increase in digital video customers.

Revenues from high-speed data services provided to our non-commercial customers increased $47 million, or 28%, from $168 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $215 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Approximately $35 million of the increase related to the increase in the average number of customers receiving high-speed data services, whereas approximately $15 million related to the increase in average price of the service. The increase in high-speed data revenues was reduced by approximately $3 million as a result of the System Sales.

Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors. Advertising sales increased $5 million, or 8%, from $59 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $64 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005, primarily as a result of an increase in new advertising sales customers and in advertising rates. The increase was offset by a decrease of $1 million as a result of the System Sales. For each of the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we received $3 million in advertising sales revenues from vendors.

Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from cable video and high-speed data services to our commercial customers. Commercial revenues increased $9 million, or 16%, from $56 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $65 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005, primarily as a result of an increase in commercial high-speed data revenues. The increase was reduced by approximately $2 million as a result of the System Sales.

Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees, telephony revenue, equipment rental, customer installations, home shopping, dial-up Internet service, late payment fees, wire maintenance fees and other miscellaneous revenues. Other revenues increased $3 million, or 4%, from $82 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $85 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The increase was

Operating Expenses. Operating expenses increased $47 million, or 9%, from $512 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $559 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The increase in operating expenses was reduced by approximately $12 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming costs included in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations were $358 million and $334 million, representing 29% and 32% of total costs and expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):

Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers for analog, premium, digital channels, VOD and pay-per-view programming. The increase in programming costs of $24 million, or 7%, for the three months ended March 31, 2005 over the three months ended March 31, 2004, was a result of price increases, particularly in sports programming, an increased number of channels carried on our systems, and an increase in digital video customers, partially offset by a decrease in analog video customers. Additionally, the increase in programming costs was reduced by $9 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming costs were offset by the amortization of payments received from programmers in support of launches of new channels of $9 million and $14 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Our cable programming costs have increased in every year we have operated in excess of U.S. inflation and cost-of-living increases, and we expect them to continue to increase because of a variety of factors, including inflationary or negotiated annual increases, additional programming being provided to customers and increased costs to purchase programming. In 2005, we expect programming costs to increase at a higher rate than in 2004. These costs will be determined in part on the outcome of programming negotiations in 2005 and will likely be subject to offsetting events or otherwise affected by factors similar to the ones mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Our increasing programming costs will result in declining operating margins for our video services to the extent we are unable to pass on cost increases to our customers. We expect to partially offset any resulting margin compression from our traditional video services with revenue from advanced video services, increased high-speed data revenues, advertising revenues and commercial service revenues.

Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to traditional advertising services provided to advertising customers, including salaries, benefits and commissions. Advertising sales expenses increased $2 million, or 9%, primarily as a result of increased salary, benefit and commission costs. Service costs consist primarily of service personnel salaries and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities, Internet service provider fees, maintenance and pole rent expense. The increase in service costs of $21 million, or 14%, resulted primarily from increased labor costs to support our infrastructure, increased equipment maintenance and higher fuel prices. The increase in service costs was reduced by $3 million as a result of the System Sales.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses decreased by $2 million, or 1%, from $239 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $237 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Included in the decrease in selling, general and

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property taxes. The decrease in general and administrative expenses of $6 million, or 3%, resulted primarily from the System Sales of $4 million, decreases in bad debt expense of $5 million, property taxes of $6 million and salaries and benefits of $4 million offset by increases in costs associated with our commercial business of $3 million and professional fees of $6 million.

Marketing expenses increased $4 million, or 13%, as a result of an increased investment in targeted marketing and branding campaigns.

Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $11 million, or 3%, from $370 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $381 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The increase in depreciation related to an increase in capital expenditures, which was offset by lower depreciation as the result of the System Sales.

Asset Impairment Charges. Asset impairment charges for the three months ended March 31, 2005 represent the write-down of assets related to two pending cable asset sales to fair value less costs to sell. See Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.

(Gain) Loss on Sale of Assets, Net. The loss on sale of assets of $4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 represents the loss recognized on the disposition of plant and equipment. Gain on sale of assets of $106 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 primarily represents the pretax gain realized on the sale of cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC which closed in March 2004.

Option Compensation Expense, Net. Option compensation expense of $4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 primarily represents options expensed in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Option compensation expense of $14 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 includes the expense of approximately $6 million related to a stock option exchange program, under which our employees were offered the right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) issued under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some instances, cash. The exchange offer closed in February 2004. Additionally, during the three months ended March 31, 2004, we recognized approximately $3 million related to the options granted under the Charter Long-Term Incentive Program and approximately $5 million related to options granted and expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123.

Special Charges, Net. Special charges of $4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 represents $4 million of severance and related costs of our management realignment. Special charges of $10 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 represents approximately $9 million of litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of the South Carolina national class action suit subject to final documentation and court approval and approximately $1 million of severance and related costs of our workforce reduction.

Interest Expense, Net. Net interest expense increased by $27 million, or 7%, from $393 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $420 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The increase in net interest expense was a result of an increase in our average borrowing rate from 8.22% in the first quarter of 2004 to 8.86% in the first quarter of 2005 coupled with an increase of $848 million in average debt outstanding from $18.4 billion for the first quarter of 2004 compared to $19.2 billion for the first quarter of 2005 and was offset partially by $19 million in gains related to embedded derivatives in Charter’s 5.875% convertible senior notes issued in November 2004. See Note 9 to the condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.

Gain (Loss) on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, Net. Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities increased $34 million from a loss of $7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to a gain of $27 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The increase is primarily the result of an increase in gains on interest rate agreements that do not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, which increased from a loss of $6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to a gain of $26 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

Loss on Debt to Equity Conversions. Loss on debt to equity conversions of $8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 represents the loss recognized from a privately negotiated exchange of $10 million principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes held by a single unrelated party for shares of Charter Class A common stock, which resulted in the issuance of more shares in the exchange transaction than would have been issued pursuant to the original terms of the convertible senior notes.

Gain on Extinguishment of Debt. Gain on extinguishment of debt of $7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 represents approximately $11 million related to the issuance of Charter Operating notes in exchange for Charter Holdings notes and approximately $1 million related to the repurchase of $34 million principal amount of our 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006. These gains were offset by approximately $5 million of losses related to the redemption of our subsidiary’s, CC V Holdings, LLC, 11.875% notes due 2008. See Note 6 to the condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.

Other, Net. Net other income of $1 million and net other expense of $2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, primarily represents gains and losses on equity investments.

Minority Interest. Minority interest represents the 2% accretion of the preferred membership interests in our indirect subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC, and in the first quarter of 2004, the pro rata share of the profits and losses of CC VIII, LLC. Effective January 1, 2005, we ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII, LLC for financial reporting purposes until such time as the resolution of the dispute between Charter and Mr. Allen regarding the preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC is determinable or certain other events occur. See Note 7 to the condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. Reported losses allocated to minority interest on the statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Holdco. Because minority interest in Charter Holdco is substantially eliminated, Charter absorbs substantially all losses before income taxes that otherwise would be allocated to minority interest. Subject to any changes in Charter Holdco’s capital structure, future losses will continue to be substantially absorbed by Charter.

Income Tax Expense. Income tax expense of $15 million and $54 million was recognized for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The income tax expense is recognized through increases in deferred tax liabilities related to our investment in Charter Holdco, as well as through current federal and state income tax expense and increases in the deferred tax liabilities of certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries. Additionally, the sale of certain systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC on March 1, 2004 resulted in income tax expense of $14 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004.

Net Loss. Net loss increased by $59 million, or 20%, from $293 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $352 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as a result of the factors described above.

Preferred Stock Dividends. On August 31, 2001, Charter issued 505,664 shares (and on February 28, 2003 issued an additional 39,595 shares) of Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock in connection with the Cable USA acquisition, on which Charter pays or accrues a quarterly cumulative cash dividend at an annual rate of 5.75% if paid or 7.75% if accrued on a liquidation preference of $100 per share. Beginning January 1, 2005, Charter is accruing the dividend on its Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock.

Loss Per Common Share. The loss per common share increased by $0.16 from $1.00 per common share for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $1.16 per common share for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as a result of the factors described above.

The following table sets forth the percentages of revenues that items in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations constitute for the indicated periods (dollars in millions, except per share and share data):

Revenues. Revenues increased by $158 million, or 3%, from $4.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $5.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004. This increase is principally the result of an increase of 318,800 and 2,800 high-speed data customers and digital video customers, respectively, as well as price increases for video and high-speed data services, and is offset partially by a decrease of 439,800 analog video customers. Included in the reduction in analog video customers and reducing the increase in digital video and high-speed data customers are 230,800 analog video customers, 83,300 digital video customers and 37,800 high-speed data customers sold in the cable system sales to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, which closed in March and April 2004 (collectively, with the cable system sale to WaveDivision Holdings, LLC in October 2003, referred to in this section as the “System Sales”). The System Sales reduced the increase in revenues by $160 million.

Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased from $61.92 for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $68.02 for the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily as a result of price increases and incremental revenues from advanced services. Average monthly revenue per analog video customer represents total annual revenue, divided by twelve, divided by the average number of analog video customers during the respective period.

Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers. Video revenues decreased by $88 million, or 3%, from $3.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $3.4 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004. Approximately $116 million of the decrease was the result of the System Sales and approximately an additional $65 million related to a decline in analog video customers. These decreases were offset by increases of approximately $66 million resulting from price increases and incremental video revenues from existing customers and approximately $27 million resulting from an increase in digital video customers.

Revenues from high-speed data services provided to our non-commercial customers increased $185 million, or 33%, from $556 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $741 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. Approximately $163 million of the increase related to the increase in the average number of customers receiving high-speed data services, whereas approximately $35 million related to the increase in average price of the service. The increase in high-speed data revenues was reduced by approximately $12 million as a result of the System Sales.

Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors. Advertising sales increased $26 million, or 10%, from $263 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $289 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily as a result of an increase in national advertising campaigns and election related advertising. The increase was offset by a decrease of $7 million as a result of the System Sales. For the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, we received $16 million and $15 million, respectively, in advertising revenue from vendors.

Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from cable video and high-speed data services to our commercial customers. Commercial revenues increased $34 million, or 17%, from $204 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, to $238 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, primarily as a result of an increase in commercial high-speed data revenues. The increase was reduced by approximately $14 million as a result of the System Sales.

Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees, telephony revenue, equipment rental, customer installations, home shopping, dial-up Internet service, late payment fees, wire maintenance fees and other miscellaneous revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, franchise fees represented approximately 49% and 48%, respectively, of total other revenues. Other revenues increased $1 million from $335 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $336 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily the result of an increase in home shopping and infomercial revenue and was partially offset by approximately $11 million as a result of the System Sales.

Operating expenses. Operating expenses increased $128 million, or 7%, from $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $2.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase in operating expenses was reduced by approximately $59 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming costs included in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations were $1.3 billion and $1.2 billion, representing 63% and 64% of total operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):

Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers for analog, premium and digital channels and pay-per-view programming. The increase in programming costs of $70 million, or 6%, for the year ended December 31, 2004 over the year ended December 31, 2003 was a result of price increases, particularly in sports programming, an increased number of channels carried on our systems, and an increase in digital video customers, partially offset by a decrease in analog video customers. Additionally, the increase in programming costs was reduced by $42 million as a result of the System Sales. Programming costs were offset by the amortization of payments received from programmers in support of launches of new channels of $59 million and $62 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Programming costs for the year ended December 31, 2004 also include a $5 million reduction related to the settlement of a dispute with TechTV, Inc., a related party. See Note 22 to the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.

Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to traditional advertising services provided to advertising customers, including salaries, benefits and commissions. Advertising sales expenses increased $10 million, or 11%, primarily as a result of increased salary, benefit and commission costs. The increase in advertising sales expenses was reduced by $2 million as a result of the System Sales. Service costs consist primarily of service personnel salaries and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities, Internet service provider fees, maintenance and pole rental expense. The increase in service costs of $48 million, or 8%, resulted

Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by $31 million, or 3%, from $940 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $971 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase in selling, general and administrative expenses was reduced by $22 million as a result of the System Sales. Key components of expense as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property taxes. The increase in general and administrative expenses of $16 million, or 2%, resulted primarily from increases in costs associated with our commercial business of $21 million, third party call center costs resulting from increased emphasis on customer service of $10 million and bad debt expense of $10 million offset by decreases in costs associated with salaries and benefits of $21 million and rent expense of $3 million.

Marketing expenses increased $15 million, or 14%, as a result of an increased investment in marketing and branding campaigns.

Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $42 million, or 3%, to $1.5 billion in 2004. The increase in depreciation related to an increase in capital expenditures, which was partially offset by lower depreciation as the result of the System Sales.

Impairment of franchises. We performed an impairment assessment during the third quarter of 2004. The use of lower projected growth rates and the resulting revised estimates of future cash flows in our valuation, primarily as a result of increased competition, led to the recognition of a $2.4 billion impairment charge for the year ended December 31, 2004.

(Gain) loss on sale of assets, net. Gain on sale of assets of $86 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily represents the pretax gain of $104 million realized on the sale of systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC which closed in March and April 2004 offset by losses recognized on the disposition of plant and equipment. Loss on sale of assets of $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the loss recognized on the disposition of plant and equipment offset by a gain of $21 million recognized on the sale of cable systems in Port Orchard, Washington which closed on October 1, 2003.

Option compensation expense, net. Option compensation expense of $31 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily represents $22 million related to options granted and expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Additionally, during the year ended December 31, 2004, we expensed approximately $8 million related to a stock option exchange program, under which our employees were offered the right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) issued under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some instances, cash. The exchange offer closed in February 2004. Option compensation expense of $4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 primarily represents options expensed in accordance with SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. See Note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus for more information regarding our option compensation plans.

Special charges, net. Special charges of $104 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 represents approximately $85 million of aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and warrants to purchase Charter Class A common stock contemplated to be issued as part of a settlement of the consolidated federal class actions, state derivative actions and federal derivative action lawsuits, approximately $10 million of litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of a South Carolina national class action suit, all of which settlements are subject to final documentation and court approval and approximately $12 million of severance and related costs of our workforce reduction and realignment. Special charges for the year ended December 31, 2004 were offset by $3 million received from a third party in settlement of a dispute. Special charges of $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents approximately $26 million of severance and related costs of our workforce reduction partially offset by a $5 million credit from a settlement from the Internet service provider Excite@Home related to the conversion of about 145,000 high-speed data customers to our Charter Pipeline service in 2001.

Unfavorable contracts and other settlements. Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 relates to changes in estimated legal reserves established in connection with prior business combinations, which based on an evaluation of current facts and circumstances, are no longer required.

Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $72 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the settlement of estimated liabilities recorded in connection with prior business combinations. The majority of this benefit (approximately $52 million) is due to the renegotiation in 2003 of a major programming contract, for which a liability had been recorded for the above market portion of that agreement in connection with a 1999 and a 2000 acquisition. The remaining benefit relates to the reversal of previously recorded liabilities, which are no longer required.

Interest expense, net. Net interest expense increased by $113 million, or 7%, from $1.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $1.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase in net interest expense was a result of an increase in our average borrowing rate from 7.99% in the year ended December 31, 2003 to 8.66% in the year ended December 31, 2004 partially offset by a decrease of $306 million in average debt outstanding from $18.9 billion in 2003 to $18.6 billion in 2004.

Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net. Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities increased $4 million from a gain of $65 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to a gain of $69 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase is primarily the result of an increase in gains on interest rate agreements that do not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, which increased from a gain of $57 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to a gain of $65 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This was coupled with a decrease in gains on interest rate agreements, as a result of hedge ineffectiveness on designated hedges, which decreased from $8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Loss on debt to equity conversions. Loss on debt to equity conversions of $23 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 represents the loss recognized from privately negotiated exchanges of a total of $30 million principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes held by two unrelated parties for shares of Charter Class A common stock. The exchange resulted in the issuance of more shares in the exchange transaction than would have been issuable under the original terms of the convertible senior notes.

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt. Loss on extinguishment of debt of $31 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 represents the write-off of deferred financing fees and third party costs related to the Charter Communications Operating refinancing in April 2004 and the redemption of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 in December 2004. Gain on extinguishment of debt of $267 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the gain realized on the purchase of an aggregate $609 million principal amount of our outstanding convertible senior notes and $1.3 billion principal amount of Charter Holdings’ senior notes and senior discount notes in consideration for an aggregate of $1.6 billion principal amount of 10.25% notes due

Other, net. Net other expense decreased by $19 million from $16 million in 2003 to income of $3 million in 2004. Other expense in 2003 included $11 million associated with amending a revolving credit facility of our subsidiaries and costs associated with terminated debt transactions that did not recur in 2004. In addition, gains on equity investments increased $7 million in 2004 over 2003.

Minority interest. Minority interest represents the 2% accretion of the preferred membership interests in our indirect subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC, and since June 6, 2003, the pro rata share of the profits and losses of CC VIII, LLC. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.” Reported losses allocated to minority interest on the statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Holdco. Because minority interest in Charter Holdco was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in the first quarter of 2004, Charter began to absorb substantially all future losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest. For the year ended December 31, 2003, 53.5% of our losses were allocated to minority interest. As a result of negative equity at Charter Holdco during the year ended December 31, 2004, no additional losses were allocated to minority interest, resulting in an additional $2.4 billion of net losses. Under our existing capital structure, future losses will be substantially absorbed by Charter.

Income tax benefit. Income tax benefit of $103 million and $110 million was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The income tax benefits were realized as a result of decreases in certain deferred tax liabilities related to our investment in Charter Holdco as well as decreases in the deferred tax liabilities of certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries.

The income tax benefit recognized in the year ended December 31, 2004 was directly related to the impairment of franchises as discussed above. The deferred tax liabilities decreased as a result of the write-down of franchise assets for financial statement purposes, but not for tax purposes. We do not expect to recognize a similar benefit associated with the impairment of franchises in future periods. However, the actual tax provision calculations in future periods will be the result of current and future temporary differences, as well as future operating results.

The income tax benefit recognized in the year ended December 31, 2003 was directly related to the tax losses allocated to Charter from Charter Holdco. In the second quarter of 2003, Charter started receiving tax loss allocations from Charter Holdco. Previously, the tax losses had been allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. in accordance with the Special Loss Allocations provided under the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement. We do not expect to recognize a similar benefit related to our investment in Charter Holdco after 2003 related to tax loss allocations received from Charter Holdco, due to limitations associated with our ability to offset future tax benefits against the remaining deferred tax liabilities. However, the actual tax provision calculations in future periods will be the result of current and future temporary differences, as well as future operating results.

Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax. Cumulative effect of accounting change of $765 million (net of minority interest effects of $19 million and tax effects of $91 million) in 2004 represents the impairment charge recorded as a result of our adoption of EITF Topic D-108.

Net loss. Net loss increased by $4.1 billion from $238 million in 2003 to $4.3 billion in 2004 as a result of the factors described above. The impact to net loss in 2004 of the impairment of franchises, cumulative effect of accounting change and the reduction in losses allocated to minority interest was to increase net loss by approximately $3.7 billion. The impact to net loss in 2003 of the gain on the sale of systems, unfavorable contracts and settlements and gain on debt exchange, net of income tax impact, was to decrease net loss by $168 million.

Preferred stock dividends. On August 31, 2001, in connection with the Cable USA acquisition, Charter issued 505,664 shares (and on February 28, 2003 issued an additional 39,595 shares) of Series A

Loss per common share. The loss per common share increased by $13.65, from $0.82 per common share for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $14.47 per common share for the year ended December 31, 2004 as a result of the factors described above.

Revenues. Revenues increased by $253 million, or 6%, from $4.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $4.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase is principally the result of an increase of 427,500 high-speed data customers, as well as price increases for video and high-speed data services, and is offset partially by a decrease of 147,500 and 10,900 in analog and digital video customers, respectively. Included within the decrease of analog and digital video customers and reducing the increase of high-speed data customers are 25,500 analog video customers, 12,500 digital video customers and 12,200 high-speed data customers sold in the Port Orchard, Washington sale on October 1, 2003.

Average monthly revenue per analog video customer increased from $56.91 for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $61.92 for the year ended December 31, 2003 primarily as a result of price increases and incremental revenues from advanced services. Average monthly revenue per analog video customer represents total annual revenue, divided by twelve, divided by the average number of analog video customers during the respective period.

Video revenues consist primarily of revenues from analog and digital video services provided to our non-commercial customers. Video revenues increased by $41 million, or 1%, for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the year ended December 31, 2002. Video revenues increased approximately $65 million due to price increases and incremental video revenues from existing customers and $82 million as a result of increases in the average number of digital video customers, which were partially offset by a decrease of approximately $106 million as a result of a decline in analog video customers.

Revenues from high-speed data services provided to our non-commercial customers increased $219 million, or 65%, from $337 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $556 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Approximately $206 million of the increase related to the increase in the average number of customers, whereas approximately $13 million related to the increase in the average price of the service. The increase in customers was primarily due to the addition of high-speed data customers in our existing service areas. We were also able to offer this service to more of our customers, as the estimated percentage of homes passed that could receive high-speed data service increased from 82% as of December 31, 2002 to 87% as of December 31, 2003 as a result of our system upgrades.

Advertising sales revenues consist primarily of revenues from commercial advertising customers, programmers and other vendors. Advertising sales decreased $39 million, or 13%, from $302 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, to $263 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, primarily as a

Commercial revenues consist primarily of revenues from video and high-speed data services to our commercial customers. Commercial revenues increased $43 million, or 27%, from $161 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, to $204 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, primarily due to an increase in commercial high-speed data revenues.

Other revenues consist of revenues from franchise fees, equipment rental, customer installations, home shopping, dial-up Internet service, late payment fees, wire maintenance fees and other miscellaneous revenues. For the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, franchise fees represented approximately 48% and 46%, respectively, of total other revenues. Other revenues decreased $11 million, or 3%, from $346 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $335 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The decrease was due primarily to a decrease in franchise fees after an FCC ruling in March 2002, no longer requiring the collection of franchise fees for high-speed data services. Franchise fee revenues are collected from customers and remitted to franchise authorities.

The decrease in accounts receivable of 27% compared to the increase in revenues of 6% is primarily due to the timing of collection of receivables from programmers for fees associated with the launching of their networks coupled with our tightened credit and collections policy. These fees from programmers are not recorded as revenue but, rather, are recorded as reductions of programming expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract. Programmer receivables decreased $40 million, or 57%, from $70 million as of December 31, 2002 to $30 million as of December 31, 2003.

Operating expenses. Operating expenses increased $145 million, or 8%, from $1.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003. Programming costs included in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations were $1.2 billion and $1.2 billion, representing 64% and 65% of total operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Key expense components as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):

Programming costs consist primarily of costs paid to programmers for analog, premium and digital channels and pay-per-view programs. The increase in programming costs of $83 million, or 7%, was due to price increases, particularly in sports programming, and due to an increased number of channels carried on our systems, partially offset by decreases in analog and digital video customers. Programming costs were offset by the amortization of payments received from programmers in support of launches of new channels against programming costs of $62 million and $57 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Advertising sales expenses consist of costs related to traditional advertising services provided to advertising customers, including salaries and benefits and commissions. Advertising sales expenses increased $1 million, or 1%, primarily due to increased sales commissions, taxes and benefits. Service costs consist primarily of service personnel salaries and benefits, franchise fees, system utilities, Internet service provider fees, maintenance and pole rental expense. The increase in service costs of $61 million, or 11%, resulted primarily from additional activity associated with ongoing infrastructure maintenance and customer service, including activities associated with our promotional programs.

Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses decreased by $23 million, or 2%, from $963 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $940 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Key components of expense as a percentage of revenues were as follows (dollars in millions):

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits, rent expense, billing costs, call center costs, internal network costs, bad debt expense and property taxes. The increase in general and administrative expenses of $23 million, or 3%, resulted primarily from increases in salaries and benefits of $4 million, call center costs of $25 million and internal network costs of $16 million. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in bad debt and collection expense of $27 million as a result of our strengthened credit policies.

Marketing expenses decreased $46 million, or 30%, due to reduced promotional activity related to our service offerings including reductions in advertising, telemarketing and direct sales activities.

Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $17 million, or 1%, from $1.4 billion in 2002 to $1.5 billion in 2003 due primarily to an increase in depreciation expense related to additional capital expenditures in 2003 and 2002.

Impairment of franchises. We performed our annual impairment assessments as of October 1, 2002 and 2003. Revised estimates of future cash flows and the use of a lower projected long-term growth rate in our valuation led to a $4.6 billion impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2002. Our 2003 assessment performed on October 1, 2003 did not result in an impairment.

Loss on sale of assets, net. Loss on sale of assets for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents $26 million of losses related to the disposition of fixed assets offset by the $21 million gain recognized on the sale of cable systems in Port Orchard, Washington on October 1, 2003. Loss on sale of assets for the year ended December 31, 2002 represents losses related to the disposition of fixed assets.

Option compensation expense, net. Option compensation expense decreased by $1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the year ended December 31, 2002. Option compensation expense includes expense related to exercise prices on certain options that were issued prior to our initial public offering in 1999 that were less than the estimated fair values of our common stock at the time of grant. Compensation expense was recognized over the vesting period of such options and was recorded until the last vesting period lapsed in April 2004. On January 1, 2003, we adopted SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, using the prospective method under which we will recognize compensation expense of a stock-based award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair value of the award on the grant date.

Special charges, net. Special charges of $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represent approximately $26 million of severance and related costs of our ongoing initiative to reduce our workforce partially offset by a $5 million credit from a settlement from the Internet service provider Excite@Home related to the conversion of about 145,000 high-speed data customers to our Charter Pipeline service in 2001. In the fourth quarter of 2002, we recorded a special charge of $35 million, of which $31 million was associated with our workforce reduction program. The remaining $4 million is related to legal and other costs associated with our shareholder lawsuits and governmental investigations.

Unfavorable contracts and other settlements. Unfavorable contracts and other settlements of $72 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the settlement of estimated liabilities recorded in connection with prior business combinations. The majority of this benefit (approximately $52 million) is due to the renegotiation in 2003 of a major programming contract, for which a liability had been recorded for the above market portion of that agreement in connection with a 1999 and a 2000 acquisition. The remaining benefit relates to the reversal of previously recorded liabilities, which, based on an evaluation of current facts and circumstances, are no longer required.

Interest expense, net. Net interest expense increased by $54 million, or 4%, from $1.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $1.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase in net interest expense was a result of increased average debt outstanding in 2003 of $18.9 billion compared to $17.8 billion in 2002, partially offset by a decrease in our average borrowing rate from 8.02% in 2002 to 7.99% in 2003. The increased debt was primarily used for capital expenditures.

Gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities, net. Net gain on derivative instruments and hedging activities increased $180 million from a loss of $115 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to a gain of $65 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase is primarily due to an increase in gains on interest rate agreements, which do not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, which increased from a loss of $101 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 to a gain of $57 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt. Net gain on extinguishment of debt of $267 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 represents the gain realized on the purchase, in a non-monetary transaction, of a total of $609 million principal amount of our outstanding convertible senior notes and $1.3 billion principal amount of Charter Holdings’ senior notes and senior discount notes in consideration for a total of $1.6 billion principal amount of 10.25% notes due 2010 issued by our indirect subsidiary, CCH II. The gain is net of the write-off of deferred financing costs associated with the retired debt of $27 million.

Other expense, net. Other expense increased by $12 million from $4 million in 2002 to $16 million in 2003. This increase is primarily due to increases in costs associated with amending a revolving credit facility of our subsidiaries and costs associated with terminated debt transactions.

Minority interest. Minority interest represents the allocation of losses to the minority interest based on ownership of Charter Holdco, the 10% dividend on preferred membership units in our indirect subsidiary, Charter Helicon, LLC and the 2% accretion of the preferred membership interests in our indirect subsidiary, CC VIII, LLC, and since June 6, 2003, the pro rata share of the profits of CC VIII, LLC. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”

Income tax benefit. Income tax benefit of $110 million and $460 million was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The income tax benefits were realized as a result of decreases in certain deferred tax liabilities related to our investment in Charter Holdco as well as decreases in the deferred tax liabilities of certain of our indirect corporate subsidiaries.

The income tax benefit recognized in the year ended December 31, 2003 was directly related to the tax losses allocated to Charter from Charter Holdco. In the second quarter of 2003, Charter started receiving tax loss allocations from Charter Holdco. Previously, the tax losses had been allocated to Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. in accordance with the Special Loss Allocations provided under the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement. We do not expect to recognize a similar benefit after 2003 related to tax loss allocations received from Charter Holdco, due to limitations associated with our ability to offset future tax benefits against the remaining deferred tax liabilities. However, the actual tax provision calculations in future periods will be the result of current and future temporary differences, as well as future operating results.

The income tax benefit recognized in the year ended December 31, 2002 was directly related to the impairment of franchises associated with the adoption of SFAS No. 142.

Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax. Cumulative effect of accounting change in 2002 represents the impairment charge recorded as a result of adopting SFAS No. 142.

Net loss. Net loss decreased by $2.3 billion, or 91%, from $2.5 billion in 2002 to $238 million in 2003 as a result of the factors described above. The impact of the gain on sale of system, unfavorable contracts and settlements and gain on debt exchange, net of minority interest and income tax impacts, was to decrease net loss by $168 million in 2003. The impact of the impairment of franchises and the cumulative effect of accounting change, net of minority interest and income tax impacts, was to increase net loss by $1.6 billion in 2002.

Preferred stock dividends. On August 31, 2001, in connection with the Cable USA acquisition, Charter issued 505,664 shares (and on February 28, 2003 issued an additional 39,595 shares) of Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock on which it pays or accrues a quarterly cumulative cash dividend at an annual rate of 5.75% if paid or 7.75% if accrued on a liquidation preference of $100 per share.

Loss per common share. Loss per common share decreased by $7.73, from $8.55 per common share for the year ended December 31, 2002 to $0.82 per common share for the year ended December 31, 2003 as a result of the factors described above.

This section contains a discussion of our liquidity and capital resources, including a discussion of our cash position, sources and uses of cash, access to credit facilities and other financing sources, historical financing activities, cash needs, capital expenditures and outstanding debt.

We have a significant level of debt. For the remainder of 2005, $23 million of our debt matures, and in 2006, an additional $152 million matures. In 2007 and beyond, significant additional amounts will become due under our remaining long-term debt obligations.

Our business requires significant cash to fund debt service costs, capital expenditures and ongoing operations. We have historically funded our debt service costs, operating activities and capital requirements through cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries, sales of assets, issuances of debt and equity securities and cash on hand. However, the mix of funding sources changes from period to period. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, we generated $153 million of net cash flows from operating activities after paying cash interest of $249 million. In addition, we used approximately $211 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment. Finally, we had net cash flows used in financing activities of $578 million, which included, among other things, approximately $628 million in repayment of outstanding borrowings under the Charter Operating revolving credit facility through a series of transactions in February 2005. We expect that our mix of sources of funds will continue to change in the future based on overall needs relative to our cash flow and on the availability of funds under the credit facilities of our subsidiaries, our access to the debt and equity markets, the timing of possible asset sales and our ability to generate cash flows from operating activities. We continue to explore asset dispositions as one of several possible actions that we could take in the future to improve our liquidity, but we do not presently consider future asset sales as a significant source of liquidity.

We expect that cash on hand, cash flows from operating activities and the amounts available under our credit facilities will be adequate to meet our cash needs in 2005. Cash flows from operating activities and amounts available under our credit facilities may not be sufficient to permit us to fund our operations and satisfy our principal repayment obligations that come due in 2006 and, we believe, such amounts will not be sufficient to fund our operations and satisfy such repayment obligations thereafter.

It is likely that we will require additional funding to repay debt maturing after 2006. We are working with our financial advisors to address such funding requirements. However, there can be no assurance that

Our ability to operate depends upon, among other things, our continued access to capital, including credit under the Charter Operating credit facilities. These credit facilities, along with our and our subsidiaries’ indentures, contain certain restrictive covenants, some of which require us to maintain specified financial ratios and meet financial tests and to provide audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from our independent auditors. We are in compliance with the covenants under our indentures and credit facilities and the indentures of our subsidiaries, and we expect to remain in compliance with those covenants for the next twelve months. As of March 31, 2005, we had borrowing availability under our credit facilities of $1.2 billion, none of which was restricted due to covenants. Continued access to our credit facilities is subject to our remaining in compliance with the covenants of these credit facilities, including covenants tied to our operating performance. If our operating performance results in non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain other events of non-compliance under these credit facilities or indentures governing our debt occurs, funding under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on some or potentially all of our debt obligations could occur. An event of default under the covenants governing any of our debt instruments could result in the acceleration of our payment obligations under that debt and, under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under our other debt obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.

The Charter Operating credit facilities required us to redeem the CC V Holdings, LLC notes as a result of the Charter Holdings leverage ratio becoming less than 8.75 to 1.0. In satisfaction of this requirement, in March 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. The total cost of the redemption including accrued and unpaid interest was approximately $122 million and was funded with borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities.

Our ability to make interest payments on our convertible senior notes, and, in 2006 and 2009, to repay the outstanding principal of our convertible senior notes of $122 million and $863 million, respectively, as of March 31, 2005, will depend on our ability to raise additional capital and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco or its subsidiaries, including CCH II, CCO Holdings and Charter Operating. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter Holdings distributed $60 million to Charter Holdco. As of March 31, 2005, Charter Holdco was owed $161 million in intercompany loans from its subsidiaries, which amount was available to pay interest and principal on Charter’s convertible senior notes. In addition, Charter has $145 million of governmental securities pledged as security for the first six interest payments on Charter’s 5.875% convertible senior notes.

Distributions by Charter’s subsidiaries to a parent company (including Charter and Charter Holdco) for payment of principal on Charter’s convertible senior notes, however, are restricted by the indentures governing the CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, and Charter Operating notes, unless under their respective indentures there is no default and a specified leverage ratio test is met at the time of such event.

The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under the Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests are met. For the quarter ended March 31, 2005, there was no default under Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests were met. However, Charter Holdings did not meet the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0 based on March 31, 2005 financial results. As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or Charter Holdco are currently restricted and will continue to be restricted until that test is met. During this restriction period, the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings and its

We were required to register for resale by April 21, 2005 our 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 issued in November 2004. Since these convertible notes were not registered by that date, we have incurred liquidated damages since that date at a rate of 0.25% per annum of the accreted principal amount of the notes. The rate will increase to 0.50% from and after July 20, 2005 if the notes have not been registered by that date. The liquidated damages will be payable by Charter in cash so long as the convertible notes remained unregistered, but not to exceed a maximum period of two years from the original issuance date. In addition, we were required to have effective the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part by April 1, 2005. Such registration was not declared effective by that date, and we incurred liquidated damages from April 2, 2005 until the effective date of the registration statement containing this prospectus. These liquidated damages were payable in cash or additional principal on a monthly basis. These liquidated damages accrued at a rate of 0.25% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes for the first 60 days after April 1, 2005 and 0.50% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes thereafter (or 0.375% and 0.75% per month, respectively, if, in lieu of paying such liquidated damages in cash, we elect to pay such damages by adding to the outstanding principal amount of the notes). In April, May and June 2005, the liquidated damage payments were made in cash.

Our significant amount of debt could negatively affect our ability to access additional capital in the future. No assurances can be given that we will not experience liquidity problems if we do not obtain sufficient additional financing on a timely basis as our debt becomes due or because of adverse market conditions, increased competition or other unfavorable events. If, at any time, additional capital or borrowing capacity is required beyond amounts internally generated or available under our credit facilities or through additional debt or equity financings, we would consider:


	•	issuing equity that would significantly dilute existing shareholders;


	•	issuing convertible debt or some other securities that may have structural or other priorities over our existing notes and may also significantly dilute Charter’s existing shareholders;


	•	further reducing our expenses and capital expenditures, which may impair our ability to increase revenue;

	•	selling assets; or

	•	requesting waivers or amendments with respect to our credit facilities, the availability and terms of which would be subject to market conditions.

If the above strategies are not successful, we could be forced to restructure our obligations or seek protection under the bankruptcy laws. In addition, if we need to raise additional capital through the issuance of equity or find it necessary to engage in a recapitalization or other similar transaction, our shareholders could suffer significant dilution and our noteholders might not receive principal and interest payments to which they are contractually entitled.

Issuance of Charter Operating Notes in Exchange for Charter Holdings Notes; Repurchase of Convertible Notes

In March and June 2005, our subsidiary, Charter Operating, consummated exchange transactions with a small number of institutional holders of Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007 pursuant to which Charter Operating issued, in private placement transactions, approximately $271 million and $62 million, respectively, principal amount of new notes with terms identical to Charter Operating’s 8.375% senior second lien notes due 2014 in exchange for approximately $284 million and $62 million, respectively, of the Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007. In addition, in March 2005, we repurchased from a single holder $34 million principal amount of our 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006 for a price equal to 98% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Since March 31,

In March 2004, we closed the sale of certain cable systems in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC. We closed the sale of an additional cable system in New York to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC in April 2004. The total net proceeds from the sale of all of these systems were approximately $735 million. The proceeds were used to repay a portion of our revolving credit facilities.

The following table summarizes our payment obligations as of December 31, 2004 under our long-term debt and certain other contractual obligations and commitments (dollars in millions).


(1)	The table presents maturities of long-term debt outstanding as of December 31, 2004 and does not reflect the effects of the March 2005 redemption of the CC V Holdings, LLC notes. Refer to “Description of Certain Indebtedness” and Notes 9 and 23 to our December 31, 2004 consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus for a description of our long-term debt and other contractual obligations and commitments.

(2)	Interest payments on variable debt are estimated using amounts outstanding at December 31, 2004 and the average implied forward London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) rates applicable for the quarter during the interest rate reset based on the yield curve in effect at December 31, 2004. Actual interest payments will differ based on actual LIBOR rates and actual amounts outstanding for applicable periods.

(3)	Represents amounts we will be required to pay under our interest rate hedge agreements estimated using the average implied forward LIBOR rates applicable for the quarter during the interest rate reset based on the yield curve in effect at December 31, 2004.


(4)	We pay programming fees under multi-year contracts ranging generally from three to six years typically based on a flat fee per customer, which may be fixed for the term or may in some cases, escalate over the term. Programming costs included in the accompanying statements of operations were $1.3 billion, $1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Certain of our programming agreements are based on a flat fee per month or have guaranteed minimum payments. The table sets forth the aggregate guaranteed minimum commitments under our programming contracts.


(5)	“Other” represents other guaranteed minimum commitments, which consist primarily of commitments to our billing services vendors.

The following items are not included in the contractual obligations table because the obligations are not fixed and/ or determinable due to various factors discussed below. However, we incur these costs as part of our operations:


	•	We also rent utility poles used in our operations. Generally, pole rentals are cancelable on short notice, but we anticipate that such rentals will recur. Rent expense incurred for pole rental attachments for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, was $43 million, $40 million and $41 million, respectively.


	•	We pay franchise fees under multi-year franchise agreements based on a percentage of revenues earned from video service per year. We also pay other franchise related costs, such as public education grants under multi-year agreements. Franchise fees and other franchise-related costs included in the accompanying statements of operations were $164 million, $162 million and $160 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.


	•	We also have $166 million in letters of credit, primarily to our various worker’s compensation, property casualty and general liability carriers as collateral for reimbursement of claims. These letters of credit reduce the amount we may borrow under our credit facilities.

We held $32 million in cash and cash equivalents as of March 31, 2005 compared to $650 million as of December 31, 2004. The decrease in cash and cash equivalents reflects the repayment of approximately $628 million of outstanding borrowings under the Charter Operating revolving credit facility through a series of transactions in February 2005.

Operating Activities. Net cash provided by operating activities increased $38 million, or 33%, from $115 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $153 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, net cash provided by operating activities increased primarily as a result of changes in operating assets and liabilities that provided $92 million more cash during the three months ended March 31, 2005 than the corresponding period in 2004 primarily driven by collections of accounts receivable offset by an increase in cash interest expense of $71 million over the corresponding prior period.

Net cash provided by operating activities decreased $293 million, or 38%, from $765 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $472 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. For the year ended December 31, 2004, net cash provided by operating activities decreased primarily as a result of changes in operating assets and liabilities that provided $83 million less cash during the year ended December 31, 2004 than the corresponding period in 2003 and an increase in cash interest expense of $203 million over the corresponding prior period. The change in operating assets and liabilities is primarily the result of the benefit in the year ended December 31, 2003 from collection of receivables from programmers related to network launches, while accounts receivable remained essentially flat in the year ended December 31, 2004.

Net cash provided by operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 was $765 million and $748 million, respectively. Operating activities provided $17 million more cash in 2003 than in 2002 primarily due to an increase in revenue over cash costs year over year partially offset by changes in operating assets and liabilities that provided $82 million less cash in 2003 than in 2002.

Investing Activities. Net cash used by investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was $193 million and net cash provided by investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2004 was $526 million. Investing activities used $719 million more cash during the three months ended March 31, 2005 than the corresponding period in 2004 primarily as a result of proceeds from the sale of certain cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC in 2004 offset by increased cash used for capital expenditures.

Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $243 million and $817 million, respectively. Investing activities used $574 million less cash during the year ended December 31, 2004 than the corresponding period in 2003 primarily as a result of cash provided by proceeds from the sale of certain cable systems to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC offset by increased cash used for capital expenditures.

Net cash used in investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 was $817 million and $2.4 billion, respectively. Investing activities used $1.5 billion less cash in 2003 than in 2002 primarily as a result of reductions in capital expenditures and acquisitions. Purchases of property, plant and equipment used $1.3 billion less cash in 2003 than in 2002 as a result of reduced rebuild and upgrade activities and our efforts to reduce capital expenditures. Payments for acquisitions used $139 million less cash in 2003 than in 2002.

Financing Activities. Net cash used in financing activities decreased $37 million from $615 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 to $578 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. The decrease in cash used during the three months ended March 31, 2005 as compared to the corresponding period in 2004, was primarily the result of an increase in borrowings of long-term debt.

Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $294 million and the net cash used in financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $142 million. The increase in cash provided during the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the corresponding period in 2003, was primarily the result of an increase in borrowings of long-term debt and proceeds from issuance of debt reduced by repayments of long-term debt.

Net cash used in financing activities was $142 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, whereas net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was $1.9 billion. Financing activities provided $2.1 billion less cash in 2003 than in 2002. The decrease in cash provided in 2003 compared to 2002 was primarily due to a decrease in borrowings of long-term debt.

We have significant ongoing capital expenditure requirements. However, we experienced a significant decline in such requirements starting in 2003. This decline was primarily the result of a substantial reduction in rebuild costs as our network had been largely upgraded and rebuilt in prior years. Capital expenditures, excluding acquisitions of cable systems, were $211 million, $190 million, $924 million, $854 million and $2.2 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The majority of the capital expenditures in 2004 and 2003 related to our customer premise equipment costs. The majority of the capital expenditures in 2002 related to our rebuild and upgrade program and purchases of customer premise equipment. Capital expenditures for the three months ended March 31, 2005 increased as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2004 as a result of increased spending on support capital related to our investment in service improvements and scalable infrastructure related to telephony services and digital simulcast offset by a decrease in the purchase of customer premise equipment. See the table below for more details.

Upgrading our cable systems has enabled us to offer digital television, high-speed data services, VOD, interactive services, additional channels and tiers, expanded pay-per-view options and VOIP telephony services to a larger customer base. Our capital expenditures are funded primarily from cash flows from operating activities, the issuance of debt and borrowings under credit facilities. In addition, during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, our liabilities related to capital expenditures increased $14 million and decreased $6 million, $43 million, $33 million and $55 million, respectively.

During 2005, we expect capital expenditures to increase to approximately $1 billion. The increase in capital expenditures for 2005 compared to 2004 is the result of expected increases in telephony services and deployment of advanced digital boxes. We expect that the nature of these expenditures will continue to be composed primarily of purchases of customer premise equipment and for scalable infrastructure

We have adopted capital expenditure disclosure guidance, which was developed by eleven publicly traded cable system operators, including Charter, with the support of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (“NCTA”). The disclosure is intended to provide more consistency in the reporting of operating statistics in capital expenditures and customers among peer companies in the cable industry. These disclosure guidelines are not required disclosure under GAAP, nor do they impact our accounting for capital expenditures under GAAP.

The following table presents our major capital expenditures categories in accordance with NCTA disclosure guidelines for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 (dollars in millions):

We are exposed to various market risks, including fluctuations in interest rates. We use interest rate risk management derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as interest rate agreements) as required under the terms of the credit facilities of our subsidiaries. Our policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, we agree to exchange, at specified intervals through 2007, the difference between fixed and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar agreements are used to limit our exposure to, and to derive benefits from, interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt to within a certain range of rates. Interest rate risk management agreements are not held or issued for speculative or trading purposes.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our long-term debt totaled approximately $18.9 billion and $19.5 billion, respectively. This debt was comprised of approximately $5.1 billion and $5.5 billion of credit facility debt, $12.9 billion and $13.0 billion accreted value of high-yield notes and $957 million and $990 million accreted value of convertible senior notes, respectively.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the weighted average interest rate on the credit facility debt was approximately 7.0% and 6.8%, the weighted average interest rate on the high-yield notes was approximately 9.9% and 9.9%, and the weighted average interest rate on the convertible senior notes was approximately 5.7% and 5.7%, respectively, resulting in a blended weighted average interest rate of 8.9% and 8.8%, respectively. The interest rate on approximately 82% and 83% of the total principal amount of our debt was effectively fixed, including the effects of our interest rate hedge agreements as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our high-yield notes was $11.2 billion and $12.2 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our convertible senior notes was $859 million and $1.1 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our credit facilities was $5.1 billion and $5.5 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of high-yield and convertible notes is based on quoted market prices, and the fair value of the credit facilities is based on dealer quotations.

We do not hold or issue derivative instruments for trading purposes. We do, however, have certain interest rate derivative instruments that have been designated as cash flow hedging instruments. Such instruments effectively convert variable interest payments on certain debt instruments into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges, SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to offset related results on hedged items in the consolidated statement of operations. We have formally documented, designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that receive hedge accounting. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $1 million and losses of $1 million, gains of $4 million and $8 million and losses of $14 million, respectively, which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations. Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated other comprehensive loss. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, a gain of $9 million, $2 million, $42 million and $48 million and losses of $65 million, respectively, related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges, was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss and minority interest. The amounts are subsequently reclassified into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affects earnings (losses).

Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management believes such instruments are closely correlated with the respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities in our statements of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $26 million and losses of $6 million, gains of $65 million and $57 million and losses of $101 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges.

The table set forth below summarizes the fair values and contract terms of financial instruments subject to interest rate risk maintained by us as of December 31, 2004 (dollars in millions):

The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of our exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the contracts. The estimated fair value approximates the costs (proceeds) to settle the outstanding contracts. Interest rates on variable debt are estimated using the average implied forward London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) rates for the year of maturity based on the yield curve in effect at December 31, 2004.

At March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, we had outstanding $2.2 billion and $2.7 billion and $20 million and $20 million, respectively, in notional amounts of interest rate swaps and collars, respectively. The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the contracts.

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued the revised SFAS No. 123, Share-Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for share-based payment transactions in which a company receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of that company or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the company’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of such equity instruments. This statement will be effective for us beginning January 1, 2006. Because we adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 on January 1, 2003, we do not expect this revised standard to have a material impact on our financial statements.

We do not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would have a material effect on our accompanying financial statements.

We are a broadband communications company operating in the United States, with approximately 6.23 million customers at March 31, 2005. Through our broadband network of coaxial and fiber optic cable, we offer our customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital, which we refer to as “video” service), high-speed cable Internet access (which we refer to as “high-speed data service”), advanced broadband cable services (such as video on demand (“VOD”), high definition television service and interactive television) and, in some of our markets, we offer telephone service (which we refer to as “telephony”). See “Business — Products and Services” for further description of these terms, including “customers.”

At March 31, 2005, we served approximately 5.98 million analog video customers, of which approximately 2.69 million were also digital video customers. We also served approximately 1.98 million high–speed data customers (including approximately 229,400 who received only high-speed data services). We also provided telephony service to approximately 55,300 customers as of that date.

At March 31, 2005, our investment in cable properties, long-term debt, accumulated deficit and total shareholders’ deficit were $16.0 billion, $18.9 billion, $9.5 billion and $4.8 billion, respectively. Our working capital deficit was $1.0 billion at March 31, 2005. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, our revenues, net loss applicable to common stock and loss per common share were approximately $1.3 billion, $353 million and $1.16, respectively.

We have a history of net losses. Further, we expect to continue to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses are principally attributable to insufficient revenue to cover the interest costs we incur because of our high level of debt, the depreciation expenses that we incur resulting from the capital investments we have made in our cable properties, and the amortization and impairment of our franchise intangibles. We expect that these expenses (other than impairment of franchises) will remain significant, and we therefore expect to continue to report net losses for the foreseeable future. Additionally, because minority interest in Charter Holdco was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in the first quarter of 2004, we absorb substantially all future losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest. This resulted in an additional $2.4 billion of net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004. Under our existing capital structure, future losses will continue to be absorbed by Charter.

Charter was organized as a Delaware corporation in 1999 and completed an initial public offering of its Class A common stock in November 1999. Charter is a holding company whose principal assets are an approximate 47% equity interest and a 100% voting interest in Charter Holdco, the direct parent of Charter Holdings. Charter also holds certain preferred equity and indebtedness of Charter Holdco that mirror the terms of securities issued by Charter. Charter’s only business is to act as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries. As sole manager, Charter controls the affairs of Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries. Certain of our subsidiaries commenced operations under the “Charter Communications” name in 1994, and our growth to date has been primarily due to acquisitions and business combinations, most notably acquisitions completed from 1999 through 2001, pursuant to which we acquired a total of approximately 5.5 million customers. We do not expect to make any significant acquisitions in the foreseeable future, but plan to evaluate opportunities to consolidate our operations through exchanges of cable systems with other cable operators, as they arise. We may also sell certain assets from time to time. Paul G. Allen owns approximately 53% of Charter Holdco through affiliated entities. His membership units are convertible at any time for shares of our Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. Paul G. Allen controls Charter with an as-converted common equity interest of approximately 57% and a beneficial voting control interest of approximately 93% as of March 31, 2005.


	•	generating improvements in the overall customer experience in such critical areas as service delivery, customer care, and new product offerings;

	•	developing more sophisticated customer management capabilities through investment in our customer care and marketing infrastructure, including targeted marketing capabilities;

	•	executing growth strategies for new services, including digital simulcast, VOD, telephony, and digital video recorder service (“DVR”);

	•	managing our operating costs by exercising discipline in capital and operational spending; and

	•	identifying opportunities to continue to improve our balance sheet and liquidity.

We have begun an internal operational improvement initiative aimed at helping us gain new customers and retain existing customers, which is focused on customer care, technical operations and sales. We intend to increase efforts to focus management attention on instilling a customer service oriented culture throughout the company and to give those areas of our operations increased priority of resources for staffing levels, training budgets and financial incentives for employee performance in those areas.

We believe we offer our customers an excellent choice of services through a variety of bundled packages, particularly with respect to our digital video and high-speed data services as well as telephony in certain markets. Our digital platform enables us to offer a significant number and variety of channels, and we offer customers the opportunity to choose among groups of channel offerings, including premium channels, and to combine selected programming with other services such as high-speed data, high definition television (in selected markets) and VOD (in selected markets).

We continue to pursue opportunities to improve our liquidity. Our efforts in this regard resulted in the completion of a number of transactions in 2004, as follows:


	•	the December 2004 sale by our subsidiaries, CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. of $550 million of senior floating rate notes due 2010;

	•	the November 2004 sale of $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009;

	•	the December 2004 redemption of all of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 ($588 million principal amount);

	•	the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second lien notes by our subsidiary, Charter Operating, together with the concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and


	•	the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to reduce indebtedness.

In 1998, Mr. Allen acquired approximately 99% of the non-voting economic interests in Marcus Cable, which owned various operating subsidiaries that served approximately 1.1 million customers. Thereafter, in December 1998, Mr. Allen acquired, through a series of transactions, approximately 94% of the equity interests of Charter Investment, Inc., which controlled various operating subsidiaries that serviced approximately 1.2 million customers.

In March and April of 1999, Mr. Allen acquired the remaining interests in Marcus Cable and, through a series of transactions, combined the Marcus companies with the Charter companies. As a consequence, the former operating subsidiaries of Marcus Cable and all of the cable systems they owned came under the ownership of Charter Holdings.

In July 1999, Charter was formed as a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Investment, Inc., and in November 1999, Charter completed its initial public offering.

During 1999 and 2000, Charter completed 16 cable system acquisitions for a total purchase price of $14.7 billion including $9.1 billion in cash, $3.3 billion of assumed debt, $1.9 billion of equity interests issued and Charter cable systems valued at $420 million. These transactions resulted in a net total increase of approximately 3.9 million customers as of their respective dates of acquisition.

In February 2001, Charter entered into several agreements with AT&T Broadband, LLC involving several strategic cable system transactions that resulted in a net addition of customers for our systems. In the AT&T transactions, which closed in June 2001, Charter acquired cable systems from AT&T Broadband serving approximately 551,000 customers for a total of $1.74 billion consisting of $1.71 billion in cash and a Charter cable system valued at $25 million. In 2001, Charter also acquired all of the outstanding stock of Cable USA, Inc. and the assets of certain of its related affiliates in exchange for consideration valued at $100 million (consisting of Series A preferred stock with a face amount of $55 million and the remainder in cash and assumed debt).

During 2002, Charter purchased additional cable systems in Illinois serving approximately 28,000 customers, for a total cash purchase price of approximately $63 million.

For additional information regarding Charter’s acquisitions see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Acquisitions.”

In 2003 and 2004, Charter sold certain non-core cable systems serving approximately 264,100 customers in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, West Virginia and Washington for an aggregate consideration of approximately $826 million.

We offer our customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as high-speed data services and in some areas advanced broadband services such as high definition television, VOD and interactive television. We sell our video programming and high-speed data services on a subscription basis, with prices and related charges, that vary primarily based on the types of service selected, whether the services are sold as a “bundle” versus on an “à la carte” basis, and the equipment necessary to receive the services, with some variation in prices depending on geographic location. In addition, we offer telephony service to a limited number of customers.

The following table summarizes our customer statistics for analog and digital video, residential high-speed data, and residential telephony as of March 31, 2005 and 2004:


	•	Basic Analog Video. All of our video customers receive a package of basic programming, which generally consists of local broadcast television, local community programming, including governmental and public access, and limited satellite-delivered or non-broadcast channels, such as weather, shopping and religious services. Our basic channel line-up generally has between 15 and 30 channels.


	•	Expanded Basic Video. This expanded programming level includes a package of satellite-delivered or non-broadcast channels and generally has between 30 and 50 channels in addition to the basic channel line-up.

	•	Premium Channels. These channels provide commercial-free movies, sports and other special event entertainment programming. Although we offer subscriptions to premium channels on an individual basis, we offer an increasing number of premium channel packages and we offer premium channels with our advanced services.

	•	Pay-Per-View. These channels allow customers to pay on a per event basis to view a single showing of a recently released movie, a one-time special sporting event, music concert or similar event on a commercial-free basis.

	•	Digital Video. We offer digital video service to our customers in several different service combination packages. All of our digital packages include a digital set-top terminal, an interactive electronic programming guide, an expanded menu of pay-per-view channels and the option to also receive digital packages which range from 4 to 30 additional video channels. We also offer our customers certain digital packages with one or more premium channels that give customers access to several different versions of the same premium channel. Some digital tier packages focus on the interests of a particular customer demographic and emphasize, for example, sports, movies, family or ethnic programming. In addition to video programming, digital video service enables customers to receive our advanced services such as VOD and high definition television. Other digital packages bundle digital television with our advanced services, such as high-speed data services.

	•	Video On Demand and Subscription Video on Demand. We offer VOD service, which allows customers to access hundreds of movies and other programming at any time with digital picture quality. In some systems we also offer subscription VOD (SVOD) for a monthly fee or included in a digital tier premium channel subscription.

	•	High Definition Television. High definition television offers our digital customers video programming at a higher resolution than the standard analog or digital video image.

	•	Digital Video Recorder. DVR service enables customers to digitally record programming and to pause and rewind live programming.

We offer high-speed data services to our residential and commercial customers primarily via cable modems attached to personal computers. We generally offer our high-speed data service as Charter High-Speed Internet^TM. We also offer traditional dial-up Internet access in a very limited number of our markets.

We ended the first quarter of 2005 with 18% penetration of high-speed data homes passed, an increase from 16% penetration of high-speed data homes passed at March 31, 2004. This gave us a percentage increase in high-speed data customers of 20% and an increase in high-speed data revenues of 28% in the three months ended March 31, 2005 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2004.

We continue to deploy voice communications services using VOIP to transmit digital voice signals over our systems. At March 31, 2005, our telephone service was available to approximately 1.1 million homes and we were marketing to approximately two-thirds of those homes. We will continue to prepare additional markets for VOIP launches in 2005.

We offer integrated network solutions to commercial and institutional customers. These solutions include high-speed data and video services. In addition, we offer high-speed data services to small businesses.

We receive revenues from the sale of local advertising on satellite-delivered networks such as MTV®, CNN® and ESPN®. In any particular market, we generally insert local advertising on up to 39 channels. Our system rebuilds have increased the number of available channels on which we are able to insert local advertising. We also provide cross-channel advertising to some programmers.

From time to time, certain of our vendors, including equipment vendors, have purchased advertising from us. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and the years ending December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, we had advertising revenues from vendors of approximately $3 million, $16 million, $15 million and $79 million, respectively. These revenues resulted from purchases at market rates pursuant to binding agreements.

Our revenues are derived principally from the monthly fees our customers pay for the services we offer. A one-time installation fee, which is sometimes waived or discounted during certain promotional periods, is charged to new customers. The prices we charge vary based on the level of service the customer chooses and the geographic market. Most of our pricing is reviewed and adjusted on an annual basis.

In accordance with the Federal Communications Commission’s rules, the prices we charge for cable-related equipment, such as set-top terminals and remote control devices, and for installation services are based on actual costs plus a permitted rate of return.

Although our cable service offerings vary across the markets we serve because of various factors including competition and regulatory factors, our services, when offered on a stand-alone basis, are typically offered at monthly price ranges, excluding franchise fees and other taxes, as follows:

In addition, from time to time we offer free service or reduced-price service during promotional periods in order to attract new customers.

The following table sets forth the technological capacity of our systems as of March 31, 2005 based on a percentage of homes passed:

As a result of the upgrade of our systems over the past several years, approximately 92% of the homes passed by our systems have bandwidth of 550 megahertz or greater. This bandwidth capacity enables us to offer digital television, high-speed data services and other advanced services. It also enables us to offer up to 82 analog channels, and even more channels when our bandwidth is used for digital signal transmissions.

As part of our systems upgrade and partly as a result of system sales, we reduced the number of headends that serve our customers from 1,138 at January 1, 2001 to 744 at March 31, 2005. Because headends are the control centers of a cable system, where incoming signals are amplified, converted, processed and combined for transmission to the customer, reducing the number of headends reduces related equipment, service personnel and maintenance expenditures. We believe that the headend consolidation, together with our other upgrades, allows us to provide enhanced picture quality and greater system reliability. As a result of the upgrade, approximately 84% of our customers were served by headends serving at least 10,000 customers as of March 31, 2005.

As of March 31, 2005, our cable systems consisted of approximately 222,100 strand miles, including approximately 53,600 strand miles of fiber optic cable, passing approximately 12.2 million households and serving approximately 6.2 million customers.

We adopted the hybrid fiber coaxial cable (“HFC”) architecture as the standard for our systems upgrades. HFC architecture combines the use of fiber optic cable with coaxial cable. Fiber optic cable is a communication medium that uses glass fibers to transmit signals over long distances with minimum signal loss or distortion. Fiber optic cable has excellent broadband frequency characteristics, noise immunity and physical durability and can carry hundreds of video, data and voice channels over extended distances. Coaxial cable is less expensive and requires a more extensive signal amplification in order to obtain the desired transmission levels for delivering channels. In most systems, we deliver our signals via fiber optic cable from the headend to a group of nodes, and use coaxial cable to deliver the signal from individual nodes to the homes passed served by that node. Our system design enables a maximum of 500 homes passed to be served by a single node. Currently, our average node serves approximately 385 homes passed. Our system design provides for six strands of fiber to each node, with two strands activated and four strands reserved for spares and future services. The design also provides reserve capacity for the addition of future services.

The primary advantages of HFC architecture over traditional coaxial-only cable networks include:


	•	increased bandwidth capacity, for more channels and other services;

	•	dedicated bandwidth for two-way services, which avoids reverse signal interference problems that can occur with two-way communication capability; and

	•	improved picture quality and service reliability.

We currently maintain a national network operations center to monitor our data networks and to further our strategy of providing high quality service. Centralized monitoring is increasingly important as we increase the number of high-speed data customers utilizing two-way high-speed data service. Our local dispatch centers focus primarily on monitoring the HFC plant.

Many of the functions associated with our financial management are centralized, including accounting, billing, finance and acquisitions, payroll, accounts payable and benefits administration, information system design and support, internal audit, purchasing, marketing, programming contract administration and Internet service, network and circuits administration. We operate with four divisions. Each division is supported by operational, financial, marketing and engineering functions.

We have 36 customer service locations, including 14 divisional contact centers that serve approximately 97% of our customers. Our customer care centers are managed divisionally by a Vice President of Customer Care and are supported by a corporate care team, which oversees and supports deployment and execution of care strategies and initiatives on a company-wide basis. This reflects a

Specifically, through this consolidation, we are now able to service our customers 24 hours a day, seven days a week and utilize technologically advanced equipment that we believe enhances interactions with our customers through more intelligent call routing, data management, and forecasting and scheduling capabilities. We believe this consolidation also allows us to more effectively provide our customer care specialists with ongoing training intended to improve complaint resolution, equipment troubleshooting, sales of new and additional services, and customer retention.

We believe that, despite our consolidation, we have not yet sufficiently improved in the area of customer care, and that this lack of improvement has in part led to a continued net loss of customers. Accordingly, we have begun an internal operational improvement initiative aimed at helping us gain new customers and retain existing customers, which is focused on customer care, among other areas. We intend to increase our efforts to focus management attention on instilling a customer service oriented culture throughout the company and to give those areas of our operations increased priority of resources for staffing levels, training budgets and financial incentives for employee performance in those areas.

In a further effort to better serve our customers, we have also entered into outsource partnership agreements with two key outsource providers. We believe the establishment of these relationships expands our ability to achieve our service objectives and increases our ability to support marketing activities by providing additional capacity available to support customer inquiries.

We also utilize our website to enhance customer care by enabling customers to view and pay their bills online, obtain useful information and perform various equipment troubleshooting procedures.

In the third quarter of 2004, Charter shifted primary responsibility for implementing sales and marketing strategies to the divisional and system level, with a single corporate team to ensure compliance with guidelines established by the corporate marketing department designed to promote national branding consistency. Our marketing infrastructure is intended to promote interaction, information flow and sharing of best practices between our corporate office and our field offices, which make strategic decisions as to when and how marketing programs will be implemented.

Due to our focus in 2003 on certain other operational matters and due to certain financial constraints, we reduced spending in 2003 on marketing our products and services. Marketing expenditures increased 14% for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $122 million. We expect to increase our spending on marketing in 2005 and as such marketing expenditures increased 13% to $35 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

We monitor government regulation, customer perception, competition, pricing and product preferences, among other factors, to increase our responsiveness to our customers. Our coordinated marketing strategies include door-to-door solicitation, telemarketing, media advertising, e-marketing, direct mail solicitation and retail locations. In 2004, we increased our focus on marketing and selling our services through consumer electronics retailers and other retailers that sell televisions or cable modems.

In January 2004, we introduced the first national branding campaign in Charter’s history. The “Get Hooked” branding initiative was a key focal point of our national marketing campaigns in 2004, with the aim of promoting deeper market penetration and increased revenue per customer. In 2004, our corporate team produced eight national “Get Hooked” marketing campaigns designed to:


	•	Promote awareness and loyalty among existing customers and attract new customers;

	•	Announce the availability of our advanced services as we roll them out in our systems;


	•	Promote our advanced services (such as DVR, high definition television, telephony, VOD and SVOD) with the goal that our customers will view their cable connection as one-stop shopping for video, voice, high-speed data and interactive services; and

	•	Promote our bundling of digital video and high-speed data services and pricing strategies.

We believe that offering a wide variety of programming is an important factor that influences a customer’s decision to subscribe to and retain our cable services. We rely on market research, customer demographics and local programming preferences to determine channel offerings in each of our markets. We obtain basic and premium programming from a number of suppliers, usually pursuant to a written contract. Our programming contracts generally continue for a fixed period of time, usually from three to ten years, and are subject to negotiated renewal. Some program suppliers offer financial incentives to support the launch of a channel and ongoing marketing support or launch fees. We also negotiate volume discount pricing structures. Programming costs are usually payable each month based on calculations performed by us and are subject to adjustment based on the results of periodic audits by the programmers.

Programming tends to be made available to us for a license fee, which is generally paid based on the number of customers to whom we make such programming available. Such license fees may include “volume” discounts available for higher numbers of customers, as well as discounts for channel placement or service penetration. Some channels are available without cost to us for a limited period of time, after which we pay for the programming. For home shopping channels, we receive a percentage of the amount our customers spend on home shopping purchases.

Our cable programming costs have increased, in every year we have operated, in excess of customary inflationary and cost-of-living type increases. We expect them to continue to increase due to a variety of factors, including annual increases imposed by programmers and additional programming being provided to customers as a result of system rebuilds and bandwidth reallocation, both of which increase channel capacity.

In particular, sports programming costs have increased significantly over the past several years. In addition, contracts to purchase sports programming sometimes contain built-in cost increases for programming added during the term of the contract.

Historically, we have absorbed increased programming costs in large part through increased prices to our customers. However, with the impact of competition and other marketplace factors, there is no assurance that we will be able to continue to do so. In order to maintain or mitigate reductions of margins despite increasing programming costs, we plan to continue to migrate certain program services from our analog level of service to our digital tiers. As we migrate our programming to our digital tier packages, certain programming that was previously available to all of our customers via an analog signal, may be part of an elective digital tier package. As a result, the customer base upon which we pay programming fees will proportionately decrease, and the overall expense for providing that service would likewise decrease. Reductions in the size of certain programming customer bases may result in the loss of specific volume discount benefits.

As measured by programming costs, and excluding premium services (substantially all of which were renegotiated and renewed in 2003), as of July 7, 2005 approximately 9% of our current programming contracts were expired, and approximately another 21% are scheduled to expire at or before the end of 2005. We plan to seek to renegotiate the terms of our agreements with certain programmers as these agreements come due for renewal. There can be no assurance that these agreements will be renewed on favorable or comparable terms. To the extent that we are unable to reach agreement with certain programmers on terms that we believe are reasonable, we may be forced to remove such programming

As of March 31, 2005, our systems operated pursuant to a total of approximately 4,100 franchises, permits and similar authorizations issued by local and state governmental authorities. Each franchise, permit or similar authorization is awarded by a governmental authority and such governmental authority often must approve a transfer to another party. Most franchises are subject to termination proceedings in the event of a material breach. In addition, most franchises require us to pay the granting authority a franchise fee of up to 5.0% of revenues as defined in the various agreements, which is the maximum amount that may be charged under the applicable federal law. We are entitled to and generally do pass this fee through to the customer.

Prior to the scheduled expiration of most franchises, we initiate renewal proceedings with the granting authorities. This process usually takes three years but can take a longer period of time. The Communications Act provides for an orderly franchise renewal process in which granting authorities may not unreasonably withhold renewals. In connection with the franchise renewal process, many governmental authorities require the cable operator to make certain commitments. Historically we have been able to renew our franchises without incurring significant costs, although any particular franchise may not be renewed on commercially favorable terms or otherwise. Our failure to obtain renewals of our franchises, especially those in the major metropolitan areas where we have the most customers, could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our liquidity, including our ability to comply with our debt covenants. Approximately 10% of our franchises, covering approximately 9% of our analog video customers were expired as of March 31, 2005. Approximately 6% of additional franchises, covering approximately 8% of additional analog video customers will expire on or before December 31, 2005, if not renewed prior to expiration. We expect to renew substantially all of these franchises.

Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the “1996 Telecom Act”), state and local authorities are prohibited from limiting, restricting or conditioning the provision of telecommunications services. They may, however, impose “competitively neutral” requirements and manage the public rights-of-way. Granting authorities may not require a cable operator to provide telecommunications services or facilities, other than institutional networks, as a condition of an initial franchise grant, a franchise renewal, or a franchise transfer. The 1996 Telecom Act also limits franchise fees to an operator’s cable-related revenues and clarifies that they do not apply to revenues that a cable operator derives from providing new telecommunications services. In a March 2002 decision, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) held that revenue derived from the provision of cable modem service should not be added to franchise fee payments already limited by federal law to 5% of traditional cable service revenue. The same decision tentatively limited local franchising authority regulation of cable modem service. The FCC decision was appealed and ultimately affirmed by the Supreme Court in a June 2005 ruling.

We face competition in the areas of price, service offerings, and service reliability. We compete with other providers of television signals and other sources of home entertainment. In addition, as we continue to expand into additional services such as high-speed Internet access and telephony, we face competition from other providers of each type of service. We operate in a very competitive business environment, which can adversely affect our business and operations.

In terms of competition for customers, we view ourselves as a member of the broadband communications industry, which encompasses multi-channel video for television and related broadband services, such as high-speed data and other interactive video services. In the broadband industry, our principal competitor for video services throughout our territory is direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”), and

Although cable operators tend not to be direct competitors for customers, their relative size may affect the competitive landscape in terms of how a cable company competes against non-cable competitors in the marketplace as well as in relationships with vendors who deal with cable operators. For example, a larger cable operator might have better access to and pricing for the multiple types of services cable companies offer. Also, a larger entity might have different access to financial resources and acquisition opportunities.

Direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) is a significant competitor to cable systems. The DBS industry has grown rapidly over the last several years, far exceeding the growth rate of the cable television industry, and now serves more than 24 million subscribers nationwide. DBS service allows the subscriber to receive video services directly via satellite using a relatively small dish antenna. Consistent with increasing consolidation in the communications industry, News Corp., one of the world’s largest media companies, acquired a controlling interest in DIRECTV, Inc. (“DirecTV”) in 2003, the largest domestic DBS company. This business combination could further strengthen DirecTV’s competitive posture, particularly through favorable programming arrangements with various News Corp. affiliates and subsidiaries, such as the Fox television network. Additionally, EchoStar Communications Corporation (“EchoStar”) and DirecTV both have entered into joint marketing agreements with major telecommunications companies to offer bundled packages combining phone, data and video services.

Video compression technology and high powered satellites allow DBS providers to offer more than 200 digital channels from a single satellite, thereby surpassing the typical analog cable system. In 2003, major DBS competitors offered a greater variety of channel packages, and were especially competitive at the lower end pricing, such as a monthly price of approximately $30 for 75 channels compared to approximately $40 for the closest comparable package in most of our markets. In addition, while we continue to believe that the initial investment by a DBS customer exceeds that of a cable customer, the initial equipment cost for DBS has decreased substantially, as the DBS providers have aggressively marketed offers to new customers of incentives for discounted or free equipment, installation and multiple units. DBS providers are able to offer service nationwide and are able to establish a national image and branding with standardized offerings, which together with their ability to avoid franchise fees of up to 5% of revenues and property tax, leads to greater efficiencies and lower costs in the lower tiers of service. However, we believe that many consumers continue to prefer our stronger local presence in our markets. We believe that cable-delivered VOD and SVOD service are superior to DBS service because cable headends can store thousands of titles which customers can access and control independently, whereas DBS technology can only make available a much smaller number of titles with DVR-like customer control. We also believe that our higher tier products, particularly our bundled premium packages, are price-competitive with DBS packages and that many consumers prefer our ability to economically bundle video packages with data packages. Further, cable providers have the potential in some areas to provide a more complete “whole house” communications package when combining video, high-speed data and voice. We believe that this ability to bundle, combined with the introduction of more new products that DBS cannot readily offer (local high definition television and local interactive television) differentiates us from DBS competitors and could enable us to win back some of our former customers who migrated to satellite. However, recent joint marketing arrangements between DBS providers and telecommunications carriers allow similar bundling of services in certain areas. Competition from DBS service providers may also

DBS companies historically were prohibited from retransmitting popular local broadcast programming. However, a change to the copyright laws in 1999, which was continued in 2004, eliminated this legal impediment. As a result, DBS companies now may retransmit such programming, once they have secured retransmission consent from the popular broadcast stations they wish to carry, and honor mandatory carriage obligations of less popular broadcast stations in the same television markets. In response to the legislation, DirecTV and EchoStar have been carrying the major network stations in many of the nation’s television markets. DBS, however, is limited in the local programming it can provide because of the current capacity limitations of satellite technology. DBS companies do not offer local broadcast programming in every U.S. market, although the number of markets covered is substantial and increasing.

DBS providers have made attempts at widespread deployment of high-speed Internet access services via satellite but those services have been technically constrained and of limited appeal. However, DBS providers have entered into joint marketing arrangements with telecommunications carriers allowing them to offer terrestrial DSL services in many markets.

Digital subscriber line (“DSL”) service allows Internet access to subscribers at data transmission speeds greater than those available over conventional telephone lines. DSL service therefore is competitive with high-speed Internet access over cable systems. Most telephone companies which already have plant, an existing customer base, and other operational functions in place (such as, billing, service personnel, etc.) offer DSL service. DSL actively markets its service and many providers have offered promotional pricing with a one-year service agreement. The FCC has initiated a rulemaking proceeding that could materially reduce existing regulation of DSL service, essentially freeing such service from traditional telecommunications regulation. It is also possible that federal legislation could reduce regulation of Internet services offered by incumbent telephone companies. Legislative action and the FCC’s decisions and policies in this area are subject to change. We expect DSL to remain a significant competitor to our data services. In addition, the further deployment of fiber by telephone companies into their networks will enable them to provide higher bandwidth Internet service than provided over traditional DSL lines.

In addition to terrestrially based DSL, satellite-based delivery options are in development. Local wireless Internet services have also begun to operate in many markets using unlicensed radio spectrum. This service option, popularly known as “wi-fi”, offers another alternative to cable-based Internet access.

High-speed Internet access facilitates the streaming of video into homes and businesses. As the quality and availability of video streaming over the Internet improves, video streaming likely will compete with the traditional delivery of video programming services over cable systems. It is possible that programming suppliers will consider bypassing cable operators and market their services directly to the consumer through video streaming over the Internet.

We believe that pricing for residential and commercial data services on our system is generally comparable to that for similar DSL services and that some residential customers prefer our ability to bundle data services with video services. However, DSL providers may currently be in a better position to offer data services to businesses since their networks tend to be more complete in commercial areas. They also have the ability to bundle telephony with data services for a higher percentage of their customers, and that ability is appealing to many consumers. Joint marketing arrangements between DSL providers and DBS providers may allow some additional bundling of services. Moreover, major telephone companies, such as SBC and Verizon, are now deploying fiber deep into their networks that will enable them to offer high bandwidth video services over their networks, in addition to established voice and Internet services.

Cable television has long competed with broadcast television, which consists of television signals that the viewer is able to receive without charge using an “off-air” antenna. The extent of such competition is dependent upon the quality and quantity of broadcast signals available through “off-air” reception compared to the services provided by the local cable system. Traditionally, cable television has provided a higher picture quality and more channel offerings than broadcast television. However, the recent licensing of digital spectrum by the FCC will provide traditional broadcasters with the ability to deliver high definition television pictures and multiple digital-quality program streams, as well as advanced digital services such as subscription video and data transmission.

Cable systems are operated under non-exclusive franchises granted by local authorities. More than one cable system may legally be built in the same area. It is possible that a franchising authority might grant a second franchise to another cable operator and that such a franchise might contain terms and conditions more favorable than those afforded us. In addition, entities willing to establish an open video system, under which they offer unaffiliated programmers non-discriminatory access to a portion of the system’s cable system, may be able to avoid local franchising requirements. Well financed businesses from outside the cable industry, such as public utilities that already possess fiber optic and other transmission lines in the areas they serve, may over time become competitors. There are a number of cities that have constructed their own cable systems, in a manner similar to city-provided utility services. There also has been interest in traditional overbuilds by private companies. Constructing a competing cable system is a capital intensive process which involves a high degree of risk. We believe that in order to be successful, a competitor’s overbuild would need to be able to serve the homes and businesses in the overbuilt area on a more cost-effective basis than we can. Any such overbuild operation would require either significant access to capital or access to facilities already in place that are capable of delivering cable television programming.

As of March 31, 2005, we are aware of overbuild situations impacting approximately 5% of our total homes passed and potential overbuild situations in areas servicing approximately 1% of our total homes passed. Additional overbuild situations may occur in other systems. In response to such overbuilds, these systems have been designated priorities for the upgrade of cable plant and the launch of new and enhanced services. As of March 31, 2005, we have upgraded many of these systems to at least 750 megahertz two-way HFC architecture.

The competitive environment has been significantly affected by technological developments and regulatory changes enacted under the 1996 Telecom Act, which is designed to enhance competition in the cable television and local telephone markets. Federal cross-ownership restrictions historically limited entry by local telephone companies into the cable business. The 1996 Telecom Act modified this cross-ownership restriction, making it possible for local exchange carriers, who have considerable resources, to provide a wide variety of video services competitive with services offered by cable systems.

Telephone companies can lawfully enter the cable television business, and although activity in this area historically has been quite limited, recent announcements by telephone companies indicate a growing interest in offering a video product. Local exchange carriers do already provide facilities for the transmission and distribution of voice and data services, including Internet services, in competition with our existing or potential interactive services ventures and businesses. Some telephone companies have begun more extensive deployment of fiber in their networks that will enable them to begin providing video services, as well as telephony and Internet access service. At least one major telephone company, SBC, plans to provide Internet protocol video over its upgraded network. SBC contends that its use of this technology should allow it to provide video service without a cable franchise as required under Title VI of the Communications Act. Other telephone companies deploying fiber more extensively are attempting through various means (including federal and state legislation) to weaken or streamline the franchising requirements applicable to them. If

As we expand our offerings to include Internet access and other telecommunications services, we will be subject to competition from other telecommunications providers. The telecommunications industry is highly competitive and includes competitors with greater financial and personnel resources, who have brand name recognition and long-standing relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Moreover, mergers, joint ventures and alliances among franchise, wireless or private cable operators, local exchange carriers and others may result in providers capable of offering cable television, Internet, and telecommunications services in direct competition with us. For example, major local exchange carriers have entered into arrangements with EchoStar and DirecTV in which they will market packages combining phone service, DSL and DBS services.

Additionally, we are subject to competition from utilities which possess fiber optic transmission lines capable of transmitting signals with minimal signal distortion. Utilities are also developing broadband over power line technology, which will allow the provision of Internet and other broadband services to homes and offices.

Additional competition is posed by satellite master antenna television systems, or SMATV systems, serving multiple dwelling units, or MDUs, such as condominiums, apartment complexes, and private residential communities. These private cable systems may enter into exclusive agreements with such MDUs, which may preclude operators of franchise systems from serving residents of such private complexes. Private cable systems can offer both improved reception of local television stations and many of the same satellite-delivered program services that are offered by cable systems. SMATV systems currently benefit from operating advantages not available to franchised cable systems, including fewer regulatory burdens and no requirement to service low density or economically depressed communities. Exemption from regulation may provide a competitive advantage to certain of our current and potential competitors.

Cable systems also compete with wireless program distribution services such as multi-channel multipoint distribution systems or “wireless cable,” known as MMDS, which uses low-power microwave frequencies to transmit television programming over-the-air to paying customers. MMDS services, however, require unobstructed “line of sight” transmission paths and MMDS ventures have been quite limited to date.

The FCC has completed its auction of Multichannel Video Distribution & Data Service (“MVDDS”) licenses. MVDDS is a new terrestrial video and data fixed wireless service that the FCC hopes will spur competition to the cable and DBS industries.

Our principal physical assets consist of cable distribution plant and equipment, including signal receiving, encoding and decoding devices, headend reception facilities, distribution systems and customer drop equipment for each of our cable systems.

Our cable plant and related equipment are generally attached to utility poles under pole rental agreements with local public utilities and telephone companies, and in certain locations are buried in underground ducts or trenches. We own or lease real property for signal reception sites and own most of our service vehicles.

Historically, our subsidiaries have owned the real property and buildings for our data centers, customer contact centers and our divisional administrative offices. Since early 2003 we have reduced our total real estate portfolio square footage by approximately 17% and have decreased our operating annual lease costs by approximately 30%. We plan to continue reducing our number of administrative offices and lease the space, where possible, while attempting to sell those existing locations that we believe are no longer required. Our subsidiaries generally have leased space for business offices throughout our operating divisions. Our headend and tower locations are located on owned or leased parcels of land, and we generally own the towers on which our equipment is located. Charter Holdco owns the real property and building for our principal executive offices.

The physical components of our cable systems require maintenance as well as periodic upgrades to support the new services and products we introduce. See “Business — Our Network Technology.” We believe that our properties are generally in good operating condition and are suitable for our business operations.

As of March 31, 2005, we had approximately 16,100 full-time equivalent employees. At March 31, 2005, approximately 100 of our employees were represented by collective bargaining agreements. We have never experienced a work stoppage.

The corporate office, which includes employees of Charter and Charter Holdco, is responsible for coordinating and overseeing our operations. The corporate office performs certain financial and administrative functions on a centralized basis such as accounting, taxes, billing, finance and acquisitions, payroll and benefit administration, information system design and support, internal audit, purchasing, marketing and programming contract administration and oversight and coordination of external auditors and consultants. The corporate office performs these services on a cost reimbursement basis pursuant to a management services agreement. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter and Its Subsidiaries — Intercompany Management Arrangements” and “— Mutual Services Agreements.”

Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the “Federal Class Actions”) were filed against Charter and certain of its former and present officers and directors in various jurisdictions allegedly on behalf of all purchasers of Charter’s securities during the period from either November 8 or November 9, 1999 through July 17 or July 18, 2002. Unspecified damages were sought by the plaintiffs. In general, the lawsuits alleged that Charter utilized misleading accounting practices and failed to disclose these accounting practices and/or issued false and misleading financial statements and press releases concerning Charter’s operations and prospects. The Federal Class Actions were specifically and individually identified in public filings made by Charter prior to the date of this prospectus.

Vogel and Allen, the court entered an order providing, among other things, that: (1) the parties who filed such motion engage in a mediation within ninety (90) days; and (2) all proceedings in the Consolidated Federal Class Actions were stayed until May 10, 2004. On May 11, 2004, the Court extended the stay in the Consolidated Federal Class Action for an additional sixty (60) days. On July 12, 2004, the parties submitted a joint motion to again extend the stay, this time until September 10, 2004. The Court granted that extension on July 20, 2004. On August 5, 2004, Stoneridge, Charter and the individual defendants who were the subject of the suit entered into a Memorandum of Understanding setting forth agreements in principle to settle the Consolidated Federal Class Action. These parties subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005 (described more fully below) which incorporate the terms of the August 5, 2004 Memorandum of Understanding.


	•	In re Charter Communications, Inc. Securities Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1506 (All Cases), StoneRidge Investments Partners, LLC, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Charter Communications, Inc., Paul Allen, Jerald L. Kent, Carl E. Vogel, Kent Kalkwarf, David G. Barford, Paul E. Martin, David L. McCall, Bill Shreffler, Chris Fenger, James H. Smith, III, Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., Motorola, Inc. and Arthur Andersen, LLP, Consolidated Case No. 4:02-CV-1186-CAS.

On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the “State Derivative Action”) was filed in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the “Missouri State Court”), against Charter and its then current directors, as well as its former auditors. The plaintiffs allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, are sought by the plaintiffs.


	•	Kenneth Stacey, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant Charter Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G. Allen, Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William Savoy, John H. Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, Arthur Andersen, LLP and Charter Communications, Inc.

On March 12, 2004, an action substantively identical to the State Derivative Action was filed in the Missouri State Court, against Charter and certain of its current and former directors, as well as its former auditors. The plaintiffs in that case alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, were sought by plaintiffs. On July 14, 2004, the Court consolidated this case with the State Derivative Action.


	•	Thomas Schimmel, Derivatively on behalf on Nominal Defendant Charter Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G. Allen, Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William D. Savoy, John H. Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, and Arthur Andersen, LLP, and Charter Communications, Inc.

Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative suit (the “Federal Derivative Action”), was filed against Charter and its then current directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiff in that suit alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, were sought by the plaintiffs.


	•	Arthur Cohn, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant Charter Communications, Inc., v. Ronald L. Nelson, Paul G. Allen, Marc B. Nathanson, Nancy B. Peretsman, William Savoy, John H. Tory, Carl E. Vogel, Larry W. Wangberg, and Charter Communications, Inc.

As noted above, Charter and the individual defendants entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on August 5, 2004 setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of the Consolidated Federal Class Action, the State Derivative Action(s) and the Federal Derivative Action (the “Actions”). Charter and various other defendants in those actions subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005, setting forth a settlement of the Actions in a manner consistent with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Stipulations of Settlement, along with various supporting documentation, were filed with the Court on February 2, 2005. An amendment to the Stipulations was later filed with the Court and made effective as of May 23, 2005. On May 23, 2005 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri conducted the final fairness hearing for the Actions, and on June 30, 2005, the court issued its final approval of the settlements. Members of the class have 30 days from the issuance of the June 30 order approving the settlement to file an appeal challenging the approval.

As amended, the Stipulations of Settlement provide that, in exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against Charter and its former and present officers and directors named in the Actions, Charter would pay to the plaintiffs a combination of cash and equity collectively valued at $144 million, which will include the fees and expenses of plaintiffs’ counsel. Of this amount, $64 million would be paid in cash (by Charter’s insurance carriers) and the $80 million balance was to be paid (subject to Charter’s right to substitute cash therefor described below) in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate warrant value of $40 million, with such values in each case being determined pursuant to formulas set forth in the Stipulations of Settlement. However, Charter had the right, in its sole discretion, to substitute cash for some or all of the aforementioned securities on a dollar for dollar basis. Pursuant to that right, Charter has elected to fund the $80 million obligation with 13.4 million shares of Charter Class A common stock (having an aggregate value of approximately $15 million pursuant to the formula set forth in the Stipulations of Settlement) with the remaining balance (less an agreed upon $1.6 million discount in respect of that portion allocable to plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees) to be paid in cash. In addition, Charter had agreed to issue additional shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier having an aggregate value of $5 million; however, Charter and its carriers have agreed that Charter will pay them $4.5 million in lieu of issuing such shares. Charter delivered the settlement consideration to the claims administrator on July 8, 2005, and it will be held in escrow pending any appeals of the approval.

As part of the settlements, Charter also committed to a variety of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public disclosures, some of which have already been undertaken and none of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation described below.

In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter reported customer numbers, and its reporting of amounts received from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The U.S. Attorney’s Office publicly stated that Charter is not a target of the investigation. Charter was also advised by the U.S. Attorney’s Office that no current officer or member of its board of directors is a target of the investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Each of the indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and were sentenced April 22, 2005. Charter fully cooperated with the investigation, and following the sentencings, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri announced that its investigation was concluded and that no further indictments would issue.

Charter is generally required to indemnify, under certain conditions, each of the named individual defendants in connection with the matters described above pursuant to the terms of its bylaws and (where applicable) such individual defendants’ employment agreements. In accordance with these documents, in connection with the pending grand jury investigation, the now-settled SEC investigation and the above-described lawsuits, some of Charter’s current and former directors and current and former officers have been advanced certain costs and expenses incurred in connection with their defense. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Indemnification Advances” for greater detail. On February 22, 2005, Charter filed suit against four of its former officers who were indicted in the course of the grand jury investigation. These suits seek to recover the legal fees and other related expenses advanced to these individuals by Charter for the grand jury investigation, SEC investigation and class action and related lawsuits. One of these former officers, James Smith, has counterclaimed against Charter alleging, among other things, that Charter owes him additional indemnification for legal fees that Charter did not pay. Another of these former officers, David McCall, has counterclaimed against Charter that Charter owes him accrued sick leave.

In October 2001, two customers, Nikki Nicholls and Geraldine M. Barber, filed a class action suit against Charter Holdco in South Carolina Court of Common Pleas (the “South Carolina Class Action”), purportedly on behalf of a class of Charter Holdco’s customers, alleging that Charter Holdco improperly charged them a wire maintenance fee without request or permission. They also claimed that Charter Holdco improperly required them to rent analog and/or digital set-top terminals even though their television sets were “cable ready.” A substantively identical case was filed in the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia by Emma S. Tobar on March 26, 2002 (the “Georgia Class Action”), alleging a nationwide class for these claims. Charter Holdco removed the South Carolina Class Action to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in November 2001, and moved to dismiss the suit in December 2001. The federal judge remanded the case to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas in August 2002 without ruling on the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs subsequently moved for a default judgment, arguing that upon return to state court, Charter Holdco should have, but did not file a new motion to dismiss. The state court judge granted the plaintiff’s motion over Charter Holdco’s objection in September 2002. Charter Holdco immediately appealed that decision to the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the South Carolina Supreme Court, but those courts ruled that until a final judgment was entered against Charter Holdco, they lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

consolidated statement of operations in the first quarter of 2004. On July 8, 2004, the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia granted a motion to amend the Tobar complaint to add Nicholls, Barber and April Jones as plaintiffs in the Georgia Class Action and to add any potential class members in South Carolina. The court also granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on that date. On August 2, 2004, the parties submitted a joint request to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to stay the South Carolina Class Action pending final approval of the settlement and on August 17, 2004, that court granted the parties’ request. On November 10, 2004, the court granted final approval of the settlement, rejecting positions advanced by two objectors to the settlement. On December 13, 2004, the court entered a written order formally approving that settlement. On January 11, 2005, certain class members appealed the order entered by the Georgia court. Those objectors voluntarily dismissed their appeal with prejudice on February 8, 2005. On February 9, 2005, the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas entered a court order of dismissal for the South Carolina Class Action. Additionally, one of the objectors to this settlement filed a similar, but not identical, lawsuit in Massachusetts state court. The action purports to be brought on behalf of three different classes of customers and generally alleges that the putative class members were overcharged for converter boxes and remote controls.


	•	Nikki Nicholls and Geraldine M. Barber, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and City of Spartanburg filed on October 29, 2001.


	•	Emma S. Tobar, Nikki Nicholls, Geraldine M. Barber and April Jones, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC, et al, originally filed on March 26, 2002.

In addition to the matters set forth above, Charter is also party to other lawsuits and claims that arose in the ordinary course of conducting its business. In the opinion of management, after taking into account recorded liabilities, the outcome of these other lawsuits and claims are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or our liquidity.

The following summary addresses the key regulatory and legislative developments affecting the cable industry. Cable system operations are extensively regulated by the FCC, some state governments and most local governments. A failure to comply with these regulations could subject us to substantial penalties. Our business can be dramatically impacted by changes to the existing regulatory framework, whether triggered by legislative, administrative, or judicial rulings. Congress and the FCC have expressed a particular interest in increasing competition in the communications field generally and in the cable television field specifically. The 1996 Telecom Act altered the regulatory structure governing the nation’s communications providers. It removed barriers to competition in both the cable television market and the local telephone market. We could be materially disadvantaged in the future if we are subject to regulations that do not equally impact our key competitors. Congress and the FCC have frequently revisited the subject of communications regulation, and they are likely to do so in the future. In addition, franchise agreements with local governments must be periodically renewed, and new operating terms may be imposed. Future legislative, regulatory, or judicial changes could adversely affect our operations. We can provide no assurance that the already extensive regulation of our business will not be expanded in the future.

The cable industry has operated under a federal rate regulation regime for more than a decade. The regulations currently restrict the prices that cable systems charge for basic service and associated equipment. All other cable offerings are now universally exempt from rate regulation. Although rate regulation operates pursuant to a federal formula, local governments, commonly referred to as local franchising authorities, are primarily responsible for administering this regulation. The majority of our local franchising authorities have never certified to regulate basic cable rates, but they retain the right to do so (and order rate reductions and refunds), except in those specific communities facing “effective competition.” Federal law defines effective competition as existing in a variety of circumstances that historically were rarely satisfied, but are increasingly likely to be satisfied with the recent increase in DBS competition. We already have secured official recognition by the FCC of effective competition in many of our communities.

There have been frequent calls to impose expanded rate regulation on the cable industry. Confronted with rapidly increasing cable programming costs, it is possible that Congress may adopt new constraints on the retail pricing or packaging of cable programming. Such constraints could adversely affect our operations.

The federal rate regulations also require cable operators to maintain a “geographically uniform” rate within each community, except in those communities facing effective competition. As we attempt to respond to a changing marketplace with competitive pricing practices, we may face legal restraints and challenges that impede our ability to compete.

Federal law currently includes “must carry” regulations, which require cable systems to carry certain local broadcast television stations that the cable operator would not select voluntarily. Alternatively, popular commercial television stations can prohibit cable carriage unless the cable operator first negotiates for “retransmission consent,” which may be conditioned on significant payments or other concessions. Either option has a potentially adverse effect on our business. The burden associated with must carry could increase significantly if cable systems were required to simultaneously carry both the analog and digital signals of each television station (dual carriage), as the broadcast industry transitions from an analog to a digital format.

The burden could also increase significantly if cable systems become required to carry multiple program streams included within a single digital broadcast transmission (multicast carriage). Additional government-mandated broadcast carriage obligations could disrupt existing programming commitments, interfere with our preferred use of limited channel capacity and limit our ability to offer services that

There are indications that broadcasters invoking retransmission consent may be even more forceful in upcoming negotiations. These negotiations could result in increased broadcast carriage burdens or the loss of popular programming.

Local franchise agreements often require cable operators to set aside certain channels for public, educational and governmental access programming. Federal law also requires cable systems to designate a portion of their channel capacity for commercial leased access by unaffiliated third parties. Increased activity in this area could further burden the channel capacity of our cable systems.

The FCC recently extended a regulation prohibiting video programmers affiliated with cable companies from favoring cable operators over new competitors and requiring such programmers to sell their satellite-delivered programming to other multichannel video distributors. This provision limits the ability of vertically integrated cable programmers to offer exclusive programming arrangements to cable companies. DBS providers traditionally had no similar restriction on exclusive programming, but the FCC recently imposed that restriction as part of its approval of the DirecTV-News Corp. merger. The FCC has also adopted regulations to avoid unreasonable conduct in retransmission consent negotiations between broadcasters and multichannel video programming distributors, including cable and DBS. It imposed special conditions on the DirectTV-News Corp. merger, including a requirement that Fox affiliated broadcast stations enter into commercial arbitration for disputes over retransmission consent. Given the heightened competition and media consolidation that Charter faces, it is possible that we will find it increasingly difficult to gain access to popular programming at favorable terms. Such difficulty could adversely impact our business.

Federal regulation of the communications field traditionally included a host of ownership restrictions, which limited the size of certain media entities and restricted their ability to enter into competing enterprises. Through a series of legislative, regulatory, and judicial actions, most of these restrictions recently were eliminated or substantially relaxed. For example, historic restrictions on local exchange carriers offering cable service within their telephone service area, as well as those prohibiting broadcast stations from owning cable systems within their broadcast service area, no longer exist. Changes in this regulatory area could alter the business landscape in which we operate, as formidable new competitors (including electric utilities, local exchange carriers, and broadcast/media companies) may increasingly choose to offer cable services.

The FCC previously adopted regulations precluding any cable operator from serving more than 30% of all domestic multichannel video subscribers and from devoting more than 40% of the activated channel capacity of any cable system to the carriage of affiliated national video programming services. These cable ownership restrictions were invalidated by the courts, and the FCC is now considering adoption of replacement regulations.

Over the past several years, proposals have been advanced that would require cable operators offering Internet service to provide non-discriminatory access to unaffiliated Internet service providers. In a June 2005 ruling, commonly referred to as Brand X, the Supreme Court upheld an FCC decision (and

As the Internet has matured, it has become the subject of increasing regulatory interest. There is now a host of federal laws affecting Internet service, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which affords copyright owners certain rights against us that could adversely affect our relationship with any customer accused of violating copyright laws. Recently enacted Anti-Spam legislation also imposes new obligations on our operations. The adoption of new Internet regulations could adversely affect our business.

The 1996 Telecom Act created a more favorable regulatory environment for us to provide telecommunications services. In particular, it limited the regulatory role of local franchising authorities and established requirements ensuring that we could interconnect with other telephone companies to provide a viable service. Many implementation details remain unresolved, and there are substantial regulatory changes being considered that could impact, in both positive and negative ways, our primary telecommunications competitors and our own entry into the field of phone service. The FCC and state regulatory authorities are considering, for example, whether common carrier regulation traditionally applied to incumbent local exchange carriers should be modified. The FCC recently decided that alternative voice technologies, like certain types of VOIP, should be regulated only at the federal level, rather than by individual states. While this decision appears to be a positive development for VOIP offerings, it is unclear whether and how the FCC will apply certain types of common carrier regulations, such as intercarrier compensation and universal service obligations to alternative voice technology. The FCC recently imposed traditional 911 emergency service obligations on VOIP provided telephony, as well as certain additional notice requirements. The treatment of these regulations and other regulatory matters will affect our potential expansion into phone service.

The Communications Act requires most utilities to provide cable systems with access to poles and conduits and simultaneously regulates the rates charged for this access. The Act specifies that significantly higher rates apply if the cable plant is providing telecommunications service, as well as traditional cable service. The FCC has clarified that a cable operator’s favorable pole rates are not endangered by the provision of Internet access, and that determination was upheld by the United States Supreme Court. It remains possible that the underlying pole attachment formula, or its application to Internet and telecommunications offerings, will be modified in a manner that substantially increases our pole attachment costs.

The FCC has undertaken several steps to promote competition in the delivery of cable equipment and compatibility with new digital technology. The FCC has expressly ruled that cable customers must be

The FCC has adopted rules implementing an agreement between major cable operators and manufacturers of consumer electronics on “plug and play” specifications for one-way digital televisions. The rules require cable operators to provide “CableCard” security modules and support to customer owned digital televisions and similar devices already equipped with built-in set-top terminal functionality. Cable operators must support basic home recording rights and copy protection rules for digital programming content. The FCC’s plug and play rules are under appeal, although, the appeal has been stayed pending FCC reconsideration.

The FCC adopted companion “broadcast flag” rules, requiring cable carriage of a code embedded in digital broadcast programming that will regulate the further use of copyright programming. However, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently held that the FCC lacks jurisdiction to impose the broadcast flag rules.

The FCC is conducting additional related rulemakings, and the cable and consumer electronics industries are currently negotiating an agreement that would establish additional “plug and play” specifications for two-way digital televisions.

The FCC rules are subject to challenge and inter-industry negotiations are ongoing. It is unclear how this process will develop and how it will affect our offering of cable equipment and our relationship with our customers.

In addition to the Communications Act provisions and FCC regulations noted above, there are other statutory provisions and FCC regulations affecting our business. The Communications Act, for example, includes cable-specific privacy obligations. The Act carefully limits our ability to collect and disclose personal information.

FCC regulations include a variety of additional areas, including, among other things: (1) equal employment opportunity obligations; (2) customer service standards; (3) technical service standards; (4) mandatory blackouts of certain network, syndicated and sports programming; (5) restrictions on political advertising; (6) restrictions on advertising in children’s programming; (7) restrictions on origination cablecasting; (8) restrictions on carriage of lottery programming; (9) sponsorship identification obligations; (10) closed captioning of video programming; (11) licensing of systems and facilities; (12) maintenance of public files; and (13) emergency alert systems.

It is possible that Congress or the FCC will expand or modify its regulation of cable systems in the future, and we cannot predict at this time how that might impact our business. For example, there have been recent discussions about imposing “indecency” restrictions directly on cable programming.

Cable systems are subject to federal copyright licensing covering carriage of television and radio broadcast signals. The possible modification or elimination of this compulsory copyright license is the subject of continuing legislative review and could adversely affect our ability to obtain desired broadcast programming. We cannot predict the outcome of this legislative activity. Moreover, the Copyright Office has not yet provided any guidance as to the how the compulsory copyright license should apply to newly offered digital broadcast signals.

Copyright clearances for non-broadcast programming services are arranged through private negotiations. Cable operators also must obtain music rights for locally originated programming and advertising from the major music performing rights organizations. These licensing fees have been the source of litigation in the past, and we cannot predict with certainty whether license fee disputes may arise in the future.

Cable systems generally are operated pursuant to nonexclusive franchises granted by a municipality or other state or local government entity in order to cross public rights-of-way. Cable franchises generally are granted for fixed terms and in many cases include monetary penalties for noncompliance and may be terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with material provisions.

The specific terms and conditions of cable franchises vary materially between jurisdictions. Each franchise generally contains provisions governing cable operations, franchise fees, system construction, maintenance, technical performance, and customer service standards. A number of states subject cable systems to the jurisdiction of centralized state government agencies, such as public utility commissions. Although local franchising authorities have considerable discretion in establishing franchise terms, there are certain federal protections. For example, federal law caps local franchise fees and includes renewal procedures designed to protect incumbent franchisees from arbitrary denials of renewal. Even if a franchise is renewed, however, the local franchising authority may seek to impose new and more onerous requirements as a condition of renewal. Similarly, if a local franchising authority’s consent is required for the purchase or sale of a cable system, the local franchising authority may attempt to impose more burdensome requirements as a condition for providing its consent.

The following sets forth certain biographical information with respect to the directors listed above.

Paul G. Allen, 52, has been Chairman of our board of directors since July 1999, and Chairman of the board of directors of Charter Investment, Inc. (a predecessor to, and currently an affiliate of, Charter) since December 1998. Mr. Allen, co-founder of Microsoft Corporation, has been a private investor for more than 15 years, with interests in over 50 technology, telecommunications, content and biotech companies. Mr. Allen’s investments include Vulcan Inc., Vulcan Productions, Inc., the Portland Trail Blazers NBA and Seattle Seahawks NFL franchises, and investments in DreamWorks LLC and Oxygen Media. In addition, Mr. Allen is a director of Vulcan Programming Inc., Vulcan Ventures, Vulcan Inc., Vulcan Cable III Inc., numerous privately held companies and, until its sale in May 2004 to an unrelated third party, TechTV L.L.C.

W. Lance Conn, 37, was elected to our board of directors in September 2004. Since July 2004, Mr. Conn has served as Executive Vice President, Investment Management for Vulcan Inc., the investment and project management company that oversees a diverse multi-billion dollar portfolio of investments by Paul G. Allen. Prior to joining Vulcan Inc., Mr. Conn was employed by America Online, Inc., an interactive online services company, from March 1996 to May 2003. From 1997 to 2000, Mr. Conn served in various senior business development roles at America Online. In 2000, Mr. Conn began supervising all of America Online’s European investments, alliances and business initiatives. In 2002, he became Senior Vice President of America Online U.S. where he led a company-wide effort to restructure and optimize America Online’s operations. From September 1994 until February 1996, Mr. Conn was an attorney with the Shaw Pittman law firm in Washington, D.C. Mr. Conn holds a J.D. degree from the University of Virginia, a master’s degree in history from the University of Mississippi and an A.B. in history from Princeton University.

Jonathan L. Dolgen, 60, was elected to our board of directors in October 2004. Since July 2004, Mr. Dolgen has also been a Senior Advisor to Viacom, Inc. (“Viacom”) a worldwide entertainment and media company, where he provides advisory services to the current Chairman and Chief Executive of Viacom, or others designated by him, on an as requested basis. Since July 2004, Mr. Dolgen has been a private investor and since September 2004, Mr. Dolgen has been a principal of Wood River Ventures, LLC, a private start-up entity that is seeking investment and other opportunities primarily in the media sector. From April 1994 to July 2004, Mr. Dolgen served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Viacom Entertainment Group, a unit of Viacom, where he oversaw various operations of Viacom’s businesses, which during 2003 and 2004 primarily included the operations engaged in motion picture production and distribution, television production and distribution, regional theme parks, theatrical exhibition and publishing. Mr. Dolgen began his career in the entertainment industry in 1976, and until joining the Viacom Entertainment Group, served in executive positions at Columbia Pictures Industries,

Robert P. May, 56, was elected to our board of directors in October 2004 and became our Interim President and Chief Executive Officer in January 2005. Mr. May has served on the board of directors of HealthSouth Corporation, a national provider of healthcare services, since October 2002, and has been its Chairman since July 2004. Mr. May also served as HealthSouth Corporation’s Interim Chief Executive Officer from March 2003 until May 2004, and as Interim President of its Outpatient and Diagnostic Division from August 2003 to January 2004. Since March 2001, Mr. May has been a private investor and principal of RPM Systems, which provides strategic business consulting services. From March 1999 to March 2001, Mr. May served on the board of directors and was Chief Executive of PNV Inc., a national telecommunications company. PNV Inc. filed for bankruptcy in December 2000. Prior to his employment at PNV Inc., Mr. May was Chief Operating Officer and a member of the board of directors of Cablevision Systems Corporation from October 1996 to February 1998, and from 1973 to 1993 he held several senior executive positions with Federal Express Corporation, including President, Business Logistics Services. Mr. May was educated at Curry College and Boston College and attended Harvard Business School’s Program for Management Development.

David C. Merritt, 51, was elected to our board of directors in July 2003, and was also appointed as Chairman of the Audit Committee at that time. Since October 2003, Mr. Merritt has been a Managing Director of Salem Partners, LLC, an investment banking firm. He was a Managing Director in the Entertainment Media Advisory Group at Gerard Klauer Mattison & Co., Inc., a company that provides financial advisory services to the entertainment and media industries from January 2001 through April 2003. Prior to that, he served as Chief Financial Officer of CKE Associates, Ltd., a privately held company with interests in talent management, film production, television production, music and new media from July 1999 to November 2001. He also served as a director of Laser-Pacific Media Corporation from January 2001 until October 2003 and served as Chairman of its audit committee. During December 2003, he became a director of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. Mr. Merritt joined KPMG LLP in 1975 and served in a variety of capacities during his years with the firm, including national partner in charge of the media and entertainment practice and before joining CKE Associates, Mr. Merritt was an audit and consulting partner of KPMG LLP for 14 years. Mr. Merritt holds a B.S. degree in Business and Accounting from California State University — Northridge.

Marc B. Nathanson, 60, has been a director of Charter since January 2000. Mr. Nathanson is the Chairman of Mapleton Investments LLC, an investment vehicle formed in 1999. He also founded and served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Falcon Holding Group, Inc., a cable operator, and its predecessors, from 1975 until 1999. He served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Enstar Communications Corporation, a cable operator, from 1988 until November 1999. Prior to 1975, Mr. Nathanson held executive positions with Teleprompter Corporation, Warner Cable and Cypress Communications Corporation. In 1995, he was appointed by the President of the United States to the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and from 1998 through September 2002, served as its Chairman. Mr. Nathanson holds a bachelors degree in Mass Communications from the University of Denver and a masters degree in Political Science from University of California/ Santa Barbara.

Jo Allen Patton, 47, has been a director of Charter since April 2004. Ms. Patton joined Vulcan Inc. as Vice President in 1993, and since that time she has served as an officer and director of many affiliates of Mr. Allen, including her current position as President and Chief Executive Officer of Vulcan Inc. since July 2001. Ms. Patton is also President of Vulcan Productions, an independent feature film and documentary production company, Vice Chair of First & Goal, Inc., which developed and operated the Seattle Seahawks NFL stadium, and served as Executive Director of the six Paul G. Allen Foundations. Ms. Patton is a co-founder of the Experience Music Project museum, as well as the Science Fiction Museum and Hall of Fame. Ms. Patton is the sister of Mr. Allen.

John H. Tory, 51, has been a director of Charter since December 2001. Mr. Tory served as the Chief Executive Officer of Rogers Cable Inc., Canada’s largest broadband cable operator, from 1999 until 2003.

On June 29, 2005, Mr. Tory formally notified Charter that he intends to resign from its board of directors and the board committees on which he serves. Mr. Tory was elected Leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party in September 2004 and elected to Parliament in March 2005. The date for Mr. Tory’s departure has not yet been determined, but he has indicated that he will continue to serve on Charter’s board and its committees at least until the date of the annual shareholders meeting or until a replacement director is named.

Larry W. Wangberg, 63, has been a director of Charter since January 2002. From August 1997 to May 2004, Mr. Wangberg was a director of TechTV L.L.C., a cable television network controlled by Paul Allen. He also served as its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from August 1997 through July 2002. In May 2004, TechTV L.L.C. was sold to an unrelated party. Prior to joining TechTV L.L.C., Mr. Wangberg was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of StarSight Telecast Inc., an interactive navigation and program guide company which later merged with Gemstar International, from 1994 to 1997. Mr. Wangberg was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Times Mirror Cable Television and Senior Vice President of its corporate parent, Times Mirror Co., from 1983 to 1994. He currently serves on the boards of Autodesk Inc. and ADC Telecommunications. Mr. Wangberg holds a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering and a master’s degree in Industrial Engineering, both from the University of Minnesota.

The Audit Committee, which has a written charter approved by the board of directors, consisted of three directors as of March 28, 2005: Charles Lillis, John Tory and David Merritt, all of whom are believed to be independent in accordance with the applicable corporate governance listing standards of the NASDAQ National Market. Charter’s board of directors has determined that, in its judgment, David Merritt is an audit committee financial expert within the meaning of the applicable federal regulations.

On March 29, 2005, Charter announced the resignation of Charles M. Lillis from its board of directors, effective on March 28, 2005. Mr. Lillis was one of three independent members of the Audit Committee. As a result of his resignation, Charter no longer complies with Nasdaq’s Marketplace Rule 4350(d)(2)(A), requiring an Audit Committee with at least three members who are “independent” as defined in that rule. On March 31, 2005, Charter received notification from Nasdaq of its noncompliance with Marketplace Rule 4350. Nasdaq has informed Charter that it has until the date of its next annual shareholder meeting to regain compliance or its securities will be delisted. Charter intends to regain compliance by appointing, within such timeframe, a new Audit Committee member who meets the independence requirements of the Nasdaq rules.

On June 29, 2005, John Tory formally notified Charter that he intends to resign from its board of directors and the board committees on which he serves. The date for Mr. Tory’s departure has not yet been determined, but he has indicated that he will continue to serve on Charter’s board and its committees at least until the date of the annual shareholders meeting or until a replacement director is named.

Each non-employee member of our board receives an annual retainer of $40,000 in cash plus restricted stock, vesting one year after date of grant, with a value on the date of grant of $50,000. In addition, the Audit Committee chair receives $25,000 per year, and the chair of each other committee receives $10,000 per year. Prior to February 22, 2005, all committee members also received $1,000 for attendance at each committee meeting. Beginning on February 22, 2005 each director also receives $1,000 for telephonic attendance at each meeting of the full board and $2,000 for in-person attendance. Each director of Charter is entitled to reimbursement for costs incurred in connection with attendance at board and committee meetings. Vulcan has informed us that, in accordance with its internal policy, Mr. Conn turns over to Vulcan all cash compensation he receives for his participation on Charter’s board of directors or committees thereof.

Directors who were employees did not receive additional compensation in 2003 or 2004. Mr. Vogel, who was our President and Chief Executive Officer in 2004, was the only director who was also an employee during 2004.

Our Bylaws provide that all directors are entitled to indemnification to the maximum extent permitted by law from and against any claims, damages, liabilities, losses, costs or expenses incurred in connection with or arising out of the performance by them of their duties for us or our subsidiaries. In addition, we have been informed by Vulcan that the bylaws of Vulcan, Inc. also provide that Ms. Patton and Messrs. Allen and Conn are entitled to similar indemnification in connection with their service on our Board of Directors.

Information regarding our executive officers who do not serve as directors is set forth below.

Wayne H. Davis, 51, Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer. Prior to his current position, Mr. Davis served as Senior Vice President, Engineering and Technical Operations, and as Assistant to the President/ Vice President of Management Services since July 2002 and prior to that, he was Vice President of Engineering/ Operations for Charter’s National Region from December 2001. Before joining Charter, Mr. Davis held the position of Vice President of Engineering for Comcast Corporation, Inc. Prior to that, he held various engineering positions including Vice President of Engineering for Jones Intercable Inc. He began his career in the cable industry in 1980. He attended the State University of New York at Albany. Mr. Davis serves as an advisory board member of Cedar Point Communications, and as a board member of @Security Broadband Corp., a company in which Charter owns an equity investment interest. Mr. Davis is also a member of the Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers.

Sue Ann R. Hamilton, 44, Executive Vice President of Programming. Ms. Hamilton joined Charter as Senior Vice President of Programming in March 2003 and was promoted to her current position in April 2005. From March 1999 to November 2002, Ms. Hamilton served as Vice President of Programming for

Thomas J. Hearity, 58, Senior Vice President, Acting General Counsel and Secretary. Mr Hearity joined Charter as Vice President and Associate General counsel in September 2003 and was promoted to Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel in August 2004. He was appointed to Acting General Counsel in April 2005 and appointed Secretary in May 2005. Prior to joining Charter, Mr. Hearity served as outside counsel for Charter and several other major wireline and wireless telecommunications firms from 1996 to 2003. Mr. Hearity served as counsel for the NYNEX Corporation from 1984 to 1996. Mr. Hearity graduated with honors and received a B.A. degree in History and a J.D. degree from the University of Iowa.

Michael J. Lovett, 44, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Lovett was promoted to his current position in April 2005. Prior to that he served as Executive Vice President, Operations and Customer Care from September 2004 through March 2005, and as Senior Vice President, Midwest Division Operations and as Senior Vice President of Operations Support, since joining Charter in August 2003 until September 2004. Mr. Lovett was Chief Operating Officer of Voyant Technologies, Inc., a voice conferencing hardware/ software solutions provider, from December 2001 to August 2003. From November 2000 to December 2001, he was Executive Vice President of Operations for OneSecure, Inc., a startup company delivering management/monitoring of firewalls and virtual private networks. Prior to that, Mr. Lovett was Regional Vice President at AT&T from June 1999 to November 2000 where he was responsible for operations. Mr. Lovett was Senior Vice President at Jones Intercable from October 1989 to June 1999 where he was responsible for operations in nine states. Mr. Lovett began his career in cable television at Centel Corporation where he held a number of positions.

Paul E. Martin, 44, Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller. Mr. Martin has been employed by Charter since March 2000, when he joined Charter as Vice President and Corporate Controller. In April 2002, Mr. Martin was promoted to Senior Vice President, Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller, in August 2004 was named Interim co-Chief Financial Officer and in April 2005 was named Interim Chief Financial Officer. Prior to joining Charter, Mr. Martin was Vice President and Controller for Operations and Logistics for Fort James Corporation, a manufacturer of paper products. From 1995 to February 1999, Mr. Martin was Chief Financial Officer of Rawlings Sporting Goods Company, Inc. Mr. Martin received a B.S. degree with honors in Accounting from the University of Missouri — St. Louis.

Lynne F. Ramsey, 47, Senior Vice President, Human Resources. Ms. Ramsey joined Charter’s Human Resources group in March 2001 and served as Corporate Vice President, Human Resources. She was promoted to her current position in July 2004. Before joining Charter, Ms. Ramsey was Executive Vice President of Human Resources for Broadband Infrastructure Group from March 2000 through November 2000. From 1994 to 1999, Ms. Ramsey served as Senior Vice President of Human Resources for Firstar Bank, previously Mercantile Bank of St. Louis. She served as Vice President of Human Resources for United Postal Savings from 1982 through 1994, when it was acquired by Mercantile Bank of St. Louis. Ms. Ramsey received a bachelor’s degree in Education from Maryville College and a master’s degree in Human Resources Management from Washington University.

Until April 2004, when Mr. Savoy resigned from the board, the Compensation Committee of Charter was comprised of Messrs. Allen, Savoy and Nathanson. In 2004, Ms. Peretsman and Mr. Merritt served as the Option Plan Committee that administered the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and the

No member of the Compensation Committee or the Option Plan Committee was an officer or employee of Charter or any of its subsidiaries during 2004, except for Mr. Allen, who served as a non-employee chairman of the Compensation Committee. Also, Mr. Nathanson was an officer of certain subsidiaries of Charter prior to their acquisition by Charter in 1999 and held the title of Vice Chairman of Charter’s board of directors, a non-executive, non-salaried position in 2004. Mr. Allen is the 100% owner and a director of Vulcan Inc. and certain of its affiliates, which employed Mr. Savoy, one of our directors until April 27, 2004, as an executive officer in the past and currently employs Mr. Conn and Ms. Patton as executive officers. Mr. Allen also was a director of and indirectly owned 98% of TechTV, of which Mr. Wangberg, one of our directors, was a director until the sale of TechTV to an unrelated third party in May 2004. Transactions between Charter and members of the Compensation Committee are more fully described in “— Director Compensation” and in “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Other Miscellaneous Relationships.”

During 2004, (1) none of our executive officers served on the compensation committee of any other company that has an executive officer currently serving on the board of directors, Compensation Committee or Option Plan Committee of Charter and (2) except for Carl Vogel who served as a director of Digeo, Inc., an entity of which Paul Allen is a director and by virtue of his position as Chairman of the board of directors of Digeo, Inc. is also a non-employee executive officer. None of our executive officers served as a director of another entity, one of whose executive officers served on the Compensation Committee or Option Plan Committee of Charter.

The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2004 regarding the compensation to those executive officers listed below for services rendered for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004. These officers consist of the Chief Executive Officer, each of the other four most highly compensated executive officers as of December 31, 2004, and one other highly compensated executive officer who served during 2004 but was not an executive officer on December 31, 2004.


	(1)	Except as noted in notes 24 through 27 below, these amounts consist of matching contributions under our 401(k) plan, premiums for supplemental life insurance available to executives, and long-term disability available to executives.

	(2)	Mr. Vogel resigned from all of his positions with Charter and its subsidiaries on January 17, 2005.

	(3)	Ms. Bellville became the Chief Operating Officer of Charter in December 2002 and terminated her employment, effective September 30, 2004.

	(4)	Mr. Chang was hired as Executive Vice President of Finance and Strategy in December 2003, and was appointed Interim co-Chief Financial Officer in August 2004. Mr. Chang resigned from all positions with Charter and its subsidiaries effective April 15, 2005.

	(5)	Mr. Schumm’s position with Charter and its subsidiaries was eliminated, resulting in the termination of his employment on January 28, 2005.

	(6)	Mr. Shaw resigned from all positions with Charter and its subsidiaries effective April 15, 2005.

	(7)	Mr. Lovett joined Charter in August 2003 and was promoted to Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer in April 2005.

	(8)	Mr. Vogel’s bonus for 2004 was a mid-year discretionary bonus.

	(9)	Mr. Vogel’s and Ms. Bellville’s 2002 and 2003 bonuses were determined in accordance with the terms of their respective employment agreements.


(10)	Includes a one-time signing bonus of $150,000 pursuant to an employment agreement.

(11)	Mr. Chang’s bonus for 2004 represents the 2004 portion of a $150,000 special bonus which was paid in connection with his continued service as Interim co-Chief Financial Officer through April 15, 2005.

(12)	Mr. Schumm’s bonus for 2004 was determined in accordance with his separation agreement.

(13)	Includes a “stay” bonus representing the principal and interest forgiven under employee’s promissory note, amounting to $363,000 for 2002; and $225,000 awarded as a bonus for services performed in 2002.

(14)	Includes a “stay” bonus representing the principal and interest forgiven under employee’s promissory note, amounting to $181,500 for 2002; and $100,000 awarded as a bonus for services performed in 2002.

(15)	Amount attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane in 2003 and $100,000 attributed to personal use and commuting in the corporate airplane in 2002 and $114,961 for purchase of a car in 2002.

(16)	Includes (i) for 2004, reimbursement for taxes (on a “grossed up” basis) paid in respect of prior reimbursements for relocation expenses, and (ii) for 2003, $26,010 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane and $4,800 for car allowance.

(17)	Includes reimbursement for taxes (on a “grossed up” basis) paid in respect of prior reimbursements for relocation expenses.


(18)	Includes 340,000 performance shares granted in January 2004 under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. Also includes 680,000 restricted shares issued in exchange for stock options held by the named officer pursuant to the February 2004 option exchange program described below, one half of which constituted performance shares which were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria, and the other half of which were to vest over three years in equal one-third installments. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $2,310,468, based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for our Class A common stock on December 31, 2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon termination of employment. The remainder of the restricted shares will vest in part on the terms described below under “Employment Arrangements.”

(19)	These restricted shares consisted solely of performance shares granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to have vested on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $0, since all performance shares were previously forfeited upon the termination of employment.

(20)	Restricted shares granted in 2003 vest over four years in equal one-fourth installments. Restricted shares granted in 2004 represent 77,500 performance shares granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $257,600 based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for our Class A common stock on December 31, 2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon termination of employment. The remainder of restricted shares will vest in part on the terms described below under “Employment Arrangements.”

(21)	Includes 77,500 performance shares granted in January 2004 under our Long-Term Incentive Program that were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. Also includes restricted shares issued in exchange for stock options held by the named officer pursuant to the February 2004 option exchange program described below. One half of these restricted shares constitutes performance shares which were to vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria and the other half of which were to vest over three years in equal one-third installments. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $417,240, based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for our Class A common stock on December 31, 2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon the termination of employment. The remainder of the restricted shares will vest in part on the terms described below under “Employment Arrangements.”

(22)	These restricted shares consist solely of performance shares granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that will vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $173,600 based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for our Class A common stock on December 31, 2004. All performance shares were forfeited upon termination of employment.

(23)	These restricted shares consist solely of performance shares granted under our Long-Term Incentive Program that will vest on the third anniversary of the grant date only if Charter meets certain performance criteria. At December 31, 2004, the value of all of the named officer’s unvested restricted stock holdings (including performance shares) was $197,120, based on a per share market value (closing sale price) of $2.24 for our Class A common stock on December 31, 2004.

(24)	In addition to items in note 1 above, includes (i) for 2004, $28,977 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane, $10,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory services and (ii) for 2003, $10,000 as


	reimbursement for tax advisory services; and (iii) for 2002, $10,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory services.


(25)	In addition to items in note 1 above, includes (i) for 2004, $183,899 for severance and accrued vacation at termination of employment, $10,299 for COBRA payments following termination, $4,650 for automobile allowance and $2,831 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane, and (ii) for 2003, $5,000 as reimbursement for tax advisory services, $7,500 for legal services and $93,684 paid in relation to relocation expenses.

(26)	In addition to items in note 1 above, includes for 2003, $2,287 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane.


(27)	In addition to items in note 1 above, includes, (i) for 2004, $7,200 for automobile allowance, and $597 attributed to personal use of the corporate airplane and (ii) for 2003, $2,400 for automobile allowance.

The following table shows individual grants of options made to individuals named in the Summary Compensation Table during 2004. All such grants were made under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and the exercise price was based upon the fair market value of Charter’s Class A common stock on the respective grant dates.


(1)	Options are transferable under limited conditions, primarily to accommodate estate planning purposes. These options generally vest in four equal installments commencing on the first anniversary following the grant date.

(2)	This column shows the hypothetical gains on the options granted based on assumed annual compound price appreciation of 5% and 10% over the full ten-year term of the options. The assumed rates of 5% and 10% appreciation are mandated by the SEC and do not represent our estimate or projection of future prices.

(3)	Mr. Vogel’s employment terminated on January 17, 2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.

(4)	Ms. Bellville’s employment terminated on September 30, 2004. Under the terms of the separation agreement, her options will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.


(5)	Mr. Chang resigned effective April 15, 2005. Mr. Chang’s agreement provided that one half of his unvested restricted shares would immediately vest, and one half of his unvested options of the initial option grant would vest if he elected to terminate his employment due to a change in our Chief Executive Officer.


(6)	Mr. Schumm’s employment terminated on January 28, 2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options will continue to vest until April 28, 2006, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.


(7)	Mr. Shaw resigned, effective April 15, 2005. As of that date, his options are no longer exercisable.

The following table sets forth, for the individuals named in the Summary Compensation Table, (i) information concerning options exercised during 2004, (ii) the number of shares of our Class A common stock underlying unexercised options at year-end 2004, and (iii) the value of unexercised “in-the-money” options (i.e., the positive spread between the exercise price of outstanding options and the market value of our Class A common stock) on December 31, 2004.


(1)	Options granted prior to 2001 and under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan, when vested, are exercisable for membership units of Charter Holdco which are immediately exchanged on a one-for-one basis for shares of our Class A common stock upon exercise of the option. Options granted under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and after 2000 are exercisable for shares of our Class A common stock.

(2)	Based on a per share market value (closing price) of $2.24 as of December 31, 2004 for our Class A common stock.

(3)	Mr. Vogel’s employment terminated on January 17, 2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.

(4)	Ms. Bellville’s employment terminated on September 30, 2004. Under the terms of the separation agreement, her options will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.

(5)	Mr. Chang resigned from all of his positions with Charter effective April 15, 2005. One-half of the remainder of his options will vest on the terms described below under “Employment Arrangements.”

(6)	Mr. Schumm’s employment terminated on January 28, 2005. Under the terms of the separation agreement, his options will continue to vest until April 28, 2006, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.


(7)	Mr. Shaw resigned from all of his positions with Charter effective April 15, 2005. As of that date, his options are no longer exercisable.

The Plans. We have granted stock options, restricted stock and other incentive compensation under two plans — the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. The 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan provided for the grant of options to purchase membership units in Charter Holdco to current and prospective employees and consultants of Charter Holdco and its affiliates and to our current and prospective non-employee directors. Membership units received upon exercise of

The 2001 Stock Incentive Plan provides for the grant of non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalent rights, performance units and performance shares, share awards, phantom stock and/or shares of restricted stock (not to exceed 3,000,000 shares) as each term is defined in the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Employees, officers, consultants and directors of Charter and its subsidiaries and affiliates are eligible to receive grants under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Generally, options expire 10 years from the grant date. Unless sooner terminated by our board of directors, the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan will terminate on February 12, 2011, and no option or award can be granted thereafter.

Together, the plans allow for the issuance of up to a total of 90,000,000 shares of our Class A common stock (or units exchangeable for our Class A common stock). Any shares covered by options that are terminated under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan will be transferred to the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan, and no new options will be granted under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan. At March 31, 2005, 1,309,620 shares had been issued under the plans upon exercise of options, 655,749 had been issued upon vesting of restricted stock granted under the plans, and 1,162,176 shares were subject to future vesting under restricted stock agreements. Of the remaining 86,872,455 shares covered by the plans, as of March 31, 2005, 29,067,828 were subject to outstanding options (30% of which were vested), and there were 11,627,420 performance shares granted under Charter’s Long-Term Incentive Program, which will vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant conditional upon Charter’s performance against certain financial targets approved by Charter’s board of directors at the time of the award. As of March 31, 2005, 46,177,207 shares remained available for future grants under the plans.

The plans authorize the repricing of options, which could include reducing the exercise price per share of any outstanding option, permitting the cancellation, forfeiture or tender of outstanding options in exchange for other awards or for new options with a lower exercise price per share, or repricing or replacing any outstanding options by any other method.

In January 2004, the Compensation Committee of our board of directors approved our Long-Term Incentive Program, or LTIP, which is a program administered under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the LTIP, employees of Charter and its subsidiaries whose pay classifications exceed a certain level are eligible to receive stock options, and more senior level employees were eligible to receive stock options and performance shares. The stock options vest 25% on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant. The performance shares vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant shares of Class A common stock are issued, conditional upon our performance against financial performance measures established by our management and approved by the board of directors or Compensation Committee as of the time of the award. We granted 6,899,600 performance shares in January 2004 under this program and recognized expense of $8 million in the first three quarters of 2004. However, in the fourth quarter of 2004, we reversed the entire $8 million of expense based on our assessment of the probability of achieving the financial performance measures established by management and required to be met for the performance shares to vest.

The 2001 Stock Incentive Plan must be administered by, and grants and awards to eligible individuals must be approved by our board of directors or a committee thereof consisting solely of nonemployee directors as defined in Section 16b-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The board of directors or such committee determines the terms of each stock option grant, restricted stock grant or other award at the time of grant, including the exercise price to be paid for the shares, the vesting schedule for each option, the price, if any, to be paid by the grantee for the restricted stock, the restrictions placed on the shares, and the time or times when the restrictions will lapse. The board of directors or such committee also has the power to accelerate the vesting of any grant or extend the term thereof.

Upon a change of control of Charter, the board of directors or the administering committee can shorten the exercise period of any option, have the survivor or successor entity assume the options with

February 2004 Option Exchange. In January 2004, we offered employees of Charter and its subsidiaries the right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio, which varied depending on the exercise price of an employee’s outstanding options, if an employee would have received more than 400 shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, we issued to that employee shares of restricted stock in the exchange. If, based on the exchange ratios, an employee would have received 400 or fewer shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, we instead paid to the employee cash in an amount equal to the number of shares the employee would have received multiplied by $5.00. The offer applied to options to purchase a total of 22,929,573 shares of Class A common stock, or approximately 48% of our 47,882,365 total options (vested and unvested) issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2003. Participation by employees was voluntary. Non-employee members of the board of directors of Charter or any of its subsidiaries were not eligible to participate in the exchange offer.

In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004, we accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase approximately 18,137,664 shares of our Class A common stock. In exchange, we granted approximately 1,966,686 shares of restricted stock, including 460,777 performance shares to eligible employees of the rank of senior vice president and above, and paid a total cash amount of approximately $4 million (which amount includes applicable withholding taxes) to those employees who received cash rather than shares of restricted stock. The restricted stock was granted on February 25, 2004. Employees tendered approximately 79% of the options eligible to be exchanged under the program.

The cost of the stock option exchange program was approximately $10 million, with a 2004 cash compensation expense of approximately $4 million and a non-cash compensation expense of approximately $6 million to be expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period of the restricted stock issued in the exchange.

On June 9, 2005, Charter adopted the 2005 Executive Cash Award Plan (“Plan”), to provide additional incentive to, and retain the services of, certain officers of Charter and its subsidiaries, to achieve the highest level of individual performance and contribute to the success of Charter. Eligible participants are employees of Charter or any of its subsidiaries, at the level of Vice President and above, who have been recommended by the CEO and designated and approved as Plan participants by the Compensation Committee of Charter’s board of directors. At the time the Plan was adopted, the interim CEO recommended and the Compensation Committee designated and approved as Plan participants the permanent President and Chief Executive Officer position (when filled), Executive Vice President positions and selected Senior Vice President positions.

The Plan provides that each participant be granted an award which represents an opportunity to receive cash payments in accordance with the Plan. An award will be credited in book entry format to a participant’s account in an amount equal to 100% of a participant’s base salary on the date of Plan approval in 2005 and 20% of participant’s base salary in each year 2006 through 2009, based on that participant’s base salary as of May 1 of the applicable year. The Plan awards will vest at the rate of 50% of the plan award balance at the end of 2007 and 100% of the plan award balance at the end of 2009.

A participant’s eligibility for, and right to receive, any payment under the Plan (except in the case of intervening death) is conditioned upon the participant first executing and delivering to Charter an agreement releasing and giving up all claims that participant may have against Charter and related parties arising out of or based upon any facts or conduct occurring prior to the payment date, and containing additional restrictions on post-employment use of confidential information, non-competition and non-solicitation and recruitment of customers and employees.

Charter entered into an agreement with Robert P. May, effective January 17, 2005, whereby Mr. May serves as Charter’s Interim President and Chief Executive Officer (the “May Executive Services Agreement”). Under the May Executive Services Agreement, Mr. May receives a $1,250,000 base fee per year. If Mr. May becomes Charter’s permanent President and Chief Executive Officer or is terminated without cause, Mr. May will be eligible to receive a one-time discretionary bonus up to 100% of the actual base fee paid to him for his interim service under the agreement, based on individual and company performance. Mr. May will continue to receive the compensation and reimbursement of expenses to which he is entitled in his capacity as a member of the board of directors. Mr. May may terminate the May Executive Services Agreement on thirty (30) days notice. Charter may terminate such agreement upon three (3) months notice, and Charter may elect at its discretion to pay Mr. May the base rate for such period in lieu of all or part of the notice. Subject to the approval of the board of directors or a suitable committee thereof, Mr. May will be granted options to purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock and/or receive a grant of restricted stock pursuant to the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan, the number and terms of which will be determined as soon as practicable. Mr. May serves as an independent contractor and is not entitled to any vacation or eligible to participate in any employee benefit programs of Charter. Charter will reimburse Mr. May for reasonable transportation costs from Mr. May’s residence in Florida or other locations to Charter’s offices and will provide temporary living quarters or reimburse expenses related thereto.

On April 1, 2005, we entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Lovett, pursuant to which he will be employed as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer for a term commencing April 1, 2005 and expiring on April 1, 2008. The contract will be reviewed every 18 months thereafter and may be extended pursuant to such reviews. Under the agreement, Mr. Lovett will receive an annual base salary of $575,000 and will be eligible to receive an annual bonus targeted at 80% of his base salary under our senior management bonus plan. We will also provide Mr. Lovett with equity incentives commensurate with his position and responsibilities, as determined by the Board of Directors in its discretion. If his employment is terminated without cause or if he terminates his employment due to a change in control or for good reason (as defined in the agreement), we will pay Mr. Lovett an amount equal to the aggregate base salary due to Mr. Lovett during the remainder of the term, within fifteen days of termination. In addition, if we terminate his employment without cause, Mr. Lovett will be entitled to receive a pro rated bonus for the fiscal year in which he is terminated based upon financial results through the month of termination. Mr. Lovett’s agreement includes a covenant not to compete for the balance of the term and for two years thereafter. The agreement further provides that Mr. Lovett is entitled to receive certain relocation expenses and to participate in any benefit plan generally afforded to, and to receive vacation and sick pay on such terms as are offered to, our other senior executive officers.

Effective April 15, 2005, Charter has entered into an agreement governing the terms of the service of Mr. Paul E. Martin as Interim Chief Financial Officer. Under the terms of the agreement, Mr. Martin will receive approximately $13,700 each month for his service in the capacity of Interim Chief Financial Officer until a permanent Chief Financial Officer is employed. Under the agreement, Mr. Martin will also

Until his resignation effective April 15, 2005, Mr. Chang was employed under the terms contained in an offer letter effective December 2, 2003 providing for an annual base salary of $400,000 (which was increased to $450,000 per year) and eligibility for an annual incentive target of 100% of the base salary (based on a combination of personal performance goals and overall company performance). Mr. Chang was also eligible to participate in our 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under this plan, Mr. Chang was granted 350,000 options to purchase Class A common stock and 50,000 restricted shares on December 9, 2003. Mr. Chang was also entitled to participate in our LTIP. Mr. Chang’s agreement provided that one half of his unvested restricted shares would immediately vest, and one half of his unvested options of the initial option grant would vest if he was terminated without cause or if he elected to terminate his employment due to (1) a change in our Chief Executive Officer, (2) a change in reporting relationship to anyone other than the Chief Executive Officer, (3) a requirement that the employee relocate, or (4) a change of control of Charter, if terminated without cause. In addition, Mr. Chang was entitled to eighteen months of full severance benefits at his current compensation rate, plus the pro rata portion of his bonus amounts within thirty days after termination because of any of these events. In light of Mr. Vogel’s resignation, Charter and Mr. Chang agreed that he would have until April 15, 2005 to exercise his right to terminate his employment and receive the foregoing vesting, severance and other benefits. In addition, Charter agreed that it would pay Mr. Chang a special $150,000 bonus, in addition to any other bonuses to which he would be otherwise entitled, conditioned on Mr. Chang’s continued service as Interim co-Chief Financial Officer through March 31, 2005, which was paid in April 2005.

Until his resignation in January 2005, Mr. Vogel was employed as President and Chief Executive Officer, earning a base annual salary of $1,000,000 and was eligible to receive an annual bonus of up to $500,000, a portion of which was based on personal performance goals and a portion of which was based on company performance measured against criteria established by the board with Mr. Vogel. Pursuant to his employment agreement, Mr. Vogel was granted 3,400,000 options to purchase Class A common stock and 50,000 shares of restricted stock under our 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. In the February 2004 option exchange, Mr. Vogel exchanged his 3,400,000 options for 340,000 shares of restricted stock and 340,000 performance shares. Mr. Vogel’s initial 50,000 restricted shares vested 25% on the grant date, with the remainder vesting in 36 equal monthly installments beginning December 2002. The 340,000 shares of restricted stock were to vest over a three-year period, with one-third of the shares vesting on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date. The 340,000 performance shares were to vest at the end of a three-year period if certain financial criteria were met. Mr. Vogel’s agreement provided that, if Mr. Vogel is terminated without cause or if Mr. Vogel terminated the agreement for good reason, he is entitled to his aggregate base salary due during the remainder of the term and full prorated benefits and bonus for the year in which termination occurs. Mr. Vogel’s agreement included a covenant not to compete for the balance of the initial term or any renewal term, but no more than one year in the event of termination without cause or by Mr. Vogel with good reason. Mr. Vogel’s agreement entitled him to participate in any disability insurance, pensions or other benefit plans afforded to employees generally or to our executives, including our LTIP. We agreed to reimburse Mr. Vogel annually for the cost of term life insurance in the amount of $5 million, although he declined this reimbursement in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Mr. Vogel was entitled to reimbursement of fees and dues for his membership in a country club of his choice, which he declined in 2002, 2003 and 2004, and reimbursement for up to $10,000 per year for tax, legal and financial planning services. His agreement also provided for a car and associated expenses for Mr. Vogel’s use. Mr. Vogel’s agreement provided for automatic one-year renewals and also provided that we would cause him to be elected to our board of directors without any additional compensation.

In February 2005, Charter entered into an agreement with Mr. Vogel setting forth the terms of his resignation. Under the terms of the agreement, Mr. Vogel received in February 2005 all accrued and unpaid base salary and vacation pay through the date of resignation and a lump sum payment equal to the remainder of his base salary during 2005 (totaling $953,425). In addition, he will receive a lump sum cash payment of $500,000 at December 31, 2005, which is subject to reduction to the extent of compensation attributable to certain competitive activities.

Mr. Vogel will continue to receive certain health benefits during 2005 and COBRA premiums for such health insurance coverage for 18 months thereafter. All of his outstanding stock options, as well as his restricted stock granted in 2004 (excluding 340,000 shares of restricted stock granted as “performance units”, which will automatically be forfeited), will continue to vest through December 31, 2005. In addition, one-half of the remaining unvested portion of his 2001 restricted stock grant vested upon the effectiveness of the agreement, and the other half was forfeited. Mr. Vogel had 60 days after December 31, 2005 to exercise any outstanding vested stock options. Under the agreement, Mr. Vogel waived any further right to any bonus or incentive plan participation and provided certain releases of claims against Charter and its subsidiaries from any claims arising out of or based upon any facts occurring prior to the date of the agreement, but Charter will continue to provide Mr. Vogel certain indemnification rights and to include Mr. Vogel in its director and officer liability insurance for a period of six years. Charter and its subsidiaries also agreed to provide releases of certain claims against Mr. Vogel with certain exceptions reserved. Mr. Vogel has also agreed, with limited exceptions that he will continue to be bound by the covenant not to compete, confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions contained in his 2001 employment agreement.

Ms. Bellville was employed as Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer. Until her resignation in September 2004, she was employed under an employment agreement entered into as of April 27, 2003, that would have terminated on September 1, 2007. Her annual base salary was $625,000 and she was eligible to receive an annual bonus in an amount to be determined by our board of directors, with a contractual minimum for 2003 of $203,125. Commencing in 2004, Ms. Bellville would have been eligible to receive a target annual bonus equal to 100% of her base salary for the applicable year at the discretion of the board of directors, 50% to be based on personal performance goals and 50% to be based on overall company performance. Under a prior offer letter dated December 3, 2002, Ms. Bellville was granted 500,000 options to purchase shares of our Class A common stock, which vested 25% on the date of the grant (December 9, 2002), with the balance to vest in 36 equal installments commencing January 2003. Ms. Bellville’s employment agreement provided that if she was terminated without cause or if she terminated the agreement for good reason (including due to a change in control or if Ms. Bellville was required to report, directly or indirectly, to persons other than the Chief Executive Officer), we would pay Ms. Bellville an amount equal to the aggregate base salary due to Ms. Bellville during the remainder of the term, or renewal term and a full prorated bonus for the year in which the termination occurs, within thirty days of termination. Ms. Bellville’s agreement included a covenant not to compete for the balance of the initial term or any renewal term, but no more than one year, in the event of termination without cause or by her with good reason. Her agreement further provided that she was entitled to participate in any disability insurance, pension or other benefit plan afforded to employees generally or to executives, including our LTIP. Ms. Bellville was entitled to a monthly car allowance and reimbursement for all business expenses associated with the use of such car. Ms. Bellville’s agreement provided that she was entitled to the reimbursement of dues for her membership in a country club of her choice, and reimbursement for up to $5,000 per year for tax, legal and financial planning services.

On September 16, 2004, Charter entered into an agreement with Ms. Bellville governing the terms and conditions of her resignation as an officer and employee of Charter. Under the terms of this agreement, Ms. Bellville has the right to receive 65 weeks of base pay based on an annual base of $625,000, plus usual compensation for all accrued vacation and other leave time. Her options to purchase 700,000 shares of Class A common stock will continue to vest during the salary continuation period. Ms. Bellville will have 60 days after the expiration of the salary continuation period to exercise any outstanding vested options at the applicable exercise prices established at each grant date. To date,

Ms. Bellville has exercised her options to purchase 350,000 shares. Ms. Bellville was entitled to and received relocation benefits under Charter’s current relocation policy with respect to a move to a specified geographic area and was provided outplacement assistance for 6 months following the date of her separation from Charter. Her resignation was effective September 30, 2004. The agreement provides that the previously existing employment agreement would terminate, except for certain ongoing obligations on Ms. Bellville’s part concerning confidentiality, non-solicitation and non-disparagement. The contractual restriction on her ability to solicit current Charter employees does not apply to persons who, at the time of solicitation, have not worked for Charter in the prior 6 months and are not receiving severance from Charter. In addition, the non-competition provisions of her employment agreement were waived. Under the agreement, Ms. Bellville waived a right to any bonus or incentive plan and released Charter from any claims arising out of or based upon any facts occurring prior to the date of the agreement, but Charter will continue to provide Ms. Bellville certain indemnification rights for that period.

In addition to the indemnification provisions which apply to all employees under our bylaws, Mr. Vogel’s and Ms. Bellville’s agreements provide that we will indemnify and hold harmless each employee to the maximum extent permitted by law from and against any claims, damages, liabilities, losses, costs or expenses in connection with or arising out of the performance by the applicable employee of his or her duties. Each of the above agreements also contains confidentiality and non-solicitation provisions.

Effective January 28, 2005, we eliminated the position of Chief Administrative Officer, resulting in the termination of employment of Steven A. Schumm, Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer from Charter and each of our subsidiaries for which Mr. Schumm served as an officer. Pursuant to a Separation Agreement executed on February 8, 2005, we will continue to pay Mr. Schumm’s base salary for 65 weeks at an annual rate of $450,000, and Mr. Schumm was paid a bonus of $15,815 at the time other executives received their bonuses in April 2005. Mr. Schumm’s stock options will continue to vest during the 65-week severance period, and he will have 60 days thereafter to exercise any vested options.

Thomas A. Cullen resigned, effective April 30, 2005, from his position as Executive Vice President of Advanced Services and Business Development of Charter and each of Charter’s subsidiaries for which Mr. Cullen served as an officer. Pursuant to a Separation Agreement and Release executed on March 15, 2005, Charter will continue to pay Mr. Cullen’s base salary for 65 weeks following the termination of his employment at a rate of $5,769 per week, and Mr. Cullen will be paid a one time payment of $10,347 to cover COBRA payments. Mr. Cullen’s stock options will continue to vest during the 65-week severance period, and he will have 60 days thereafter to exercise any vested options.

We have established separation guidelines which generally apply to all employees in situations where management determines that an employee is entitled to severance benefits. Severance benefits are granted solely in management’s discretion and are not an employee entitlement or guaranteed benefit. The guidelines provide that persons employed at the level of Senior Vice President may be eligible to receive between six and fifteen months of severance benefits and persons employed at the level of Executive Vice President may be eligible to receive between nine and eighteen months of severance benefits in the event of separation under certain circumstances generally including elimination of a position, work unit or general staff reduction. Separation benefits are contingent upon the signing of a separation agreement containing certain provisions including a release of all claims against us. Severance amounts paid under these guidelines are distinct and separate from any one-time, special or enhanced severance programs that may be approved by us from time to time.

Our senior executives are eligible to receive bonuses according to our 2005 Executive Bonus Plan. Under this plan, our executive officers and certain other management and professional employees are eligible to receive an annual bonus. Each participating employee would receive his or her target bonus if Charter (or such employee’s division) meets specified performance measures for revenues, operating cash flow, free cash flow and customer satisfaction.

Our certificate of incorporation limits the liability of directors to the maximum extent permitted by Delaware law. The Delaware General Corporation Law provides that a corporation may eliminate or limit the personal liability of a director for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability for:


	(1) any breach of the director’s duty of loyalty to the corporation and its shareholders;

	(2) acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;

	(3) unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock purchases or redemptions; or

	(4) any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit.

Our bylaws provide that we will indemnify all persons whom we may indemnify pursuant thereto to the fullest extent permitted by law.

Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or persons controlling us pursuant to the foregoing provisions, we have been informed that in the opinion of the SEC, such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.

We have reimbursed certain of our current and former directors, officers and employees in connection with their defense in certain legal actions. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Other Miscellaneous Relationships — Indemnification Advances.”

The following table sets forth certain information regarding beneficial ownership of Charter’s Class A common stock as of May 31, 2005 by:


	•	each person currently serving as a director of Charter;

	•	the current chief executive officer and individuals named in the Summary Compensation Table;

	•	all persons currently serving as directors and officers of Charter, as a group; and


	•	each person known by us to own beneficially 5% or more of our outstanding Class A common stock as of May 31, 2005.

With respect to the percentage of voting power set forth in the following table:


	•	each holder of Class A common stock is entitled to one vote per share; and

	•	each holder of Class B common stock is entitled to (i) ten votes per share of Class B common stock held by such holder and its affiliates and (ii) ten votes per share of Class B Common Stock for which membership units in Charter Holdco held by such holder and its affiliates are exchangeable.


	(1)	Includes shares for which the named person has sole voting and investment power; or shared voting and investment power with a spouse. Does not include shares that may be acquired through exercise of options.

	(2)	Includes unvested shares of restricted stock issued under the Charter Communications, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan (including those issued in the February 2004 option exchange for those eligible employees who elected to participate), as to which the applicable director or employee has sole voting power but not investment power. Excludes certain performance units granted under the Charter 2001 Stock Incentive Plan with respect to which shares will not be issued until the third anniversary of the grant date and then only if Charter meets certain performance criteria (and which consequently do not provide the holder with any voting rights).


	(3)	Includes shares of Class A common stock issuable upon exercise of options that have vested or will vest on or before July 30, 2005 under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan.



	(4)	Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act. The beneficial owners at May 31, 2005 of Class B common stock, Charter Holdco membership units and convertible senior notes of Charter are deemed to be beneficial owners of an equal number of shares of Class A common stock because such holdings are either convertible into Class A shares (in the case of Class B shares and convertible senior notes) or exchangeable (directly or indirectly) for Class A shares (in the case of the membership units) on a one-for-one basis. Unless otherwise noted, the named holders have sole investment and voting power with respect to the shares listed as beneficially owned. An issue has arisen as to whether the documentation for the Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII, LLC membership interests following the consummation of the Bresnan put transaction on June 6, 2003. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”


	(5)	The calculation of this percentage assumes for each person that:



	•	304,966,995 shares of Class A common stock are issued and outstanding as of May 31, 2005;


	•	50,000 shares of Class B common stock held by Mr. Allen have been converted into shares of Class A common stock;

	•	the acquisition by such person of all shares of Class A common stock that such person or affiliates of such person has the right to acquire upon exchange of membership units in subsidiaries or conversion of Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock or 5.875% or 4.75% convertible senior notes;


	•	the acquisition by such person of all shares that may be acquired upon exercise of options to purchase shares or exchangeable membership units that have vested or will vest by July 30, 2005; and


	•	that none of the other listed persons or entities has received any shares of Class A common stock that are issuable to any of such persons pursuant to the exercise of options or otherwise.

A person is deemed to have the right to acquire shares of Class A common stock with respect to options vested under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan. When vested, these options are exercisable for membership units of Charter Holdco, which are immediately exchanged on a one-for-one basis for shares of Charter Class A common stock. A person is also deemed to have the right to acquire shares of Class A common stock issuable upon the exercise of vested options under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan.


	(6)	The calculation of this percentage assumes that Mr. Allen’s equity interests are retained in the form that maximizes voting power (i.e., the 50,000 shares of Class B common stock held by Mr. Allen have not been converted into shares of Class A common stock; that the membership units of Charter


		Holdco owned by each of Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. have not been exchanged for shares of Class A common stock).

	(7)	The total listed includes:


	•	222,818,858 membership units in Charter Holdco held by Charter Investment, Inc.; and

	•	116,313,173 membership units in Charter Holdco held by Vulcan Cable III Inc.

The listed total excludes 24,273,943 shares of Class A common stock issuable upon exchange of units of Charter Holdco, which may be issuable to Charter Investment, Inc. (which is owned by Mr. Allen) as a consequence of the closing of his purchase of the membership interests in CC VIII, LLC that were put to Mr. Allen and were purchased by him on June 6, 2003. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of such CC VIII, LLC membership interests following the consummation of such put transaction. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”


	The address of this person is: 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98104.


	(8)	Includes 222,818,858 membership units in Charter Holdco, which are exchangeable for shares of Class B common stock on a one-for-one basis, which are convertible to shares of Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. The address of this person is Charter Plaza, 12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, MO 63131.

	(9)	Includes 116,313,173 membership units in Charter Holdco, which are exchangeable for shares of Class B common stock on a one-for-one basis, which are convertible to shares of Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. The address of this person is: 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98104.


(10)	Mr. Vogel terminated his employment effective on January 17, 2005. His stock options and restricted stock shown in this table continue to vest through December 31, 2005, and his options will be exercisable for another 60 days thereafter.

(11)	Ms. Bellville resigned from Charter effective September 30, 2004. Under the terms of her separation agreement, her options will continue to vest until December 31, 2005, and all vested options are exercisable until sixty (60) days thereafter.

(12)	Mr. Chang and Mr. Shaw resigned effective April 15, 2005.

(13)	Includes 1,000 shares for which Mr. Schumm has shared investment and voting power. Mr. Schumm’s employment was terminated effective January 28, 2005. His stock options and restricted stock shown in this table continue to vest for 65 weeks following his termination, and his options will be exercisable for another 60 days thereafter.

(14)	The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon holder’s Schedule 13G filed with the SEC February 2, 2005. The address of this person is: c/o Amaranth Advisors L.L.C., One American Lane, Greenwich, Connecticut, 06831.

(15)	The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the holder’s Schedule 13G filed with the SEC March 28, 2005. The address of this person is 712 Fifth Avenue, 42nd Floor, New York, New York, 10019. Mr. Bommer is the managing member of SAB Capital Advisors, L.L.C., which serves as general partner of SAB Capital Partners, L.P. and SAB Capital Partners II, L.P. (which in turn collectively hold 10,124,695 shares of Class A common stock). Mr. Bommer is also the managing member of SAB Capital Management, L.L.C., which serves as general partner of SAB Overseas Capital Management, L.P. (which in turn serves as investment manager to and has investment discretion over the securities held by a holder of 8,113,049 shares of Class A common stock).


(16)	The equity ownership reported in this table is based upon the holder’s Schedule 13G filed with the SEC June 3, 2005. The address of the principal business office of the reporting person is 399 Park Avenue, Floor 39, New York, New York 10022. The shares shown consist of: (A) 1,669,400 shares held for the account of Glenview Capital Partners; (B) 5,991,000 shares held for the account of Glenview Capital Master Fund; and (C) 12,243,100 shares held for the account of Glenview

The following information is provided as of December 31, 2004 with respect to equity compensation plans:


(1)	This total does not include 2,076,860 shares issued pursuant to restricted stock grants made under our 2001 Stock Incentive Plan, which were subject to vesting based on continued employment or 6,899,600 performance shares issued under our LTIP plan, which are subject to vesting upon Charter’s achievement of certain performance criteria during a three-year performance cycle ending on December 31, 2007.


(2)	Includes shares of Class A common stock to be issued upon exercise of options granted pursuant to an individual compensation agreement with a consultant. In 2003, we agreed to exchange 186,385 of these options for 18,638 shares of Class A common stock, and that exchange is scheduled to be consummated in 2005.

The following sets forth certain transactions in which we are involved and in which the directors, executive officers and affiliates of Charter have or may have a material interest. The transactions fall generally into three broad categories:


	•	Transactions in which Mr. Allen has an interest that arise directly out of Mr. Allen’s investment in Charter and Charter Holdco. A large number of the transactions described below arise out of Mr. Allen’s direct and indirect (through Charter Investment, Inc., or the Vulcan entities, each of which Mr. Allen controls) investment in Charter and its subsidiaries, as well as commitments made as consideration for the investments themselves.

	•	Transactions with third party providers of products, services and content in which Mr. Allen has or had a material interest. Mr. Allen has had numerous investments in the areas of technology and media. We have a number of commercial relationships with third parties in which Mr. Allen has or had an interest.

	•	Other Miscellaneous Transactions. We have a limited number of transactions in which certain of the officers, directors and principal shareholders of Charter and its subsidiaries, other than Mr. Allen, have an interest.

A number of our debt instruments and those of our subsidiaries require delivery of fairness opinions for transactions with Mr. Allen or his affiliates involving more than $50 million. Such fairness opinions have been obtained whenever required. All of our transactions with Mr. Allen or his affiliates have been considered for approval either by the board of directors of Charter or a committee of the board of directors. All of our transactions with Mr. Allen or his affiliates have been deemed by the board of directors or a committee of the board of directors to be in our best interest. Related party transactions are approved by our Audit Committee in compliance with the listing requirements applicable to NASDAQ National Market listed companies. Except where noted below, we do not believe that these transactions present any unusual risks for us that would not be present in any similar commercial transaction.

The chart below summarizes certain information with respect to these transactions. Additional information regarding these transactions is provided following the chart.

The following sets forth additional information regarding the transactions summarized above.

Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries

As noted above, a number of our related party transactions arise out of Mr. Allen’s investment in Charter and its subsidiaries. Some of these transactions are with Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Ventures (both owned 100% by Mr. Allen), Charter (controlled by Mr. Allen) and Charter Holdco (approximately 47% owned by us and 53% owned by other affiliates of Mr. Allen). See “Summary — Organizational Structure” for more information regarding the ownership by Mr. Allen and certain of his affiliates.

Charter is a party to management arrangements with Charter Holdco and certain of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, Charter provides management services for the cable systems owned or operated by its subsidiaries. These management agreements provide for reimbursement to Charter for all costs and expenses incurred by it for activities relating to the ownership and operation of the managed cable systems, including overhead, administration and salary expense.

The total amount paid by Charter Holdco and all of its subsidiaries is limited to the amount necessary to reimburse Charter for all of its expenses, costs, losses, liabilities and damages paid or incurred by it in connection with the performance of its services under the various management agreements and in connection with its corporate overhead, administration, salary expense and similar items. The expenses subject to reimbursement include fees Charter is obligated to pay under the mutual services agreement with Charter Investment, Inc. Payment of management fees by Charter’s operating subsidiaries is subject to certain restrictions under the credit facilities and indentures of such subsidiaries and the indentures governing the Charter Holdings public debt. If any portion of the management fee due and payable is not paid, it is deferred by Charter and accrued as a liability of such subsidiaries. Any deferred amount of the

Charter, Charter Holdco and Charter Investment, Inc. are parties to a mutual services agreement whereby each party shall provide rights and services to the other parties as may be reasonably requested for the management of the entities involved and their subsidiaries, including the cable systems owned by their subsidiaries all on a cost-reimbursement basis. The officers and employees of each party are available to the other parties to provide these rights and services, and all expenses and costs incurred in providing these rights and services are paid by Charter. Each of the parties will indemnify and hold harmless the other parties and their directors, officers and employees from and against any and all claims that may be made against any of them in connection with the mutual services agreement except due to its or their gross negligence or willful misconduct. The mutual services agreement expires on November 12, 2009, and may be terminated at any time by any party upon thirty days’ written notice to the other. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter paid approximately $70 million, $73 million, $74 million and $20 million to Charter Holdco for services rendered pursuant to the mutual services agreement. All such amounts are reimbursable to Charter pursuant to a management arrangement with our subsidiaries. See “— Intercompany Management Arrangements.” The accounts and balances related to these services eliminate in consolidation. Charter Investment, Inc. no longer provides services pursuant to this agreement.

Prior to November 12, 1999, Charter Investment, Inc. provided management and consulting services to our operating subsidiaries for a fee equal to 3.5% of the gross revenues of the systems then owned, plus reimbursement of expenses. The balance of management fees payable under the previous management agreement was accrued with payment at the discretion of Charter Investment, Inc., with interest payable on unpaid amounts. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, and the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter’s subsidiaries did not pay any fees to Charter Investment, Inc. to reduce management fees payable. As of December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and March 31, 2005, total management fees payable by our subsidiaries to Charter Investment, Inc. were approximately $14 million, exclusive of any interest that may be charged.

The limited liability company agreement of Charter Holdco contains special provisions regarding the allocation of tax losses and profits among its members — Vulcan Cable III Inc., Charter Investment, Inc. and us. In some situations, these provisions may cause us to pay more tax than would otherwise be due if Charter Holdco had allocated profits and losses among its members based generally on the number of common membership units. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Income Taxes.”

Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled by Mr. Allen, Charter, Charter Investment and Charter Holdco are parties to an agreement dated September 21, 1999 granting to Vulcan Ventures the right to use up to eight of our digital cable channels as partial consideration for a prior capital contribution of $1.325 billion. Specifically, at Vulcan Ventures’ request, we will provide Vulcan Ventures with exclusive rights for carriage of up to eight digital cable television programming services or channels on each of the digital cable systems with local and to the extent available, national control of the digital product owned, operated, controlled or managed by Charter or its subsidiaries now or in the future of 550 megahertz or more. If the system offers digital services but has less than 550 megahertz of capacity, then the programming services will be equitably reduced. Upon request of Vulcan Ventures, we will attempt to

CC VIII. As part of the acquisition of the cable systems owned by Bresnan Communications Company Limited Partnership in February 2000, CC VIII, Charter’s indirect limited liability company subsidiary, issued, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership units (collectively, the “CC VIII interest”) with a value and an initial capital account of approximately $630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (the “Comcast sellers”). While held by the Comcast sellers, the CC VIII interest was entitled to a 2% priority return on its initial capital account and such priority return was entitled to preferential distributions from available cash and upon liquidation of CC VIII. While held by the Comcast sellers, the CC VIII interest generally did not share in the profits and losses of CC VIII. Mr. Allen granted the Comcast sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII interest for approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest annually from February 2000 (the “Comcast put right”). In April 2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right in full, and this transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003. Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the holder of the CC VIII interest, indirectly through an affiliate. Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in the next paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter will be allocated his pro rata share (based on number of membership interests outstanding) of profits or losses of CC VIII. In the event of a liquidation of CC VIII, Mr. Allen would be entitled to a priority distribution with respect to the 2% priority return (which will continue to accrete). Any remaining distributions in liquidation would be distributed to CC V Holdings, LLC and Mr. Allen in proportion to CC V Holdings, LLC’s capital account and Mr. Allen’s capital account (which will equal the initial capital account of the Comcast sellers of approximately $630 million, increased or decreased by Mr. Allen’s pro rata share of CC VIII’s profits or losses (as computed for capital account purposes) after June 6, 2003). The limited liability company agreement of CC VIII does not provide for a mandatory redemption of the CC VIII interest.

An issue has arisen as to whether the documentation for the Bresnan transaction was correct and complete with regard to the ultimate ownership of the CC VIII interest following consummation of the Comcast put right. Specifically, under the terms of the Bresnan transaction documents that were entered into in June 1999, the Comcast sellers originally would have received, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units, but due to an FCC regulatory issue raised by the Comcast sellers shortly before closing, the Bresnan transaction was modified to provide that the Comcast sellers instead would receive the preferred equity interests in CC VIII represented by the CC VIII interest. As part of the last-minute changes to the Bresnan transaction documents, a draft amended version of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement was prepared, and contract provisions were drafted for that agreement that would have required an automatic exchange of the CC VIII interest for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units if the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right and sold the CC VIII interest to Mr. Allen or his affiliates. However, the provisions that would have required this automatic exchange did not appear in the final version of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement that was delivered and executed at the closing of the Bresnan transaction. The law firm that prepared the documents for the Bresnan transaction brought this matter to the attention of Charter and representatives of Mr. Allen in 2002.

Thereafter, the board of directors of Charter formed a Special Committee (currently comprised of Messrs. Merritt, Tory and Wangberg) to investigate the matter and take any other appropriate action on

behalf of Charter with respect to this matter. After conducting an investigation of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Special Committee determined that a “scrivener’s error” had occurred in February 2000 in connection with the preparation of the last-minute revisions to the Bresnan transaction documents and that, as a result, Charter should seek the reformation of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement, or alternative relief, in order to restore and ensure the obligation that the CC VIII interest be automatically exchanged for Charter Holdco units. The Special Committee further determined that, as part of such contract reformation or alternative relief, Mr. Allen should be required to contribute the CC VIII interest to Charter Holdco in exchange for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units. The Special Committee also recommended to the board of directors of Charter that, to the extent the contract reformation is achieved, the board of directors should consider whether the CC VIII interest should ultimately be held by Charter Holdco or Charter Holdings or another entity owned directly or indirectly by them.

Mr. Allen disagrees with the Special Committee’s determinations described above and has so notified the Special Committee. Mr. Allen contends that the transaction is accurately reflected in the transaction documentation and contemporaneous and subsequent company public disclosures.

The parties engaged in a process of non-binding mediation to seek to resolve this matter, without success. The Special Committee is evaluating what further actions or processes it may undertake to resolve this dispute. To accommodate further deliberation, each party has agreed to refrain from initiating legal proceedings over this matter until it has given at least ten days’ prior notice to the other. In addition, the Special Committee and Mr. Allen have determined to utilize the Delaware Court of Chancery’s program for mediation of complex business disputes in an effort to resolve the CC VIII interest dispute. If the Special Committee and Mr. Allen are unable to reach a resolution through that mediation process or to agree on an alternative dispute resolution process, the Special Committee intends to seek resolution of this dispute through judicial proceedings in an action that would be commenced, after appropriate notice, in the Delaware Court of Chancery against Mr. Allen and his affiliates seeking contract reformation, declaratory relief as to the respective rights of the parties regarding this dispute and alternative forms of legal and equitable relief. The ultimate resolution and financial impact of the dispute are not determinable at this time.

Rifkin. On September 14, 1999, Mr. Allen and Charter Holdco entered into a put agreement with certain sellers of the Rifkin cable systems that received a portion of their purchase price in the form of 3,006,202 Class A preferred membership units of Charter Holdco. This put agreement allowed these holders to compel Charter Holdco to redeem their Class A preferred membership units at any time before September 14, 2004 at $1.00 per unit, plus accretion thereon at 8% per year from September 14, 1999. Mr. Allen had guaranteed the redemption obligation of Charter Holdco. These units were put to Charter Holdco for redemption, and were redeemed on April 18, 2003 for a total price of approximately $3.9 million.

Mr. Allen also was a party to a put agreement with certain sellers of the Rifkin cable systems that received a portion of their purchase price in the form of shares of Class A common stock of Charter. Under this put agreement, such holders have the right to sell to Mr. Allen any or all of such shares of Charter’s Class A common stock at $19 per share (subject to adjustments for stock splits, reorganizations and similar events), plus interest at a rate of 4.5% per year, compounded annually from November 12, 1999. Approximately 4.6 million shares were put to Mr. Allen under these agreements prior to their expiration on November 12, 2003.

Falcon. Mr. Allen also was a party to a put agreement with certain sellers of the Falcon cable systems (including Mr. Nathanson, one of our directors) that received a portion of their purchase price in the form of shares of Class A common stock of Charter. Under the Falcon put agreement, such holders had the right to sell to Mr. Allen any or all shares of Class A common stock received in the Falcon acquisition at $25.8548 per share (subject to adjustments for stock splits, reorganizations and similar events), plus interest at a rate of 4.5% per year, compounded annually from November 12, 1999. Approximately 19.4 million shares were put to Mr. Allen under these agreements prior to their expiration on November 12, 2003.

Effective April 14, 2003, our subsidiary, Charter Communications VII, LLC entered into a commitment letter with Vulcan Inc., which is an affiliate of Paul Allen, under which Vulcan Inc. agreed to lend, under certain circumstances, or cause an affiliate to lend initially to Charter Communications VII, LLC, or another subsidiary of Charter Holdings, up to $300 million, which amount included a subfacility of up to $100 million for the issuance of letters of credit. No amounts were ever drawn under the commitment letter. In November 2003, the commitment was terminated. We incurred expenses to Vulcan Inc. totaling $5 million in connection with the commitment (including an extension fee) prior to termination. Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and the President and Chief Executive Officer of Vulcan Inc., and Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President of Vulcan Inc.

Charter is a holding company and its principal assets are its equity interest in Charter Holdco and certain mirror notes payable by Charter Holdco to Charter, and mirror preferred units held by Charter, which have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes and Charter’s outstanding preferred stock. In 2002, 2003 and 2004, Charter Holdco paid to Charter $73 million, $68 million and $49 million, respectively, related to interest on the mirror notes, and Charter Holdco paid an additional $4 million related to dividends on the mirror preferred membership units.

In connection with our 2003 repurchase of approximately $477 million of our outstanding 4.75% senior convertible notes due 2006 and approximately $132 million of our outstanding 5.75% senior convertible notes due 2005, $520 million of CCH II 10.25% senior notes were transferred (through a series of distributions) by CCH II to Charter Holdco, which in turn assigned those CCH II senior notes to us in exchange for the cancellation of mirror notes of each series having a principal amount equal to the amount of convertible notes of that series repurchased by us. As part of the closing of that transaction, Charter Holdco also paid to Charter cash in the amount of $10 million, which represented the sum of (a) all accrued and unpaid interest on the portions of the mirror notes transferred by Charter to Charter Holdco, to, but not including, the date of the closing, on the basis set forth in the mirror notes, (b) an amount equal to the total amount of cash payable by Charter in lieu of fractional interests in the 10.25% CCH II senior notes which would have otherwise been due to the holders as a consequence of the exchange and (c) the costs and expenses relating to such transactions. Further, during 2004 Charter Holdco issued 7,252,818 common membership units to Charter in cancellation of $30 million principal amount of mirror notes so as to mirror the issuance by Charter of Class A common stock in exchange for a like principal amount of its outstanding convertible notes.

In addition, in connection with our November 2004 sale of $862.5 million principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, Charter Holdco issued to us mirror notes in identical principal amount in exchange for the proceeds from our offering. Charter Holdco then purchased and pledged certain U.S. government securities to us as security for the mirror notes (which were in turn repledged by us to the trustee for the benefit of holders of our 5.875% convertible senior notes and which we expect to use to fund the first six interest payments on the notes), and agreed to lend common units to us, the terms of which will, to the extent practicable, mirror the terms of the shares offered hereby. Charter Holdco also redeemed the remaining $588 million principal amount of the mirror notes in respect of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 concurrently with our December 23, 2004 redemption of our 5.75% convertible senior notes. In addition, in November 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a unit lending agreement with Charter in which it agreed to lend common units to Charter that would mirror the anticipated loan of Class A common shares by Charter to Citigroup Global Markets pursuant to a share lending agreement. The members of Charter Holdco (including the entities controlled by Mr. Allen) also at that time entered into a letter agreement providing, among other things, that for purposes of the allocation provisions of the Limited Liability Company Agreement of Charter Holdco, the mirror units be treated as disregarded and not outstanding until such time (and except to the extent) that, under Charter’s share lending agreement, Charter treats the loaned shares in a manner that assumes they will neither be returned to Charter by the borrower nor otherwise be acquired by Charter in lieu of such a return.

As described under “— Third Party Business Relationships in which Mr. Allen has or had an Interest” in this section, Mr. Allen and a number of his affiliates have interests in various entities that provide services or programming to our subsidiaries. Given the diverse nature of Mr. Allen’s investment activities and interests, and to avoid the possibility of future disputes as to potential business, Charter and Charter Holdco, under the terms of their respective organizational documents, may not, and may not allow their subsidiaries, to engage in any business transaction outside the cable transmission business except for the Digeo, Inc. joint venture; a joint venture to develop a digital video recorder set-top terminal; an existing investment in Cable Sports Southeast, LLC, a provider of regional sports programming; as an owner of the business of Interactive Broadcaster Services Corporation or, Chat TV, an investment in @Security Broadband Corp., a company developing broadband security applications; and incidental businesses engaged in as of the closing of Charter’s initial public offering in November 1999. This restriction will remain in effect until all of the shares of Charter’s high-vote Class B common stock have been converted into shares of Charter Class A common stock due to Mr. Allen’s equity ownership falling below specified thresholds.

Should Charter or Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries wish to pursue, or allow their subsidiaries to pursue, a business transaction outside of this scope, it must first offer Mr. Allen the opportunity to pursue the particular business transaction. If he decides not to pursue the business transaction and consents to Charter or its subsidiaries engaging in the business transaction, they will be able to do so. In any such case, the restated certificate of incorporation of Charter and the limited liability company agreement of Charter Holdco would need to be amended accordingly to modify the current restrictions on the ability of such entities to engage in any business other than the cable transmission business. The cable transmission business means the business of transmitting video, audio, including telephony, and data over cable systems owned, operated or managed by Charter, Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries from time to time.

Under Delaware corporate law, each director of Charter, including Mr. Allen, is generally required to present to Charter, any opportunity he or she may have to acquire any cable transmission business or any company whose principal business is the ownership, operation or management of cable transmission businesses, so that we may determine whether we wish to pursue such opportunities. However, Mr. Allen and the other directors generally will not have an obligation to present other types of business opportunities to Charter and they may exploit such opportunities for their own account.

Also, conflicts could arise with respect to the allocation of corporate opportunities between us and Mr. Allen and his affiliates in connection with his investments in businesses in which we are permitted to engage under Charter’s restated certificate of incorporation. Certain of the indentures of Charter and its subsidiaries require the applicable issuer of notes to obtain, under certain circumstances, approval of the board of directors of Charter and, where a transaction or series of related transactions is valued at or in excess of $50 million, a fairness opinion with respect to transactions in which Mr. Allen has an interest. Related party transactions are approved by our Audit Committee in compliance with the listing requirements applicable to NASDAQ National Market listed companies. We have not instituted any other formal plan or arrangement to address potential conflicts of interest.

The restrictive provisions of the organizational documents described above may limit our ability to take advantage of attractive business opportunities. Consequently, our ability to offer new products and services outside of the cable transmission business and enter into new businesses could be adversely affected, resulting in an adverse effect on our growth, financial condition and results of operations.

Third Party Business Relationships in Which Mr. Allen has or had an Interest

As previously noted, Mr. Allen has and has had extensive investments in the areas of media and technology. We have a number of commercial relationships with third parties in which Mr. Allen has an interest. Mr. Allen or his affiliates own equity interests or warrants to purchase equity interests in various entities with which we do business or which provide us with products, services or programming. Mr. Allen owns 100% of the equity of Vulcan Ventures Incorporated and Vulcan Inc. and is the president of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and the President and Chief Executive Officer of Vulcan Inc. and is a director and Vice President of Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President of Vulcan Inc. and Vulcan Ventures. The various cable, media, Internet and telephony companies in which Mr. Allen has invested may mutually benefit one another. We can give no assurance, nor should you expect, that any of these business relationships will be successful, that we will realize any benefits from these relationships or that we will enter into any business relationships in the future with Mr. Allen’s affiliated companies.

Mr. Allen and his affiliates have made, and in the future likely will make, numerous investments outside of us and our business. We cannot assure you that, in the event that we or any of our subsidiaries enter into transactions in the future with any affiliate of Mr. Allen, such transactions will be on terms as favorable to us as terms we might have obtained from an unrelated third party.

High Speed Access Corp. was a provider of high-speed Internet access services over cable modems. During the period from 1997 to 2000, certain Charter entities entered into Internet-access related service agreements, and both Vulcan Ventures, an entity owned by Mr. Allen, and Charter Holdco made equity investments in High Speed Access.

On February 28, 2002, our subsidiary, CC Systems, purchased from High Speed Access the contracts and associated assets, and assumed related liabilities, that served our customers, including a customer contact center, network operations center and provisioning software. At the closing, certain of our subsidiaries paid $78 million to High Speed Access and delivered 37,000 shares of High Speed Access’s Series D convertible preferred stock and all of the warrants to buy High Speed Access common stock owned by Charter Holdco (which had been acquired pursuant to two network services agreements which were cancelled in connection with this transaction, as described below), and High Speed Access purchased 38,000 shares of its Series D Preferred Stock from Vulcan Ventures for $8 million. Additional purchase price adjustments were made as provided in the asset purchase agreement. Charter Holdco obtained a fairness opinion from a qualified investment-banking firm regarding the valuation of the assets purchased. Concurrently with the closing of the transaction, High Speed Access also purchased all of its common stock held by Vulcan Ventures.

In conjunction with the High Speed Access asset purchase, on February 28, 2002, Charter Communications Holding Company granted High Speed Access the right to use certain intellectual property sold by High Speed Access to Charter Holdco. High Speed Access does not pay any fees under the agreement. The domestic portion of the license terminated on June 30, 2002, and the international portion of the license expired on February 2, 2005. Prior to closing the asset purchase, Charter performed certain management services formerly performed by High Speed Access, for which it received approximately $4 million in January and February 2002. Concurrently with the asset purchase, all of the other agreements between Charter Holdco and High Speed Access Corp. (other than the license agreement described above), namely the programming content agreement, the services agreement, the systems access agreement, the 1998 network services agreement and the May 2000 network services agreement, were terminated. The revenues we earned from High Speed Access for the year ended December 31, 2002 were approximately $17 million. In addition, for the year ended December 31, 2002, we paid High Speed Access approximately $2 million under the 1998 network services agreement and the 2000 network services agreement, representing a per customer fee to High Speed Access according to agreed pricing terms and compensation for services exceeding certain minimum thresholds.

Immediately prior to the asset purchase, Vulcan Ventures beneficially owned approximately 37%, and Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries beneficially owned approximately 13%, of the common stock of High Speed Access (including the shares of common stock which could be acquired upon conversion of the Series D preferred stock, and upon exercise of the warrants owned by Charter Holdco). Following the consummation of the asset purchase, neither Charter Holdco nor Vulcan Ventures beneficially owned any securities of, or were otherwise affiliated with, High Speed Access.

On May 12, 2000, Charter entered into a five-year network services agreement with High Speed Access, which was assigned by Charter Communications, Inc. to Charter Holdco on August 1, 2000. With respect to each system launched or intended to be launched, we paid a per customer fee to High Speed Access according to agreed pricing terms. In addition, we compensated High Speed Access for services exceeding certain minimum thresholds.

In 2001, Charter Holdco was a party to a systems access and investment agreement with Vulcan Ventures and High Speed Access and a related network services agreement with High Speed Access. These agreements provided High Speed Access with exclusive access to certain of our homes passed. The term of the network services agreement was, as to a particular cable system, five years from the date revenue billing commenced for that cable system. The programming content agreement provided each of Vulcan Ventures and High Speed Access with a license to use certain content and materials of the other on a non-exclusive, royalty-free basis.

Under the above described transactions, we also earned certain warrants to purchase High Speed Access stock. These warrants were cancelled in February 2002 in connection with the asset purchase described above. As a result of the transaction with High Speed Access described above, we neither paid to, nor received, any amounts from High Speed Access in 2003.

TechTV, Inc. (“TechTV”) operated a cable television network that offered programming mostly related to technology. Pursuant to an affiliation agreement that originated in 1998 and that terminates in 2008, TechTV has provided us with programming for distribution via our cable systems. The affiliation agreement provides, among other things, that TechTV must offer Charter certain terms and conditions that are no less favorable in the affiliation agreement than are given to any other distributor that serves the same number of or fewer TechTV viewing customers. Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation agreement, we were entitled to incentive payments for channel launches through December 31, 2003.

In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for (i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation agreement which, among other things, revises the description of the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of content relating to technology and video gaming for Charter’s interactive television platforms through December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we recognized approximately $4 million, $1 million, $5 million and $0.3 million, respectively, of the Vulcan Programming payment as an offset to programming expense and paid approximately $0.2 million, $80,600, $2 million and $0.5 million, respectively, to TechTV under the affiliation agreement.

We believe that Vulcan Programming, which is 100% owned by Mr. Allen, owned an approximate 98% equity interest in TechTV at the time Vulcan Programming sold TechTV to an unrelated third party in May 2004. Until September 2003, Mr. Savoy, a former Charter director, was the president and director of Vulcan Programming and was a director of TechTV. Mr. Wangberg, one of Charter’s directors, was the

Oxygen Media LLC (“Oxygen”) provides programming content aimed at the female audience for distribution over cable systems and satellite. On July 22, 2002, Charter Holdco entered into a carriage agreement with Oxygen, whereby we agreed to carry programming content from Oxygen. Under the carriage agreement, we currently make Oxygen programming available to approximately 5 million of our video customers. The term of the carriage agreement was retroactive to February 1, 2000, the date of launch of Oxygen programming by us, and was to run for a period of five years from that date. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we paid Oxygen approximately $6 million, $9 million, $13 million and $3 million, respectively, for programming content. In addition, Oxygen pays us marketing support fees for customers launched after the first year of the term of the carriage agreement up to a total of $4 million. We recorded approximately $2 million, $1 million, $1 million and $0.1 million related to these launch incentives as a reduction of programming expense for each of the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, respectively.

Concurrently with the execution of the carriage agreement, Charter Holdco entered into an equity issuance agreement pursuant to which Oxygen’s parent company, Oxygen Media Corporation (“Oxygen Media”), granted a subsidiary of Charter Holdco a warrant to purchase 2.4 million shares of Oxygen Media common stock for an exercise price of $22.00 per share. In February 2005, this warrant expired unexercised. Charter Holdco was also to receive unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock with a guaranteed fair market value on the date of issuance of $34 million, on or prior to February 2, 2005, with the exact date to be determined by Oxygen Media, but this commitment was later revised as discussed below.

We recognize the guaranteed value of the investment over the life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of programming expense. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we recorded approximately $6 million, $9 million, $13 million and $1 million, respectively, as a reduction of programming expense. The carrying value of our investment in Oxygen was approximately $10 million, $19 million, $32 million and $33 million as of December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and March 31, 2005, respectively.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number of our customers to which Oxygen programming must be carried and for which we must pay, (b) releases Charter Holdco from any claims related to the failure to achieve distribution benchmarks under the carriage agreement, (c) requires Oxygen to make payment on outstanding receivables for marketing support fees due to us under the carriage agreement; and (d) requires that Oxygen provide its programming content to us on economic terms no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable or satellite operator having fewer subscribers than us. The renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the period that we will carry Oxygen programming to our customers through January 31, 2008, and (b) requires license fees to be paid based on customers receiving Oxygen programming, rather than for specific customer benchmarks.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of 1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued dividends to Charter Holdco in place of the $34 million of unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock. Oxygen Media delivered these shares in March 2005. The preferred stock is convertible into common stock after December 31, 2007 at a conversion ratio, the numerator of which is the liquidation preference and the denominator which is the fair market value per share of Oxygen Media common stock on the conversion date.

As of March 31, 2005, through Vulcan Programming, Mr. Allen owned an approximate 31% interest in Oxygen assuming no exercises of outstanding warrants or conversion or exchange of convertible or exchangeable securities. Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and the President of Vulcan Programming. Mr. Lance Conn is a Vice President of Vulcan Programming.

On October 7, 1996, the former owner of our Falcon cable systems entered into a letter agreement and a cable television agreement with Trail Blazers Inc. for the cable broadcast in the metropolitan area surrounding Portland, Oregon of pre-season, regular season and playoff basketball games of the Portland Trail Blazers, a National Basketball Association basketball team. Mr. Allen is the 100% owner of the Portland Trail Blazers and Trail Blazers Inc. After the acquisition of the Falcon cable systems in November 1999, we continued to operate under the terms of these agreements until their termination on September 30, 2001. Under the letter agreement, Trail Blazers Inc. was paid a fixed fee for each customer in areas directly served by the Falcon cable systems. Under the cable television agreement, we shared subscription revenues with Trail Blazers Inc. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we paid approximately $1 million, $135,200, $96,100 and $22,300, respectively, in connection with the cable broadcast of Portland Trail Blazers basketball games under the October 1996 cable television agreement and subsequent local cable distribution agreements.

On July 1, 2001, Charter Holdco and Action Sports Cable Network (“Action Sports”), which was 100% owned by Mr. Allen, entered into a new carriage agreement for a five-year term, which became effective on October 1, 2001 with the expiration of the previous agreement. Under the July 2001 carriage agreement, Charter Holdco pays Action Sports a fixed fee for each customer receiving the Action Sports programming, which covered sporting events in the Pacific Northwest, including the Portland Trail Blazers, the Seattle Seahawks, a National Football League football team, and the Portland Fire, a Women’s National Basketball Association basketball team. On November 5, 2002, Action Sports, which was 100% owned by Mr. Allen, announced that it was discontinuing its business following its failure to obtain an acceptable carriage agreement with AT&T Cable, the cable television provider in Portland, Oregon. Action Sports service was terminated on November 5, 2002 and Charter Holdco ceased carriage of the service. For the year ended December 31, 2002, we paid Action Sports approximately $1 million for rights to carry its programming.

Charter Holdco executed a Software License Agreement effective September 30, 2002, with Click2learn, Inc. (“Click2learn”), a company which provided enterprise software for organizations seeking to capture, manage and disseminate knowledge throughout their extended enterprise. As of December 31, 2003, Mr. Allen owned an approximate 21% interest in Click2learn through 616,120 shares held of record by Vulcan Ventures and 387,096 shares issuable upon exercise of a warrant issued to Vulcan Ventures. In March 2004, Click2learn was merged with an unrelated company, resulting in a new company, SumTotal Systems, Inc., which is publicly traded. We have been informed by Vulcan that, as of December 31, 2004, Mr. Allen owned an approximate 10% interest in SumTotal Systems, Inc. through his ownership in Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Allen owns 100% of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and Vice President of Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President of Vulcan Ventures. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, we paid approximately $250,000, $57,100 and $0, respectively, to Click2learn. For the year ended December 31, 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we paid approximately $0 and $0, respectively to SumTotal Systems, Inc.

In March 2001, Charter Ventures and Vulcan Ventures Incorporated formed DBroadband Holdings, LLC for the sole purpose of purchasing equity interests in Digeo. In connection with the execution of the

broadband carriage agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC purchased an equity interest in Digeo funded by contributions from Vulcan Ventures Incorporated. The equity interest is subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to the amount contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount contributed and any cumulative loss allocations, Charter Ventures has a 100% profit interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC. Charter Ventures is not required to make any capital contributions, including capital calls, and may require Vulcan Ventures, through January 24, 2004, to make certain additional contributions through DBroadband Holdings, LLC to acquire additional equity in Digeo as necessary to maintain Charter Ventures’ pro rata interest in Digeo in the event of certain future Digeo equity financings by the founders of Digeo. These additional equity interests are also subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to amounts contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. DBroadband Holdings, LLC is therefore not included in our consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to an amended version of this arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures contributed a total of $29 million to Digeo, $7 million of which was contributed on Charter Ventures’ behalf, subject to Vulcan Ventures’ aforementioned priority return. Since the formation of DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has contributed approximately $56 million on Charter Ventures’ behalf.

On March 2, 2001, a subsidiary of Charter, Charter Communications Ventures, LLC (“Charter Ventures”) entered into a broadband carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive, LLC (“Digeo Interactive”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo, Inc. (“Digeo”), an entity controlled by Paul Allen. The carriage agreement provided that Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter a “portal” product, which would function as the television-based Internet portal (the initial point of entry to the Internet) for Charter’s customers who received Internet access from Charter. The agreement term was for 25 years and Charter agreed to use the Digeo portal exclusively for six years. Before the portal product was delivered to Charter, Digeo terminated development of the portal product.

On September 27, 2001, Charter and Digeo Interactive amended the broadband carriage agreement. According to the amendment, Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter the content for enhanced “Wink” interactive television services, known as Charter Interactive Channels (“i-channels”). In order to provide the i-channels, Digeo Interactive sublicensed certain Wink technologies to Charter. Charter is entitled to share in the revenues generated by the i-channels. Currently, our digital video customers who receive i-channels receive the service at no additional charge.

On September 28, 2002, Charter entered into a second amendment to its broadband carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive. This amendment supersedes the amendment of September 27, 2001. It provides for the development by Digeo Interactive of future features to be included in the Basic i-TV service provided by Digeo and for Digeo’s development of an interactive “toolkit” to enable Charter to develop interactive local content. Furthermore, Charter may request that Digeo Interactive manage local content for a fee. The amendment provides for Charter to pay for development of the Basic i-TV service as well as license fees for customers who receive the service, and for Charter and Digeo to split certain revenues earned from the service. In 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we paid Digeo Interactive approximately $3 million, $4 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively, for customized development of the i-channels and the local content tool kit. We received no revenues under the broadband carriage agreement in 2003. This amendment expired pursuant to its terms on December 31, 2003. Digeo Interactive is continuing to provide the Basic i-TV service on a month-to-month basis.

In April 2004, we launched DVR service (using units containing the Digeo software) in our Rochester, Minnesota market using a broadband media center that is an integrated set-top terminal with a cable converter, DVR hard drive and connectivity to other consumer electronics devices (such as stereos, MP3 players, and digital cameras).

In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development, testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would enter into a license agreement for Digeo’s proprietary software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement, each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet. Total purchase price and license and maintenance fees during the term of the definitive agreements are expected to be approximately $41 million. The definitive agreements are terminable at no penalty to Charter in certain circumstances.

In late 2003, Microsoft sued Digeo for $15 million in a breach of contract action, involving an agreement that Digeo and Microsoft had entered into in 2001. Digeo informed us that it believed it had an indemnification claim against us for half that amount. Digeo settled with Microsoft agreeing to make a cash payment and to purchase certain amounts of Microsoft software products and consulting services through 2008. In consideration of Digeo agreeing to release us from its potential claim against us, after consultation with outside counsel we agreed, in June 2005, to purchase a total of $2.3 million in Microsoft consulting services through 2008, a portion of which amounts Digeo has informed us will count against Digeo’s purchase obligations with Microsoft. To date, we have made no such payments under this agreement.

We believe that Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled by Mr. Allen, owns an approximate 60% equity interest in Digeo, Inc., on a fully-converted basis. Mr. Allen is a director of Digeo, and Mr. Vogel was a director of Digeo in 2002, 2003 and 2004. During 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, Mr. Vogel held options to purchase 10,000 shares of Digeo common stock.

Pursuant to certain affiliation agreements with networks of Viacom, Inc. (“Viacom”), including MTV, MTV2, Nickelodeon, VH1, TVLand, CMT, Spike TV, Comedy Central, Viacom Digital Suite, CBS-owned and operated broadcast stations, Showtime, The Movie Channel, and Flix, Viacom provides Charter with programming for distribution via our cable systems. The affiliation agreements provide for, among other things, rates and terms of carriage, advertising on the Viacom networks, which Charter can sell to local advertisers and marketing support. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter paid Viacom approximately $177 million, $188 million, $194 million and $50 million, respectively, for programming. Charter recorded approximately $5 million, $5 million, $8 million and $0 as receivables from Viacom networks related to launch incentives for certain channels and marketing support, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005. From April 1994 to July 2004, Mr. Dolgen served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Viacom Entertainment Group.

Charter and Charter Holdco purchase certain equipment for use in our business from ADC Telecommunications, which provides broadband access and network equipment. Mr. Wangberg serves as a director for ADC Telecommunications. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, we paid $759,600, $60,100, $344,800 and $112,800, respectively, to ADC Telecommunications under this arrangement.

On January 10, 2003 we signed an agreement to carry two around-the-clock, high-definition networks, HDNet and HDNet Movies. HDNet Movies delivers a commercial-free schedule of full-length feature films converted from 35mm to high-definition, including titles from an extensive library of Warner Bros. films. HDNet Movies will feature a mix of theatrical releases, made-for-TV movies, independent films and shorts. The HDNet channel features a variety of HDTV programming, including live sports, sitcoms, dramas, action series, documentaries, travel programs, music concerts and shows, special events, and news features including the popular HDNet World Report. HDNet also offers a selection of classic and recent television series. We paid HDNet and HDNet Movies approximately $21,900, $609,100 and $447,400 in 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005. We believe that entities controlled by Mr. Cuban owned approximately 81% of HDNet as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005. As of March 31, 2005, we believe that Mark Cuban, co-founder and president of HDNet, owned approximately 19,000,000 shares, or 6.2% of the total common equity in Charter based on a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on May 21, 2003. However, we believe Mr. Cuban disposed of his interest in Charter in April 2005.

David L. McCall, who served as Senior Vice President — Operations — Eastern Division during 2002 and January 2003, is a partner in a partnership that leases office space to us under a lease agreement, which expires December 31, 2010. The partnership received approximately $117,600, $189,200, $43,400 and $0 pursuant to such lease and related agreements for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, respectively. In addition, during 2002 and 2003, we paid approximately $644,800 and $381,300, respectively, for construction services to a construction company controlled by Mr. McCall’s brother under a construction agreement that expired on December 31, 2003. We also paid approximately $3 million, $373,800, $0 and $0 during 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, respectively, for construction services to a construction company controlled by Mr. McCall’s son under several agreements, the last of which expired January 31, 2004.

Companies controlled by Mr. Nathanson, a director of Charter, leased certain warehouse space in Riverside, California, to our subsidiaries. For the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003, total rent paid for the Riverside warehouse space was approximately $76,000 and $16,600, respectively, under a lease agreement which expired March 15, 2003.

We have carried The Outdoor Channel on a month-to-month basis since the expiration of an affiliation agreement in July 2002. We paid approximately $1 million, $1 million, $1 million and $298,300 to The Outdoor Channel during 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, respectively. In December 2003, Mr. Merritt became director of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc., an affiliate of The Outdoor Channel, Inc.

Additionally, in 1999, Heather Wood, a daughter of Howard Wood, a former director, who resigned as a Vice President of Charter Holdco in February 2002, received a bonus in the form of a three-year promissory note bearing interest at 7% per year. One-third of the original outstanding principal amount of

Since June 2003, Mr. Vogel’s brother-in-law has been an employee of Charter Holdco and has received a salary commensurate with his position in the engineering department.

We believe that, through a third party advertising agency, we have paid approximately $113,200, $79,700 and $49,700, in 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively, to Mapleton Communications, an affiliate of Mapleton Investments, LLC that owns radio stations in Oregon and California. Mr. Nathanson is the Chairman and owner of Mapleton Investments, LLC.

In April 2002, Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, Rifkin Acquisition Partners, LLC and Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC, each an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Holdings, completed the cash purchase of certain assets of Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar Income/ Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-1, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-2, L.P., and Enstar Income Program IV-3, L.P., serving approximately 21,600 customers, for a total cash sale price of approximately $48 million. In September 2002, Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC purchased all of Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P.’s Illinois cable television systems, serving approximately 6,400 customers, for a cash sale price of $15 million. Enstar Communications Corporation, a direct subsidiary of Charter Holdco is a general partner of the Enstar limited partnerships but does not exercise control over them. The purchase prices were allocated to assets acquired based on fair values, including approximately $41 million assigned to franchises and $4 million assigned to other intangible assets amortized over a useful life of three years.

In addition, Enstar Cable Corporation, the manager of the Enstar limited partnerships through a management agreement, engaged Charter Holdco to manage the Enstar limited partnerships. Pursuant to the management agreement, Charter Holdco provides management services to the Enstar limited partnerships in exchange for management fees. The Enstar limited partnerships also purchase basic and premium programming for their systems at cost from Charter Holdco. For the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter Holdco earned approximately $1 million, $469,300, $0 and $0, respectively, by providing management services to the Enstar limited partnerships. In September 2003 the Enstar limited partnerships completed sales of all their remaining assets, and as a result no further management fees were paid in 2004. In November 2004, the Enstar limited partnerships were dissolved.

All of the executive officers of Charter (with the exception of Mr. Allen), Charter Holdco and Charter Holdings act as officers of Enstar Communications Corporation.

Pursuant to Charter’s bylaws (and the employment agreements of certain of our current and former officers), Charter is obligated (subject to certain limitations) to indemnify and hold harmless, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any officer, director or employee against all expense, liability and loss (including, among other things, attorneys’ fees) reasonably incurred or suffered by such officer, director or employee as a result of the fact that he or she is a party or is threatened to be made a party or is otherwise involved in any action, suit or proceeding by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a director, officer or employee of Charter. In addition, Charter is obligated to pay, as an advancement of its indemnification obligation, the expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred by any officer, director or employee in defending any such action, suit or proceeding in advance of its final disposition, subject to an obligation to repay those amounts under certain circumstances. Pursuant to these indemnification arrangements and as an advancement of

costs, Charter has reimbursed certain of its current and former directors and executive officers a total of approximately $3 million, $8 million, $3 million and $0 in respect of invoices received in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2005, respectively, in connection with their defense of certain legal actions described herein. See “Business — Legal Proceedings.” Those current and former directors and officers include: Paul G. Allen, David C. Andersen, David G. Barford, Mary Pat Blake, J. Christian Fenger, Kent D. Kalkwarf, Ralph G. Kelly, Jerald L. Kent, Paul E. Martin, David L. McCall, Ronald L. Nelson, Nancy B. Peretsman, John C. Pietri, William D. Savoy, Steven A. Schumm, Curtis S. Shaw, William J. Shreffer, Stephen E. Silva, James Trey Smith and Carl E. Vogel. These amounts were submitted to Charter’s director and officer insurance carrier and have been reimbursed consistent with the terms of the Securities Class Action and Derivative Action Settlements described in “Business — Legal Proceedings.” On or about February 22, 2005, Charter filed lawsuits against the four former officers who were indicted and pled guilty as part of the government investigation conducted by the United States Attorney’s Office. These suits seek to recover fees and related expenses that Charter advanced these former officers under the indemnification provisions described above. One of these former officers, James Smith, has counterclaimed against Charter alleging, among other things, that Charter owes him additional indemnification for legal fees that Charter did not pay. Another of these former officers, David McCall, has counterclaimed against Charter that Charter owes him accrued sick leave.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, our actual total debt was approximately $18.9 billion and $19.5 billion, as summarized below (in millions):


		2005, we repurchased, from a small number of institutional holders, a total of $97 million principal amount of the 4.75% convertible senior notes, leaving $25 million principal amount outstanding.


(d)		Since March 31, 2005, Charter Operating, consummated exchange transactions with a small number of institutional holders of Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007 pursuant to which Charter Operating issued, in a private placement, approximately $62 million principal amount of its 8.375% senior second lien notes due 2014 in exchange for approximately $62 million of the Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007. The Charter Holdings notes received in the exchange were thereafter distributed to Charter Holdings and cancelled.


(e)		On March 14, 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. We are not required to redeem any of the other notes listed above prior to their stated maturity dates.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the weighted average interest rate on the credit facility debt was approximately 7.0% and 6.8%, respectively, the weighted average interest rate on our high-yield notes was approximately 9.9% and 9.9%, and the weighted average interest rate on the convertible senior notes was approximately 5.7% and 5.7%, respectively, resulting in a blended weighted average interest rate of 8.9% and 8.8%, respectively. The interest rate on approximately 82% and 83% of the total principal amount of our debt was effectively fixed, including the effects of our interest rate hedge agreements as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our high-yield notes was $11.2 billion and $12.2 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our convertible senior notes was $859 million and $1.1 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of our credit facilities was approximately $5.1 billion and $5.5 billion at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. The fair value of high-yield and convertible notes is based on quoted market prices, and the fair value of the credit facilities is based on dealer quotations.

The following description is a summary of certain material provisions of the amended and restated Charter Operating credit facilities and the public notes of our subsidiaries (collectively, the “Debt Agreements”). The summary does not restate the terms of the Debt Agreements in their entirety, nor does it describe all terms of the Debt Agreements. The agreements and instruments governing each of the Debt Agreements are complicated and you should consult such agreements and instruments for more detailed information regarding the Debt Agreements.

The Charter Operating credit facilities were amended and restated concurrently with the sale of $1.5 billion senior second-lien notes in April 2004, among other things, to defer maturities and increase availability under these facilities and to enable Charter Operating to acquire the interests of the lenders under the CC VI Operating, CC VIII Operating and Falcon credit facilities, thereby consolidating all credit facilities under one amended and restated Charter Operating credit agreement.


	•	provide borrowing availability of up to $6.5 billion;

	•	provide for two term facilities:


	(i) a Term A facility with a total principal amount of $2.0 billion, of which 12.5% matures in 2007, 30% matures in 2008, 37.5% matures in 2009 and 20% matures in 2010; and


	(ii) a Term B facility with a total principal amount of $3.0 billion, which shall be repayable in 27 equal quarterly installments aggregating in each loan year to 1% of the original amount of the Term B facility, with the remaining balance due at final maturity in 2011; and


	•	provide for a revolving credit facility, in a total amount of $1.5 billion, with a maturity date in 2010.

Amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit facilities bear interest, at Charter Operating’s election, at a base rate or the Eurodollar rate, as defined, plus a margin for Eurodollar loans of up to 3.00% for the Term A facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 3.25% for the Term B facility, and for base rate loans of up to 2.00% for the Term A facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 2.25% for the Term B facility. A quarterly commitment fee of up to .75% is payable on the average daily unborrowed balance of the revolving credit facilities.

The obligations of our subsidiaries under the Charter Operating credit facilities (the “Obligations”) are guaranteed by Charter Operating’s immediate parent company, CCO Holdings, and the subsidiaries of Charter Operating, except for immaterial subsidiaries and subsidiaries precluded from guaranteeing by reason of the provisions of other indebtedness to which they are subject (the “non-guarantor subsidiaries,” primarily Renaissance and its subsidiaries). The Obligations are also secured by (i) a lien on all of the assets of Charter Operating and its subsidiaries (other than assets of the non-guarantor subsidiaries), to the extent such lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement, and (ii) by a pledge by CCO Holdings of the equity interests owned by it in Charter Operating or any of Charter Operating’s subsidiaries, as well as intercompany obligations owing to it by any of such entities. Upon the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio (as defined in the indenture governing the Charter Holdings senior notes and senior discount notes) being under 8.75 to 1.0, the Charter Operating credit facilities require that the 11.875% notes due 2008 issued by CC V Holdings, LLC be redeemed. Because such Leverage Ratio was determined to be under 8.75 to 1.0, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed such notes in March 2005, and CC V Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor subsidiaries) became guarantors of the Obligations and have granted a lien on all of their assets as to which a lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement.

The Charter Operating credit facilities contain representations and warranties, and affirmative and negative covenants customary for financings of this type. The financial covenants measure performance against standards set for leverage, debt service coverage, and interest coverage, tested as of the end of each quarter. The maximum allowable leverage ratio is 4.25 to 1.0 until maturity, tested as of the end of each quarter beginning September 30, 2004. Additionally, the Charter Operating credit facilities contain provisions requiring mandatory loan prepayments under specific circumstances, including when significant amounts of assets are sold and the proceeds are not reinvested in assets useful in the business of the borrower within a specified period, and upon the incurrence of certain indebtedness when the ratio of senior first lien debt to operating cash flow is greater than 2.0 to 1.0.

The Charter Operating credit facilities permit Charter Operating and its subsidiaries to make distributions to pay interest on the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes, the CCH II senior notes, the CCO Holdings senior notes, the Charter convertible senior notes and the Charter Holdings senior notes, provided that, among other things, no default has occurred and is continuing under the Charter Operating credit facilities. Conditions to future borrowings include absence of a default or an event of default under the Charter Operating credit facilities and the continued accuracy in all material respects of the representations and warranties, including the absence since December 31, 2003 of any event, development or circumstance that has had or could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business.

The events of default under the Charter Operating credit facilities include, among other things:


	(i) the failure to make payments when due or within the applicable grace period,

	(ii) the failure to comply with specified covenants, including but not limited to a covenant to deliver audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from our independent auditors,

	(iii) the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that cause or permit the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by CCO Holdings, Charter Operating or Charter Operating’s subsidiaries in amounts in excess of $50 million in aggregate principal amount,

	(iv) the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that result in the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by certain of CCO Holdings’ direct and indirect parent companies in amounts in excess of $200 million in aggregate principal amount,

	(v) Paul Allen and/or certain of his family members and/or their exclusively owned entities (collectively, the “Paul Allen Group”) ceasing to have the power, directly or indirectly, to vote at least 35% of the ordinary voting power of Charter Operating,

	(vi) the consummation of any transaction resulting in any person or group (other than the Paul Allen Group) having power, directly or indirectly, to vote more than 35% of the ordinary voting power of Charter Operating, unless the Paul Allen Group holds a greater share of ordinary voting power of Charter Operating,

	(vii) certain of Charter Operating’s indirect or direct parent companies having indebtedness in excess of $500 million aggregate principal amount which remains undefeased three months prior to the final maturity of such indebtedness, and

	(viii) Charter Operating ceasing to be a wholly-owned direct subsidiary of CCO Holdings, except in certain very limited circumstances.

In May 2001, Charter issued 4.75% convertible senior notes with a total principal amount at maturity of $633 million. As of March 31, 2005, there was $122 million in total principal amount of these notes outstanding. Since March 31, 2005, we repurchased, from a small number of institutional holders, $97 million total principal amount of these notes, leaving $25 million in principal amount outstanding. The 4.75% convertible notes rank equally with any of our future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness, but are structurally subordinated to all existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities of our subsidiaries.

The 4.75% convertible notes are convertible at the option of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at a conversion rate of 38.0952 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equivalent to a price of $26.25 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions, which automatically occur based on the occurrence of specified events to provide protection rights to holders of the notes. Additionally, Charter may adjust the conversion ratio under certain circumstances when deemed appropriate. These notes are redeemable at our option at amounts decreasing from 101.9% to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest beginning on June 4, 2004, to the date of redemption. Interest is payable semiannually on December 1 and June 1, beginning December 1, 2001, until maturity on June 1, 2006.

Upon a change of control, subject to certain conditions and restrictions, Charter may be required to repurchase the notes, in whole or in part, at 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest at the repurchase date.

In November 2004, Charter issued 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 with a total original principal amount of $862.5 million. The 5.875% convertible senior notes are unsecured (except with respect to the collateral as described below) and rank equally with our existing and future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness (except with respect to the collateral described below), but are structurally subordinated to all existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities of our subsidiaries. Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears.

The 5.875% convertible senior notes are convertible at any time at the option of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of 413.2231 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $2.42 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions, which cause adjustments to occur automatically based on the occurrence of specified events to provide protection rights to holders of the notes. The conversion rate may also be increased (but not to exceed 462 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes) upon a specified change of control transaction. Additionally, Charter may elect to increase the conversion rate under certain circumstances when deemed appropriate and subject to applicable limitations of the NASDAQ stock market. Holders who convert their notes prior to November 16, 2007 will receive an early conversion make whole amount in respect of their notes based on a proportional share of the portfolio of pledged securities described below, with specified adjustments.

No holder of notes will be entitled to receive shares of our Class A common stock on conversion to the extent that receipt of the shares would cause the converting holder to become, directly or indirectly, a “beneficial holder” (within the meaning of Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) of more than 4.9% of the outstanding shares of our Class A common stock if such conversion would take place prior to November 16, 2008, or more than 9.9% thereafter.

If a holder tenders a note for conversion, we may direct that holder (unless we have called those notes for redemption) to a financial institution designated by us to conduct a transaction with that institution, on substantially the same terms that the holder would have received on conversion. But if any such financial institution does not accept such notes or does not deliver the required conversion consideration, we remain obligated to convert the notes.

Charter Holdco used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the notes to purchase a portfolio of U.S. government securities in an amount which we believe will be sufficient to make the first six interest payments on the notes. These government securities were pledged to us as security for a mirror note issued by Charter Holdco to Charter and pledged to the trustee under the indenture governing the notes as security for our obligations thereunder. We expect to use such securities to fund the first six interest payments under the notes. The pledged securities were valued at $145 million at March 31, 2005. Any holder that converts its notes prior to the third anniversary of the issue date will be entitled to receive, in addition to the requisite number of shares upon conversion, an interest make whole payment equal to the cash proceeds from the sale by the trustee of that portion of the remaining pledged U.S. government securities which secure interest payments on the notes so converted, subject to certain limitations with respect to notes that have not been sold pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933.

Upon a change of control and certain other fundamental changes, subject to certain conditions and restrictions, Charter may be required to repurchase the notes, in whole or in part, at 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest at the repurchase date.

We were required to have effective the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part by April 1, 2005. Such registration was not declared effective by that date, and we incurred liquidated damages from April 2, 2005 until the effective date. These liquidated damages were payable in cash or additional principal on a monthly basis. These liquidated damages accrued at a rate of 0.25% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes for the first 60 days after April 1, 2005 and 0.50% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes thereafter (or 0.375% and 0.75%

We have filed a shelf registration statement for resale of our 5.875% convertible senior notes and shares issuable on conversion of the notes by the holders, and were required to use our reasonable best efforts to cause that registration statement to be declared effective on or before April 21, 2005. Such registration statement was not declared effective by that date and we are incurring liquidated damages at a rate from 0.25% per annum of the accreted principal amount of the notes. The rate will increase to 0.50% from and after July 20, 2005 if the notes have not been registered by that date. The liquidated damages will be payable by Charter in cash so long as the convertible notes remain unregistered, but not to exceed a maximum period of two years from the original issuance date.

Following the earlier of the sale of the notes pursuant to an effective registration statement or the date two years following the issue date, we may redeem the notes in whole or in part for cash at any time at a redemption price equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, deferred interest and liquidated damages, if any, but only if for any 20 trading days in any 30 consecutive trading day period the closing price has exceeded 180% of the conversion price, if such 30 trading day period begins prior to November 16, 2007 or 150% of the conversion price, if such 30 trading period begins thereafter. Holders who convert notes that we have called for redemption shall receive, in addition to the early conversion make whole amount, if applicable, the present value of the interest on the notes converted that would have been payable for the period from the later of November 17, 2007 and the redemption date through the scheduled maturity date for the notes, plus any accrued deferred interest.

The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three separate indentures, each dated as of March 17, 1999, among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged these notes for new notes with substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are registered under the Securities Act.

The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash interest on the March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes began to accrue on April 1, 2004.

The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the March 1999 8.250% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity on April 1, 2007. Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the March 1999 8.625% Charter Holdings notes and the March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal amount of March 1999 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after April 1, 2007.

In the event that a specified change of control event occurs, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase any then outstanding March 1999 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of their principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.

The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three separate indentures, each dated as of January 12, 2000, among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. In June 2000, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged these notes for new notes with substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are registered under the Securities Act.

The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash interest on the January 2000 11.75% Charter Holdings notes began to accrue on January 15, 2005.

The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the January 2000 10.00% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity on April 1, 2009. Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the January 2000 10.25% Charter Holdings notes and the January 2000 11.75% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal amount of the January 2000 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after January 15, 2008.

In the event that a specified change of control event occurs, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase any then outstanding January 2000 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of their total principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.

The indentures governing the January 2000 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See “— Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.”

The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three separate indentures, each dated as of January 10, 2001, each among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. In March 2001, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged these notes for new notes, with substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are registered under the Securities Act.

The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash interest on the January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to January 15, 2006.

The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the January 2001 10.750% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity on October 1, 2009. On or after January 15, 2006, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the January 2001 11.125% Charter Holdings

In the event that a specified change of control event occurs, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase any then outstanding January 2001 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of their total principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.

The indentures governing the January 2001 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See “— Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.”

The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three separate indentures, each among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee. In September 2001, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged substantially all of these notes for new notes with substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are registered under the Securities Act.

The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash interest on the May 2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to May 15, 2006.

The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the May 2001 9.625% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity on November 15, 2009. On or after May 15, 2006, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the May 2001 10.000% Charter Holdings notes and the May 2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal amount of the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after May 15, 2009.

In the event that a specified change of control event occurs, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase any then outstanding May 2001 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of their total principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.

The indentures governing the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See “— Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.”

The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes were issued under three separate indentures, each among Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, as the issuers, and BNY Midwest Trust Company, as trustee, two of which were supplements to the indentures for the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes. In July 2002, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital exchanged substantially all of these notes for new notes, with substantially similar terms, except that the new notes are registered under the Securities Act.

The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. Cash interest on the January 2002 12.125% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to January 15, 2007.

The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with the current and future unsecured and unsubordinated debt of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

The Charter Holdings 12.125% senior discount notes are redeemable at the option of the issuers at amounts decreasing from 106.063% to 100% of accreted value beginning January 15, 2007.

In the event that a specified change of control event occurs, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital must offer to repurchase any then outstanding January 2002 Charter Holdings notes at 101% of their total principal amount or accreted value, as applicable, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any.

The indentures governing the January 2002 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes. See “— Summary of Restrictive Covenants Under the Charter Holdings High-Yield Notes.”

The limitations on incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred stock contained in Charter Holdings’ indentures permit Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to incur additional debt or issue preferred stock, so long as there is no default under the Charter Holdings indentures. These limitations restrict the incurrence of debt unless, after giving pro forma effect to the incurrence, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below 8.75 to 1.0. In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be met, so long as no default exists or would result from the incurrence or issuance, Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to issue:


	•	up to $3.5 billion of debt under credit facilities,

	•	up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase or capital lease of new assets,

	•	up to $300 million of additional debt for any purpose,

	•	additional debt in an amount equal to 200% of new cash equity proceeds received by Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries since March 1999, the date of our first indenture, and not allocated for restricted payments or permitted investments, and

	•	other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest rates.

Indebtedness under a single facility or agreement may be incurred in part under one of the categories listed above and in part under another. Accordingly, indebtedness under our credit facilities is incurred under a combination of the categories of permitted indebtedness listed above.

The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Holdings are generally not permitted to issue debt securities contractually subordinated in right of payment to other debt of the issuing subsidiary or preferred stock, in either case in any public or Rule 144A offering.

The Charter Holdings indentures permit Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and later reclassify that debt into another category. The Charter Operating credit facilities generally impose more restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than Charter Holdings’ indentures, so our subsidiaries that are subject to the Charter Operating credit facilities may not be permitted to utilize the full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the Charter Holdings indenture covenants.


	•	Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are generally permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make other specified restricted payments only if, after giving


		pro forma effect to the transaction, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below 8.75 to 1.0 and if no default exists or would exist as a consequence of such incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments in a total amount of up to 100% of Charter Holdings’ consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.2 times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash and non-cash equity proceeds received by Charter Holdings and not allocated to the debt incurrence covenant or to permitted investments, all cumulatively from March 1999, the date of the first Charter Holdings indenture, plus $100 million.

In addition, Charter Holdings may make distributions or restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by transactions:


	•	to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year,

	•	regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in Charter Holdings or its restricted subsidiaries, or

	•	to make other specified restricted payments including merger fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing subsidiary preferred equity interests.

Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may not make investments except permitted investments if there is a default under the indentures or if, after giving effect to the transaction, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be above 8.75 to 1.0.


	•	investments by Charter Holdings in restricted subsidiaries or by restricted subsidiaries in Charter Holdings,

	•	investments in productive assets (including through equity investments) aggregating up to $150 million since March 1999,

	•	investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by Charter Holdings since March 1999 and not allocated to the debt incurrence or restricted payments covenant, and

	•	other investments aggregating up to $50 million since March 1999.

Charter Holdings is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens securing debt and other obligations incurred under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities, liens securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing indebtedness of up to $50 million and other specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business. The lien covenant does not restrict liens on assets of subsidiaries of Charter Holdings.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital, its co-issuer, are generally not permitted to sell all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their leverage ratio after any such transaction would be no greater than their leverage ratio immediately prior to the transaction, or unless after giving effect to the transaction, the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio would be below 8.75 to 1.0, no default exists, and the surviving entity is a U.S. entity that assumes the Charter Holdings notes.

Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash, assumption of liabilities, securities converted into cash within 60 days or productive assets. Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are then required within 365 days after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash proceeds over a specified threshold to acquire assets, including current assets, used or useful in their businesses or use the net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase the Charter Holdings notes with any remaining proceeds.

Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the time of the transaction, Charter Holdings could have incurred secured

Charter Holdings’ restricted subsidiaries may generally not enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends or distributions or transfer assets to Charter Holdings on terms that are materially more restrictive than those governing their debt, lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements existing when they entered into the indentures, unless those restrictions are on customary terms that will not materially impair Charter Holdings’ ability to repay the high-yield notes.

The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Holdings are generally not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of Charter Holdings, unless the guaranteeing subsidiary issues a guarantee of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from the guarantee transaction for at least one year.

The indentures also restrict the ability of Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with affiliates involving consideration in excess of $15 million without a determination by the board of directors of Charter Holdings that the transaction is on terms no less favorable than arms length, or transactions with affiliates involving over $50 million without receiving an independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction addressed to the holders of the Charter Holdings notes.

In September 2003, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. jointly issued approximately $1.6 billion total principal amount of 10.25% senior notes due 2010. The CCH II notes are general unsecured obligations of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. The CCH II notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries of CCH II, including the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Interest on the CCH II notes accrues at 10.25% per annum and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each March 15 and September 15, commencing on March 15, 2004.

At any time prior to September 15, 2006, the issuers of the CCH II notes may redeem up to 35% of the total principal amount of the CCH II notes on a pro rata basis at a redemption price equal to 110.25% of the principal amount of CCH II notes redeemed, plus any accrued and unpaid interest.

On or after September 15, 2008, the issuers of the CCH II notes may redeem all or a part of the notes at a redemption price that declines ratably from the initial redemption price of 105.125% to a redemption price on or after September 15, 2009 of 100.0% of the principal amount of the CCH II notes redeemed, plus, in each case, any accrued and unpaid interest.

In the event of specified change of control events, CCH II must offer to purchase the outstanding CCH II notes from the holders at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total principal amount of the notes, plus any accrued and unpaid interest.

The indenture governing the CCH II notes contains restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries, including the covenants summarized below. Substantially all of CCH II’s direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

The covenant in the indenture governing the CCH II notes that restricts incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred stock permits CCH II and its subsidiaries to incur or issue specified amounts of debt or preferred stock, if, after giving effect to the incurrence, CCH II could meet a leverage ratio (ratio of consolidated debt to four times EBITDA from the most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports are available) of 5.5 to 1.0.

In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be met, so long as no default exists or would result from the incurrence or issuance, CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:


	•	up to $9.75 billion of debt under credit facilities, including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue date of the CCH II notes,

	•	up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase or capital lease of new assets,

	•	up to $300 million of additional debt for any purpose, and

	•	other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest rates.

The restricted subsidiaries of CCH II are generally not permitted to issue debt securities contractually subordinated to other debt of the issuing subsidiary or preferred stock, in either case in any public or Rule 144A offering.

The CCH II indenture permits CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and later reclassify that debt into another category. Our and our subsidiaries’ credit agreements generally impose more restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than the CCH II indenture, so we and our subsidiaries that are subject to credit agreements are not permitted to utilize the full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the CCH II indenture covenants.

Generally, under the CCH II indenture, CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make other specified restricted payments only if CCH II can incur $1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test, which requires that CCH II meet a 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio after giving effect to the transaction, and if no default exists or would exist as a consequence of such incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments in a total amount of up to 100% of CCH II’s consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.3 times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash and non-cash equity proceeds received by CCH II and not allocated to the debt incurrence covenant, all cumulatively from the fiscal quarter commenced July 1, 2003, plus $100 million.

In addition, CCH II may make distributions or restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by transactions:


	•	to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year;

	•	regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in CCH II or its restricted subsidiaries;

	•	regardless of the existence of any default, to pay interest when due on Charter Holdings notes, to pay, so long as there is no default, interest on the convertible senior notes (including the notes) of Charter, to purchase, redeem or refinance, so long as CCH II could incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test referred to above and there is no default, Charter Holdings notes, Charter notes, and other direct or indirect parent company notes (including the CCH II notes);

	•	to make distributions in connection with the private exchanges pursuant to which the CCH II notes were issued; and

	•	other specified restricted payments including merger fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing subsidiary preferred equity interests.

The indenture governing the CCH II notes restricts CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries from making investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the indenture or if CCH II could not incur $1.00 of new debt under the 5.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the transaction.


	•	investments by CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries in CCH II and in other restricted subsidiaries, or entities that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the investment;

	•	investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by CCH II since September 23, 2003 to the extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted payments covenant described above;

	•	investments resulting from the private exchanges pursuant to which the CCH II notes were issued;

	•	other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any time; and

	•	certain specified additional investments, such as investments in customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and investments received in connection with permitted asset sales.

CCH II is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens securing debt and other obligations incurred under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities, liens securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing indebtedness up to $50 million and other specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business. The lien covenant does not restrict liens on assets of subsidiaries of CCH II.

In November 2003, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. jointly issued $500 million total principal amount of 8³/4% senior notes due 2013. The CCO Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The CCO Holdings notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of CCO Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Interest on the CCO Holdings senior notes accrues at 8³/4% per year and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each May 15 and November 15.

At any time prior to November 15, 2006, the issuers of the CCO Holdings senior notes may redeem up to 35% of the total principal amount of the CCO Holdings senior notes to the extent of public equity proceeds they have received on a pro rata basis at a redemption price equal to 108.75% of the principal amount of CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus any accrued and unpaid interest.

On or after November 15, 2008, the issuers of the CCO Holdings senior notes may redeem all or a part of the notes at a redemption price that declines ratably from the initial redemption price of 104.375% to a redemption price on or after November 15, 2011 of 100.0% of the principal amount of the CCO Holdings senior notes redeemed, plus, in each case, any accrued and unpaid interest.

In December 2004, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. jointly issued $550 million total principal amount of senior floating rate notes due 2010.

Interest on the CCO Holdings senior floating rate notes accrues at the LIBOR rate plus 4.125% annually, from December 15, 2004 or, if interest already has been paid, from the date it was most recently paid. Interest is reset and payable quarterly in arrears on each March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15, commencing on March 15, 2005.

The issuers of the senior floating rate notes may redeem the notes in whole or in part at the issuers’ option from December 15, 2006 until December 14, 2007 for 102% of the principal amount, from December 15, 2007 until December 14, 2008 for 101% of the principal amount and from and after December 15, 2008, at par, in each case, plus accrued and unpaid interest.

The CCO Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The CCO Holdings notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries of CCO Holdings, including the Renaissance notes, the Charter Operating notes and the Charter Operating credit facilities.

In the event of specified change of control events, CCO Holdings must offer to purchase the outstanding CCO Holdings senior notes from the holders at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total principal amount of the notes, plus any accrued and unpaid interest.

The indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior notes contains restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries, including the covenants summarized below. Substantially all of CCO Holdings’ direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

The covenant in the indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior notes that restricts incurrence of debt and issuance of preferred stock permits CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries to incur or issue specified amounts of debt or preferred stock, if, after giving pro forma effect to the incurrence or issuance, CCO Holdings could meet a leverage ratio (ratio of consolidated debt to four times EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports are available) of 4.5 to 1.0.

In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be met, so long as no default exists or would result from the incurrence or issuance, CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:


	•	up to $9.75 billion of debt under credit facilities, including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue date of the CCO Holdings senior notes;

	•	up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase or capital lease of new assets;

	•	up to $300 million of additional debt for any purpose; and

	•	other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt, and interest rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest rates.

The restricted subsidiaries of CCO Holdings are generally not permitted to issue debt securities contractually subordinated to other debt of the issuing subsidiary or preferred stock, in either case in any public or Rule 144A offering.

The CCO Holdings indenture permits CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries to incur debt under one category, and later reclassify that debt into another category. The Charter Operating credit facilities generally impose more restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than CCO Holdings’ indenture, so our subsidiaries that are subject to credit facilities are not permitted to utilize the full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the CCO Holdings indenture covenants.


	•	CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make other specified restricted payments only if CCO Holdings can incur $1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test, which requires that CCO Holdings meet a 4.5 to


		1.0 leverage ratio after giving effect to the transaction, and if no default exists or would exist as a consequence of such incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments are permitted in a total amount of up to 100% of CCO Holdings’ consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.3 times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash and appraised non-cash equity proceeds received by CCO Holdings and not allocated to the debt incurrence covenant, all cumulatively from the fiscal quarter commenced on October 1, 2003, plus $100 million.

In addition, CCO Holdings may make distributions or restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by the transaction:


	•	to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year;

	•	to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, pass-through tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in Charter Holdings or its restricted subsidiaries;

	•	to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, interest when due on Charter Holdings notes and our notes;

	•	to pay, so long as there is no default, interest on the Charter convertible notes;

	•	to purchase, redeem or refinance Charter Holdings notes, CCH II notes, Charter notes, and other direct or indirect parent company notes, so long as CCO Holdings could incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the 4.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test referred to above and there is no default; or

	•	to make other specified restricted payments including merger fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing subsidiary preferred equity interests.

The indenture governing the CCO Holdings senior notes restricts CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries from making investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the indenture or if CCO Holdings could not incur $1.00 of new debt under the 4.5 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the transaction.


	•	investments by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries in CCO Holdings and in other restricted subsidiaries, or entities that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the investment,

	•	investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by CCO Holdings since November 10, 2003 to the extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted payments covenant described above,

	•	other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any time, and

	•	certain specified additional investments, such as investments in customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and investments received in connection with permitted asset sales.

CCO Holdings is not permitted to grant liens on its assets other than specified permitted liens. Permitted liens include liens securing debt and other obligations incurred under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities, liens securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing indebtedness up to $50 million and other specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business. The lien covenant does not restrict liens on assets of subsidiaries of CCO Holdings.

CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital, its co-issuer, are generally not permitted to sell all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their leverage ratio after any such transaction would be no greater than their leverage ratio immediately prior to the transaction, or unless CCO Holdings and its subsidiaries could incur $1.00 of new debt under the 4.50 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the transaction, no default exists, and the surviving entity is a U.S. entity that assumes the CCO Holdings senior notes.

CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash, assumption of liabilities, securities converted into cash within 60 days or productive assets. CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are then required within 365 days after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash proceeds over a specified threshold to acquire assets, including current assets, used or useful in their businesses or use the net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase the CCO Holdings senior notes with any remaining proceeds.

CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the time of the transaction, CCO Holdings could have incurred secured indebtedness in an amount equal to the present value of the net rental payments to be made under the lease, and the sale of the assets and application of proceeds is permitted by the covenant restricting asset sales.

CCO Holdings’ restricted subsidiaries may generally not enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends or distributions or transfer assets to CCO Holdings on terms that are materially more restrictive than those governing their debt, lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements existing when they entered into the indenture, unless those restrictions are on customary terms that will not materially impair CCO Holdings’ ability to repay its notes.

The restricted subsidiaries of CCO Holdings are generally not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of CCO Holdings, unless the guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from the guarantee transaction for at least one year.

The indenture also restricts the ability of CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with affiliates involving consideration in excess of $15 million without a determination by the board of directors that the transaction is on terms no less favorable than arms-length, or transactions with affiliates involving over $50 million without receiving an independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction to the holders of the CCO Holdings notes.

On April 27, 2004, Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp. jointly issued $1.1 billion of 8% senior second lien notes due 2012 and $400 million of 8³/8% senior second lien notes due 2014, for total gross proceeds of $1.5 billion.

In the first quarter of 2005, as a result of the occurrence of the guarantee and pledge date (generally, upon the Charter Holdings leverage ratio being below 8.75 to 1.0), CCO Holdings and those subsidiaries of Charter Operating that are currently guarantors of, or otherwise obligors with respect to, indebtedness under the Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations provided guarantees of the Charter Operating notes. The note guarantee of each such existing guarantor is, and the note guarantee of any additional future subsidiary guarantor will be:


	•	a senior obligation of such guarantor;

	•	structurally senior to the outstanding senior notes of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. (except in the case of CCO Holdings’ note guarantee, which is structurally pari passu with such senior notes), the outstanding senior notes of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp., the outstanding senior notes and senior discount notes of Charter Holdings, the outstanding convertible senior notes of Charter and any future indebtedness of parent companies of CCO Holdings (but


		subject to provisions in the Charter Operating indenture that permit interest and, subject to meeting the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test, principal payments to be made thereon); and

	•	senior in right of payment to any future subordinated indebtedness of such guarantor.

All the subsidiaries of Charter Operating (except CCO NR Sub, LLC, and certain other subsidiaries that are not deemed material and are designated as nonrecourse subsidiaries under the Charter Operating credit facilities) are restricted subsidiaries of Charter Operating under the Charter Operating notes. Unrestricted subsidiaries generally will not be subject to the restrictive covenants in the Charter Operating indenture.

In the event of specified change of control events, Charter Operating must offer to purchase the Charter Operating notes at a purchase price equal to 101% of the total principal amount of the Charter Operating notes repurchased plus any accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

The limitations on incurrence of debt contained in the indenture governing the Charter Operating notes permit Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries that are guarantors of the Charter Operating notes to incur additional debt or issue shares of preferred stock if, after giving pro forma effect to the incurrence, Charter Operating could meet a leverage ratio test (ratio of consolidated debt to four times EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports are available) of 4.25 to 1.0.

In addition, regardless of whether the leverage ratio test could be met, so long as no default exists or would result from the incurrence or issuance, Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to incur or issue:


	•	up to $6.5 billion of debt under credit facilities (but such incurrence is permitted only by Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries that are guarantors of the Charter Operating notes, so long as there are such guarantors), including debt under credit facilities outstanding on the issue date of the Charter Operating notes;

	•	up to $75 million of debt incurred to finance the purchase or capital lease of assets;

	•	up to $300 million of additional debt for any purpose, and

	•	other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as refinancing of existing debt and interest rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest rates and, subject to meeting the leverage ratio test, debt existing at the time of acquisition of a restricted subsidiary.

The indenture governing the Charter Operating notes permits Charter Operating to incur debt under one of the categories above, and later reclassify the debt into a different category. The Charter Operating credit facilities generally impose more restrictive limitations on incurring new debt than the Charter Operating indenture, so our subsidiaries that are subject to the Charter Operating credit facilities are not permitted to utilize the full debt incurrence that would otherwise be available under the Charter Operating indenture covenants.

Generally, under Charter Operating’s indenture, Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, or make other specified restricted payments only if Charter Operating could incur $1.00 of new debt under the leverage ratio test, which requires that Charter Operating meet a 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio after giving effect to the transaction, and if no default exists or would exist as a consequence of such incurrence. If those conditions are met, restricted payments are permitted in a total amount of up to 100% of Charter Operating’s consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 1.3 times its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash and appraised non-cash equity proceeds received by Charter Operating and not allocated to the debt incurrence covenant, all cumulatively from the fiscal quarter commenced April 1, 2004, plus $100 million.

In addition, Charter Operating may make distributions or restricted payments, so long as no default exists or would be caused by the transaction:


	•	to repurchase management equity interests in amounts not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year;

	•	regardless of the existence of any default, to pay pass-through tax liabilities in respect of ownership of equity interests in Charter Operating or its restricted subsidiaries;

	•	to pay, regardless of the existence of any default, interest when due on the Charter Holdings notes, the CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, and our notes;

	•	to pay, so long as there is no default, interest on the Charter convertible notes;

	•	to purchase, redeem or refinance the Charter Holdings notes, CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Charter notes, and other direct or indirect parent company notes, so long as Charter Operating could incur $1.00 of indebtedness under the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test referred to above and there is no default, or

	•	to make other specified restricted payments including merger fees up to 1.25% of the transaction value, repurchases using concurrent new issuances, and certain dividends on existing subsidiary preferred equity interests.

The indenture governing the Charter Operating notes restricts Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries from making investments, except specified permitted investments, or creating new unrestricted subsidiaries, if there is a default under the indenture or if Charter Operating could not incur $1.00 of new debt under the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the transaction.


	•	investments by Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries in Charter Operating and in other restricted subsidiaries, or entities that become restricted subsidiaries as a result of the investment,

	•	investments aggregating up to 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by Charter Operating since April 27, 2004 to the extent the proceeds have not been allocated to the restricted payments covenant described above,

	•	other investments up to $750 million outstanding at any time, and

	•	certain specified additional investments, such as investments in customers and suppliers in the ordinary course of business and investments received in connection with permitted asset sales.

Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are not permitted to grant liens senior to the liens securing the Charter Operating notes, other than permitted liens, on their assets to secure indebtedness or other obligations, if, after giving effect to such incurrence, the senior secured leverage ratio (generally, the ratio of obligations secured by first priority liens to four times EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent fiscal quarter for which internal financial reports are available) would exceed 3.75 to 1.0. Permitted liens include liens securing indebtedness and other obligations under permitted credit facilities, liens securing the purchase price of new assets, liens securing indebtedness of up to $50 million and other specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business.

Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp., its co-issuer, are generally not permitted to sell all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their leverage ratio after any such transaction would be no greater than their leverage ratio immediately prior to the transaction, or unless Charter Operating and its subsidiaries could incur $1.00 of new debt under the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test described above after giving effect to the transaction, no default exists, and the surviving entity is a U.S. entity that assumes the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries generally may not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of restricted subsidiaries, issue equity interests, unless they receive consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the assets or equity interests, consisting of at least 75% in cash, assumption of liabilities,

Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless, at the time of the transaction, Charter Operating could have incurred secured indebtedness in an amount equal to the present value of the net rental payments to be made under the lease, and the sale of the assets and application of proceeds is permitted by the covenant restricting asset sales.

Charter Operating’s restricted subsidiaries may generally not enter into restrictions on their ability to make dividends or distributions or transfer assets to Charter Operating on terms that are materially more restrictive than those governing their debt, lien, asset sale, lease and similar agreements existing when Charter Operating entered into the indenture governing the Charter Operating senior second lien notes unless those restrictions are on customary terms that will not materially impair Charter Operating’s ability to repay the Charter Operating notes.

The restricted subsidiaries of Charter Operating are generally not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of Charter Operating, unless the guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee of the notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from the guarantee transaction for at least one year.

The indenture also restricts the ability of Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with affiliates involving consideration in excess of $15 million without a determination by the board of directors that the transaction is on terms no less favorable than arms-length, or transactions with affiliates involving over $50 million without receiving an independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction to the holders of the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries are generally not permitted to transfer equity interests in restricted subsidiaries unless the transfer is of all of the equity interests in the restricted subsidiary or the restricted subsidiary remains a restricted subsidiary and net proceeds of the equity sale are applied in accordance with the asset sales covenant.

Since the occurrence of the guarantee and pledge date, the collateral for the Charter Operating notes consists of all of Charter Operating’s and its subsidiaries’ assets that secure the obligations of Charter Operating or any subsidiary of Charter Operating with respect to the Charter Operating credit facilities and the related obligations. The collateral currently consists of the capital stock of Charter Operating held by CCO Holdings, all of the intercompany obligations owing to CCO Holdings by Charter Operating or any subsidiary of Charter Operating, and substantially all of Charter Operating’s and the guarantors’ assets (other than the assets of CCO Holdings) in which security interests may be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by filing a financing statement (including capital stock and intercompany obligations), including, but not limited to:


	•	with certain exceptions, all capital stock (limited in the case of capital stock of foreign subsidiaries, if any, to 66% of the capital stock of first tier foreign Subsidiaries) held by Charter Operating or any guarantor; and

	•	with certain exceptions, all intercompany obligations owing to Charter Operating or any guarantor.

In March 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed in full the notes outstanding under the CC V indenture. Following that redemption CC V Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries guaranteed the Charter Operating credit facilities and the related obligations and secured those guarantees with first-priority liens, and guaranteed the notes and secured the Charter Operating senior second lien notes with second-priority liens, on substantially all of their assets in which security interests may be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by filing a financing statement (including capital stock and intercompany obligations).

In addition, if Charter Operating or its subsidiaries exercise any option to redeem in full the notes outstanding under the Renaissance indenture, then, provided that the Leverage Condition remains satisfied, the Renaissance entities will be required to provide corresponding guarantees of the Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations and note guarantees and to secure the Charter Operating notes and the Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations with corresponding liens.

In the event that additional liens are granted by Charter Operating or its subsidiaries to secure obligations under the Charter Operating credit facilities or the related obligations, second priority liens on the same assets will be granted to secure the Charter Operating notes, which liens will be subject to the provisions of an intercreditor agreement (to which none of Charter Operating or its affiliates are parties). Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, no such second priority liens need be provided if the time such lien would otherwise be granted is not during a guarantee and pledge availability period (when the Leverage Condition is satisfied), but such second priority liens will be required to be provided in accordance with the foregoing sentence on or prior to the fifth business day of the commencement of the next succeeding guarantee and pledge availability period.

These notes were redeemed on March 14, 2005 and are therefore no longer outstanding. See “Summary — Recent Events.”

The 10% senior discount notes due 2008 were issued by Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC and Renaissance Media Holdings Capital Corporation, with Renaissance Media Group LLC as guarantor and the United States Trust Company of New York as trustee. Renaissance Media Group LLC, which is the direct or indirect parent company of these issuers, is now a subsidiary of Charter Operating. The Renaissance 10% notes and the Renaissance guarantee are unsecured, unsubordinated debt of the issuers and the guarantor, respectively. In October 1998, the issuers of the Renaissance notes exchanged $163 million of the original issued and outstanding Renaissance notes for an equivalent value of new Renaissance notes. The form and terms of the new Renaissance notes are the same in all material respects as the form and terms of the original Renaissance notes except that the issuance of the new Renaissance notes was registered under the Securities Act.

There was no payment of any interest in respect of the Renaissance notes prior to October 15, 2003. Since October 15, 2003, interest on the Renaissance notes is payable semi-annually in arrears in cash at a rate of 10% per year. On April 15, 2003, the Renaissance notes became redeemable at the option of the issuers thereof, in whole or in part, initially at 105% of their principal amount at maturity, plus accrued interest, declining to 100% of the principal amount at maturity, plus accrued interest, on or after April 15, 2006.

Our acquisition of Renaissance triggered change of control provisions of the Renaissance notes that required us to offer to purchase the Renaissance notes at a purchase price equal to 101% of their accreted value on the date of the purchase, plus accrued interest, if any. In May 1999, we made an offer to repurchase the Renaissance notes, and holders of Renaissance notes representing 30% of the total principal amount outstanding at maturity tendered their Renaissance notes for repurchase.

The limitations on incurrence of debt contained in the indenture governing the Renaissance notes permit Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries to incur additional debt, so long as they are not in default under the indenture:


	•	if, after giving effect to the incurrence, Renaissance Media Group could meet a leverage ratio (ratio of consolidated debt to four times consolidated EBITDA, as defined, from the most recent quarter) of 6.75 to 1.0, and, regardless of whether the leverage ratio could be met,

	•	up to the greater of $200 million or 4.5 times Renaissance Media Group’s consolidated annualized EBITDA, as defined,


	•	up to an amount equal to 5% of Renaissance Media Group’s consolidated total assets to finance the purchase of new assets,

	•	up to two times the sum of (a) the net cash proceeds of new equity issuances and capital contributions, and (b) 80% of the fair market value of property received by Renaissance Media Group or an issuer as a capital contribution, in each case received after the issue date of the Renaissance notes and not allocated to make restricted payments, and

	•	other items of indebtedness for specific purposes such as intercompany debt, refinancing of existing debt and interest rate swaps to provide protection against fluctuation in interest rates.

The indenture governing the Renaissance notes permits us to incur debt under one of the categories above, and reclassify the debt into a different category.

Under the indenture governing the Renaissance notes, Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends on equity interests, repurchase interests, make restricted investments, or make other specified restricted payments only if Renaissance Media Group could incur $1.00 of additional debt under the debt incurrence test, which requires that Renaissance Media Group meet the 6.75 to 1.0 leverage ratio after giving effect to the transaction of the indebtedness covenant and that no default exists or would occur as a consequence thereof. If those conditions are met, Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are permitted to make restricted payments in a total amount not to exceed the result of 100% of Renaissance Media Group’s consolidated EBITDA, as defined, minus 130% of its consolidated interest expense, plus 100% of new cash equity proceeds received by Renaissance Media Group and not allocated to the indebtedness covenant, plus returns on certain investments, all cumulatively from June 1998. Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries may make permitted investments up to $2 million in related businesses and other specified permitted investments, restricted payments up to $10 million, dividends up to 6% each year of the net cash proceeds of public equity offerings, and other specified restricted payments without meeting the foregoing test.

Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are not permitted to grant liens on their assets other than specified permitted liens, unless corresponding liens are granted to secure the Renaissance notes. Permitted liens include liens securing debt permitted to be incurred under credit facilities, liens securing debt incurred under the incurrence of indebtedness test, in amounts up to the greater of $200 million or 4.5 times Renaissance Media Group’s consolidated EBITDA, as defined, liens as deposits for acquisitions up to 10% of the estimated purchase price, liens securing permitted financings of new assets, liens securing debt permitted to be incurred by restricted subsidiaries, and specified liens incurred in the ordinary course of business.

Renaissance Media Group and the issuers of the Renaissance notes are generally not permitted to sell or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other companies unless their consolidated net worth after any such transaction would be equal to or greater than their consolidated net worth immediately prior to the transaction, or unless Renaissance Media Group could incur $1.00 of additional debt under the debt incurrence test, which would require them to meet a leverage ratio of 6.75 to 1.00 after giving effect to the transaction.

Renaissance Media Group and its subsidiaries may generally not otherwise sell assets or, in the case of subsidiaries, equity interests, unless they receive consideration at least equal to the fair market value of the assets, consisting of at least 75% cash, temporary cash investments or assumption of debt. Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries are then required within 12 months after any asset sale either to commit to use the net cash proceeds over a specified threshold either to acquire assets used in their own or related businesses or use the net cash proceeds to repay debt, or to offer to repurchase the Renaissance notes with any remaining proceeds.

Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries may generally not engage in sale and leaseback transactions unless the lease term does not exceed three years or the proceeds are applied in accordance with the covenant limiting asset sales.

Renaissance Media Group’s restricted subsidiaries may generally not enter into restrictions on their abilities to make dividends or distributions or transfer assets to Renaissance Media Group except those not more restrictive than is customary in comparable financings.

The restricted subsidiaries of Renaissance Media Group are not permitted to guarantee or pledge assets to secure debt of the Renaissance Media Group or its restricted subsidiaries, unless the guarantying subsidiary issues a guarantee of the Renaissance notes of comparable priority and tenor, and waives any rights of reimbursement, indemnity or subrogation arising from the guarantee transaction.

Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries are generally not permitted to issue or sell equity interests in restricted subsidiaries, except sales of common stock of restricted subsidiaries so long as the proceeds of the sale are applied in accordance with the asset sale covenant, and issuances as a result of which the restricted subsidiary is no longer a restricted subsidiary and any remaining investment in that subsidiary is permitted by the covenant limiting restricted payments.

The indenture governing the Renaissance notes also restricts the ability of Renaissance Media Group and its restricted subsidiaries to enter into certain transactions with affiliates involving consideration in excess of $2 million without a determination by the disinterested members of the board of directors that the transaction is on terms no less favorable than arms length, or transactions with affiliates involving over $4 million with affiliates without receiving an independent opinion as to the fairness of the transaction to Renaissance Media Group.

All of these covenants are subject to additional specified exceptions. In general, the covenants of the Charter Operating credit facilities are more restrictive than those of our indentures.

Our indentures and those of certain of our subsidiaries include various events of default, including cross-default provisions. Under these provisions, a failure by any of the issuers or any of their restricted subsidiaries to pay at the final maturity thereof the principal amount of other indebtedness having a principal amount of $100 million or more (or any other default under any such indebtedness resulting in its acceleration) would result in an event of default under the indenture governing the applicable notes. The Renaissance indenture contains a similar cross-default provision with a $10 million threshold that applies to the issuers of the Renaissance notes and their restricted subsidiaries. As a result, an event of default related to the failure to repay principal at maturity or the acceleration of the indebtedness under the Charter Holdings notes, CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, Charter Operating notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities or the Renaissance notes could cause cross-defaults under our subsidiaries’ indentures.

Our capital stock and the provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws are as described below. These summaries are qualified by reference to the restated certificate of incorporation and the bylaws, copies of which have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Our authorized capital stock consists of 1.750 billion shares of Class A common stock, par value $.001 per share, 750 million shares of Class B common stock, par value $.001 per share, and 250 million shares of preferred stock, par value $.001 per share.

Our restated certificate of incorporation and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s amended and restated limited liability company agreement contain provisions that are designed to cause the number of shares of our common stock that are outstanding to equal the number of common membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC owned by Charter and to cause the value of a share of common stock to be equal to the value of a common membership unit. These provisions are meant to allow a holder of our common stock to easily understand the economic interest that such holder’s common shares represent of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s business.

In particular, provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation provide that:


	(1) at all times the number of shares of our common stock outstanding will be equal to the number of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC common membership units owned by Charter.

	(2) Charter will not hold any assets other than, among other allowable assets:


	•	working capital and cash held for the payment of current obligations and receivables from Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC;

	•	common membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC; and

	•	obligations and equity interests of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC that correspond to obligations and equity interests issued by Charter;


	(3) Charter will not borrow any money or enter into any capital lease unless Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC enters into the same arrangements with Charter so that Charter’s liability flows through to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC.

Provisions in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s amended and restated limited liability company agreement provide that, upon the contribution by Charter of assets acquired through the issuance of common stock by Charter, Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC will issue to Charter that number of common membership units as equals the number of shares of common stock issued by Charter. In the event of the contribution by Charter of assets acquired through the issuance of indebtedness or preferred interests of Charter, Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC will issue to Charter a corresponding obligation or interest, respectively to allow Charter to pass through to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC these liabilities or preferred interests. Such liabilities or preferred interest of Charter Communication Holding Company, LLC will be assets of Charter, in addition to the Class B common units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC that are held by Charter.

As of March 31, 2005, there were 304,763,192 shares of Class A common stock issued and outstanding and 50,000 shares of Class B common stock issued and outstanding. If, as described below, all shares of Class B common stock convert to shares of Class A common stock as a result of dispositions by Mr. Allen and his affiliates, the holders of Class A common stock will be entitled to elect all members of the board of directors, other than any members elected separately by the holders of any preferred shares with the right to vote, of which there are currently none outstanding.

Voting Rights. The holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock generally have identical rights, except:


	•	each Class A common shareholder is entitled to one vote per share; and

	•	each Class B common shareholder is entitled to a number of votes based on the number of outstanding Class B common stock and Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units exchangeable for Class B common stock. For example, Mr. Allen is entitled to ten votes for each share of Class B common stock held by him or his affiliates and ten votes for each membership unit held by him or his affiliates; and

	•	the Class B common shareholders have the sole power to vote to amend or repeal the provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation relating to:


	(1) the activities in which Charter may engage;

	(2) the required ratio of outstanding shares of common stock to outstanding membership units owned by Charter; and

	(3) the restrictions on the assets and liabilities that Charter may hold.

The effect of the provisions described in the final bullet point is that holders of Class A common stock have no right to vote on these matters. These provisions allow Mr. Allen, for example, to amend the restated certificate of incorporation to permit Charter to engage in currently prohibited business activities without having to seek the approval of holders of Class A common stock.

The voting rights relating to the election of Charter’s board of directors are as follows:


	•	The Class B common shareholders, voting separately as a class, are entitled to elect all but one member of our board of directors.

	•	Class A and Class B common shareholders, voting together as one class, are entitled to elect the remaining member of our board of directors who is not elected by the Class B common shareholders.

	•	Class A common shareholders and Class B common shareholders are not entitled to cumulate their votes in the election of directors.

	•	In addition, Charter may issue one or more series of preferred stock that entitle the holders of such preferred stock to elect directors.

Other than the election of directors and any matters where Delaware law or Charter’s restated certificate of incorporation or bylaws requires otherwise, all matters to be voted on by shareholders must be approved by a majority of the votes cast by the holders of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock present in person or represented by proxy, voting together as a single class, subject to any voting rights granted to holders of any preferred stock.

Amendments to Charter’s restated certificate of incorporation that would adversely alter or change the powers, preferences or special rights of the Class A common stock or the Class B common stock must be


	•	the issuance of any Class B common stock other than to Mr. Allen and his affiliates and other than pursuant to specified stock splits and dividends;

	•	the issuance of any stock other than Class A common stock (and other than Class B common stock as described above); and

	•	the amendment, modification or repeal of any provision of its restated certificate of incorporation relating to capital stock or the removal of directors.

Charter will lose its rights to manage the business of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and Charter Investment, Inc. will become the sole manager of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC if at any time a court holds that the holders of the Class B common stock no longer:


	•	have the number of votes per share of Class B common stock described above;

	•	have the right to elect, voting separately as a class, all but one member of Charter’s board of directors, except for any directors elected separately by the holders of preferred stock; or

	•	have the right to vote as a separate class on matters that adversely affect the Class B common stock with respect to:


	(1) the issuance of equity securities of Charter other than the Class A common stock; or

	(2) the voting power of the Class B common stock.

These provisions are contained in the amended and restated limited liability company agreement of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC. The Class B common stock could lose these rights if a holder of Class A common stock successfully challenges in a court proceeding the voting rights of the Class B common stock. In any of these circumstances, Charter would also lose its 100% voting control of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC as provided in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s amended and restated limited liability company agreement. These provisions exist to assure Mr. Allen that he will be able to control Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC in the event he was no longer able to control Charter through his ownership of Class B common stock. These events could have a material adverse impact on our business and the market price of the Class A common stock and the notes. See “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business.”

Dividends. Holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock will share ratably (based on the number of shares of common stock held) in any dividend declared by our board of directors, subject to any preferential rights of any outstanding preferred stock. Dividends consisting of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock may be paid only as follows:


	•	shares of Class A common stock may be paid only to holders of Class A common stock;

	•	shares of Class B common stock may be paid only to holders of Class B common stock; and

	•	the number of shares of each class of common stock payable per share of such class of common stock shall be equal in number.

Our restated certificate of incorporation provides that we may not pay a stock dividend unless the number of outstanding Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC common membership units are adjusted accordingly. This provision is designed to maintain the equal value between shares of common stock and membership units and the one-to-one exchange ratio.

Conversion of Class B Common Stock. Each share of outstanding Class B common stock will automatically convert into one share of Class A common stock if, at any time, Mr. Allen or any of his affiliates sells any shares of common stock of Charter or membership units of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and as a result of such sale, Mr. Allen and his affiliates no longer own directly and indirectly common stock and other equity interests in Charter and membership units in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC that in total represent at least:


	•	20% of the sum of the values, calculated as of November 12, 1999, of the shares of Class B common stock directly or indirectly owned by Mr. Allen and his affiliates and the shares of Class B common stock for which outstanding Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units directly or indirectly owned by Mr. Allen and his affiliates were exchangeable on that date, and

	•	5% of the sum of the values, calculated as of the measuring date, of shares of outstanding common stock and other equity interests in Charter and the shares of Charter common stock for which outstanding Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units are exchangeable on such date.

These provisions exist to assure that Mr. Allen will no longer be able to control Charter if after sales of his equity interests he owns an insignificant economic interest in our business. The conversion of all Class B common stock in accordance with these provisions would not trigger Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s limited liability company agreement provisions described above whereby Charter would lose its management rights and special voting rights relating to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC in the event of an adverse determination of a court affecting the rights of the Class B common stock.

Each holder of a share of Class B common stock has the right to convert such share into one share of Class A common stock at any time on a one-for-one basis. If a Class B common shareholder transfers any shares of Class B common stock to a person other than an authorized Class B common shareholder, these shares of Class B common stock will automatically convert into shares of Class A common stock. Authorized Class B common shareholders are Paul G. Allen entities controlled by Mr. Allen, Mr. Allen’s estate, any organization qualified under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that is Mr. Allen’s beneficiary upon his death and certain trusts established by or for the benefit of Mr. Allen. In this context “controlled” means the ownership of more than 50% of the voting power and economic interest of an entity and “transfer” means the transfer of record or beneficial ownership of any such share of Class B common stock.

Other Rights. Shares of Class A common stock will be treated equally in the event of any merger or consolidation of Charter so that:


	•	each class of common shareholders will receive per share the same kind and amount of capital stock, securities, cash and/or other property received by any other class of common shareholders, provided that any shares of capital stock so received may differ in a manner similar to the manner in which the shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock differ; or

	•	each class of common shareholders, to the extent they receive a different kind (other than as described above) or different amount of capital stock, securities, cash and/or other property than that received by any other class of common shareholders, will receive for each share of common stock they hold, stock, securities, cash and/or either property having a value substantially equivalent to that received by such other class of common shareholders.

Upon Charter’s liquidation, dissolution or winding up, after payment in full of the amounts required to be paid to preferred shareholders, if any, all common shareholders, regardless of class, are entitled to share ratably in any assets and funds available for distribution to common shareholders.

No shares of any class of common stock are subject to redemption or have preemptive right to purchase additional shares of common stock.

Charter’s board of directors is authorized, subject to the approval of the holders of the Class B common stock, to issue from time to time up to a total of 250 million shares of preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the numbers, powers, designations, preferences, and any special rights of the shares of each such series thereof, including:


	•	dividend rights and rates;

	•	conversion rights;

	•	voting rights;

	•	terms of redemption (including any sinking fund provisions) and redemption price or prices;

	•	liquidation preferences; and

	•	the number of shares constituting and the designation of such series.

Pursuant to their authority the board of directors has designated 1 million of the above-described 250 million shares as Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock (“Series A Preferred Stock”). Holders of the Series A Preferred Stock have no voting rights but are entitled to receive cumulative cash dividends at an annual rate of 5.75%, payable quarterly. If for any reason Charter fails to pay the dividends on the Series A Preferred Stock on a timely basis, the dividend rate on each share increases to an annual rate of 7.75% until the payment is made. The Series A Preferred Stock is redeemable by Charter at its option on or after August 31, 2004 and must be redeemed by Charter at any time upon a change of control, or if not previously redeemed or converted, on August 31, 2008. The Series A Preferred Stock is convertible, in whole or in part, at the option of the holders on or before August 31, 2008, into shares of common stock at an initial conversion rate equal to a conversion price of $24.71 per share of common stock, subject to certain customary adjustments. The redemption price per share of Series A Preferred Stock is the liquidation preference of $100, subject to certain customary adjustments. At March 31, 2005, there were 545,259 shares of Series A Preferred Stock outstanding, with an aggregate liquidation preference of approximately $55 million. These shares are convertible into approximately 2.2 million shares of Class A common stock.

As of March 31, 2005, options to purchase a total of 1,809,751 membership units in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC were outstanding pursuant to the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan, and options to purchase a total of 27,258,077 shares of Class A common stock were outstanding pursuant to Charter’s 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Of these options, 9,745,313 have vested. The membership units received upon exercise of any of the options under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan are automatically exchanged for shares of our Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis. In addition, a portion of the unvested options will vest each month. There are also additional options outstanding to purchase an aggregate of 475,653 shares of Class A common stock, which were issued to a consultant outside of the plan. We have agreed to exchange 186,385 of these options for 18,638 shares of Class A common stock.

At March 31, 2005, we had outstanding $862.5 million principal amount of our 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, which are convertible (at approximately $2.42 per share) into a total of approximately 356 million shares of our Class A common stock. At March 31, 2005, we also had outstanding approximately $122 million principal amount of our 4.75% senior convertible notes due 2006, which are convertible (at approximately $26.25 per share) into a total of approximately 4.6 million shares of Class A common stock.

Anti-takeover Effects of Provisions of Charter’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

Provisions of Charter’s restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws may be deemed to have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt that a shareholder might consider in its best interest, including those attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares held by shareholders.

Special Meeting of Shareholders. Our bylaws provide that, subject to the rights of holders of any series of preferred stock, special meetings of our shareholders may be called only by the chairman of our board of directors, our chief executive officer or a majority of our board of directors.

Advance Notice Requirements For Shareholder Proposals And Director Nominations. Our bylaws provide that shareholders seeking to bring business before an annual meeting of shareholders, or to nominate candidates for election as directors at an annual meeting of shareholders, must provide timely prior written notice of their proposals. To be timely, a shareholder’s notice must be received at our principal executive offices not less than 45 days nor more than 70 days prior to the first anniversary of the date on which we first mailed our proxy statement for the prior year’s annual meeting. If, however, the date of the annual meeting is more than 30 days before or after the anniversary date of the prior year’s annual meeting, notice by the shareholder must be received not less than 90 days prior to the annual meeting or by the 10th day following the public announcement of the date of the meeting, whichever occurs later, and not more than 120 days prior to the annual meeting. Our bylaws specify requirements as to the form and content of a shareholder’s notice. These provisions may limit shareholders in bringing matters before an annual meeting of shareholders or in making nominations for directors at an annual meeting of shareholders.

Authorized But Unissued Shares. The authorized but unissued shares of Class A common stock are available for future issuance without shareholder approval and, subject to approval by the holders of the Class B common stock, the authorized but unissued shares of Class B common stock and preferred stock are available for future issuance. These additional shares may be utilized for a variety of corporate purposes, including future public offerings to raise additional capital, corporate acquisitions and employee benefit plans. The existence of authorized but unissued shares of common stock and preferred stock could render more difficult or discourage an attempt to obtain control of us by means of a proxy contest, tender offer, merger or otherwise.

The Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC limited liability company agreement provides for three separate classes of common membership units designed Class A, Class B and Class C and one class of preferred membership units designated Class A. As of March 31, 2005, there were 643,945,223 Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC common membership units issued and outstanding, 304,813,192 of which were held by Charter.

Class A Common Membership Units. As of March 31, 2005, there were a total of 324,300,479 issued and outstanding Class A common membership units, consisting of 217,585,246 units owned by Charter Investment, Inc. and 106,715,233 units owned by Vulcan Cable III Inc.

Class B Common Membership Units. As of March 31, 2005, there were a total of 304,813,192 issued and outstanding Class B common membership units, all of which are owned by Charter.

Class C Common Membership Units. As of March 31, 2005, there were a total of 14,831,552 issued and outstanding Class C common membership units, consisting of 5,233,612 units owned by Charter Investment, Inc. and 9,597,940 units owned by Vulcan Cable III Inc.

In addition, Charter Investment, Inc., an affiliate of Mr. Allen owns 24,273,943 units of CC VIII, LLC membership units. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of such CC VIII, LLC membership interests following Mr. Allen’s acquisition of those interests on June 6, 2003. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”

Convertible Preferred Membership Units. As of March 31, 2005, there were a total of 545,259 issued and outstanding convertible preferred membership units. These units are owned by Charter and mirror the terms of Charter’s Series A Preferred Stock.

Any matter requiring a vote of the members of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the Class B common membership units. Charter owns all Class B common membership units and therefore controls Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC. Because Mr. Allen owns high vote Class B common stock of Charter that entitles him to approximately 93% of the voting power of the outstanding common stock of Charter, Mr. Allen controls us and through us has voting control of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC.

The net cash proceeds that Charter receives from any issuance of shares of common stock will be immediately transferred to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC in exchange for membership units equal in number to the number of shares of common stock issued by Charter.

Charter is a party to an agreement permitting Vulcan Cable III Inc., Charter Investment, Inc. and any other affiliate of Mr. Allen to exchange at any time on a one-for-one basis any or all of their Charter Holdco common membership units for shares of Class B common stock. This exchange may occur directly or, at the election of the exchanging holder, indirectly through a tax-free reorganization such as a share exchange or a statutory merger of any Allen-controlled entity with and into Charter or a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter. In the case of an exchange in connection with a tax-free share exchange or a statutory merger, shares of Class A common stock held by Mr. Allen or the Allen-controlled entity will also be exchanged for Class B common stock. Mr. Allen currently owns shares of Class A common stock as a result of the exercise of put rights granted to sellers in the Falcon acquisition and the Rifkin acquisition.

Charter Holdco common membership units held by Mr. Allen and his affiliates are exchangeable at any time for shares of our Class B common stock, which is then convertible into shares of Class A common stock. The exchange agreement and the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan state that common membership units are exchangeable for shares of common stock at a value equal to the fair market value of the common membership units. The exchange ratio of common membership units to shares of Class A common stock will be one to one because Charter and Charter Holdco have been structured so that the fair market value of a share of the Class A common stock equals the fair market value of a common membership unit owned by Charter.


	•	limiting the assets and liabilities that Charter may hold; and

	•	requiring the number of shares of our common stock outstanding at any time to equal the number of common membership units owned by Charter.

If we fail to comply with these provisions or they are changed, the exchange ratio may vary from one to one and will then be based on a pre-determined formula contained in the exchange agreements and the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan. This formula will be based on the then current relative fair market values of common membership units and common stock.

Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s limited liability company agreement contains a number of provisions affecting allocation of net tax losses and net tax profits to its members. In some situations, these provisions could result in Charter having to pay income taxes in an amount that is more or less than it would have had to pay if these provisions did not exist. For additional information see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Income Taxes.”

Other Material Terms of the Amended and Restated Limited Company Agreement of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC

General. Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC’s amended and restated limited liability company agreement contains provisions that permit each member (and its officers, directors, agents, shareholders, members, partners or affiliates) to engage in businesses that may compete with the businesses of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC or any subsidiary. However, the directors of Charter, including Mr. Allen, are subject to fiduciary duties under Delaware corporate law that generally require them to present business opportunities in the cable transmission business to Charter.

The amended and restated limited liability company agreement restricts the business activities that Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC may engage in.

Transfer Restrictions. The amended and restated limited liability company agreement restricts the ability of each member to transfer its membership interest unless specified conditions have been met. These conditions include:


	•	the transfer will not result in the loss of any license or regulatory approval or exemption that has been obtained by Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and is materially useful in its business as then conducted or proposed to be conducted;

	•	the transfer will not result in a material and adverse limitation or restriction on the operations of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC and its subsidiaries taken as a whole;

	•	the proposed transferee agrees in writing to be bound by the limited liability company agreement; and

	•	except for a limited number of permitted transfers under the limited liability company agreement, the transfer has been approved by the manager in its sole discretion.

Amendments to the Limited Liability Company Agreement. Any amendment to the limited liability company agreement generally may be adopted only upon the approval of a majority of the Class B common membership units. The agreement may not be amended in a manner that adversely affects the rights of any class of common membership units without the consent of holders holding a majority of the membership units of that class.

Holders of Class B Common Stock. Charter, Mr. Allen, Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Cable III Inc., are parties to a registration rights agreement. The agreement gives Mr. Allen and his affiliates the right to cause us to register the shares of Class A common stock issued to them upon conversion of any shares of Class B common stock that they may hold.

This registration rights agreement provides that each eligible holder is entitled to unlimited “piggyback” registration rights permitting them to include their shares of Class A common stock in registration statements filed by us. These holders may also exercise their demand rights causing us, subject to specified limitations, to register their Class A shares, provided that the amount of shares subject to each demand has a market value at least equal to $50 million or, if the market value is less than $50 million, all of the Class A shares of the holders participating in the offering are included in such registration. We are obligated to pay the costs associated with all such registrations.

Holders may elect to have their shares registered pursuant to a shelf registration statement if at the time of the election, Charter is eligible to file a registration statement on Form S-3 and the amount of shares to be registered has a market value equal to at least $100 million on the date of the election.

All shares of Class A common stock issuable to the registration rights holders in exchange for Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units and upon conversion of outstanding Class B common stock and conversion of Class B common stock issuable to the registration rights holders upon exchange of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units are subject to the registration rights described above.

The transfer agent and registrar for our Class A common stock is Mellon Investor Services, LLC.

In addition to the 150 million shares of Class A common stock offered hereby, as of March 31, 2005, we had 304,763,192 shares of Class A common stock issued and outstanding, all of which are eligible for immediate resale (subject to limitations of Rule 144 in the case of shares held by affiliates).

As of March 31, 2005, the following additional shares of Class A common stock are or will be issuable after giving effect to this offering and the redemption of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005:


	•	339,132,031 shares of Class A common stock will be issuable upon conversion of Class B common stock issuable upon exchange of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units held by Vulcan Cable III Inc. and Charter Investment, Inc. These membership units are exchangeable for shares of Class B common stock on a one-for-one basis. Shares of Class B common stock are convertible into shares of Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis.

	•	24,273,943 shares of Class A common stock may be issuable upon the exchange of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units potentially issuable in exchange for CC VIII, LLC membership units held by an affiliate of Mr. Allen. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of such CC VIII, LLC membership interests following Mr. Allen’s acquisition of those interests on June 6, 2003. See“Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising Out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”

	•	50,000 shares of Class A common stock will be issuable upon conversion of outstanding Class B common stock on a one-for-one basis.

	•	Up to 90,000,000 shares of Class A common stock (or units exchangeable for Class A common stock) are authorized for issuance pursuant to Charter’s 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan. At March 31, 2005, 1,309,620 shares had been issued under the plans upon exercise of options, 655,749 shares had been issued upon vesting of restricted stock grants, and 1,162,176 shares are subject to future vesting under restricted stock agreements. Of the remaining 86,872,455 shares covered by the plans, as of March 31, 2005, 29,067,828 were subject to outstanding options (30% of which were vested), and there were 11,627,420 performance units granted under Charter’s long-term incentive program, which will vest on the third anniversary of the date of grant conditional upon Charter’s performance against financial targets approved by the board of directors at the time of the awards. 46,177,207 shares remained available for future grant under the plans.

	•	356,404,924 shares of Class A common stock are issuable upon conversion of our 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009.

	•	An aggregate of 6,850,671 shares of Class A common stock would be issuable upon conversion of our 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006 and our Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock.


	•	As more fully described in “Business — Legal Proceedings”, 13,400,000 shares of Class A common stock issued on July 8, 2005 in settlement of certain legal proceedings.

All of the shares of Class A common stock issuable upon exchange of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC membership units and upon conversion of shares of our Class B common stock are subject to demand and piggyback registration rights.

All of the shares of Class A common stock issuable upon conversion of outstanding convertible senior notes due 2006 and convertible preferred stock would be eligible for immediate resale. Shares issuable upon conversion of the 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 are expected to be eligible for resale pursuant to a resale shelf registration statement which we have filed and which we were required to have declared effective on or before April 21, 2005. All of the shares issuable to claimants pursuant to the settlements will be eligible for immediate resale and, upon filing of an anticipated shelf registration statement for the issuance of warrant shares, all of the shares issuable upon exercise of the warrants will also be eligible for immediate resale.

A registration statement on Form S-8 covering the Class A common stock issuable pursuant to the exercise of options under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in May 2000 and registration statements on Form S-8 covering shares issuable under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan were filed in May 2001 and November 2003. The shares of Class A common stock covered by the Form S-8 registration statements generally may be resold in the public market without restriction or limitation, except in the case of our affiliates who generally may only resell such shares in accordance with the provisions of Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1933.

The sale of a substantial number of shares of Class A common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, could adversely affect prevailing market prices for the Class A common stock. In addition, any such sale or perception could make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities or equity related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate.

The following is a general discussion of certain U.S. federal income and estate tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of our Class A common stock by a person that is not a “United States person” for U.S. federal income tax purposes (a “non-U.S. holder”). For this purpose, a “United States person” is a citizen or resident of the United States, a corporation, partnership or other entity created or organized in or under the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, an estate, the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a trust the administration of which is subject to the primary supervision of a U.S. court and which has one or more United States persons who have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust or that was in existence on, August 20, 1996, was treated as a United States person under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), on that date and has made a valid election to be treated as a United States person under the Code. The discussion does not consider specific facts and circumstances that may be relevant to a particular non-U.S. holder’s tax position. Special rules may apply to certain non-U.S. holders, such as dealers in securities, banks, insurance companies, tax-exempt organizations, persons holding their shares as part of a “straddle,” “hedge,” or “conversion transaction,” persons who acquire shares as compensation, “controlled foreign corporations,” “passive foreign investment companies,” “foreign personal holding companies,” and corporations that accumulate earnings to avoid U.S. federal income tax, that are subject to special treatment under the Code. This discussion is limited to beneficial owners of the Class A common stock who hold the Class A common stock as capital assets. It does not address any aspect of state, local, or foreign law, persons who hold Class A common stock through a partnership or other pass-through entity, or persons who are former citizens or long-term residents of the United States.

Accordingly, each non-U.S. holder is urged to consult its own tax advisor with respect to the United States tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of Class A common stock, as well as any tax consequences that may arise under the laws of any state, municipality, foreign country or other taxing jurisdiction.

In general, distributions paid to a Non-U.S. Holder of Class A common stock will constitute a dividend for U.S. federal income tax purposes to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. We do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future. See “Dividend Policy.”

Dividends paid to a non-U.S. holder of our Class A common stock ordinarily will be subject to withholding of U.S. federal income tax at a 30 percent rate, or at a lower rate under an applicable income tax treaty that provides for a reduced rate of withholding. To claim the benefit of a lower treaty rate, a non-U.S. holder must properly file with the payor an IRS Form W-8BEN, or successor form, or, in the case of payments made outside the United States with respect to an offshore account, comply with certain documentary evidence procedures, directly, or under certain circumstances, through an intermediary. If, however, the dividends are effectively connected with the conduct by the non-U.S. holder of a trade or business within the United States and, where a tax treaty applies, are attributable to a United States permanent establishment of the non-U.S. holder, then the dividends will be exempt from the withholding tax described above, provided that an IRS Form W-8ECI, or successor form, is furnished to the payor. Such dividends will instead be taxed on a net basis at applicable graduated individual or corporate rates. If, however, the dividends are effectively connected with the conduct by the non-U.S. holder of a trade or business within the United States, but are not attributable to a United States permanent establishment of the non-U.S. holder, a recipient will be required to file a U.S. tax return and should file an IRS Form 8833 claiming benefits of the tax treaty with respect to dividends not attributable to a United States permanent establishment.

Effectively connected dividends received by a foreign corporation may, under certain circumstances, be subject as well to a “branch profits” tax at a rate of 30% or a lower applicable treaty rate. A non-United States Holder who furnished the payor with an IRS Form W-8ECI or successor form must also provide a United States tax identification number.

A non-U.S. holder of our Class A common stock that is eligible for a reduced rate of U.S. withholding tax pursuant to an income tax treaty may obtain a refund of any amounts withheld in excess of the tax treaty rate by filing an appropriate claim for a refund with the Internal Revenue Services (the “IRS”).

A non-U.S. holder generally will not be subject to United States federal income tax in respect of a gain realized on a disposition of our Class A common stock, provided that (a) the gain is not effectively connected with a trade or business conducted by the non-U.S. holder in the United States, (b) in the case of a non-U.S. holder who is an individual, such holder is present in the United States for less than 183 days in the taxable year of the sale and other conditions are met, and (c) we are not nor have been a “United States real property holding corporation” for United States federal income tax purposes (a “USRPHC”). We believe that we were not, are not currently, and are not likely to become a USRPHC. If we were to become a USRPHC, gain recognized on the sale or other disposition of Class A common stock by a non-United States holder generally would be subject to United States federal income tax (and withholding) unless (i) our Class A common stock continues to be “regularly traded on an established securities market” at any time during the calendar year of disposition within the meaning of the Code and (ii) such non-United States holder does not actually or constructively own more than 5% of the Class A common stock at any time during the shorter of the five-year period preceding the disposition or such non-United States holder’s holding period.

If a non-U.S. holder is engaged in the conduct of a trade or business in the United States, gain on the disposition of our Class A common stock that is effectively connected with the conduct of such trade or business and, where an income tax treaty applies, is attributable to a United States permanent establishment, will be taxed on a net basis at applicable graduated individual or corporate rates. Effectively connected gain of a foreign corporation may, under certain circumstances, be subject as well to a “branch profits” tax at a rate of 30 percent or a lower applicable treaty rate.

U.S. information reporting on IRS Form 1099 and backup withholding tax will not apply to dividends paid on our Class A common stock to a non-U.S. holder, provided that non-U.S. holder provides an IRS Form W-8BEN (or satisfies certain certification documentary evidence requirements for establishing that it is a non-United States person under U.S. Treasury regulations) or otherwise establishes an exemption. Distributions on our Class A common stock will, however, be reported to the IRS and to the non-U.S. holder on IRS Form 1042-S.

Information reporting and backup withholding also generally will not apply to a payment of the proceeds of a sale of our Class A common stock affected outside the United States by a foreign office of a foreign broker. However, information reporting requirements (but not backup withholding) will apply to a payment of the proceeds of a sale of our Class A common stock effected outside the United States by a foreign office of a broker if the broker (i) is a United States person, (ii) derives 50 percent or more of its gross income for certain periods from the conduct of a trade or business in the United States, (iii) is a “controlled foreign corporation” as to the United States, or (iv) is a foreign partnership that, at any time during its taxable year, is 50 percent or more (by income or capital interest) owned by United States persons or is engaged in the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, unless in any such case the broker has documentary evidence in its records that the holder is a non-U.S. holder and certain conditions are met, or the holder otherwise establishes an exemption. Payment by a United States office of a broker of the proceeds of a sale of our Class A common stock will be subject to both backup withholding and information reporting unless the holder certifies its non-U.S. status under penalties of perjury or otherwise establishes an exemption.

Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules may be allowed as a refund or a credit against that holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability provided the required information is furnished to the IRS.

Prior to this offering of our Class A common stock, we sold $862.5 million in aggregate principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 in a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act.

We understand that, when we sold the 5.875% convertible notes, and for some time thereafter, it was difficult for investors in the notes to borrow shares of our Class A common stock for the purpose of shorting such stock to hedge their investment in the notes. We also understand that many investors in convertible securities seek to hedge their exposure to the issuer’s common stock by selling the stock short to establish an initial hedge position that partially offsets the long position represented by the convertible securities. Such investors then dynamically adjust their hedge position over time as the market price of the underlying stock and the time to maturity of the convertible securities changes. As the stock price increases, investors will generally increase their hedge position by borrowing and shorting more shares, and as the stock price decreases, investors will generally decrease their hedge position by buying shares in the market and closing out their stock loans.

Because there were not sufficient shares of our Class A common stock available for investors to borrow when we offered our 5.875% convertible notes, and because we understood that the shares that were available were relatively expensive to borrow, we were concerned that, in order to sell the notes, we would be forced to offer terms that would have been unfavorable to us. To address this concern, and to make it possible or less expensive for prospective investors in our 5.875% convertible notes to hedge their investment, we entered into a share lending agreement, dated November 22, 2004, with Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (“Citigroup”), as agent for Citigroup Global Markets Limited (“CGML”), as borrower. Under this agreement, we agreed to loan to CGML up to 150,000,000 shares of our Class A common stock on one or more occasions prior to November 16, 2006 or, if earlier, the date as of which all of the 5.875% convertible notes cease to be outstanding as the result of conversion, repurchase, redemption or otherwise. We will receive a loan fee of $.001 per share for each share that we loan to CGML, payable at the time such share is borrowed. Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc. guaranteed the obligations of CGML under the share lending agreement.

Notwithstanding the difficulties that we believe holders faced in establishing hedge positions at time we initially sold the 5.875% convertible senior notes and for some time thereafter, we now understand that many investors in the notes have since been able to borrow shares of our Class A common stock for the purpose of shorting such stock to hedge their investment in the notes. However, we are nonetheless required under the registration rights agreement described below to register the shares offered hereby. As noted below, we have been advised by CGML that it or its affiliates intend to use the short sales of our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus to facilitate, through the transactions discussed below, the establishment by the holders of our 5.875% convertible senior notes of hedged positions with respect to the 5.875% convertible senior notes. These holders may include holders who have not yet established hedge positions and may also include other holders who have already established hedge positions but wish to establish new hedge positions through CGML because these new hedge positions will be less expensive to maintain than their pre-existing hedge positions. We understand that such holders who are already hedged will likely seek to close out their existing hedge positions by obtaining shares in the open market.

Under the agreement, CGML agreed that it will not transfer or dispose of the borrowed shares except for the purpose of directly or indirectly facilitating the hedging of the 5.875% convertible notes by holders. Any shares of our Class A common stock that Citigroup returns to us to reduce its stock loan after such shares have been sold into the public market pursuant to a registration statement cannot be reborrowed.

Share loans under the agreement will terminate and the borrowed shares must be returned to us:


	•	if and when CGML in its discretion terminates all or any portion of a loan at any time;

	•	if and when we terminate any or all of the outstanding loans upon a default by CGML under the share lending agreement, including a breach by CGML of any of its representations and warranties, covenants or agreements under such agreement or the bankruptcy of CGML; or

	•	on November 16, 2009, the termination date for the share lending agreement or, sooner, if and when all of the 5.875% convertible senior notes have been converted, repaid, redeemed or are otherwise no longer outstanding.

Any shares that we loan to CGML will be issued and outstanding for corporate law purposes, and accordingly, the purchasers of the borrowed shares and their transferees will have all of the rights of a holder of our outstanding shares of Class A common stock, including the right to vote the shares on all matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders and the right to receive any dividends or other distributions that we may pay or make on our outstanding shares of Class A common stock. However, under the share lending agreement, CGML has agreed:


	•	to pay to us an amount equal to any cash dividends that we pay on the borrowed shares, and

	•	to pay or deliver to us any other distribution, in liquidation or otherwise, that we make on the borrowed shares.

CGML has also agreed under the share lending agreement that it will not vote any borrowed shares of which it is the record owner, and it will not transfer or dispose of any borrowed shares except pursuant to a registration statement that is effective under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. However, investors that purchase the shares from CGML (and any subsequent transferees of such purchasers) will be entitled to the same voting rights with respect to those shares as any other holder of our Class A common stock.

If the credit ratings of Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc., the guarantor of CGML’s obligations under the share lending agreement, decline below a specified level, CGML has agreed under the share lending agreement to post and maintain with Citigroup, as collateral agent on our behalf, collateral in the form of cash, government securities, certificates of deposit, high grade commercial paper of U.S. issuers or money market shares with a market value at least equal to 100% of the market value of the borrowed shares as security for the obligation of CGML to return the borrowed shares to us when required.

In view of the contractual undertakings of CGML in the share lending agreement, which have the effect of substantially eliminating the economic dilution that would otherwise result from the issuance of the borrowed shares, we believe that under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles currently in effect, the borrowed shares will not be considered outstanding for the purpose of computing and reporting our earnings per share.

CGML, through Citigroup as principal or agent, is offering for sale pursuant to this prospectus the entire 150,000,000 shares it is entitled to borrow under the share lending agreement. We expect that Citigroup will attempt to sell the entire 150,000,000 shares offered by this prospectus, subject, as described under “Underwriting” below, to demand by investors in this offering for shares of our Class A common stock and demand by investors in the notes to establish corresponding short positions through Citigroup. Due to the fact that many investors in the notes have been able to borrow shares of our Class A common stock for the purpose of shorting such stock to hedge their investment in the notes, and in light of prohibitions on the purchase of shares in this offering by such persons, substantially less than all 150,000,000 shares offered hereby may be sold in this offering. If less than 150,000,000 shares of Class A common stock are sold in this offering, pursuant to a registration rights agreement, Charter will be obligated to file, at Citigroup’s request, up to four additional registration statements with respect to these

We have been advised by CGML that it or its affiliates intend to use the short sales of our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus to facilitate the establishment by investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes of short positions with respect to those convertible senior notes. Concurrently with the offering of shares of Class A common stock offered hereby, CGML or its affiliates will offer investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes the opportunity to establish short positions in one of two ways:



	•	First, CGML or its affiliates may enter into a swap transaction with an investor under which the investor is economically short to CGML or such affiliate. As described under “Underwriting” below, the initial reference price of these swap transactions (and effectively the price at which the investor has established its short position) will be the offering price at which Citigroup sells shares to investors in our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus. We refer to this first alternative as “Alternative One.” In this case, CGML would ultimately use the proceeds from the sale of shares in this offering to acquire shares in the market when it must return shares to Charter under the Share Lending Agreement (and, if applicable, to fund its obligations to the swap counter-parties if the price of the Class A common stock when the swap is terminated is below the price in this offering).



	•	Second, CGML or its affiliates may borrow shares of our Class A common stock from persons who did not purchase shares in the offering (an “unrelated share lender”), on-lend those shares to an investor in our convertible senior notes, then use the proceeds it receives in this offering to repurchase those shares from the convertible senior notes investor. As described under “Underwriting” below, the purchase price that CGML or its affiliate will pay to a convertible senior notes investor that has borrowed shares from CGML or its affiliate and sold them back to CGML or its affiliate will be the offering price at which Citigroup sells shares to investors in our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus. Once CGML or its affiliate purchases those borrowed shares from such convertible senior notes investor, it will either lend those shares to another investor who wishes to establish a short position through this second alternative or return them to the unrelated share lender. We refer to this second alternative as “Alternative Two.”

Citigroup expects to enter into the transactions described under “Alternative One” or “Alternative Two” concurrently with the sale of the shares of our Class A common stock offered hereby.

As described under “Underwriting” below, the number of shares sold in this offering, and the price at which those shares will be sold, will be determined by (i) the level of demand by investors willing to purchase shares of our Class A common stock pursuant to this offering and (ii) the level of demand by investors in our convertible senior notes willing to establish short positions under Alternative One or Alternative Two. Because, as described above, the price at which convertible senior notes investors establish their short positions through CGML or its affiliates (whether by means of Alternative One or Alternative Two) will be the offering price of the shares of our Class A common stock offered hereby, Citigroup will attempt to establish a “clearing price” for a number of shares at which both purchasers of our Class A common stock are willing to purchase shares offered hereby and investors in our convertible senior notes are willing to establish short positions. There may be no such clearing price, in which case Citigroup will not sell any shares of Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus. Alternatively, such clearing price may relate to a number of shares less than the full 150,000,000 shares offered hereby, in which case Citigroup will only borrow from us and sell that lesser number of shares of our Class A common stock under this prospectus. In either situation, however, we will be obligated to file, at

The offering of shares of our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus, as well as the facilitation of short positions as described above, may have a significant impact on the market price of our common stock:



	•	As described above, this offering of shares of our Class A common stock will increase the number of shares issued and outstanding, and such shares will be eligible for trading in the Nasdaq National Market. Accordingly, the increase in supply of shares may have an adverse impact on the trading price of our Class A common stock. As described under “Underwriting” below, the offering price of the shares offered hereby may be at a significant discount to the market price of our Class A common stock.



	•	As described above, holders of our convertible senior notes that have established their hedge positions prior to this offering, but wish to establish new hedge positions through CGML or its affiliates under Alternative One or Alternative Two, will likely seek to close out their existing hedge positions. In order to close out those existing hedge positions, it is likely those holders will purchase shares in the open market prior to, or after, the determination of the offering price for the Class A common stock offered hereby. While the effect of those transactions cannot be ascertained at this time, the purchase activity by such holders may temporarily increase the market price of our common stock, which may significantly increase the volatility of our stock price.



	•	A Holder of convertible senior notes that has established a short position through Citigroup under either Alternative One or Alternative Two may from time to time wish to decrease its short position for a variety of reasons, including any conversion of their notes or a decline in the price of our Class A common stock. If a holder wishes to decrease its hedged position, it may either terminate all or part of its swap transaction with CGML’s affiliate (in the case of Alternative One) or return all or part of the borrowed shares (in the case of Alternative Two). CGML’s affiliate may concurrently enter into a similar hedge facilitation transaction with other holders of the convertible notes to replace the terminated swap transaction or the repaid stock loan. If the affiliate does not enter into a replacement transaction, it will either purchase shares in the market to unwind its swap transaction and use those shares to repay a portion of CGML’s stock loan (in the case of Alternative One) or it will use the shares returned to it upon repayment of the stock loan it made to the investor to repay a portion of CGML’s stock loan (in the case of Alternative Two). The effect of any of these transactions on the market price of our Class A common stock cannot be ascertained at this time, but they may significantly increase the volatility of our stock price.

Our issuance of 150 million shares of our Class A common stock offered pursuant to the share lending agreement will be essentially analogous to a sale of shares coupled with a forward contract for the reacquisition of the shares at a future date. An instrument that requires physical settlement by repurchase of a fixed number of shares in exchange for cash is considered a forward purchase instrument. While the share lending agreement does not require a cash payment upon return of the shares, physical settlement is required (i.e., the 150 million shares must be returned at the end of the arrangement. Assuming that the entire 150 million shares offered hereby are lent, the fair value of the common stock to be lent is approximately $189 million based on the closing price of our common stock on July 7, 2005. However, the net effect on shareholders’ deficit of the share lending agreement (exclusive of the adjustment for the fair value of the stock borrow facility discussed below) which includes our requirement to lend the shares and the counterparties’ requirement to return the shares, is to increase equity by $150,000, which represents the cash received upon lending of the shares and is equal to the par value of the common stock to be issued.

The shares to be issued are required to be returned, in accordance with the contractual arrangement, and will be treated in basic and diluted earnings per share as if they were already returned and retired. Consequently, there will be no impact of the 150 million shares of common stock subject to the share lending agreement in the earnings per share calculation. However, the shares will nonetheless be issued and outstanding and will be eligible for trading in the Nasdaq National Market. Accordingly, the increase in supply of shares may have an adverse impact on the trading price of our Class A common stock. See “Risk Factors — Additional Risks Related to This Offering — The effect of the issuance of our shares of Class A common stock pursuant to the share lending agreement and upon conversion of our 5.875% convertible notes, including sales of our Class A common stock in short sale transactions by the holders of the 5.875% convertible notes, may have a negative effect on the market price of our Class A common stock.” Accordingly, the existence of the share lending agreement and the short positions established in connection with facilitating the hedging of the 5.875% convertible senior notes could have the effect of causing the market price of our Class A common stock to be lower over the term of the share lending agreement than it would have been had we not entered into the agreement, but we believe that entering into the share lending agreement was in our best interests and the best interests of our shareholders as it facilitated the sale of the convertible notes on terms more favorable to us than we could have otherwise obtained.

The share lending agreement was entered into to facilitate the ability of the purchasers of the 5.875% convertible senior notes to improve or enhance their yield on the notes and as such was a cost of the 5.875% notes issuance transaction. We determined that the fair value of the stock borrow facility was approximately $13 million on the date of issuance of these notes. Therefore, we recorded such value at issuance as an increase to deferred financing fees and additional paid in capital in our consolidated financial statements. We are amortizing the value of the stock borrow facility to interest expense over the 5-year term of these notes.

We agreed to use our reasonable best efforts to cause the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part to become effective on or before April 1, 2005. Such registration statement was not declared effective by that date, and we therefore have incurred liquidated damages as defined in the related indenture from April 1, 2005 and will continue to incur such damages until the effective date. These liquidated damages were permitted to be paid in cash or additional principal on a monthly basis. These liquidated damages were incurred at a rate of 0.25% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes for the first 60 days of the default, and were incurred and will be incurred at a rate of 0.50% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes thereafter (or 0.75% per month, if, in lieu of paying such liquidated damages in cash, we elected to pay such damages in the future by adding to the outstanding principal amount of the notes).

The shares of our Class A common stock offered by this prospectus are shares that we have agreed to loan to CGML, an affiliate of Citigroup, pursuant to a share lending agreement described in “Share Lending Agreement.” Citigroup also acted as an initial purchaser for the private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of $862.5 million in principal amount of our 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 issued on November 22, 2004. See “Share Lending Agreement.” CGML, through Citigroup as principal or agent, is offering for sale pursuant to this prospectus the entire 150,000,000 shares CGML is entitled to borrow under the share lending agreement. We have been advised by CGML that it or its affiliates intends to use the short sales of our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus to facilitate transactions by which investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes will hedge their investments in such convertible notes. See “Share Lending Agreement.” In connection with facilitating those transactions, CGML or its affiliates expect to receive customary, negotiated fees, not to exceed approximately % per share (based on the offering price), from investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes. The National Association of Securities Dealers views these fees as underwriting compensation in connection with the offering of shares of our Class A common stock. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of our Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus, but will receive a loan fee of $0.001 per share for each share loaned under the share lending agreement.

The shares of our Class A common stock are being offered on a “best efforts” basis. “Best efforts” means that CGML is not under any obligation under the share lending agreement or otherwise to borrow and sell any of the shares offered hereby.

Citigroup will determine the offering price of the shares of Class A common stock by initially soliciting indications of interest from potential purchasers of our common stock and conducting customary negotiations with those potential purchasers during the offering period. As described Under “Share Lending Agreement” above, the price at which investors in our 5.875% convertible senior notes establish their short positions through CGML or its affiliates (whether by means of Alternative One or Alternative Two described above) will be the offering price of the shares of our Class A common stock offered hereby. As a result, during the offering period, while Citigroup is negotiating a purchase price with potential purchasers of our Class A common stock, Citigroup will also be soliciting indications of interest, based on the purchase price being negotiated with those potential purchasers, from such convertible senior notes investors seeking to establish a short position. Citigroup will attempt to establish a “clearing price” for a number of shares at which both purchasers of our Class A common stock are willing to purchase shares offered hereby and investors in our convertible senior notes are willing to establish short positions. This clearing price will be the offering price hereunder, and may be at a significant discount to the market price of our Class A common stock at the time the offering is commenced.

There can be no assurance, however, that there will be any such clearing price, in which case Citigroup will not sell any shares Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus. Alternatively, such clearing price may relate to a number of shares less than the full 150,000,000 shares offered hereby, in which case Citigroup will only borrow from us and sell that lesser number of shares of our Class A common stock under this prospectus.

The offering will be at a fixed price and will not be conducted on a delayed or continuous basis. The offering will terminate on or before , 2005.

The Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “CHTR.”

The following table summarizes the compensation that we are to pay to the underwriter in connection with this offering.

The underwriter has performed investment banking and advisory services for us from time to time for which it has received customary fees and expenses. The underwriter may, from time to time, engage in transactions with and perform services for us in the ordinary course of its business. The underwriter also was an initial purchaser of the convertible notes.

We have agreed to indemnify the underwriter against certain liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities Act of 1933, or to contribute to payments the underwriter may be required to make because of any of those liabilities.

Each purchaser of Charter’s Class A common stock in this offering must execute and deliver the Investor Acknowledgement set forth on Annex A hereto to Citigroup by facsimile to (212) - .

The validity of the securities offered by this prospectus has been passed upon for Charter Communications, Inc. by Irell & Manella, LLP. Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP represented the underwriter in this offering.

The consolidated financial statements of Charter Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 and for the three year periods ended December 31, 2004, which are included in this prospectus, have been audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report included in this prospectus, which includes explanatory paragraphs regarding the adoption, effective January 1, 2002, of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets”, effective September 30, 2004 of EITF Topic D-108, “Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill,” and, effective January 1, 2003, of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” as amended by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure — an amendment to FASB Statement No. 123.” The consolidated financial statements referred to above have been included in this prospectus in reliance upon the authority of KPMG LLP as experts in giving said report.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

Charter Communications, Inc. (“Charter”) is a holding company whose principal assets at March 31, 2005 are the 47% controlling common equity interest in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (“Charter Holdco”) and “mirror” notes which are payable by Charter Holdco to Charter and have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes. Charter Holdco is the sole owner of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC (“Charter Holdings”). The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Charter, Charter Holdco, Charter Holdings and all of their wholly owned subsidiaries where the underlying operations reside, collectively referred to herein as the “Company.” Charter consolidates Charter Holdco on the basis of voting control. Charter Holdco’s limited liability company agreement provides that so long as Charter’s Class B common stock retains its special voting rights, Charter will maintain a 100% voting interest in Charter Holdco. Voting control gives Charter full authority and control over the operations of Charter Holdco. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions among consolidated entities have been eliminated. The Company is a broadband communications company operating in the United States. The Company offers its customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as high-speed data services and, in some areas, advanced broadband services such as high definition television, video on demand and telephony. The Company sells its cable video programming, high-speed data and advanced broadband services on a subscription basis. The Company also sells local advertising on satellite-delivered networks.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for interim financial information and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, certain information and footnote disclosures typically included in Charter’s Annual Report on Form 10-K have been condensed or omitted for this quarterly report. The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements are unaudited and are subject to review by regulatory authorities. However, in the opinion of management, such financial statements include all adjustments, which consist of only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the periods presented. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Areas involving significant judgments and estimates include capitalization of labor and overhead costs; depreciation and amortization costs; impairments of property, plant and equipment, franchises and goodwill, income taxes and contingencies. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Certain 2004 amounts have been reclassified to conform with the 2005 presentation.

The Company incurred net loss applicable to common stock of $353 million and $294 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The Company’s net cash flows from operating activities were $153 million and $115 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

The Company has a significant level of debt. The Company’s long-term financing as of March 31, 2005 consists of $5.1 billion of credit facility debt, $12.9 billion accreted value of high-yield notes and $957 million

accreted value of convertible senior notes. For the remainder of 2005, $23 million of the Company’s debt matures, and in 2006, an additional $152 million of the Company’s debt matures. In 2007 and beyond, significant additional amounts will become due under the Company’s remaining long-term debt obligations.

The Company has historically required significant cash to fund debt service costs, capital expenditures and ongoing operations. Historically, the Company has funded these requirements through cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under its credit facilities, sales of assets, issuances of debt and equity securities and from cash on hand. However, the mix of funding sources changes from period to period. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Company generated $153 million of net cash flows from operating activities, after paying cash interest of $249 million. In addition, the Company used approximately $211 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment. Finally, the Company had net cash flows used in financing activities of $578 million, which included, among other things, approximately $628 million in repayment of borrowings under the Company’s revolving credit facility through a series of transactions in February 2005. This repayment was the primary reason cash on hand decreased by $618 million to $32 million at March 31, 2005.

The Company expects that cash on hand, cash flows from operating activities and the amounts available under its credit facilities will be adequate to meet its cash needs in 2005. Cash flows from operating activities and amounts available under the Company’s credit facilities may not be sufficient to fund the Company’s operations and satisfy its principal repayment obligations that come due in 2006 and, the Company believes, will not be sufficient to fund its operations and satisfy such repayment obligations thereafter.

It is likely that the Company will require additional funding to repay debt maturing after 2006. The Company is working with its financial advisors to address such funding requirements. However, there can be no assurance that such funding will be available to the Company. Although Mr. Allen and his affiliates have purchased equity from the Company in the past, Mr. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated to purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to the Company in the future.

The Company’s ability to operate depends upon, among other things, its continued access to capital, including credit under the Charter Communications Operating, LLC (“Charter Operating”) credit facilities. These credit facilities, along with the Company’s indentures, contain certain restrictive covenants, some of which require the Company to maintain specified financial ratios and meet financial tests and to provide audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from the Company’s independent auditors. As of March 31, 2005, the Company was in compliance with the covenants under its indentures and credit facilities and the Company expects to remain in compliance with those covenants for the next twelve months. As of March 31, 2005, the Company had borrowing availability under the credit facilities of $1.2 billion, none of which was restricted due to covenants. Continued access to the Company’s credit facilities is subject to the Company remaining in compliance with the covenants of these credit facilities, including covenants tied to the Company’s operating performance. If the Company’s operating performance results in non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain other events of non-compliance under these credit facilities or indentures governing the Company’s debt occurs, funding under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on some or potentially all of the Company’s debt obligations could occur. An event of default under the covenants governing any of the Company’s debt instruments could result in the acceleration of its payment obligations under that debt and, under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under its other debt obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

The Charter Operating credit facilities required the Company to redeem the CC V Holdings, LLC notes as a result of the Charter Holdings leverage ratio becoming less than 8.75 to 1.0. In satisfaction of this requirement, in March 2005, CC V Holdings, LLC redeemed all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. The total cost of the redemption including accrued and unpaid interest was approximately $122 million. The Company funded the redemption with borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities.

Charter’s ability to make interest payments on its convertible senior notes, and, in 2006 and 2009, to repay the outstanding principal of its convertible senior notes of $122 million and $863 million, respectively, will depend on its ability to raise additional capital and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco or its subsidiaries, including CCH II, LLC (“CCH II”), CCO Holdings, LLC (“CCO Holdings”) and Charter Operating. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter Holdings distributed $60 million to Charter Holdco. As of March 31, 2005, Charter Holdco was owed $161 million in intercompany loans from its subsidiaries, which amount was available to pay interest and principal on Charter’s convertible senior notes. In addition, Charter has $145 million of governmental securities pledged as security for the first six interest payments on Charter’s 5.875% convertible senior notes.

The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests are met. For the quarter ended March 31, 2005, there was no default under Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests were met. However, Charter Holdings did not meet the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0 based on March 31, 2005 financial results. As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or Charter Holdco are currently restricted and will continue to be restricted until that test is met. During this restriction period, the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to make specified investments in Charter Holdco or Charter, up to an amount determined by a formula, as long as there is no default under the indentures.

The Company was required to register for resale by April 21, 2005 its 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, issued in November 2004. Since these convertible notes were not registered by that date, the Company is incurring liquidated damages, at a rate from 0.25% per annum of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes. The rate will increase to 0.50% from and after July 20, 2005 if the notes have not been registered by that date. The liquidated damages will be payable by Charter in cash so long as the convertible notes remain unregistered, but not to exceed a maximum period of two years from the original issuance date. In addition, Charter was required to register by April 1, 2005 150 million shares of its Class A common stock that Charter expects to lend to Citigroup Global Markets Limited pursuant to a share lending agreement. Because this registration statement was not declared effective by such date, the Company is incurring liquidated damages from April 2, 2005 until the effective date of the registration statement. These liquidated damages can be paid in cash or additional principal on a monthly basis. These liquidated damages accrue as incurred at a rate of 0.25% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes for the first 60 days of the default and 0.50% per month of the accreted principal amount of the convertible notes thereafter (or 0.375% and 0.75% per month respectively, if in lieu of

paying such liquidated damages in cash, the Company elects to pay such damages by adding to the outstanding principal amount of the notes). In April 2005, the first liquidated damage payment was made in cash. Such amounts will accrue so long as the convertible notes remain unregistered, but not to exceed a maximum period of two years from the original issuance date.

As of March 31, 2005, the Company has concluded that two pending cable asset sales, representing approximately 28,000 customers, are probable of closing within the next twelve months thus meeting the criteria for assets held for sale under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. As such the assets were written down to fair value less estimated costs to sell resulting in asset impairment charges in the first quarter of 2005 of approximately $31 million. At March 31, 2005 assets held for sale included in investment in cable properties are approximately $33 million.

In March 2004, the Company closed the sale of certain cable systems in Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and West Virginia to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC. The Company closed the sale of an additional cable system in New York to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC in April 2004. These transactions resulted in a $104 million pretax gain recorded as a gain on sale of assets in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. Subject to post-closing contractual adjustments, the total net proceeds from the sale of all of these systems were approximately $733 million. The proceeds were used to repay a portion of amounts outstanding under the Company’s credit facilities.

Franchise rights represent the value attributed to agreements with local authorities that allow access to homes in cable service areas acquired through the purchase of cable systems. Management estimates the fair value of franchise rights at the date of acquisition and determines if the franchise has a finite life or an indefinite-life as defined by SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. Franchises that qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are tested for impairment annually based on valuations, or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances. Franchises are aggregated into essentially inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset groups generally represent geographic clustering of the Company’s cable systems into groups by which such systems are managed. Management believes such grouping represents the highest and best use of those assets.

The Company’s valuations, which are based on the present value of projected after tax cash flows, result in a value of property, plant and equipment, franchises, customer relationships and its total entity value. The value of goodwill is the difference between the total entity value and amounts assigned to the other assets.

The Company follows the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17, Recognition of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets Acquired in a Business Combination, in valuing customer relationships. Customer

relationships, for valuation purposes, represent the value of the business relationship with existing customers and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash flows from these customers including the right to deploy and market additional services such as interactivity and telephony to these customers. The present value of these after-tax cash flows yield the fair value of the customer relationships. Substantially all acquisitions occurred prior to January 1, 2002. The Company did not record any value associated with the customer relationship intangibles related to those acquisitions. For acquisitions subsequent to January 1, 2002 the Company did assign a value to the customer relationship intangible, which is amortized over its estimated useful life.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, indefinite-lived and finite-lived intangible assets are presented in the following table:

Franchises with indefinite lives decreased $31 million as a result of the asset impairment charges recorded related to two pending cable asset sales (see Note 3). Franchise amortization expense for each of the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 was $1 million, which represents the amortization relating to franchises that did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142, including costs associated with franchise renewals. The Company expects that amortization expense on franchise assets will be approximately $3 million annually for each of the next five years. Actual amortization expense in future periods could differ from these estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors.

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004:

Long-term debt consists of the following as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004:

The accreted values presented above represent the face value of the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale plus the accretion to the balance sheet date.

In March 2005, the Company’s subsidiary, Charter Operating, consummated exchange transactions with a small number of institutional holders of Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007 pursuant to which Charter Operating issued, in a private placement, approximately $271 million principal amount of new notes with terms identical to Charter Operating’s 8.375% senior second lien notes due 2014 in exchange for approximately $284 million of the Charter Holdings 8.25% senior notes due 2007. The exchanges resulted in a net gain on extinguishment of debt of approximately $11 million.

In March 2005, the Company repurchased from a single holder $34 million principal amount of its 4.75% convertible senior notes due 2006 for a price equal to 98% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. This transaction resulted in a net gain on extinguishment of debt of approximately $1 million.

In March 2005, the Company’s subsidiary, CC V Holdings, LLC, redeemed all of its 11.875% notes due 2008, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption. The total cost of redemption was approximately $122 million and was funded through borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities. The redemption resulted in a loss on extinguishment of debt of approximately $5 million. Following such redemption, CC V Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor subsidiaries) guaranteed the Charter Operating credit facilities and granted a lien on all of their assets as to which a lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement.

The Company recognized a loss of approximately $8 million recorded as loss on debt to equity conversion on the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004 from a privately negotiated exchange of $10 million principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes for shares of Charter Class A common stock. The exchanges resulted in the issuance of more shares in the exchange transaction than would have been issuable under the original terms of the convertible senior notes.

Charter is a holding company whose primary asset is a controlling equity interest in Charter Holdco, the indirect owner of the Company’s cable systems, and $957 million and $990 million at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively, of mirror notes which are payable by Charter Holdco to Charter and have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes. Minority interest on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets represents the ownership percentage of Charter Holdco not owned by Charter, or approximately 53% of total members’ equity of Charter Holdco, plus $659 million and $656 million of preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC (“CC VIII”), an indirect subsidiary of Charter Holdco, as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. As more fully described in Note 17, this preferred interest arises from the approximately $630 million of preferred membership units issued by CC VIII in connection with an acquisition in February 2000 and continues to be the subject of a dispute between Charter and Mr. Allen. Generally, operating earnings or losses are allocated to the minority owners based on their ownership percentage, thereby increasing or decreasing the Company’s net loss, respectively. To the extent they relate to CC VIII, the allocations of earnings or losses are subject to adjustment based on the ultimate resolution of this disputed ownership. Due to the uncertainties related to the ultimate resolution, effective January 1, 2005, the Company ceased recognizing minority interest in earnings or losses of CC VIII for financial reporting purposes until such time as the resolution of the

matter is determinable or other events occur. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, Charter’s results included $9 million attributable to CC VIII.

Members’ deficit of Charter Holdco was $4.7 billion and $4.4 billion as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. Gains and losses arising from the issuance by Charter Holdco of its membership units are recorded as capital transactions, thereby increasing or decreasing shareholders’ equity and decreasing or increasing minority interest on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Minority interest was approximately 53% as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004. Minority interest includes the proportionate share of changes in fair value of interest rate derivative agreements. Such amounts are temporary as they are contractually scheduled to reverse over the life of the underlying instrument. Additionally, reported losses allocated to minority interest on the consolidated statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Holdco. Because minority interest in Charter Holdco is substantially eliminated, Charter absorbs substantially all losses before income taxes that otherwise would be allocated to minority interest. Subject to any changes in Charter Holdco’s capital structure, future losses will continue to be substantially absorbed by Charter.

Certain marketable equity securities are classified as available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive loss on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Additionally, the Company reports changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations, that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, in accumulated other comprehensive loss, after giving effect to the minority interest share of such gains and losses. Comprehensive loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 was $349 million and $293 million, respectively.

The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as interest rate agreements) to manage its interest costs. The Company’s policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, the Company has agreed to exchange, at specified intervals through 2007, the difference between fixed and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar agreements are used to limit the Company’s exposure to and benefits from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt to within a certain range of rates.

into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges, SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to offset related results on hedged items in the consolidated statement of operations. The Company has formally documented, designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that receive hedge accounting. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $1 million and losses of $1 million, respectively, which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations. Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated other comprehensive loss. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, a gain of $9 million and $2 million, respectively, related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges, was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss and minority interest. The amounts are subsequently reclassified into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affects earnings (losses).

Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management believes such instruments are closely correlated with the respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities in the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $26 million and losses of $6 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the Company had outstanding $2.2 billion and $2.7 billion and $20 million and $20 million, respectively, in notional amounts of interest rate swaps and collars, respectively. The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the contracts.

Certain provisions of the Company’s 5.875% convertible senior notes issued in November 2004 were considered embedded derivatives for accounting purposes and were required to be accounted for separately from the convertible senior notes. In accordance with SFAS No. 133, these derivatives are marked to market with gains or losses recorded in interest expense on the Company’s consolidated statement of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Company recognized $19 million in gains related to these derivatives. At March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, $4 million and $10 million, respectively, is recorded in accounts payable and accrued expenses relating to the short-term portion of these derivatives and $8 million and $21 million, respectively, is recorded in other long-term liabilities related to the long-term portion.

Revenues consist of the following for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004:

Operating expenses consist of the following for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004:

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the following for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004:

Components of selling expense are included in general and administrative and marketing expense.

The Company has recorded special charges as a result of reducing its workforce, consolidating administrative offices and management realignment in 2004 and 2005. The activity associated with this initiative is summarized in the table below.

For the three months ended March 31, 2004, special charges also include approximately $9 million, which represents litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of a national class action suit, subject to final documentation and court approval (see Note 15).

All operations are held through Charter Holdco and its direct and indirect subsidiaries. Charter Holdco and the majority of its subsidiaries are not subject to income tax. However, certain of these subsidiaries are corporations and are subject to income tax. All of the taxable income, gains, losses, deductions and credits of Charter Holdco are passed through to its members: Charter, Charter Investment, Inc. (“Charter Investment”) and Vulcan Cable III Inc. (“Vulcan Cable”). Charter is responsible for its share of taxable income or loss of Charter Holdco allocated to Charter in accordance with the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement (“LLC Agreement”) and partnership tax rules and regulations.

As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the Company had net deferred income tax liabilities of approximately $230 million and $216 million, respectively. Approximately $213 million of the deferred tax liabilities recorded in the condensed consolidated financial statements at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, relate to certain indirect subsidiaries of Charter Holdco, which file separate income tax returns.

During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 the Company recorded $15 million and $54 million of income tax expense, respectively. The sale of systems to Atlantic Broadband, LLC on March 1, 2004 resulted in income tax expense of $14 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004.

Income tax expense is recognized through increases in the deferred tax liabilities related to Charter’s investment in Charter Holdco, as well as current federal and state income tax expense and increases to the deferred tax liabilities of certain of Charter’s indirect corporate subsidiaries. The Company recorded an additional deferred tax asset of approximately $135 million during the three months ended March 31, 2005, relating to net operating loss carryforwards, but recorded a valuation allowance with respect to these amounts because of the uncertainty of the ability to realize a benefit from these carryforwards in the future.

The Company has deferred tax assets of approximately $3.7 billion and $3.5 billion as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively, which primarily relate to financial and tax losses allocated to Charter from Charter Holdco. The deferred tax assets also include approximately $2.2 billion and $2.1 billion of tax net operating loss carryforwards as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004,

respectively (generally expiring in years 2005 through 2025), of Charter and its indirect corporate subsidiaries. Valuation allowances of $3.3 billion and $3.2 billion as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 exist with respect to these deferred tax assets, respectively.

Realization of any benefit from the Company’s tax net operating losses is dependent on: (1) Charter and its indirect corporate subsidiaries’ ability to generate future taxable income and (2) the absence of certain future “ownership changes” of Charter’s common stock. An “ownership change” as defined in the applicable federal income tax rules, would place significant limitations, on an annual basis, on the use of such net operating losses to offset any future taxable income the Company may generate. Such limitations, in conjunction with the net operating loss expiration provisions, could effectively eliminate the Company’s ability to use a substantial portion of its net operating losses to offset any future taxable income. Future transactions and the timing of such transactions could cause an ownership change. Such transactions include additional issuances of common stock by the Company (including but not limited to the anticipated issuance of 150 million shares of common stock under the share lending agreement, the issuance of shares of common stock upon future conversion of Charter’s convertible senior notes and the issuance of common stock as contemplated in the class action settlement discussed in Note 15, reacquisition of the borrowed shares by Charter, or acquisitions or sales of shares by certain holders of Charter’s shares, including persons who have held, currently hold, or accumulate in the future five percent or more of Charter’s outstanding stock (including upon an exchange by Paul Allen or his affiliates, directly or indirectly, of membership units of Charter Holdco into CCI common stock)). Many of the foregoing transactions are beyond management’s control.

In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will be realized. Because of the uncertainties in projecting future taxable income of Charter Holdco, valuation allowances have been established except for deferred benefits available to offset certain deferred tax liabilities.

Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2003. The results of the Company (excluding Charter and the indirect corporate subsidiaries) for these years are subject to this examination. Management does not expect the results of this examination to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

the Panel’s transfer order. StoneRidge subsequently filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint. The Court subsequently consolidated the Federal Class Actions into a single action (the “Consolidated Federal Class Action”) for pretrial purposes. On June 19, 2003, following a status and scheduling conference with the parties, the Court issued a Case Management Order setting forth a schedule for the pretrial phase of the Consolidated Federal Class Action. Motions to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint were filed. On February 10, 2004, in response to a joint motion made by StoneRidge and defendants Charter, Vogel and Allen, the court entered an order providing, among other things, that: (1) the parties who filed such motion engage in a mediation within ninety (90) days; and (2) all proceedings in the Consolidated Federal Class Actions were stayed until May 10, 2004. On May 11, 2004, the Court extended the stay in the Consolidated Federal Class Action for an additional sixty (60) days. On July 12, 2004, the parties submitted a joint motion to again extend the stay, this time until September 10, 2004. The Court granted that extension on July 20, 2004. On August 5, 2004, Stoneridge, Charter and the individual defendants who were the subject of the suit entered into a Memorandum of Understanding setting forth agreements in principle to settle the Consolidated Federal Class Action. These parties subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005 (described more fully below) which incorporate the terms of the August 5, 2004 Memorandum of Understanding.

On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the “State Derivative Action”) was filed in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the “Missouri State Court”) against Charter and its then current directors, as well as its former auditors. The plaintiffs allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, were sought by the plaintiffs.

Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative suit (the “Federal Derivative Action”) was filed against Charter and its then current directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiff in that suit alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, were sought by the plaintiffs.

As noted above, Charter and the individual defendants entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on August 5, 2004 setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of the Consolidated Federal Class Action, the State Derivative Action(s) and the Federal Derivative Action (the “Actions”). Charter and various other defendants in those actions subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005, setting forth a settlement of the Actions in a manner consistent with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Stipulations of Settlement, along with various supporting documentation, were filed with the Court on February 2, 2005. The Stipulations of Settlement provide that, in exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against Charter and its former and present officers and directors named in the Actions, Charter would pay to the plaintiffs a combination of cash and equity collectively valued at $144 million, which would include the fees and expenses of plaintiffs’ counsel. Of this amount, $64 million would be paid in cash (by Charter’s insurance carriers) and the balance would be paid in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate warrant value of $40 million, with such values in each case being determined pursuant to formulas set forth in the

Stipulations of Settlement. The warrants would have an exercise price equal to 150% of the fair market value (as defined) of Charter Class A common stock as of the date of the entry of the order of final judgment approving the settlement. In addition, Charter would issue additional shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier having an aggregate value of $5 million. Under this formula, the Company expects (based on recent trading prices of Charter’s Class A common stock) that the number of shares issued will be determined based on a per share value equal to the average closing price over the thirty calendar day period immediately preceding the final valuation date (which is the later of the date on which a final judgment is entered or the date of entry of an order approving the award of fees and costs to the class action plaintiffs’ counsel). Warrants are expected to become exercisable approximately one year from the date of the final judgment and will have an exercise price equal to 150% of the volume weighted average price of Charter’s Class A common stock over the thirty day period immediately preceding the final valuation date. The warrants will be valued based on a Black Scholes valuation method. Accordingly, any further declines in Charter’s stock price prior to the final valuation date could result in more shares and warrants being issued to the plaintiffs in the settlement. In the event that the valuation formula in the Stipulations provides for a per share value of less than $2.25, Charter may elect to terminate the settlement. As a result, in the second quarter of 2004, the Company recorded a $149 million litigation liability within other long-term liabilities and a $64 million insurance receivable as part of other non-current assets on its consolidated balance sheet and an $85 million special charge on its consolidated statement of operations. Additionally, as part of the settlements, Charter will also commit to a variety of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public disclosures, some of which have already been undertaken and none of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation described below. Documents related to the settlement of the Actions have now been executed and filed. On February 15, 2005, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri gave preliminary approval to the settlement of the Actions. The settlement of each of the lawsuits remains conditioned upon, among other things, final judicial approval of the settlements following notice to the class, and dismissal, with prejudice, of the consolidated derivative actions now pending in Missouri State Court, which are related to the Federal Derivative Actions. The hearing to consider final approval of the settlement is scheduled for May 23, 2005.

In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter reported customer numbers, and its reporting of amounts received from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has publicly stated that Charter is not a target of the investigation. Charter was also advised by the U.S. Attorney’s Office that no current officer or member of its board of directors is a target of the investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Each of the indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and were sentenced on April 22, 2005. Charter fully cooperated with the investigation, and following the sentencings, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri announced that its investigation was concluded and that no further indictments would issue.

On November 4, 2002, Charter received an informal, non-public inquiry from the staff of the SEC. The SEC issued a formal order of investigation dated January 23, 2003, and subsequently served document and testimony subpoenas on Charter and a number of its former employees. The investigation and subpoenas generally concerned Charter’s prior reports with respect to its determination of the number of customers, and various of its accounting policies and practices including its capitalization of certain expenses and dealings with certain vendors, including programmers and digital set-top terminal suppliers.

On July 27, 2004, the SEC and Charter reached a final agreement to settle the investigation. In the Settlement Agreement and Cease and Desist Order, Charter agreed to entry of an administrative order prohibiting any future violations of United States securities laws and requiring certain other remedial internal practices and public disclosures. Charter neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing, and the SEC assessed no fine against Charter.

Charter is generally required to indemnify each of the named individual defendants in connection with the matters described above pursuant to the terms of its bylaws and (where applicable) such individual defendants’ employment agreements. In accordance with these documents, in connection with the pending grand jury investigation, the now-settled SEC investigation and the above-described lawsuits, some of Charter’s current and former directors and current and former officers have been advanced certain costs and expenses incurred in connection with their defense. On February 22, 2005, Charter filed suit against four of its former officers who were indicted in the course of the grand jury investigation. These suits seek to recover the legal fees and other related expenses advanced to these individuals by Charter for the grand jury investigation, SEC investigation and class action and related lawsuits.

In October 2001, two customers, Nikki Nicholls and Geraldine M. Barber, filed a class action suit against Charter Holdco in South Carolina Court of Common Pleas (the “South Carolina Class Action”), purportedly on behalf of a class of Charter Holdco’s customers, alleging that Charter Holdco improperly charged them a wire maintenance fee without request or permission. They also claimed that Charter Holdco improperly required them to rent analog and/or digital set-top terminals even though their television sets were “cable ready.” A substantively identical case was filed in the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia by Emma S. Tobar on March 26, 2002 (the “Georgia Class Action”), alleging a nationwide class for these claims. Charter Holdco removed the South Carolina Class Action to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in November 2001, and moved to dismiss the suit in December 2001. The federal judge remanded the case to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas in August 2002 without ruling on the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs subsequently moved for a default judgment, arguing that upon return to state court, Charter Holdco should have, but did not, file a new motion to dismiss. The state court judge granted the plaintiff’s motion over Charter Holdco’s objection in September 2002. Charter Holdco immediately appealed that decision to the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the South Carolina Supreme Court, but those courts ruled that until a final judgment was entered against Charter Holdco, they lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

In January 2003, the Court of Common Pleas granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. In October and November 2003, Charter Holdco filed motions (a) asking that court to set aside the default judgment, and (b) seeking dismissal of plaintiffs’ suit for failure to state a claim. In January 2004, the Court of Common Pleas granted in part and denied in part Charter Holdco’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. It also took under advisement Charter Holdco’s motion to set aside the default judgment. In April 2004, the parties to both the Georgia and South Carolina Class Actions participated in a mediation. The mediator made a proposal to the parties to settle the lawsuits. In May 2004, the parties accepted the mediator’s proposal and reached a tentative settlement, subject to final documentation and court approval. As a result of the tentative settlement, the Company recorded a special charge of $9 million in its consolidated statement of operations in the first quarter of 2004 (see Note 13). On July 8, 2004, the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia granted a motion to amend the Tobar complaint to add Nicholls, Barber and April Jones as plaintiffs in the Georgia Class Action and to add any potential class members in South Carolina. The court also granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on that date. On August 2, 2004, the parties submitted a joint request to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to stay the South Carolina Class Action pending final approval of the settlement and on August 17, 2004, that court granted the parties’ request. On November 10, 2004, the court granted

final approval of the settlement, rejecting positions advanced by two objectors to the settlement. On December 13, 2004 the court entered a written order formally approving that settlement. On January 11, 2005, certain class members appealed the order entered by the Georgia court. Those objectors voluntarily dismissed their appeal with prejudice on February 8, 2005. On February 9, 2005, the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas entered a court order of dismissal for the South Carolina Class Action. Additionally, one of the objectors to this settlement recently filed a similar, but not identical, lawsuit.

In addition to the matters set forth above, Charter is also party to other lawsuits and claims that arose in the ordinary course of conducting its business. In the opinion of management, after taking into account recorded liabilities, the outcome of these other lawsuits and claims are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations or its liquidity.

Prior to January 1, 2003, the Company accounted for stock-based compensation in accordance with Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. On January 1, 2003, the Company adopted the fair value measurement provisions of SFAS No. 123 using the prospective method, under which the Company recognizes compensation expense of a stock-based award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair value of the award on the grant date consistent with the method described in Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 28, Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans. Adoption of these provisions resulted in utilizing a preferable accounting method as the condensed consolidated financial statements will present the estimated fair value of stock-based compensation in expense consistently with other forms of compensation and other expense associated with goods and services received for equity instruments. In accordance with SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure, the fair value method is being applied only to awards granted or modified after January 1, 2003, whereas awards granted prior to such date will continue to be accounted for under APB No. 25, unless they are modified or settled in cash. The ongoing effect on consolidated results of operations or financial condition will depend on future stock-based compensation awards granted by the Company.

SFAS No. 123 requires pro forma disclosure of the impact on earnings as if the compensation expense for these plans had been determined using the fair value method. The following table presents the Company’s net loss and loss per share as reported and the pro forma amounts that would have been reported using the fair value method under SFAS No. 123 for the periods presented:

In January 2004, Charter began an option exchange program in which the Company offered its employees the right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio, which varied depending on the exercise price of an employee’s outstanding options, if an employee would have received more than 400 shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, Charter issued to that employee shares of restricted stock in the exchange. If, based on the exchange ratios, an employee would have received 400 or fewer shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, Charter instead paid the employee cash in an amount equal to the number of shares the employee would have received multiplied by $5.00. The offer applied to options (vested and unvested) to purchase a total of 22,929,573 shares of Charter Class A common stock, or approximately 48% of the Company’s 47,882,365 total options (vested and unvested) issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2003. Participation by employees was voluntary. Those members of Charter’s board of directors who were not also employees of the Company were not eligible to participate in the exchange offer.

In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004, the Company accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase approximately 18,137,664 shares of Charter Class A common stock. In exchange, the Company granted 1,966,686 shares of restricted stock, including 460,777 performance shares to eligible employees of the rank of senior vice president and above, and paid a total cash amount of approximately $4 million (which amount includes applicable withholding taxes) to those employees who received cash rather than shares of restricted stock. The restricted stock was granted on February 25, 2004. Employees tendered approximately 79% of the options exchangeable under the program.

The cost to the Company of the stock option exchange program was approximately $10 million, with a 2004 cash compensation expense of approximately $4 million and a non-cash compensation expense of approximately $6 million to be expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period of the restricted stock issued in the exchange.

In January 2004, the Compensation Committee of the board of directors of Charter approved Charter’s Long-Term Incentive Program (“LTIP”), which is a program administered under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the LTIP, employees of Charter and its subsidiaries whose pay classifications exceed a certain level are eligible to receive stock options, and more senior level employees are eligible to receive stock options and performance shares. The stock options vest 25% on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant. The performance units vest on the third anniversary of the grant date and shares of Charter Class A common stock are issued, conditional upon Charter’s performance against financial performance targets established by Charter’s management and approved by its board of directors. Charter granted 6.9 million shares in January 2004 under this program and recognized expense of $3 million in the first quarter of 2004. However, in the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company reversed the $8 million of expense recorded in the first three quarters of 2004 based on the Company’s assessment of the probability of achieving the financial performance measures established by Charter and required to be met for the performance shares to vest. In March 2005, Charter granted 2.5 million performance shares and 5.3 million options under the LTIP. The impact of such grants were de minimis to the Company’s results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

The following sets forth certain transactions in which the Company and the directors, executive officers and affiliates of the Company are involved. Unless otherwise disclosed, management believes that each of the transactions described below was on terms no less favorable to the Company than could have been obtained from independent third parties.

profits or losses (as computed for capital account purposes) after June 6, 2003). The limited liability company agreement of CC VIII does not provide for a mandatory redemption of the CC VIII interest.

Thereafter, the board of directors of Charter formed a Special Committee (currently comprised of Messrs. Merritt, Tory and Wangberg) to investigate the matter and take any other appropriate action on behalf of Charter with respect to this matter. After conducting an investigation of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Special Committee determined that a “scrivener’s error” had occurred in February 2000 in connection with the preparation of the last-minute revisions to the Bresnan transaction documents and that, as a result, Charter should seek the reformation of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement, or alternative relief, in order to restore and ensure the obligation that the CC VIII interest be automatically exchanged for Charter Holdco units. The Special Committee further determined that, as part of such contract reformation or alternative relief, Mr. Allen should be required to contribute the CC VIII interest to Charter Holdco in exchange for 24,273,943 Charter Holdco membership units. The Special Committee also recommended to the board of directors of Charter that, to the extent the contract reformation is achieved, the board of directors should consider whether the CC VIII interest should ultimately be held by Charter Holdco or Charter Holdings or another entity owned directly or indirectly by them.

legal and equitable relief. The ultimate resolution and financial impact of the dispute are not determinable at this time.

TechTV, Inc. TechTV, Inc. (“TechTV”) operated a cable television network that offered programming mostly related to technology. Pursuant to an affiliation agreement that originated in 1998 and that terminates in 2008, TechTV has provided the Company with programming for distribution via Charter’s cable systems. The affiliation agreement provides, among other things, that TechTV must offer Charter certain terms and conditions that are no less favorable in the affiliation agreement than are given to any other distributor that serves the same number of or fewer TechTV viewing customers. Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation agreement, the Company was entitled to incentive payments for channel launches through December 31, 2003.

In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for (i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation agreement which, among other things, revises the description of the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of content relating to technology and video gaming for Charter’s interactive television platforms through December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For each of the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company recognized approximately $0.3 million, of the Vulcan Programming payment as an offset to programming expense and paid approximately $0.5 million and $0.2 million, respectively, to Tech TV under the affiliation agreement.

The Company believes that Vulcan Programming, which is 100% owned by Mr. Allen, owned an approximate 98% equity interest in TechTV at the time Vulcan Programming sold TechTV to an unrelated third party in May 2004. Until September 2003, Mr. Savoy, a former Charter director, was the president and director of Vulcan Programming and was a director of TechTV. Mr. Wangberg, one of Charter’s directors, was the chairman, chief executive officer and a director of TechTV. Mr. Wangberg resigned as the chief executive officer of TechTV in July 2002. He remained a director of TechTV along with Mr. Allen until Vulcan Programming sold TechTV.

Digeo, Inc. In March 2001, a subsidiary of Charter, Charter Communication Ventures, LLC (“Charter Ventures”), and Vulcan Ventures Incorporated formed DBroadband Holdings, LLC for the sole purpose of purchasing equity interests in Digeo, Inc. (“Digeo”), an entity controlled by Paul Allen. In connection with the execution of the broadband carriage agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC purchased an equity interest in Digeo funded by contributions from Vulcan Ventures Incorporated. The equity interest is subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to the amount contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount contributed and any cumulative loss allocations, Charter Ventures has a 100% profit interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC. Charter Ventures is not required to make any capital contributions, including capital calls, and may require Vulcan Ventures, through January 24, 2004, to make certain additional contributions through DBroadband Holdings, LLC to acquire additional equity in Digeo as necessary to maintain Charter Ventures’ pro rata interest in Digeo in the event of certain future Digeo equity financings by the founders of Digeo. These additional equity interests are also subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to amounts contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. DBroadband Holdings, LLC is therefore not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to

an amended version of this arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures contributed a total of $29 million to Digeo, $7 million of which was contributed on Charter Ventures’ behalf, subject to Vulcan Ventures’ aforementioned priority return. Since the formation of DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has contributed approximately $56 million on Charter Ventures’ behalf.

On March 2, 2001, Charter Ventures entered into a broadband carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive, LLC (“Digeo Interactive”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo. The carriage agreement provided that Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter a “portal” product, which would function as the television-based Internet portal (the initial point of entry to the Internet) for Charter’s customers who received Internet access from Charter. The agreement term was for 25 years and Charter agreed to use the Digeo portal exclusively for six years. Before the portal product was delivered to Charter, Digeo terminated development of the portal product.

On September 27, 2001, Charter and Digeo Interactive amended the broadband carriage agreement. According to the amendment, Digeo Interactive would provide to Charter the content for enhanced “Wink” interactive television services, known as Charter Interactive Channels (“i-channels”). In order to provide the i-channels, Digeo Interactive sublicensed certain Wink technologies to Charter. Charter is entitled to share in the revenues generated by the i-channels. Currently, the Company’s digital video customers who receive i-channels receive the service at no additional charge.

On September 28, 2002, Charter entered into a second amendment to its broadband carriage agreement with Digeo Interactive. This amendment superseded the amendment of September 27, 2001. It provided for the development by Digeo Interactive of future features to be included in the Basic i-TV service to be provided by Digeo and for Digeo’s development of an interactive “toolkit” to enable Charter to develop interactive local content. Furthermore, Charter could request that Digeo Interactive manage local content for a fee. The amendment provided for Charter to pay for development of the Basic i-TV service as well as license fees for customers who would receive the service, and for Charter and Digeo to split certain revenues earned from the service. The Company paid Digeo Interactive approximately $2 million and $0.7 million for customized development of the i-channels and the local content tool kit for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. This amendment expired pursuant to its terms on December 31, 2003. Digeo Interactive is continuing to provide the Basic i-TV service on a month-to-month basis.

On June 30, 2003, Charter Holdco entered into an agreement with Motorola, Inc. for the purchase of 100,000 digital video recorder (“DVR”) units. The software for these DVR units is being supplied by Digeo Interactive, LLC under a license agreement entered into in April 2004. Under the license agreement Digeo Interactive granted to Charter Holdco the right to use Digeo’s proprietary software for the number of DVR units that Charter deployed from a maximum of 10 headends through year-end 2004. This maximum number of headends was increased from 10 to 15 pursuant to a letter agreement executed on June 11, 2004 and the date for entering into license agreements for units deployed was extended to June 30, 2005. The number of headends was increased from 15 to 20 pursuant to a letter agreement dated August 4, 2004, from 20 to 30 pursuant to a letter agreement dated September 28, 2004 and from 30 to 50 headends by a letter agreement in February 2005. The license granted for each unit deployed under the agreement is valid for five years. In addition, Charter will pay certain other fees including a per-headend license fee and maintenance fees. Maximum license and maintenance fees during the term of the agreement are expected to be approximately $7 million. The agreement provides that Charter is entitled to receive contract terms, considered on the whole, and license fees, considered apart from other contract terms, no less favorable than those accorded to any other Digeo customer. Charter paid approximately $0.9 million in license and maintenance fees for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

In April 2004, the Company launched DVR service using units containing the Digeo software in Charter’s Rochester, Minnesota market using a broadband media center that is an integrated set-top terminal with a cable converter, DVR hard drive and connectivity to other consumer electronics devices (such as stereos, MP3 players, and digital cameras).

In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development, testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would enter into a license agreement for Digeo’s proprietary software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement, each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet. Product development and testing are continuing. Total purchase price and license and maintenance fees during the term of the definitive agreements are expected to be approximately $41 million. The definitive agreements are terminable at no penalty to Charter in certain circumstances.

The Company believes that Vulcan Ventures, an entity controlled by Mr. Allen, owns an approximate 51% equity interest in Digeo, Inc., on a fully-converted basis. Mr. Allen is a director of Digeo, and Mr. Vogel was a director of Digeo in 2004. During 2004, Mr. Vogel held options to purchase 10,000 shares of Digeo common stock.

Oxygen Media LLC. Oxygen Media LLC (“Oxygen”) provides programming content aimed at the female audience for distribution over cable systems and satellite. On July 22, 2002, Charter Holdco entered into a carriage agreement with Oxygen, whereby the Company agreed to carry programming content from Oxygen. Under the carriage agreement, the Company currently makes Oxygen programming available to approximately 5 million of its video customers. The term of the carriage agreement was retroactive to February 1, 2000, the date of launch of Oxygen programming by the Company, and runs for a period of five years from that date. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company paid Oxygen approximately $3 million and $4 million, respectively, for programming content. In addition, Oxygen pays the Company marketing support fees for customers launched after the first year of the term of the carriage agreement up to a total of $4 million. The Company recorded approximately $0.1 million and $0.4 million related to these launch incentives as a reduction of programming expense for each of the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

The Company recognized the guaranteed value of the investment over the life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of programming expense. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company recorded approximately $1 million and $4 million, respectively, as a reduction of programming expense. The carrying value of the Company’s investment in Oxygen was approximately $33 million and $32 million as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number of the Company’s customers to which Oxygen programming must be carried and for which the Company must pay, (b) releases Charter Holdco from any claims related to the failure to achieve distribution benchmarks under the carriage agreement, (c) requires Oxygen to make payment on outstanding receivables for marketing support fees due to the Company under the carriage agreement; and (d) requires that Oxygen provide its programming content to the Company on economic terms no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable or satellite operator having fewer subscribers than the Company. The renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the period that the Company will carry Oxygen programming to the Company’s customers through January 31, 2008, and (b) requires license fees to be paid based on customers receiving Oxygen programming, rather than for specific customer benchmarks.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of 1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued dividends to Charter Holdco on February 1, 2005 in place of the $34 million of unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock. Oxygen Media delivered these shares in March 2005. The preferred stock is convertible into common stock after December 31, 2007 at a conversion ratio per share of preferred stock, the numerator of which is the liquidation preference and the denominator of which is the fair market value per share of Oxygen Media common stock on the conversion date.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Charter Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders’ equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Charter Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

As discussed in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 2002, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.

As discussed in note 7 to the consolidated financial statements, effective September 30, 2004, the Company adopted EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill.

As discussed in note 19 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 2003, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, as amended by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure — an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Charter Communications, Inc. (“Charter”) is a holding company whose principal assets at December 31, 2004 are the 47% controlling common equity interest in Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (“Charter Holdco”) and “mirror” notes which are payable by Charter Holdco to Charter and have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes. Charter Holdco is the sole owner of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC (“Charter Holdings”). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Charter, Charter Holdco, Charter Holdings and all of their wholly owned subsidiaries where the underlying operations reside, collectively referred to herein as the “Company.” Charter consolidates Charter Holdco on the basis of voting control. Charter Holdco’s limited liability company agreement provides that so long as Charter’s Class B common stock retains its special voting rights, Charter will maintain a 100% voting interest in Charter Holdco. Voting control gives Charter full authority and control over the operations of Charter Holdco. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions among consolidated entities have been eliminated. The Company is a broadband communications company operating in the United States. The Company offers its customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as high-speed data services and, in some areas, advanced broadband services such as high definition television, video on demand and telephony. The Company sells its cable video programming, high-speed data and advanced broadband services on a subscription basis. The Company also sells local advertising on satellite-delivered networks.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Areas involving significant judgments and estimates include capitalization of labor and overhead costs; depreciation and amortization costs; impairments of property, plant and equipment, franchises and goodwill; income taxes; and contingencies. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform with the 2004 presentation.

The Company incurred net loss applicable to common stock of $4.3 billion, $242 million and $2.5 billion in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The Company’s net cash flows from operating activities were $472 million, $765 million and $748 million for the years ending December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

The Company has a significant level of debt. The Company’s long-term financing as of December 31, 2004 consists of $5.5 billion of credit facility debt, $13.3 billion principal amount of high-yield notes and $1.0 billion principal amount of convertible senior notes. In 2005, $30 million of the Company’s debt will mature and in 2006, an additional $186 million of the Company’s debt will mature. In 2007 and beyond, significant additional amounts will become due under the Company’s remaining long-term debt obligations.

The Company has historically required significant cash to fund capital expenditures and debt service costs. Historically, the Company has funded these requirements through cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under its credit facilities, sales of assets, issuances of debt and equity securities and cash on hand. However, the mix of funding sources changes from period to period. For the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company, generated $472 million of net cash flows from operating activities, after paying cash interest of $1.3 billion. In addition, the Company generated approximately $744 million from the sale of assets, substantially all of which was used to fund operations, including capital expenditures.

Finally, the Company had net cash flows from financing activities of $294 million, which included, among other things, the proceeds from the issuance in December of $550 million of CCO Holdings, LLC (“CCO Holdings”) Notes. This debt issuance was the primary reason cash on hand increased by $523 million to $650 million at December 31, 2004. Approximately $622 million was used to repay outstanding borrowings under the Company’s revolving credit facility, through a series of transactions executed in February 2005.

The Company’s ability to operate depends upon, among other things, its continued access to capital, including credit under the Charter Communications Operating, LLC (“Charter Operating”) credit facilities. These credit facilities, along with the Company’s indentures, are subject to certain restrictive covenants, some of which require the Company to maintain specified financial ratios and meet financial tests and to provide audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from the Company’s independent auditors. As of December 31, 2004, the Company was in compliance with the covenants under the Company’s indentures and under its credit facilities and the Company expects to remain in compliance with those covenants for the next twelve months. As of December 31, 2004, the Company had borrowing availability under the credit facilities of $804 million, none of which was restricted due to covenants. Continued access to the Company’s credit facilities is subject to the Company remaining in compliance with the applicable covenants of these credit facilities, including covenants tied to the Company’s operating performance. If the Company’s operating performance results in non-compliance with these covenants, or if any of certain other events of non-compliance under these credit facilities or indentures governing the Company’s debt occurs, funding under the credit facilities may not be available and defaults on some or potentially all of the Company’s debt obligations could occur. An event of default under the covenants governing any of the Company’s debt instruments could result in the acceleration of its payment obligations under that debt and, under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under its other debt obligations, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

The Charter Operating credit facilities require the Company to redeem the CC V Holdings notes within 45 days after the first date that the Charter Holdings leverage ratio is less than 8.75 to 1.0. In satisfaction of this requirement, CC V Holdings, LLC has called for redemption all of its outstanding notes, at 103.958% of principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption, which is expected to be March 14, 2005. The total cost of the redemption including accrued and unpaid interest is expected to be $122 million. The Company intends to fund the redemption with borrowings under its credit facilities.

Charter’s ability to make interest payments on its convertible senior notes, and, in 2006 and 2009, to repay the outstanding principal of its convertible senior notes, will depend on its ability to raise additional capital and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco or its subsidiaries, including CCH II, LLC (“CCH II”), CCO Holdings, LLC (“CCO Holdings”) and Charter Operating. The indentures governing the CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, and Charter Operating notes, however, restrict these entities and their subsidiaries from making distributions to their parent companies (including Charter and Charter Holdco) for payment of principal on Charter’s convertible senior notes, in each case unless there is no default under the applicable indenture and a specified leverage ratio test is met at the time of such event. CCH II, CCO Holdings and Charter Operating meet the applicable leverage ratio test under each of their respective indentures, and as a result are not prohibited from making any such distributions to their respective direct parent.

The indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings to make distributions to Charter Holdco for payment of interest or principal on the convertible senior notes, only if, after giving effect to the distribution, Charter Holdings can incur additional debt under the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0, there is no default under Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests are met. For the quarter ended December 31, 2004, there was no default under Charter Holdings’ indentures and other specified tests were met. In addition, Charter Holdings met the leverage ratio of 8.75 to 1.0 based on December 31, 2004 financial results. As a result, distributions from Charter Holdings to Charter or Charter Holdco are not currently restricted. Such distributions will again be restricted, however, if Charter Holdings fails to meet its leverage ratio test. In the past, Charter Holdings has from time to time failed to meet this leverage ratio test and there can be no assurance that Charter Holdings will satisfy this test in the future.

During periods when such distributions are restricted, the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes permit Charter Holdings and its subsidiaries to make specified investments in Charter Holdco or Charter, up to an amount determined by a formula, as long as there is no default under the indentures. As of December 31, 2004, Charter Holdco had $106 million in cash on hand and was owed $29 million in intercompany loans from its subsidiaries, which were available to pay interest on Charter’s 4.75% convertible senior notes, which is expected to be approximately $7 million in 2005. In addition, Charter has $144 million of governmental securities pledged as security for the six interest payments on Charter’s 5.875% convertible senior notes.

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents. These investments are carried at cost, which approximates market value.

Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost, including all material, labor and certain indirect costs associated with the construction of cable transmission and distribution facilities. Costs associated with initial customer installations and the additions of network equipment necessary to enable advanced services are capitalized. Costs capitalized as part of initial customer installations include materials, labor, and certain indirect costs. Indirect costs are associated with the activities of the Company’s personnel who assist in connecting and activating the new service and consist of compensation and indirect costs associated with these support functions. Indirect costs primarily include employee benefits and payroll taxes, direct variable costs associated with capitalizable activities, consisting primarily of installation and construction vehicle costs, the cost of dispatch personnel and indirect costs directly attributable to capitalizable activities. The costs of disconnecting service at a customer’s dwelling or reconnecting service to a previously installed dwelling are charged to operating expense in the period incurred. Costs for repairs and maintenance are charged to operating expense as incurred, while plant and equipment replacement and betterments, including replacement of cable drops from the pole to the dwelling, are capitalized.

Depreciation is recorded using the straight-line composite method over management’s estimate of the useful lives of the related assets as follows:

Franchise rights represent the value attributed to agreements with local authorities that allow access to homes in cable service areas acquired through the purchase of cable systems. Management estimates the fair value of franchise rights at the date of acquisition and determines if the franchise has a finite life or an indefinite-life as defined by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. All franchises that qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are no longer amortized against earnings but instead are tested for impairment annually as of October 1, or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances (see Note 7). The Company concluded that 99% of its franchises qualify for indefinite-life treatment; however, certain franchises did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment due to technological or operational factors that limit their lives. These franchise costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over 10 years. Costs incurred in renewing cable franchises are deferred and amortized over 10 years.

Other noncurrent assets primarily include goodwill, deferred financing costs, governmental securities and investments in equity securities. Costs related to borrowings are deferred and amortized to interest expense over the terms of the related borrowings.

Investments in equity securities are accounted for at cost, under the equity method of accounting or in accordance with SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities. Charter recognizes losses for any decline in value considered to be other than temporary. Certain marketable equity securities are classified as available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive income or loss.

The following summarizes investment information as of and for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003:

As required by the indentures to the Company’s 5.875% convertible senior notes issued in November 2004, the Company purchased U.S. government securities valued at approximately $144 million with maturities corresponding to the interest payment dates for the convertible senior notes. These securities were pledged and are held in escrow to provide payment in full for the first six interest payments of the convertible senior notes (see Note 9). These securities are accounted for as held-to-maturity securities. At December 31, 2004, the carrying value and fair value of the securities was approximately $144 million with approximately $48 million recorded in prepaid and other assets and approximately $96 million recorded in other assets in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet.

The Company evaluates the recoverability of property, plant and equipment for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Such events or changes in circumstances could include such factors as impairment of the Company’s indefinite life franchise under SFAS No. 142, changes in technological advances, fluctuations in the fair value of such assets, adverse changes in relationships with local franchise authorities, adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results. If a review indicates that the carrying value of such asset is not recoverable from estimated undiscounted cash flows, the carrying value of such asset is reduced to its estimated fair value. While the Company believes that its estimates of future cash flows are reasonable, different assumptions regarding such cash flows could materially affect its evaluations of asset recoverability. No impairment of property, plant and equipment occurred in 2004, 2003 and 2002.

The Company accounts for derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended. For those instruments which qualify as hedging activities, related gains or losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income. For all other derivative instruments, the related gains or losses are recorded in the income statement. The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements, interest rate cap agreements and interest rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as interest rate agreements) as required under the terms of the credit facilities of the Company’s subsidiaries. The Company’s policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, the Company agrees to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate cap agreements are used to lock in a maximum interest rate should variable rates rise, but enable the Company to otherwise pay lower market rates. Interest rate collar agreements are used to limit exposure to

and benefits from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt to within a certain range of rates. The Company does not hold or issue any derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.

Certain provisions of the Company’s 5.875% convertible senior notes issued in November 2004 were considered embedded derivatives for accounting purposes and were required to be separately accounted for from the convertible senior notes. In accordance with SFAS No. 133, these derivatives are marked to market with gains or losses recorded in interest expense on the Company’s consolidated statement of operations. For the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company recognized $1 million in losses related to these derivatives. At December 31, 2004, $10 million is recorded in accounts payable and accrued expenses relating to the short-term portion of these derivatives and $21 million is recorded in other long-term liabilities related to the long-term portion.

Revenues from residential and commercial video and high-speed data services are recognized when the related services are provided. Advertising sales are recognized at estimated realizable values in the period that the advertisements are broadcast. Local governmental authorities impose franchise fees on the Company ranging up to a federally mandated maximum of 5% of gross revenues as defined in the franchise agreement. Such fees are collected on a monthly basis from the Company’s customers and are periodically remitted to local franchise authorities. Franchise fees are reported as revenues on a gross basis with a corresponding operating expense.

The Company has various contracts to obtain analog, digital and premium video programming from program suppliers whose compensation is typically based on a flat fee per customer. The cost of the right to exhibit network programming under such arrangements is recorded in operating expenses in the month the programming is available for exhibition. Programming costs are paid each month based on calculations performed by the Company and are subject to adjustment based on periodic audits performed by the programmers. Certain programming contracts contain launch incentives to be paid by the programmers. The Company receives these payments related to the activation of the programmer’s cable television channel and recognizes the launch incentives on a straight-line basis over the life of the programming agreement as a reduction of programming expense. This offset to programming expense was $59 million, $62 million and $57 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Programming costs included in the accompanying statement of operations were $1.3 billion, $1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, the deferred amount of launch incentives, included in other long-term liabilities, totaled $106 million and $170 million, respectively.

Advertising costs associated with marketing the Company’s products and services are generally expensed as costs are incurred. Such advertising expense was $72 million, $62 million and $60 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

The Company has historically accounted for stock-based compensation in accordance with Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. On January 1,

2003, the Company adopted the fair value measurement provisions of SFAS No. 123 using the prospective method under which the Company will recognize compensation expense of a stock-based award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair value of the award on the grant date consistent with the method described in Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 28, Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans. Adoption of these provisions resulted in utilizing a preferable accounting method as the consolidated financial statements will present the estimated fair value of stock-based compensation in expense consistently with other forms of compensation and other expense associated with goods and services received for equity instruments. In accordance with SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure, the fair value method was applied only to awards granted or modified after January 1, 2003, whereas awards granted prior to such date were accounted for under APB No. 25, unless they were modified or settled in cash.

The fair value of each option granted is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The following weighted average assumptions were used for grants during the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively: risk-free interest rates of 3.3%, 3.0%, and 3.6%; expected volatility of 92.4%, 93.6% and 64.2%; and expected lives of 4.6 years, 4.5 years and 4.3 years, respectively. The valuations assume no dividends are paid.

The Company recognized $5 million of benefit for the year ended December 31, 2004 related to changes in estimated legal reserves established as part of previous business combinations, which, based on an evaluation of current facts and circumstances, are no longer required.

The Company recognized $72 million of benefit for the year ended December 31, 2003 as a result of the settlement of estimated liabilities recorded in connection with prior business combinations. The majority of this benefit (approximately $52 million) is due to the renegotiation of a major programming

contract, for which a liability had been recorded for the above market portion of the agreement in conjunction with the Falcon acquisition in 1999 and the Bresnan acquisition in 2000. The remaining benefit relates to the reversal of previously recorded liabilities, which are no longer required.

The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities for temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the Company’s assets and liabilities and expected benefits of utilizing net operating loss carryforwards. The impact on deferred taxes of changes in tax rates and tax law, if any, applied to the years during which temporary differences are expected to be settled, are reflected in the consolidated financial statements in the period of enactment (see Note 21).

Minority interest on the consolidated balance sheets represents the portion of members’ equity of Charter Holdco not owned by Charter, plus preferred membership interests in an indirect subsidiary of Charter held by Mr. Paul G. Allen. Minority interest totaled $648 million and $689 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Gains or losses arising from issuances by Charter Holdco of its membership units are recorded as capital transactions thereby increasing or decreasing shareholders’ equity and decreasing or increasing minority interest on the consolidated balance sheets. These losses totaled $0, $1 million and $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, on the accompanying consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity. Operating losses are allocated to the minority owners based on their ownership percentage, thereby reducing the Company’s net loss.

Reported losses allocated to minority interest on the statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Holdco. Because minority interest in Charter Holdco was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in 2004, Charter began to absorb substantially all future losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest.

Basic loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss applicable to common stock by 300,291,877 shares, 294,597,519 shares and 294,440,261 shares for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, representing the weighted-average common shares outstanding during the respective periods. Diluted loss per common share equals basic loss per common share for the periods presented, as the effect of stock options is antidilutive because the Company incurred net losses. All membership units of Charter Holdco are exchangeable on a one-for-one basis into common stock of Charter at the option of the holders. As of December 31, 2004, Charter Holdco has 644,385,801 membership units outstanding. Should the holders exchange units for shares, the effect would not be dilutive because the Company incurred net losses.

SFAS No. 131, Disclosure about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information, established standards for reporting information about operating segments in annual financial statements and in interim financial reports issued to shareholders. Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is available that is evaluated on a regular basis by the chief

operating decision maker, or decision making group, in deciding how to allocate resources to an individual segment and in assessing performance of the segment.

The Company’s operations are managed on the basis of geographic divisional operating segments. The Company has evaluated the criteria for aggregation of the geographic operating segments under paragraph 17 of SFAS No. 131 and believes it meets each of the respective criteria set forth. The Company delivers similar products and services within each of its geographic divisional operations. Each geographic and divisional service area utilizes similar means for delivering the programming of the Company’s services; have similarity in the type or class of customer receiving the products and services; distributes the Company’s services over a unified network; and operates within a consistent regulatory environment. In addition, each of the geographic divisional operating segments has similar economic characteristics. In light of the Company’s similar services, means for delivery, similarity in type of customers, the use of a unified network and other considerations across its geographic divisional operating structure, management has determined that the Company has one reportable segment, broadband services.

On February 28, 2002, CC Systems, LLC, a subsidiary of the Company, and High Speed Access Corp. (“HSA”) closed the Company’s acquisition from HSA of the contracts and associated assets, and assumed related liabilities, that served certain of the Company’s high-speed data customers. At closing, the Company paid approximately $78 million in cash and delivered 37,000 shares of HSA’s Series D convertible preferred stock and all the warrants to buy HSA common stock owned by the Company. The purchase price has been allocated to assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on fair values, including approximately $8 million assigned to intangible assets and amortized over an average useful life of three years and approximately $52 million assigned to goodwill. During the period from 1997 to 2000, certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into Internet-access related service agreements with HSA, and both Vulcan Ventures and certain of the Company’s subsidiaries made equity investments in HSA. (see Note 22 for additional information).

In April 2002, Interlink Communications Partners, LLC, Rifkin Acquisition Partners, LLC and Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC, each an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Charter Holdings, completed the purchase of certain assets of Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P., Enstar Income Program IV-3, L.P., Enstar Income/ Growth Program Six-A, L.P., Enstar Cable of Macoupin County and Enstar IV/ PBD Systems Venture, serving approximately 21,600 (unaudited) customers, for a total cash purchase price of $48 million. In September 2002, Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC purchased all of Enstar Income Program II-1, L.P.’s Illinois cable systems, serving approximately 6,400 (unaudited) customers, for a cash purchase price of $15 million. Enstar Communications Corporation, a direct subsidiary of Charter Holdco, is a general partner of the Enstar limited partnerships but does not exercise control over them. The purchase prices were allocated to assets acquired based on fair values, including $41 million assigned to franchises and $4 million assigned to other intangible assets amortized over a useful life of three years.

The 2002 acquisitions were funded primarily from borrowings under the credit facilities of the Company’s subsidiaries.

Activity in the allowance for doubtful accounts is summarized as follows for the years presented:

Property, plant and equipment consists of the following as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:

The Company periodically evaluates the estimated useful lives used to depreciate its assets and the estimated amount of assets that will be abandoned or have minimal use in the future. A significant change in assumptions about the extent or timing of future asset retirements, or in the Company’s use of new technology and upgrade programs, could materially affect future depreciation expense.

Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion and $1.4 billion respectively.

On January 1, 2002, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, which eliminates the amortization of indefinite-lived intangible assets. Accordingly, beginning January 1, 2002, all franchises that qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are no longer amortized against earnings but instead are tested for impairment annually based on valuations, or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances. Based on the guidance prescribed in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 02-7, Unit of Accounting for Testing of Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets, franchises are aggregated into essentially inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset groups generally represent geographic clustering of the Company’s cable systems into groups by which such systems are managed. Management believes such grouping represents the highest and best use of those assets.

value. The value of goodwill is the difference between the total entity value and amounts assigned to the other assets.

Franchises, for valuation purposes, are defined as the future economic benefits of the right to solicit and service potential customers (customer marketing rights), and the right to deploy and market new services such as interactivity and telephony to the potential customers (service marketing rights). Fair value is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows using assumptions consistent with internal forecasts. The franchise after-tax cash flow is calculated as the after-tax cash flow generated by the potential customers obtained and the new services added to those customers in future periods. The sum of the present value of the franchises’ after-tax cash flow in years 1 through 10 and the continuing value of the after-tax cash flow beyond year 10 yields the fair value of the franchise. Prior to the adoption of EITF Topic D-108, Use of the Residual Method to Value Acquired Assets Other than Goodwill, discussed below, the Company followed a residual method of valuing its franchise assets, which had the effect of including goodwill with the franchise assets.

The Company follows the guidance of EITF Issue 02-17, Recognition of Customer Relationship Intangible Assets Acquired in a Business Combination, in valuing customer relationships. Customer relationships, for valuation purposes, represent the value of the business relationship with existing customers and are calculated by projecting future after-tax cash flows from these customers including the right to deploy and market additional services such as interactivity and telephony to these customers. The present value of these after-tax cash flows yield the fair value of the customer relationships. Substantially all acquisitions occurred prior to January 1, 2002. The Company did not record any value associated with the customer relationship intangibles related to those acquisitions. For acquisitions subsequent to January 1, 2002 the Company did assign a value to the customer relationship intangible, which is amortized over its estimated useful life.

In September 2004, the SEC staff issued Topic D-108 which requires the direct method of separately valuing all intangible assets and does not permit goodwill to be included in franchise assets. The Company performed an impairment assessment as of September 30, 2004, and adopted Topic D-108 in that assessment resulting in a total franchise impairment of approximately $3.3 billion. The Company recorded a cumulative effect of accounting change of $765 million (approximately $875 million before tax effects of $91 million and minority interest effects of $19 million) for the year ended December 31, 2004 representing the portion of the Company’s total franchise impairment attributable to no longer including goodwill with franchise assets. The effect of the adoption was to increase net loss and loss per share by $765 million and $2.55 for the year ended December 31, 2004. The remaining $2.4 billion of the total franchise impairment was attributable to the use of lower projected growth rates and the resulting revised estimates of future cash flows in the Company’s valuation, and was recorded as impairment of franchises in the Company’s accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2004. Sustained analog video customer losses by the Company in the third quarter of 2004 primarily as a result of increased competition from direct broadcast satellite providers and decreased growth rates in the Company’s high-speed data customers in the third quarter of 2004, in part, as a result of increased competition from digital subscriber line service providers led to the lower projected growth rates and the revised estimates of future cash flows from those used at October 1, 2003.

The valuation completed at October 1, 2003 showed franchise values in excess of book value and thus resulted in no impairment. The Company’s annual impairment assessment as of October 1, 2002, based on revised estimates from January 1, 2002 of future cash flows and projected long-term growth rates in the Company’s valuation, led to the recognition of a $4.6 billion impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2002.

As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, indefinite-lived and finite-lived intangible assets are presented in the following table:

For the year ended December 31, 2004, the net carrying amount of indefinite-lived intangible assets was reduced by $490 million as a result of the sale of cable systems, primarily the sale to Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC, discussed in Note 2. Additionally, in the first and fourth quarters of 2004, approximately $29 million and $8 million, respectively, of franchises that were previously classified as finite-lived were reclassified to indefinite-lived, based on the Company’s renewal of these franchise assets in 2003 and 2004. Franchise amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $4 million, $9 million and $9 million, respectively, which represents the amortization relating to franchises that did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142, including costs associated with franchise renewals. The Company expects that amortization expense on franchise assets will be approximately $3 million annually for each of the next five years. Actual amortization expense in future periods could differ from these estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors.

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:

The accreted values presented above represents the face value of the notes less the original issue discount at the time of sale plus the accretion to the balance sheet date.

On November 22, 2004, the Company issued $862.5 million original principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, which are convertible into shares of Charter’s Class A common stock, par value $.001 per share, at a rate of 413.2231 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes (or approximately $2.42 per share), subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. On December 23, 2004, the Company used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the notes to redeem all of its outstanding 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 (total principal amount of $588 million). The redemption resulted in a loss on extinguishment of debt of $10 million.

In April 2004, Charter’s indirect subsidiaries, Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp., sold $1.5 billion of senior second-lien notes in a private transaction. Additionally, Charter Operating amended and restated its $5.1 billion credit facilities, among other things, to defer maturities and increase availability under those facilities to approximately $6.5 billion, consisting of a $1.5 billion six-year revolving credit facility, a $2.0 billion six-year term loan facility and a $3.0 billion seven-year term loan facility. Charter Operating used the additional borrowings under the amended and restated credit facilities, together with proceeds from the sale of the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes to refinance the credit facilities of its subsidiaries, CC VI Operating Company, LLC (“CC VI Operating”), Falcon Cable Communications, LLC (“Falcon Cable”), and CC VIII Operating, LLC (“CC VIII Operating”), all in concurrent transactions. In addition, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in place of the banks under those subsidiaries’ credit facilities. These transactions resulted in losses on extinguishment of debt of $21 million.

The Company recognized a loss of approximately $23 million recorded as loss on debt to equity conversion on the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2004 from privately negotiated exchanges of a total of $30 million principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes for shares of Charter Class A common stock. The exchanges resulted in the issuance of more shares in the exchange transaction than would have been issuable under the original terms of the convertible senior notes.

In September 2003, Charter, Charter Holdings and their indirect subsidiary, CCH II purchased, in a non-monetary transaction, a total of approximately $609 million principal amount of Charter’s outstanding convertible senior notes and approximately $1.3 billion principal amount of the senior notes and senior discount notes issued by Charter Holdings from institutional investors in a small number of privately negotiated transactions. As consideration for these securities, CCH II issued approximately $1.6 billion principal amount of 10.25% notes due 2010, and realized approximately $294 million of debt discount. CCH II also issued an additional $30 million principal amount of 10.25% notes for an equivalent amount of cash and used the proceeds for transaction costs and for general corporate purposes. This transaction resulted in a gain on extinguishment of debt of $267 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. See discussion of the CCH II notes below for more details.

5.75% Charter Convertible Notes. In October and November 2000, Charter issued 5.75% convertible senior notes with a total principal amount at maturity of $750 million. The 5.75% Charter convertible notes were convertible at the option of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at a conversion rate of 46.3822 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which was equivalent to a price of $21.56 per share, subject to certain adjustments. The remaining $588 million of these notes was redeemed on December 23, 2004 at a price of 101.15% of the outstanding principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest through the redemption date.

4.75% Charter Convertible Notes. In May 2001, Charter issued 4.75% convertible senior notes with a total principal amount at maturity of $633 million. As of December 31, 2004, there was $156 million in total principal amount of these notes outstanding. The 4.75% Charter convertible notes rank equally with any of Charter’s future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness, but are structurally subordinated to all existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities of Charter’s subsidiaries.

The 4.75% Charter convertible notes are convertible at the option of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at a conversion rate of 38.0952 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equivalent to a price of $26.25 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions, which automatically occur based on the occurrence of specified events to provide protection rights to holders of the notes. Additionally, Charter may adjust the conversion ratio under certain circumstances when deemed appropriate. These notes are redeemable at Charter’s option at amounts decreasing from 101.9% to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest beginning on June 4, 2004, to the date of redemption. Interest is payable semiannually on December 1 and June 1, beginning December 1, 2001, until maturity on June 1, 2006.

5.875% Charter Convertible Notes. In November 2004, Charter issued 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009 with a total original principal amount of $862.5 million. The 5.875% Charter convertible notes are convertible at any time at the option of the holder into shares of Class A common stock at an initial conversion rate of 413.2231 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $2.42 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Specifically, the adjustments include anti-dilutive provisions, which cause adjustments to occur automatically based on the occurrence of specified events to provide protection rights to holders of the notes. The conversion rate may also be increased (but not to exceed 462 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes) upon a specified change of control transaction. Additionally, Charter may elect to increase the conversion rate under certain circumstances when deemed appropriate and subject to applicable limitations of the NASDAQ stock market. Holders who convert their notes prior to November 16, 2007 will receive an early conversion make whole amount in respect of their notes based on a proportional share of the portfolio of pledged securities described below, with specified adjustments.

The 5.875% Charter convertible notes are unsecured (except with respect to the collateral as described below) and rank equally with existing and future unsubordinated and unsecured indebtedness (except with respect to the collateral described below), but are structurally subordinated to all existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities of Charter’s subsidiaries. Upon a change of control and certain other fundamental changes, subject to certain conditions and restrictions, Charter may be required to repurchase the notes, in whole or in part, at 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest at the repurchase date.

Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears. Charter Holdco used a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the notes to purchase a portfolio of U.S. government securities in an amount which the Company believes will be sufficient to make the first six interest payments on the notes. These government securities were pledged to the Company as security for a mirror note issued by Charter Holdco to Charter (as discussed below) and pledged to the trustee under the indenture governing the notes as security for the Company’s obligations thereunder. The Company expects to use such securities to fund the first six interest payments under the notes. The pledged securities totaled $144 million at December 31, 2004. Any holder that converts its notes prior to the third anniversary of the issue date will be entitled to receive, in

addition to the requisite number of shares upon conversion, an interest make whole payment equal to the cash proceeds from the sale by the trustee of that portion of the remaining pledged U.S. government securities which secure interest payments on the notes so converted, subject to certain limitations with respect to notes that have not been sold prior to being registered under the Securities Act of 1933.

Following the earlier of the sale of the notes pursuant to an effective registration statement or the date two years following the issue date, the notes in whole or in part may be redeemed for cash at any time at a redemption price equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, deferred interest and liquidated damages, if any, but only if for any 20 trading days in any 30 consecutive trading day period the closing price has exceeded 180% of the conversion price, if such 30 trading day period begins prior to November 16, 2007 or 150% of the conversion price, if such 30 trading period begins thereafter. Holders who convert notes that the Company has called for redemption shall receive, in addition to the early conversion make whole amount, if applicable, the present value of the interest on the notes converted that would have been payable for the period from the later of November 17, 2007 and the redemption date through the scheduled maturity date for the notes, plus any accrued deferred interest.

The Company is required to register the 5.875% Charter convertible notes by April 21, 2005. If the 5.875% Charter convertible notes are not registered by such date, the Company will incur liquidating damages as defined in the related indenture. In conjunction with issuing the 5.875% Charter convertible notes, the Company filed a registration statement to sell up to 150 million shares of the Company’s Class A common stock pursuant to a share lending agreement. The share lending agreement is required to be registered by April 1, 2005. If the share lending agreement is not registered by such date, the Company will incur liquidating damages as defined in the related indenture.

In connection with our November 2004 sale of the $862.5 million principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009, Charter Holdco issued to Charter mirror notes in identical principal amount in exchange for the proceeds from its offering. Charter Holdco then purchased and pledged certain U.S. government securities to Charter as security for the mirror notes (which were in turn repledged by Charter to the trustee for the benefit of holders of Charter’s 5.875% convertible senior notes and which Charter expects to use to fund the first six interest payments on the notes), and agreed to lend common units to Charter, the terms of which will, to the extent practicable, mirror the terms of the shares. Charter Holdco also redeemed the remaining $588 million principal amount of the mirror notes in respect of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 concurrently with its December 23, 2004 redemption of its 5.75% convertible senior notes.

In addition, in December 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a unit lending agreement with Charter in which it agreed to lend common units to Charter that would mirror the anticipated loan of Class A common shares by Charter to Citigroup Global Markets pursuant to a share lending agreement. The members of Charter Holdco (including the entities controlled by Mr. Allen) also at that time entered into a letter agreement providing, among other things, that for purposes of the allocation provisions of the Limited Liability Company Agreement of Charter Holdco, the mirror units be treated as disregarded and not outstanding until such time (and except to the extent) that, under Charter’s share lending agreement, Charter treats the loaned shares in a manner that assumes they will neither be returned by Charter by the borrower nor otherwise be acquired by Charter in lieu of such a return.

March 1999 Charter Holdings Notes. The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Communications Capital Corporation (“Charter Capital”). The March 1999 8.250% Charter Holdings notes mature on April 1, 2007, and as of December 31, 2004, there was $451 million in total principal amount outstanding. The March 1999 8.625% Charter Holdings notes mature on April 1, 2009 and as of December 31, 2004, there was $1.2 billion in total principal

amount outstanding. The March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes mature on April 1, 2011 and as of December 31, 2004, the total principal amount outstanding and accreted value was $1.1 billion. Cash interest on the March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes began to accrue on April 1, 2004.

The March 1999 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the March 1999 8.250% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity on April 1, 2007. On or after April 1, 2004, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the March 1999 8.625% Charter Holdings notes and the March 1999 9.920% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal amount of March 1999 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after April 1, 2007.

The indentures governing the March 1999 Charter Holdings notes contain restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by Charter Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries. Substantially all of Charter Holdings’ direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

January 2000 Charter Holdings Notes. The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. The January 2000 10.00% Charter Holdings notes mature on April 1, 2009, and as of December 31, 2004, there was $640 million in total principal amount of these notes outstanding. The January 2000 10.25% Charter Holdings notes mature on January 15, 2010 and as of December 31, 2004, there was $318 million in total principal amount of these notes outstanding. The January 2000 11.75% Charter Holdings notes mature on January 15, 2010 and as of December 31, 2004, the total principal amount outstanding was $450 million and the total accreted value of these notes was approximately $448 million. Cash interest on the January 2000 11.75% Charter Holdings notes began to accrue on January 15, 2005.

The January 2000 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

January 2001 Charter Holdings Notes. The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. The January 2001 10.750% Charter Holdings notes mature on October 1, 2009, and as of December 31, 2004, there was $874 million in total principal amount of these notes outstanding. The January 2001 11.125% Charter Holdings notes mature on January 15, 2011 and as of December 31, 2004, there was $500 million in total principal amount outstanding. The January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes mature on January 15, 2011 with a total principal amount at maturity of $675 million. As of December 31, 2004, the total accreted value of these 13.500% notes was approximately $589 million. Cash interest on the January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to January 15, 2006.

The January 2001 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with all other current and future unsubordinated obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Charter Holdings and Charter Capital will not have the right to redeem the January 2001 10.750% Charter Holdings notes prior to their maturity date on October 1, 2009. On or after January 15, 2006, Charter Holdings and Charter Capital may redeem some or all of the January 2001 11.125% Charter Holdings notes and the January 2001 13.500% Charter Holdings notes at any time, in each case, at a premium. The optional redemption price declines to 100% of the principal amount of the January 2001 Charter Holdings notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, for redemption on or after January 15, 2009.

May 2001 Charter Holdings Notes. The May 2001 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. The May 2001 9.625% Charter Holdings notes mature on November 15, 2009, and as of December 31, 2004, combined with the January 2002 additional bond issue, there was $640 million in total principal amount outstanding. The May 2001 10.000% Charter Holdings notes mature on May 15, 2011 and as of December 31, 2004, combined with the January 2002 additional bond issue, there was $710 million in total principal amount outstanding. The May 2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes mature on May 15, 2011 and as of December 31, 2004, the total principal amount outstanding was $939 million and the total accreted value of the 11.750% notes was approximately $803 million. Cash interest on the May 2001 11.750% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to May 15, 2006.

subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

The indentures governing the May 2001 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999, January 2000 and January 2001 Charter Holdings notes.

January 2002 Charter Holdings Notes. The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes consist of $330 million in total principal amount at maturity of 12.125% senior discount notes due 2012.

The January 2002 12.125% senior discount notes mature on January 15, 2012, and as of December 31, 2004, the total principal amount outstanding was $330 million and the total accreted value of these notes was approximately $259 million. Cash interest on the January 2002 12.125% Charter Holdings notes will not accrue prior to January 15, 2007.

The January 2002 Charter Holdings notes are senior debt obligations of Charter Holdings and Charter Capital. They rank equally with the current and future unsecured and unsubordinated debt of Charter Holdings. They are structurally subordinated to the obligations of Charter Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the CCH II notes, the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

The Charter Holdings 12.125% senior discount notes are redeemable at the option of the issuers at amounts decreasing from 106.063% to 100% of accreted value beginning January 15, 2007.

The indentures governing the January 2002 Charter Holdings notes contain substantially identical events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants as those contained in the indentures governing the March 1999, January 2000, January 2001 and May 2001 Charter Holdings notes.

CCH II Notes. In September 2003, CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. jointly issued $1.6 billion total principal amount of 10.25% senior notes due 2010. The CCH II notes are general unsecured obligations of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp. The CCH II notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of subsidiaries of CCH II, including the CCO Holdings notes, the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Interest on the CCH II notes accrues at 10.25% per annum and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each March 15 and September 15, commencing on March 15, 2004.

The indenture governing the CCH II notes contains restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by CCH II and its restricted subsidiaries. Substantially all of CCH II’s direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

In November 2003, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. jointly issued $500 million total principal amount of 8 3/4% senior notes due 2013. The CCO Holdings notes are general unsecured obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. They rank equally with all other current or future unsubordinated obligations of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. The CCO Holdings notes are structurally subordinated to all obligations of CCO Holdings’ subsidiaries, including the Renaissance notes, the CC V Holdings notes, the Charter Operating credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes.

Interest on the CCO Holdings senior notes accrues at 8 3/4% per year and is payable semi-annually in arrears on each May 15 and November 15.

In December 2004, CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. jointly issued $550 million total principal amount of senior floating rate notes due 2010.

At any time prior to December 15, 2006, the issuers of the senior floating rate notes may redeem up to 35% of the notes in an amount not to exceed the amount of proceeds of one or more public equity offerings at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus a premium equal to the interest rate per annum applicable to the notes on the date notice of redemption is given, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, provided that at least 65% of the original aggregate principal amount of the notes issued remains outstanding after the redemption.

The indentures governing the CCO Holdings senior notes contain restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by CCO Holdings and its restricted subsidiaries. Substantially all of CCO Holdings’ direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

Charter Operating Notes. On April 27, 2004, Charter Operating and Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp. jointly issued $1.1 billion of 8% senior second-lien notes due 2012 and $400 million of 8 3/8% senior second-lien notes due 2014, for total gross proceeds of $1.5 billion. Interest on the Charter Operating notes is payable semi-annually in arrears on each April 30 and October 30, commencing on October 30, 2004.

The Charter Operating notes were sold in a private transaction that was not subject to the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. The Charter Operating notes are not expected to have the benefit of any exchange or other registration rights, except in specified limited circumstances. On the issue date of the Charter Operating notes, because of restrictions contained in the Charter Holdings indentures, there were no Charter Operating note guarantees, even though Charter Operating’s immediate parent, CCO Holdings, and certain of the Company’s subsidiaries were obligors and/or guarantors under the Charter Operating credit facilities. Upon the occurrence of the guarantee and pledge date (generally, the fifth business day after the Charter Holdings leverage ratio is certified to be below 8.75 to 1.0), CCO Holdings and those subsidiaries of Charter Operating that are then guarantors of, or otherwise obligors with respect to, indebtedness under the Charter Operating credit facilities and related obligations will be required to guarantee the Charter Operating notes. The note guarantee of each such guarantor will be:


	•	a senior obligation of such guarantor;

	•	structurally senior to the outstanding senior notes of CCO Holdings and CCO Holdings Capital Corp. (except in the case of CCO Holdings’ note guarantee, which ranks equally with such senior notes), the outstanding senior notes of CCH II and CCH II Capital Corp., the outstanding senior notes and senior discount notes of Charter Holdings and the outstanding convertible senior notes of Charter (but subject to provisions in the Charter Operating indenture that permit interest and, subject to meeting the 4.25 to 1.0 leverage ratio test, principal payments to be made thereon); and

	•	senior in right of payment to any future subordinated indebtedness of such guarantor.

As a result of the above leverage ratio test being met, CCO Holdings and certain of its subsidiaries provided the additional guarantees described above during the first quarter of 2005.

The indenture governing the Charter Operating senior notes contains restrictive covenants that limit certain transactions or activities by Charter Operating and its restricted subsidiaries. Substantially all of Charter Operating’s direct and indirect subsidiaries are currently restricted subsidiaries.

Renaissance Notes. In connection with the acquisition of Renaissance in April 1999, the Company assumed $163 million principal amount at maturity of 10.000% senior discount notes due 2008 of which $49 million was repurchased in May 1999. The Renaissance notes did not require the payment of interest until April 15, 2003. From and after April 15, 2003, the Renaissance notes bear interest, payable semi-annually, on April 15 and October 15, commencing on October 15, 2003. The Renaissance notes are due on April 15, 2008.

CC V Holdings Notes. Charter Holdco acquired CC V Holdings in November 1999 and assumed CC V Holdings’ outstanding 11.875% senior discount notes due 2008 with an accreted value of $113 million as of December 31, 2003. Commencing December 1, 2003, cash interest on the CC V Holdings 11.875% notes will be payable semi-annually on June 1 and December 1 of each year. In February 2005, these notes were called with an anticipated redemption date of March 14, 2005.

High-Yield Restrictive Covenants; Limitation on Indebtedness. The indentures governing the notes of the Company’s subsidiaries contain certain covenants that restrict the ability of Charter Holdings, Charter Capital, CCH II, CCH II Capital Corp., CCO Holdings, CCO Holdings Capital Corp., Charter Operating, Charter Communications Operating Capital Corp., the CC V Holdings notes issuers, Renaissance Media Group, and all of their restricted subsidiaries to:


	•	incur additional debt;

	•	pay dividends on equity or repurchase equity;

	•	make investments;

	•	sell all or substantially all of their assets or merge with or into other companies;

	•	sell assets;

	•	enter into sale-leasebacks;

	•	in the case of restricted subsidiaries, create or permit to exist dividend or payment restrictions with respect to the bond issuers, guarantee their parent companies debt, or issue specified equity interests;

	•	engage in certain transactions with affiliates; and

	•	grant liens.

Charter Operating Credit Facilities. In April 2004, Charter Operating amended and restated its $5.1 billion credit facilities, among other things, to defer maturities and increase availability under those

facilities to approximately $6.5 billion, consisting of a $1.5 billion revolving credit facility with a maturity date in 2010; a $2.0 billion Term A loan facility of which 12.5% matures in 2007, 30% matures in 2008, 37.5% matures in 2009 and 20% matures in 2010; and a $3.0 billion Term B loan facility which is repayable in 27 equal quarterly installments aggregating in each loan year to 1% of the original amount of the Term B facility, with the remaining balance due at final maturity in 2011. Charter Operating used the additional borrowings under the amended and restated credit facilities, together with proceeds from the sale of the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes to refinance the credit facilities of its subsidiaries, CC VI Operating, Falcon Cable, and CC VIII Operating,, all in concurrent transactions. In addition, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in place of the banks under those subsidiaries’ credit facilities.

Amounts outstanding under the Charter Operating credit facilities bear interest, at Charter Operating’s election, at a base rate or the Eurodollar rate (2.07% to 2.28% as of December 31, 2004), as defined, plus a margin for Eurodollar loans of up to 3.00% for the Term A facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 3.25% for the Term B facility, and for base rate loans of up to 2.00% for the Term A facility and revolving credit facility, and up to 2.25% for the Term B facility. A quarterly commitment fee of up to .75% is payable on the average daily unborrowed balance of the revolving credit facilities.

The obligations of Charter’s subsidiaries under the Charter Operating credit facilities (the “Obligations”) are guaranteed by Charter Operatings’ immediate parent company, CCO Holdings, and the subsidiaries of Charter Operating, except for immaterial subsidiaries and subsidiaries precluded from guaranteeing by reason of the provisions of other indebtedness to which they are subject (the “non-guarantor subsidiaries”, primarily Renaissance and CC V Holdings and their subsidiaries). The Obligations are also secured by (i) a lien on all of the assets of Charter Operating and its subsidiaries (other than assets of the non-guarantor subsidiaries), to the extent such lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement, and (ii) by a pledge by CCO Holdings of the equity interests owned by it in Charter Operating or any of Charter Operating’s subsidiaries, as well as intercompany obligations owing to it by any of such entities. Upon the Charter Holdings Leverage Ratio (as defined in the indenture governing the Charter Holdings senior notes and senior discount notes) being under 8.75 to 1.0, the Charter Operating credit facilities require that the 11.875% notes due 2008 issued by CC V Holdings, LLC be redeemed. Because such Leverage Ratio was determined to be under 8.75 to 1.0 in February 2005, CC V Holdings has called for redemption of such notes with an anticipated redemption date of March 14, 2005. Following such redemption and provided the Leverage Ratio of Charter Holdings remains under 8.75 to 1.0, CC V Holdings and its subsidiaries (other than non-guarantor subsidiaries) will guarantee the Obligations and grant a lien on all of their assets as to which a lien can be perfected under the Uniform Commercial Code by the filing of a financing statement.

The Charter Operating credit facilities were amended and restated previously as of June 19, 2003 to allow for the insertion of intermediate holding companies between Charter Holdings and Charter Operating. In exchange for the lenders’ consent to the organizational restructuring, Charter Operating’s pricing increased by 50 basis points across all levels in the pricing grid then in effect under the Charter Operating credit facilities.

Amounts under the Charter Operating credit facilities, as amended in 2003, bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 3.0% for Eurodollar loans (3.15% to 3.92% as of December 31, 2003) and 2.0% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of between 0.25% and 0.375% per annum was payable on the unborrowed balance of the revolving credit facilities.

As of December 31, 2004, outstanding borrowings under the Charter Operating credit facilities were approximately $5.5 billion and the unused total potential availability was $804 million.

CC VI Operating Credit Facilities. As discussed above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in place of the banks for the CC VI Operating Credit Facilities.

Prior to April 2004, amounts under the CC VI Operating credit facilities bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.5% for Eurodollar loans (2.40% to 3.66% as of December 31, 2003) and 1.5% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of 0.25% per year was payable on the unborrowed balance of the Term A facility and the revolving facility.

Falcon Cable Credit Facilities. As discussed above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in place of the banks for the Falcon Cable Credit Facilities.

Prior to April 2004, amounts under the Falcon Cable credit facilities bore interest at the Eurodollar rate or the base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.25% for Eurodollar loans (2.40% to 3.42% as of December 31, 2003) and up to 1.25% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of between 0.25% and 0.375% per year was payable on the unborrowed balance of the revolving facilities.

CC VIII Operating Credit Facilities. As discussed above, in April 2004, Charter Operating was substituted as the lender in place of the banks for the CC VIII Operating Credit Facilities.

Prior to April 2004, amounts under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities bear interest at the Eurodollar rate or the base rate, each as defined, plus a margin of up to 2.50% for Eurodollar loans (2.15% to 3.66% as of December 31, 2003) and up to 1.50% for base rate loans. A quarterly commitment fee of 0.25% was payable on the unborrowed balance of the revolving credit facilities.

Charter Operating Credit Facilities Restrictive Covenants. The Charter Operating credit facilities contain representations and warranties, affirmative and negative covenants similar to those described above with respect to the indentures governing the Company’s notes, information requirements, events of default and financial covenants. The financial covenants, as defined, measure performance against standards set for leverage, debt service coverage, and operating cash flow coverage of cash interest expense on a quarterly basis or as applicable. Additionally, the credit facilities contain provisions requiring mandatory loan prepayments under specific circumstances, including when significant amounts of assets are sold and the proceeds are not promptly reinvested in assets useful in the business of the borrower within a specified period. The Charter Operating credit facilities also provide that in the event that any indebtedness of CCO Holdings remains outstanding on the date, which is six months prior to the scheduled final maturity, the term loans under the Charter Operating credit facilities will mature and the revolving credit facilities will terminate on such date. The events of default under the Charter Operating credit facilities include, among other things:


	•	the failure to make payments when due or within the applicable grace period,

	•	the failure to comply with specified covenants, including but not limited to a covenant to deliver audited financial statements with an unqualified opinion from the Company’s independent auditors,

	•	the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that cause or permit the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by CCO Holdings, Charter Operating or Charter Operating’s subsidiaries in amounts in excess of $50 million in aggregate principal amount,

	•	the failure to pay or the occurrence of events that result in the acceleration of other indebtedness owing by certain of CCO Holdings’ direct and indirect parent companies in amounts in excess of $200 million in aggregate principal amount,


	•	Paul Allen and/or certain of his family members and/or their exclusively owned entities (collectively, the “Paul Allen Group”) ceasing to have the power, directly or indirectly, to vote at least 35% of the ordinary voting power of Charter Operating,

	•	the consummation of any transaction resulting in any person or group (other than the Paul Allen Group) having power, directly or indirectly, to vote more than 35% of the ordinary voting power of Charter Operating, unless the Paul Allen Group holds a greater share of ordinary voting power of Charter Operating,

	•	certain of Charter Operating’s indirect or direct parent companies having indebtedness in excess of $500 million aggregate principal amount which remains undefeased three months prior to the final maturity of such indebtedness, and

	•	Charter Operating ceasing to be a wholly-owned direct subsidiary of CCO Holdings, except in certain very limited circumstances.

In the event of a default under the Company’s subsidiaries’ credit facilities or notes, the subsidiaries’ creditors could elect to declare all amounts borrowed, together with accrued and unpaid interest and other fees, to be due and payable. In such event, the subsidiaries’ credit facilities and indentures would not permit the Company’s subsidiaries to distribute funds to Charter Holdco or Charter to pay interest or principal on Charter’s notes. In addition, the lenders under the Company’s credit facilities could foreclose on their collateral, which includes equity interests in the Company’s subsidiaries, and exercise other rights of secured creditors. In any such case, the Company might not be able to repay or make any payments on its notes. Additionally, an acceleration or payment default under Charter Operating’s credit facilities would cause a cross-default in the indentures governing the Charter Holdings notes, CCH II notes, CCO Holdings notes, Charter Operating notes and Charter’s convertible senior notes and would trigger the cross-default provision of the Charter Operating Credit Agreement. Any default under any of the subsidiaries’ credit facilities or notes might adversely affect the holders of Charter’s notes and the Company’s growth, financial condition and results of operations and could force the Company to examine all options, including seeking the protection of the bankruptcy laws.

Based upon outstanding indebtedness as of December 31, 2004, the amortization of term loans, scheduled reductions in available borrowings of the revolving credit facilities, and the maturity dates for all senior and subordinated notes and debentures, total future principal payments on the total borrowings under all debt agreements as of December 31, 2004, are as follows:

For the amounts of debt scheduled to mature during 2005, it is management’s intent to fund the repayments from borrowings on the Company’s revolving credit facility. The accompanying consolidated balance sheet reflects this intent by presenting all debt balances as long-term while the table above reflects actual debt maturities as of the stated date.

Charter is a holding company whose primary asset is a controlling equity interest in Charter Holdco, the indirect owner of the Company’s cable systems, and $990 million and $774 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, of mirror notes which are payable by Charter Holdco to Charter and have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes. Minority interest on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets represents the ownership percentage of Charter Holdco not owned by Charter, or 52.8% of total members’ equity of Charter Holdco, plus $656 million and $694 million of preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC (“CC VIII”), an indirect subsidiary of Charter Holdco, as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 respectively. As more fully described in Note 22, this preferred interest arises from the approximately $630 million of preferred membership units issued by CC VIII in connection with an acquisition in February 2000. As of December 31, 2003, minority interest also includes $25 million of preferred interest in Charter Helicon, LLC, another indirect subsidiary of Charter Holdco, issued in connection with the 1999 Helicon acquisition. As of December 31, 2004, the preferred interest in Charter Helicon, LLC was reclassified to other long-term liabilities.

Members’ equity of Charter Holdco was ($4.4) billion, ($57) million and $662 million as of December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Gains and losses arising from the issuance by Charter Holdco of its membership units are recorded as capital transactions, thereby increasing or decreasing shareholders’ equity and decreasing or increasing minority interest on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Minority interest was 52.8% as of December 31, 2004 and 53.5% as of December 31, 2003 and 2002. Minority interest includes the proportionate share of changes in fair value of interest rate risk derivative agreements. Such amounts are temporary as they are contractually scheduled to reverse over the life of the underlying instrument. Additionally, reported losses allocated to minority interest on the consolidated statement of operations are limited to the extent of any remaining minority interest on the balance sheet related to Charter Holdco. Because minority interest in Charter Holdco was substantially eliminated at December 31, 2003, beginning in 2004, the Company began to absorb substantially all losses before income taxes that otherwise would have been allocated to minority interest. This resulted in an additional $2.4 billion of net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004. Subject to any changes in Charter Holdco’s capital structure, future losses will be substantially absorbed by Charter. Changes to minority interest consist of the following for the periods presented:

On August 31, 2001, in connection with its acquisition of Cable USA, Inc. and certain cable system assets from affiliates of Cable USA, Inc., the Company issued 505,664 shares of Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock (the Preferred Stock) valued at and with a liquidation preference of $51 million. Holders of the Preferred Stock have no voting rights but are entitled to receive cumulative cash dividends at an annual rate of 5.75%, payable quarterly. If for any reason Charter fails to pay the dividends on the Preferred Stock on a timely basis, the dividend rate on each share increases to an annual rate of 7.75% until the payment is made. The Preferred Stock is redeemable by Charter at its option on or after August 31, 2004 and must be redeemed by Charter at any time upon a change of control, or if not previously redeemed or converted, on August 31, 2008. The Preferred Stock is convertible, in whole or in part, at the option of the holders from April 1, 2002 through August 31, 2008, into shares of common stock at an initial conversion rate equal to a conversion price of $24.71 per share of common stock, subject to certain customary adjustments. The redemption price per share of Preferred Stock is the Liquidation Preference of $100, subject to certain customary adjustments. In the first quarter of 2003, the Company issued 39,595 additional shares of preferred stock valued at and with a liquidation preference of $4 million.

The Company’s Class A common stock and Class B common stock are identical except with respect to certain voting, transfer and conversion rights. Holders of Class A common stock are entitled to one vote per share and holder of Class B common stock is entitled to ten votes for each share of Class B common stock held and for each Charter Holdco membership unit held. The Class B common stock is subject to significant transfer restrictions and is convertible on a share for share basis into Class A common stock at the option of the holder. Charter Holdco membership units are exchangeable on a one-for-one basis for shares of Class A common stock.

Certain marketable equity securities are classified as available-for-sale and reported at market value with unrealized gains and losses recorded as accumulated other comprehensive loss on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Additionally, the Company reports changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations, that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, in accumulated other comprehensive loss, after giving effect to the minority interest share of such gains and losses. Comprehensive loss for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $4.3 billion, $219 million and $2.5 billion, respectively.

The Company does not hold or issue derivative instruments for trading purposes. The Company does, however, have certain interest rate derivative instruments that have been designated as cash flow hedging instruments. Such instruments effectively convert variable interest payments on certain debt instruments into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges, SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to offset related results on hedged items in the consolidated statement of operations. The Company has formally documented, designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that receive hedge accounting. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $4 million and $8 million and losses of $14 million, respectively, which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations. Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness criteria SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated other comprehensive loss. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, a gain of $42 million and $48 million and losses of $65 million, respectively, related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges, was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss and minority interest. The amounts are subsequently reclassified into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affects earnings (losses).

Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management believes such instruments are closely correlated with the respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to fair value, with the impact recorded as gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $65 million, $57 million and losses of $101 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges.

As of December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company had outstanding $2.7 billion, $3.0 billion and $3.4 billion and $20 million, $520 million and $520 million, respectively, in notional amounts of interest rate swaps and collars, respectively. The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the contracts.

The Company has estimated the fair value of its financial instruments as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 using available market information or other appropriate valuation methodologies. Considerable judgment, however, is required in interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.

Accordingly, the estimates presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements are not necessarily indicative of the amounts the Company would realize in a current market exchange.

The carrying amounts of cash, receivables, payables and other current assets and liabilities approximate fair value because of the short maturity of those instruments. The Company is exposed to market price risk volatility with respect to investments in publicly traded and privately held entities.

The fair value of interest rate agreements represents the estimated amount the Company would receive or pay upon termination of the agreements. Management believes that the sellers of the interest rate agreements will be able to meet their obligations under the agreements. In addition, some of the interest rate agreements are with certain of the participating banks under the Company’s credit facilities, thereby reducing the exposure to credit loss. The Company has policies regarding the financial stability and credit standing of major counterparties. Nonperformance by the counterparties is not anticipated nor would it have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

The estimated fair value of the Company’s notes and interest rate agreements at December 31, 2004 and 2003 are based on quoted market prices, and the fair value of the credit facilities is based on dealer quotations.

A summary of the carrying value and fair value of the Company’s debt and related interest rate agreements at December 31, 2004 and 2003 is as follows:

The weighted average interest pay rate for the Company’s interest rate swap agreements was 8.07% and 7.25% at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the following for the years presented:

Components of selling expense are included in general and administrative and marketing expense.

The Company grants stock options, restricted stock and other incentive compensation pursuant to the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan of Charter (the “2001 Plan”). Prior to 2001, options were granted under the 1999 Option Plan of Charter Holdco (the “1999 Plan”).

The 1999 Plan provided for the grant of options to purchase membership units in Charter Holdco to current and prospective employees and consultants of Charter Holdco and its affiliates and current and prospective non-employee directors of Charter. Options granted generally vest over five years from the grant date, with 25% vesting 15 months after the anniversary of the grant date and ratably thereafter. Options not exercised accumulate and are exercisable, in whole or in part, in any subsequent period, but

not later than 10 years from the date of grant. Membership units received upon exercise of the options are automatically exchanged into Class A common stock of Charter on a one-for-one basis.

The 2001 Plan provides for the grant of non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalent rights, performance units and performance shares, share awards, phantom stock and/or shares of restricted stock (not to exceed 3,000,000), as each term is defined in the 2001 Plan. Employees, officers, consultants and directors of the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates are eligible to receive grants under the 2001 Plan. Options granted generally vest over four years from the grant date, with 25% vesting on the anniversary of the grant date and ratably thereafter. Generally, options expire 10 years from the grant date.

The 2001 Plan allows for the issuance of up to a total of 90,000,000 shares of Charter Class A common stock (or units convertible into Charter Class A common stock). The total shares available reflect a July 2003 amendment to the 2001 Plan approved by the board of directors and the shareholders of Charter to increase available shares by 30,000,000 shares. In 2001, any shares covered by options that terminated under the 1999 Plan were transferred to the 2001 Plan, and no new options can be granted under the 1999 Plan.

In the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, certain directors were awarded a total of 182,932 and 80,603 shares, respectively, of restricted Class A common stock of which 25,705 shares had been cancelled as of December 31, 2004. The shares vest one year from the date of grant. In December 2003 and January 2004, in connection with new employment agreements, certain officers were awarded 50,000 and 50,000 shares, respectively, of restricted Class A common stock of which 50,000 shares had been cancelled as of December 31, 2004. The shares vest annually over a four-year period beginning from the date of grant. As of December 31, 2004, deferred compensation remaining to be recognized in future period totaled $0.4 million.

A summary of the activity for the Company’s stock options, excluding granted shares of restricted Class A common stock, for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, is as follows (amounts in thousands, except per share data):

The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding and exercisable as of December 31, 2004:

On January 1, 2003, the Company adopted the fair value measurement provisions of SFAS No. 123, under which the Company recognizes compensation expense of a stock-based award to an employee over the vesting period based on the fair value of the award on the grant date. Adoption of these provisions resulted in utilizing a preferable accounting method as the consolidated financial statements present the estimated fair value of stock-based compensation in expense consistently with other forms of compensation and other expense associated with goods and services received for equity instruments. In accordance with SFAS No. 123, the fair value method will be applied only to awards granted or modified after January 1, 2003, whereas awards granted prior to such date will continue to be accounted for under APB No. 25, unless they are modified or settled in cash. The ongoing effect on consolidated results of operations or financial condition will be dependent upon future stock based compensation awards granted. The Company recorded $31 million of option compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123, the Company used the intrinsic value method prescribed by APB No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, to account for the option plans. Option compensation expense of $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, was recorded in the consolidated statements of operations since the exercise prices of certain options were less than the estimated fair values of the underlying membership interests on the date of grant.

In January 2004, the Company began an option exchange program in which the Company offered its employees the right to exchange all stock options (vested and unvested) under the 1999 Charter Communications Option Plan and 2001 Stock Incentive Plan that had an exercise price over $10 per share for shares of restricted Charter Class A common stock or, in some instances, cash. Based on a sliding exchange ratio, which varied depending on the exercise price of an employees outstanding options, if an employee would have received more than 400 shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, Charter issued that employee shares of restricted stock in the exchange. If, based on the exchange ratios, an employee would have received 400 or fewer shares of restricted stock in exchange for tendered options, Charter instead paid the employee cash in an amount equal to the number of shares the employee would have received multiplied by $5.00. The offer applied to options (vested and unvested) to purchase a total of 22,929,573 shares of Class A common stock, or approximately 48% of the Company’s 47,882,365 total options issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2003. Participation by employees was voluntary. Those members of the Company’s board of directors who were not also employees of the Company or any of its subsidiaries were not eligible to participate in the exchange offer.

In the closing of the exchange offer on February 20, 2004, the Company accepted for cancellation eligible options to purchase approximately 18,137,664 shares of its Class A common stock. In exchange,

the Company granted 1,966,686 shares of restricted stock, including 460,777 performance shares to eligible employees of the rank of senior vice president and above, and paid a total cash amount of approximately $4 million (which amount includes applicable withholding taxes) to those employees who received cash rather than shares of restricted stock. The restricted stock was granted on February 25, 2004. Employees tendered approximately 79% of the options eligible to be exchanged under the program.

In January 2004, the Compensation Committee of the board of directors of Charter approved Charter’s Long-Term Incentive Program (“LTIP”), which is a program administered under the 2001 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the LTIP, employees of Charter and its subsidiaries whose pay classifications exceed a certain level are eligible to receive stock options, and more senior level employees are eligible to receive stock options and performance shares. The stock options vest 25% on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant. The performance shares vest on the third anniversary of the grant date and shares of Charter Class A common stock are issued, conditional upon Charter’s performance against financial performance measures established by Charter’s management and approved by its board of directors as of the time of the award. Charter granted 6.9 million shares in January 2004 under this program and recognized expense of $8 million in the first three quarters of 2004. However, in the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company reversed the entire $8 million of expense based on the Company’s assessment of the probability of achieving the financial performance measures established by Charter and required to be met for the performance shares to vest.

In the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company began a workforce reduction program and consolidation of its operations from three divisions and ten regions into five operating divisions, eliminating redundant practices and streamlining its management structure. The Company has recorded special charges as a result of reducing its workforce and consolidating administrative offices in 2003 and 2004. The activity associated with this initiative is summarized in the table below.

For the year ended December 31, 2002 special charges include $4 million related to legal and other costs associated with the Company’s ongoing grand jury investigation, shareholder lawsuits and SEC investigation and $1 million associated with severance costs related to a 2001 restructuring plan. For the

year ended December 31, 2003, the severance and lease costs were offset by a $5 million settlement from the Internet service provider Excite@Home related to the conversion of high-speed data customers to Charter Pipeline service in 2001. For the year ended December 31, 2004, special charges include approximately $85 million, representing the aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and warrants to purchase Charter Class A common stock contemplated to be issued as part of a settlement of consolidated federal and state class actions and federal derivative action lawsuits and approximately $10 million of litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of a national class action suit, all of which are subject to final documentation and court approval (see Note 23). For the year ended December 31, 2004, special charges were offset by $3 million received from a third party in settlement of a dispute.

The LLC Agreement provides for certain special allocations of net tax profits and net tax losses (such net tax profits and net tax losses being determined under the applicable federal income tax rules for determining capital accounts). Pursuant to the LLC Agreement, through the end of 2003, net tax losses of Charter Holdco that would otherwise have been allocated to Charter based generally on its percentage ownership of outstanding common units were allocated instead to membership units held by Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment (the “Special Loss Allocations”) to the extent of their respective capital account balances. After 2003, pursuant to the LLC Agreement, net tax losses of Charter Holdco are to be allocated to Charter, Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment based generally on their respective percentage ownership of outstanding common units to the extent of their respective capital account balances. The LLC Agreement further provides that, beginning at the time Charter Holdco generates net tax profits, the net tax profits that would otherwise have been allocated to Charter based generally on its percentage ownership of outstanding common membership units will instead generally be allocated to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment (the “Special Profit Allocations”). The Special Profit Allocations to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment will generally continue until the cumulative amount of the Special Profit Allocations offsets the cumulative amount of the Special Loss Allocations. The amount and timing of the Special Profit Allocations are subject to the potential application of, and interaction with, the Curative Allocation Provisions described in the following paragraph. The LLC Agreement generally provides that any additional net tax profits are to be allocated among the members of Charter Holdco based generally on their respective percentage ownership of Charter Holdco common membership units.

Because the respective capital account balance of each of Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment was reduced to zero by December 31, 2002, certain net tax losses of Charter Holdco that were to be allocated for 2002, 2003, 2004 and possibly later years (subject to resolution of the issue described in Note 22) to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment instead have been and will be allocated to Charter (the “Regulatory Allocations”). The LLC Agreement further provides that, to the extent possible, the effect of the Regulatory Allocations is to be offset over time pursuant to certain curative allocation provisions (the “Curative Allocation Provisions”) so that, after certain offsetting adjustments are made, each member’s capital account balance is equal to the capital account balance such member would have had if the

Regulatory Allocations had not been part of the LLC Agreement. The cumulative amount of the actual tax losses allocated to Charter as a result of the Regulatory Allocations through the year ended December 31, 2004 is approximately $4.0 billion.

As a result of the Special Loss Allocations and the Regulatory Allocations referred to above, the cumulative amount of losses of Charter Holdco allocated to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment is in excess of the amount that would have been allocated to such entities if the losses of Charter Holdco had been allocated among its members in proportion to their respective percentage ownership of Charter Holdco common membership units. The cumulative amount of such excess losses was approximately $2.1 billion through December 31, 2003 and $1.0 billion through December 31, 2004.

In certain situations, the Special Loss Allocations, Special Profit Allocations, Regulatory Allocations and Curative Allocation Provisions described above could result in Charter paying taxes in an amount that is more or less than if Charter Holdco had allocated net tax profits and net tax losses among its members based generally on the number of common membership units owned by such members. This could occur due to differences in (i) the character of the allocated income (e.g., ordinary versus capital), (ii) the allocated amount and timing of tax depreciation and tax amortization expense due to the application of section 704(c) under the Internal Revenue Code, (iii) the potential interaction between the Special Profit Allocations and the Curative Allocation Provisions, (iv) the amount and timing of alternative minimum taxes paid by Charter, if any, (v) the apportionment of the allocated income or loss among the states in which Charter Holdco does business, and (vi) future federal and state tax laws. Further, in the event of new capital contributions to Charter Holdco, it is possible that the tax effects of the Special Profit Allocations, Special Loss Allocations, Regulatory Allocations and Curative Allocation Provisions will change significantly pursuant to the provisions of the income tax regulations or the terms of a contribution agreement with respect to such contribution. Such change could defer the actual tax benefits to be derived by Charter with respect to the net tax losses allocated to it or accelerate the actual taxable income to Charter with respect to the net tax profits allocated to it. As a result, it is possible under certain circumstances, that Charter could receive future allocations of taxable income in excess of its currently allocated tax deductions and available tax loss carryforwards. The ability to utilize net operating loss carryforwards is potentially subject to certain limitations as discussed below.

In addition, under their exchange agreement with Charter, Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment may exchange some or all of their membership units in Charter Holdco for Charter’s Class B common stock, be merged with Charter, or be acquired by Charter in a non-taxable reorganization. If such an exchange were to take place prior to the date that the Special Profit Allocation provisions had fully offset the Special Loss Allocations, Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment could elect to cause Charter Holdco to make the remaining Special Profit Allocations to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment immediately prior to the consummation of the exchange. In the event Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment choose not to make such election or to the extent such allocations are not possible, Charter would then be allocated tax profits attributable to the membership units received in such exchange pursuant to the Special Profit Allocation provisions. Mr. Allen has generally agreed to reimburse Charter for any incremental income taxes that Charter would owe as a result of such an exchange and any resulting future Special Profit Allocations to Charter. The ability of Charter to utilize net operating loss carryforwards is potentially subject to certain limitations as discussed below. If Charter were to become subject to certain limitations (whether as a result of an exchange described above or otherwise), and as a result were to owe taxes resulting from the Special Profit Allocations, then Mr. Allen may not be obligated to reimburse Charter for such income taxes.

For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company recorded deferred income tax benefits as shown below. The income tax benefits were realized through reductions in the deferred tax

liabilities related to Charter’s investment in Charter Holdco, as well as the deferred tax liabilities of certain of Charter’s indirect corporate subsidiaries. In 2003, Charter received tax loss allocations from Charter Holdco. Previously, the tax losses had been allocated to Vulcan Cable and Charter Investment in accordance with the Special Loss Allocations provided under the Charter Holdco amended and restated limited liability company agreement. The Company does not expect to recognize a similar benefit related to its investment in Charter Holdco after 2003 due to limitations on its ability to offset future tax benefits against the remaining deferred tax liabilities. However, the actual tax provision calculation in future periods will be the result of current and future temporary differences, as well as future operating results.

The Company recorded the portion of the income tax benefit associated with the adoption of EITF Topic D-108 and SFAS No. 142 as a $91 million and a $60 million reduction of the cumulative effect of accounting change on the accompanying statement of operations for the years ended December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2002, respectively.

The Company’s effective tax rate differs from that derived by applying the applicable federal income tax rate of 35%, and average state income tax rate of 5% for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as follows:

The tax effects of these temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2004 and 2003 which are included in long-term liabilities are presented below.

As of December 31, 2004, the Company has deferred tax assets of $3.5 billion, which primarily relate to financial and tax losses allocated to Charter from Charter Holdco. The deferred tax assets include $2.1 billion of tax net operating loss carryforwards (generally expiring in years 2005 through 2024) of Charter and its indirect corporate subsidiaries. Valuation allowances of $3.2 billion exist with respect to these deferred tax assets.

The change of approximately $1.9 billion in valuation allowance between the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, presented above, includes the provision for valuation allowance, the impact of the decrease in deferred tax liabilities and the impact of additional losses resulting from the cumulative effect of accounting change.

Full realization of the Company’s tax net operating losses is dependent on: (1) Charter and its indirect corporate subsidiaries’ ability to generate future taxable income and (2) the absence of certain future “ownership changes” of Charter’s common stock. An “ownership change” as defined in the applicable federal income tax rules, would place significant limitations, on an annual basis, on the use of such net operating losses to offset any future taxable income the Company may generate. Such limitations, in conjunction with the net operating loss expiration provisions, could effectively eliminate the Company’s ability to use a substantial portion of its net operating losses to offset future taxable income. Future transactions and the timing of such transactions could cause an ownership change. Such transactions include additional issuances of common stock by the Company (including but not limited the anticipated issuances of 150 million shares of common stock under the share lending agreement in conjunction with the issuance of 5.875% convertible senior notes in November 2004 or upon future conversion of Charter’s convertible senior notes), reacquisitions of the borrowed shares by Charter, or acquisitions or sales of shares by certain holders of Charter’s shares, including persons who have held, currently hold, or accumulate in the future five percent or more of Charter’s outstanding stock (including upon an exchange

by Paul Allen or his affiliates, directly or indirectly, of membership units of Charter Holdco into CCI common stock). Many of the foregoing transactions are beyond management’s control.

The total valuation allowance for deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $3.2 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively. In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will be realized. Because of the uncertainties in projecting future taxable income of Charter Holdco, valuation allowances have been established except for deferred benefits available to offset certain deferred tax liabilities.

The Company is currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 1999 and 2000. Management does not expect the results of this examination to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operation.

Charter is a holding company and its principal assets are its equity interest in Charter Holdco and certain mirror notes payable by Charter Holdco to Charter and mirror preferred units held by Charter, which have the same principal amount and terms as those of Charter’s convertible senior notes and Charter’s outstanding preferred stock. In 2004, Charter Holdco paid to Charter $49 million related to interest on the mirror notes, and Charter Holdco paid an additional $4 million related to dividends on the mirror preferred membership units. Further, during 2004 Charter Holdco issued 7,252,818 common membership units to Charter in cancellation of $30 million principal amount of mirror notes so as to mirror the issuance by Charter of Class A common stock in exchange for a like principal amount of its outstanding convertible notes.

Charter is a party to management arrangements with Charter Holdco and certain of its subsidiaries. Under these agreements, Charter provides management services for the cable systems owned or operated by its subsidiaries. The management services include such services as centralized customer billing services, data processing and related support, benefits administration and coordination of insurance coverage and self-insurance programs for medical, dental and workers’ compensation claims. Costs associated with providing these services are billed and charged directly to the Company’s operating subsidiaries and are included within operating costs in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. Such costs totaled $202 million, $210 million and $176 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. All other costs incurred on the behalf of Charter’s operating subsidiaries are considered a part of the management fee and are recorded as a component of selling, general and administrative expense, in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the management fee charged to the Company’s operating subsidiaries approximated the expenses incurred by Charter Holdco and Charter on behalf of the Company’s operating subsidiaries. The credit facilities of the Company’s operating subsidiaries prohibit payments of management fees in excess of 3.5% of revenues until repayment of the outstanding indebtedness. In the event any portion of the management fee due and payable is not paid, it is deferred by Charter and accrued as a liability of such subsidiaries. Any deferred amount of the management fee will bear interest at the rate of 10% per year, compounded annually, from the date it was due and payable until the date it is paid.

Mr. Allen, the controlling shareholder of Charter, and a number of his affiliates have interests in various entities that provide services or programming to Charter’s subsidiaries. Given the diverse nature of Mr. Allen’s investment activities and interests, and to avoid the possibility of future disputes as to potential business, Charter and Charter Holdco, under the terms of their respective organizational documents, may not, and may not allow their subsidiaries to engage in any business transaction outside the cable transmission business except for certain existing approved investments. Should Charter or Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries wish to pursue, or allow their subsidiaries to pursue, a business transaction outside of this scope, it must first offer Mr. Allen the opportunity to pursue the particular business transaction. If he decides not to pursue the business transaction and consents to Charter or its subsidiaries engaging in the business transaction, they will be able to do so. The cable transmission business means the business of transmitting video, audio, including telephony, and data over cable systems owned, operated or managed by Charter, Charter Holdco or any of their subsidiaries from time to time.

Mr. Allen or his affiliates own or have owned equity interests or warrants to purchase equity interests in various entities with which the Company does business or which provides it with products, services or programming. Among these entities are TechTV L.L.C. (“TechTV”), Oxygen Media Corporation (“Oxygen Media”), Digeo, Inc., Click2learn, Inc., Trail Blazer Inc., Action Sports Cable Network (“Action Sports”) and Microsoft Corporation. In addition, Mr. Allen and William Savoy, a former Charter director, were directors of USA Networks, Inc. (“USA Networks”), who operates the USA Network, The Sci-Fi Channel, Trio, World News International and Home Shopping Network, owning approximately 5% and less than 1%, respectively, of the common stock of USA Networks. In 2002, Mr. Allen and Mr. Savoy sold their common stock and are no longer directors of the USA Network. In May 2004, TechTV was sold to an unrelated third party. Mr. Allen owns 100% of the equity of Vulcan Ventures Incorporated (“Vulcan Ventures”) and Vulcan Inc. and is the president of Vulcan Ventures. Ms. Jo Allen Patton is a director and the President and Chief Executive Officer of Vulcan Inc. and is a director and Vice President of Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Lance Conn is Executive Vice President of Vulcan Inc. and Vulcan Ventures. Mr. Savoy was a vice president and a director of Vulcan Ventures until his resignation in September 2003 and he resigned as a director of Charter in April 2004. The various cable, media, Internet and telephony companies in which Mr. Allen has invested may mutually benefit one another. The Company can give no assurance, nor should you expect, that any of these business relationships will be successful, that the Company will realize any benefits from these relationships or that the Company will enter into any business relationships in the future with Mr. Allen’s affiliated companies.

Mr. Allen and his affiliates have made, and in the future likely will make, numerous investments outside of the Company and its business. The Company cannot assure that, in the event that the Company or any of its subsidiaries enter into transactions in the future with any affiliate of Mr. Allen, such transactions will be on terms as favorable to the Company as terms it might have obtained from an unrelated third party. Also, conflicts could arise with respect to the allocation of corporate opportunities between the Company and Mr. Allen and his affiliates. The Company has not instituted any formal plan or arrangement to address potential conflicts of interest.

High Speed Access Corp. (“High Speed Access”) was a provider of high-speed Internet access services over cable modems. During the period from 1997 to 2000, certain Charter entities entered into Internet-access related service agreements, and both Vulcan Ventures, an entity owned by Mr. Allen, and Charter Holdco made equity investments in High Speed Access.

On February 28, 2002, Charter’s subsidiary, CC Systems, purchased from High Speed Access the contracts and associated assets, and assumed related liabilities, that served the Company’s customers, including a customer contact center, network operations center and provisioning software. Immediately prior to the asset purchase, Vulcan Ventures beneficially owned approximately 37%, and the Company

beneficially owned approximately 13%, of the common stock of High Speed Access (including the shares of common stock which could be acquired upon conversion of the Series D preferred stock, and upon exercise of the warrants owned by Charter Holdco). Following the consummation of the asset purchase, neither the Company nor Vulcan Ventures beneficially owned any securities of, or were otherwise affiliated with, High Speed Access.

The Company receives or will receive programming for broadcast via its cable systems from TechTV (now G4), USA Networks, Oxygen Media, Trail Blazers Inc. and Action Sports. The Company pays a fee for the programming service generally based on the number of customers receiving the service. Such fees for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were each less than 1% of total operating expenses with the exception of USA Networks which was 2%, 2% and 2% of total operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. In addition, the Company receives commissions from USA Networks for home shopping sales generated by its customers. Such revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were less than 1% of total revenues. On November 5, 2002, Action Sports announced that it was discontinuing its business. The Company believes that the failure of Action Sports will not materially affect the Company’s business or results of operations.

Tech TV. The Company receives from TechTV programming for distribution via its cable system pursuant to an affiliation agreement. The affiliation agreement provides, among other things, that TechTV must offer Charter certain terms and conditions that are no less favorable in the affiliation agreement than are given to any other distributor that serves the same number of or fewer TechTV viewing customers. Additionally, pursuant to the affiliation agreement, the Company was entitled to incentive payments for channel launches through December 31, 2003.

In March 2004, Charter Holdco entered into agreements with Vulcan Programming and TechTV, which provide for (i) Charter Holdco and TechTV to amend the affiliation agreement which, among other things, revises the description of the TechTV network content, provides for Charter Holdco to waive certain claims against TechTV relating to alleged breaches of the affiliation agreement and provides for TechTV to make payment of outstanding launch receivables due to Charter Holdco under the affiliation agreement, (ii) Vulcan Programming to pay approximately $10 million and purchase over a 24-month period, at fair market rates, $2 million of advertising time across various cable networks on Charter cable systems in consideration of the agreements, obligations, releases and waivers under the agreements and in settlement of the aforementioned claims and (iii) TechTV to be a provider of content relating to technology and video gaming for Charter’s interactive television platforms through December 31, 2006 (exclusive for the first year). For the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company recognized approximately $5 million of the Vulcan Programming payment as an offset to programming expense and paid approximately $2 million to Tech TV under the affiliation agreement.

Oxygen. Concurrently with the execution of a carriage agreement, Charter Holdco entered into an equity issuance agreement pursuant to which Oxygen Media LLC’s (“Oxygen”) parent company, Oxygen Media Corporation (“Oxygen Media”), granted a subsidiary of Charter Holdco a warrant to purchase 2.4 million shares of common stock of Oxygen Media for an exercise price of $22.00 per share. In February 2005, the warrant expired unexercised. Charter Holdco was also to receive unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock with a guaranteed fair market value on the date of issuance of $34 million, on or prior to February 2, 2005 with the exact date to be determined by Oxygen Media, but this commitment was later revised as discussed below.

The Company recognizes the guaranteed value of the investment over the life of the carriage agreement as a reduction of programming expense. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company recorded approximately $13 million, $9 million, and $6 million, respectively, as a

reduction of programming expense. The carrying value of the Company’s investment in Oxygen was approximately $32 million and $19 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen entered into agreements that amended and renewed the carriage agreement. The amendment to the carriage agreement (a) revises the number of the Company’s customers to which Oxygen programming must be carried and for which the Company must pay, (b) releases Charter Holdco from any claims related to the failure to achieve distribution benchmarks under the carriage agreement, (c) requires Oxygen to make payment on outstanding receivables for marketing support fees due to the Company under the affiliation agreement; and (d) requires that Oxygen provide its programming content to the Company on economic terms no less favorable than Oxygen provides to any other cable or satellite operator having fewer subscribers than the Company. The renewal of the carriage agreement (a) extends the period that the Company will carry Oxygen programming to its customers through January 31, 2008, and (b) requires license fees to be paid based on customers receiving Oxygen programming, rather than for specific customer benchmarks.

In August 2004, Charter Holdco and Oxygen also amended the equity issuance agreement to provide for the issuance of 1 million shares of Oxygen Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference of $33.10 per share plus accrued dividends to Charter Holdco on February 1, 2005 in place of the $34 million of unregistered shares of Oxygen Media common stock. Oxygen Media will deliver these shares in March 2005. The preferred stock is convertible into common stock after December 31, 2007 at a conversion ratio, the numerator of which is the liquidation preference and the denominator which is the fair market value per share of Oxygen Media common stock on the conversion date.

Digeo, Inc. In March 2001, Charter Ventures and Vulcan Ventures Incorporated formed DBroadband Holdings, LLC for the sole purpose of purchasing equity interests in Digeo. In connection with the execution of the broadband carriage agreement, DBroadband Holdings, LLC purchased an equity interest in Digeo funded by contributions from Vulcan Ventures Incorporated. The equity interest is subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to the amount contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. After Vulcan Ventures recovers its amount contributed and any cumulative loss allocations, Charter Ventures has a 100% profit interest in DBroadband Holdings, LLC. Charter Ventures is not required to make any capital contributions, including capital calls, and may require Vulcan Ventures, through January 24, 2004, to make certain additional contributions through DBroadband Holdings, LLC to acquire additional equity in Digeo as necessary to maintain Charter Ventures’ pro rata interest in Digeo in the event of certain future Digeo equity financings by the founders of Digeo. These additional equity interests are also subject to a priority return of capital to Vulcan Ventures up to amounts contributed by Vulcan Ventures on Charter Ventures’ behalf. DBroadband Holdings, LLC is therefore not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to an amended version of this arrangement, in 2003, Vulcan Ventures contributed a total of $29 million to Digeo, $7 million of which was contributed on Charter Ventures’ behalf, subject to Vulcan Ventures’ aforementioned priority return. Since the formation of DBroadband Holdings, LLC, Vulcan Ventures has contributed approximately $56 million on Charter Ventures’ behalf.

dated August 4, 2004, from 20 to 30 pursuant to a letter agreement dated September 28, 2004 and from 30 to 50 headends by a letter agreement in February 2005. The license granted for each unit deployed under the agreement is valid for five years. In addition, Charter will pay certain other fees including a per-headend license fee and maintenance fees. Maximum license and maintenance fees during the term of the agreement are expected to be approximately $7 million. The agreement provides that Charter is entitled to receive contract terms, considered on the whole, and license fees, considered apart from other contract terms, no less favorable than those accorded to any other Digeo customer. Charter paid $474,400 in license and maintenance fees in 2004.

In April 2004, the Company launched DVR service (using units containing the Digeo software) in its Rochester, Minnesota market using a broadband media center that is an integrated set-top terminal with a cable converter, DVR hard drive and connectivity to other consumer electronics devices (such as stereos, MP3 players, and digital cameras).

In May 2004, Charter Holdco entered into a binding term sheet with Digeo Interactive for the development, testing and purchase of 70,000 Digeo PowerKey DVR units. The term sheet provided that the parties would proceed in good faith to negotiate, prior to year-end 2004, definitive agreements for the development, testing and purchase of the DVR units and that the parties would enter into a license agreement for Digeo’s proprietary software on terms substantially similar to the terms of the license agreement described above. In November 2004, Charter Holdco and Digeo Interactive executed the license agreement and in December 2004, the parties executed the purchase agreement, each on terms substantially similar to the binding term sheet. Product development and testing is continuing. Total purchase price and license and maintenance fees during the term of the definitive agreements are expected to be approximately $41 million. The definitive agreements are terminable at no penalty to Charter in certain circumstances.

A wholly owned subsidiary of Digeo, Digeo Interactive, provides interactive channel (i-channel) service to Charter on a month-to-month basis. In the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, Charter paid Digeo Interactive $3 million, $4 million and $3 million, respectively, for customized development of i-channels and an interactive “toolkit” to enable Charter to develop interactive local content.

On January 10, 2003, the Company signed an agreement to carry two around-the-clock, high-definition networks, HDNet and HDNet Movies. HDNet Movies delivers a commercial-free schedule of full-length feature films converted from 35mm to high-definition, including titles from an extensive library of Warner Bros. films. HDNet Movies will feature a mix of theatrical releases, made-for-TV movies, independent films and shorts. The HDNet channel features a variety of HDTV programming, including live sports, sitcoms, dramas, action series, documentaries, travel programs, music concerts and shows, special events, and news features including HDNet World Report. HDNet also offers a selection of classic and recent television series. The Company paid HDNet and HDNet Movies approximately $0.6 million in 2004. The Company believes that entities controlled by Mr. Cuban owned approximately 81% of HDNet as of December 31, 2004. As of December 31, 2004, the Company believes that Mark Cuban, co-founder and president of HDNet, owned approximately 6.2% of the total common equity in Charter based on a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on May 21, 2003.

Certain related parties, including members of the board of directors and officers, hold interests in the Company’s senior convertible debt and senior notes and discount notes of the Company’s subsidiary of approximately $59.6 million of face value at December 31, 2004.

As part of the acquisition of the cable systems owned by Bresnan Communications Company Limited Partnership in February 2000, CC VIII, LLC, Charter’s indirect limited liability company subsidiary,

issued, after adjustments, 24,273,943 Class A preferred membership units (collectively, the “CC VIII interest”) with a value and an initial capital account of approximately $630 million to certain sellers affiliated with AT&T Broadband, subsequently owned by Comcast Corporation (the “Comcast sellers”). While held by the Comcast sellers, the CC VIII interest was entitled to a 2% priority return on its initial capital account and such priority return was entitled to preferential distributions from available cash and upon liquidation of CC VIII. While held by the Comcast sellers, the CC VIII interest generally did not share in the profits and losses of CC VIII. Mr. Allen granted the Comcast sellers the right to sell to him the CC VIII interest for approximately $630 million plus 4.5% interest annually from February 2000 (the “Comcast put right”). In April 2002, the Comcast sellers exercised the Comcast put right in full, and this transaction was consummated on June 6, 2003. Accordingly, Mr. Allen has become the holder of the CC VIII interest, indirectly through an affiliate. Consequently, subject to the matters referenced in the next paragraph, Mr. Allen generally thereafter will be allocated his pro rata share (based on number of membership interests outstanding) of profits or losses of CC VIII. In the event of a liquidation of CC VIII, Mr. Allen would be entitled to a priority distribution with respect to the 2% priority return (which will continue to accrete). Any remaining distributions in liquidation would be distributed to CC V Holdings, LLC and Mr. Allen in proportion to CC V Holdings, LLC’s capital account and Mr. Allen’s capital account (which will equal the initial capital account of the Comcast sellers of approximately $630 million, increased or decreased by Mr. Allen’s pro rata share of CC VIII’s profits or losses (as computed for capital account purposes) after June 6, 2003). The limited liability company agreement of CC VIII does not provide for a mandatory redemption of the CC VIII interest.

reformation is achieved, the board of directors should consider whether the CC VIII interest should ultimately be held by Charter Holdco or Charter Holdings or another entity owned directly or indirectly by them.

The following table summarizes the Company’s payment obligations as of December 31, 2004 for its contractual obligations.


(1)	The Company leases certain facilities and equipment under noncancellable operating leases. Leases and rental costs charged to expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, were $23 million, $30 million and $31 million, respectively.

(2)	The Company pays programming fees under multi-year contracts ranging from three to six years typically based on a flat fee per customer, which may be fixed for the term or may in some cases, escalate over the term. Programming costs included in the accompanying statement of operations were $1.3 billion, $1.2 billion and $1.2 billion for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Certain of the Company’s programming agreements are based on a flat fee per month or have guaranteed minimum payments. The table sets forth the aggregate guaranteed minimum commitments under the Company’s programming contracts.

(3)	“Other” represents other guaranteed minimum commitments, which consist primarily of commitments to the Company’s billing services vendors.

The following items are not included in the contractual obligation table due to various factors discussed below. However, the Company incurs these costs as part of its operations:


	•	The Company also rents utility poles used in its operations. Generally, pole rentals are cancelable on short notice, but the Company anticipates that such rentals will recur. Rent expense incurred for pole rental attachments for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, was $43 million, $40 million and $41 million, respectively.

	•	The Company pays franchise fees under multi-year franchise agreements based on a percentage of revenues earned from video service per year. The Company also pays other franchise related costs, such as public education grants under multi-year agreements. Franchise fees and other franchise-related costs included in the accompanying statement of operations were $164 million, $162 million and $160 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

	•	The Company also has $166 million in letters of credit, primarily to its various worker’s compensation, property casualty and general liability carriers as collateral for reimbursement of claims. These letters of credit reduce the amount the Company may borrow under its credit facilities.

In October 2002, Charter filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the “Panel”) to transfer the Federal Class Actions to the Eastern District of Missouri. On March 12, 2003, the Panel transferred the six Federal Class Actions not filed in the Eastern District of Missouri to that district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the eight Federal Class Actions already pending there. The Panel’s transfer order assigned the Federal Class Actions to Judge Charles A. Shaw. By virtue of a prior court order, StoneRidge Investment Partners LLC became lead plaintiff upon entry of the Panel’s transfer order. StoneRidge subsequently filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint. The Court subsequently consolidated the Federal Class Actions into a single action (the “Consolidated Federal Class Action”) for pretrial purposes. On June 19, 2003, following a status and scheduling conference with the parties, the Court issued a Case Management Order setting forth a schedule for the pretrial phase of the Consolidated Class Action. Motions to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint were filed. On February 10, 2004, in response to a joint motion made by StoneRidge and defendants, Charter, Vogel and Allen, the court entered an order providing, among other things, that: (1) the parties who filed such motion engage in a mediation within ninety (90) days; and (2) all proceedings in the Consolidated Federal Class Actions were stayed until May 10, 2004. On May 11, 2004, the Court extended the stay in the Consolidated Federal Class Action for an additional sixty (60) days. On July 12, 2004, the parties submitted a joint motion to again extend the stay, this time until September 10, 2004. The Court granted that extension on July 20, 2004. On August 5, 2004, Stoneridge, Charter and the individual defendants who were the subject of the suit entered into a Memorandum of Understanding setting forth agreements in principle to settle the Consolidated Federal Class Action. These parties subsequently entered into

Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005 (described more fully below) which incorporate the terms of the August 5, 2004 Memorandum of Understanding.

On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the “State Derivative Action”) was filed in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the “Missouri State Court”) against Charter and its then current directors, as well as its former auditors. A substantively identical derivative action was later filed and consolidated into the State Derivative Action. The plaintiffs allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, were sought by the plaintiffs.

As noted above, Charter entered into Memoranda of Understanding on August 5, 2004 setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of the Consolidated Federal Class Action, the State Derivative Action(s) and the Federal Derivative Action (the “Actions”). Charter and various other defendants in those actions subsequently entered into Stipulations of Settlement dated as of January 24, 2005, setting forth a settlement of the Actions in a manner consistent with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The Stipulations of Settlement, along with the various supporting documentation, were filed with the Court on February 2, 2005. The Settlements provide that, in exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against Charter and its former and present officers and directors named in the Actions, Charter will pay to the plaintiffs a combination of cash and equity collectively valued at $144 million, which will include the fees and expenses of plaintiffs’ counsel. Of this amount, $64 million will be paid in cash (by Charter’s insurance carriers) and the balance will be paid in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate warrant value of $40 million. The warrants would have an exercise price equal to 150% of the fair market value (as defined) of Charter Class A common stock as of the date of the entry of the order of final judgment approving the settlement. In addition, Charter expects to issue additional shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier having an aggregate value of $5 million. As a result, in the second quarter of 2004, the Company recorded a $149 million litigation liability within other long-term liabilities and a $64 million insurance receivable as part of other non-current assets on its consolidated balance sheet and an $85 million special charge on its consolidated statement of operations. Additionally, as part of the settlements, Charter will also commit to a variety of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public disclosures, some of which have already been undertaken and none of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation described below. Documents related to the settlement of the Actions have now been executed and filed. On February 15, 2005, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri gave preliminary approval to the settlement of the Actions. The settlement of each of the lawsuits remains conditioned upon, among other things, final judicial approval of the

settlements following notice to the class, and dismissal, with prejudice, of the consolidated derivative actions now pending in Missouri State Court, which are related to the Federal Derivative Action.

In addition to the Federal Class Actions, the State Derivative Action (s), the new Missouri State Court derivative action and the Federal Derivative Action, six putative class action lawsuits have been filed against Charter and certain of its then current directors and officers in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the “Delaware Class Actions”). The lawsuits were filed after the filing of a 13D amendment by Mr. Allen indicating that he was exploring a number of possible alternatives with respect to restructuring or expanding his ownership interest in Charter. Charter believes the plaintiffs speculated that Mr. Allen might have been contemplating an unfair bid for shares of Charter or some other sort of going private transaction on unfair terms and generally alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by participating in or acquiescing to such a transaction. The lawsuits, which are substantively identical, were brought on behalf of Charter’s securities holders as of July 29, 2002, and sought unspecified damages and possible injunctive relief. However, no such transaction by Mr. Allen has been presented. On April 30, 2004, orders of dismissal without prejudice were entered in each of the Delaware Class Actions.

In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter reported customer numbers and its reporting of amounts received from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has publicly stated that Charter is not a target of the investigation. Charter was also advised by the U.S. Attorney’s Office that no current officer or member of its board of directors is a target of the investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. Trial was set for February 7, 2005. Subsequently, each of the indicted former officers pled guilty to single conspiracy counts related to the original mail and wire fraud charges and are awaiting sentencing. The Company is fully cooperating with the investigation.

On November 4, 2002, Charter received an informal, non-public inquiry from the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The SEC issued a formal order of investigation dated January 23, 2003, and subsequently served document and testimony subpoenas on Charter and a number of its former employees. The investigation and subpoenas generally concerned Charter’s prior reports with respect to its determination of the number of customers, and various of its accounting policies and practices including its capitalization of certain expenses and dealings with certain vendors, including programmers and digital set-top terminal suppliers. On July 27, 2004, the SEC and Charter reached a final agreement to settle the investigation. In the Settlement Agreement and Cease and Desist Order, Charter agreed to entry of an administrative order prohibiting any future violation of United States securities laws and requiring certain other remedial internal practices and public disclosures. Charter neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing, and the SEC assessed no fine against Charter.

In January 2003, the Court of Common Pleas granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. In October and November 2003, Charter Holdco filed motions (a) asking that court to set aside the default judgment, and (b) seeking dismissal of plaintiffs’ suit for failure to state a claim. In January 2004, the Court of Common Pleas granted in part and denied in part Charter Holdco’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. It also took under advisement Charter Holdco’s motion to set aside the default judgment. In April 2004, the parties to both the Georgia and South Carolina Class Actions participated in a mediation. The mediator made a proposal to the parties to settle the lawsuits. In May 2004, the parties accepted the mediator’s proposal and reached a tentative settlement, subject to final documentation and court approval. As a result of the tentative settlement, we recorded a special charge of $9 million in our consolidated statement of operations in the first quarter of 2004. On July 8, 2004, the Superior Court of Athens — Clarke County, Georgia granted a motion to amend the Tobar complaint to add Nicholls, Barber and April Jones as plaintiffs in the Georgia Class Action and to add any potential class members in South Carolina. The court also granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on that date. On August 2, 2004, the parties submitted a joint request to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to stay the South Carolina Class Action pending final approval of the settlement and on August 17, 2004, that court granted the parties’ request. On November 10, 2004, the court granted final approval of the settlement, rejecting positions advanced by two objectors to the settlement. On December 13, 2004 the court entered a written order formally approving that settlement. On January 11, 2005, certain class members appealed the order entered by the Georgia court. That appeal was dismissed on or about February 3, 2005. Additionally, one of the objectors to this settlement recently filed a similar, but not identical, lawsuit.

Furthermore, Charter is also party to, other lawsuits and claims that arose in the ordinary course of conducting its business. In the opinion of management, after taking into account recorded liabilities, the outcome of these other lawsuits and claims are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations or its liquidity.

The operation of a cable system is extensively regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”), some state governments and most local governments. The FCC has the authority to enforce its regulations through the imposition of substantial fines, the issuance of cease and desist orders and/or the

imposition of other administrative sanctions, such as the revocation of FCC licenses needed to operate certain transmission facilities used in connection with cable operations. The 1996 Telecom Act altered the regulatory structure governing the nation’s communications providers. It removed barriers to competition in both the cable television market and the local telephone market. Among other things, it reduced the scope of cable rate regulation and encouraged additional competition in the video programming industry by allowing local telephone companies to provide video programming in their own telephone service areas.

The 1996 Telecom Act required the FCC to undertake a number of implementing rulemakings. Moreover, Congress and the FCC have frequently revisited the subject of cable regulation. Future legislative and regulatory changes could adversely affect the Company’s operations.

The Company’s employees may participate in the Charter Communications, Inc. 401(k) Plan. Employees that qualify for participation can contribute up to 50% of their salary, on a pre-tax basis, subject to a maximum contribution limit as determined by the Internal Revenue Service. The Company matches 50% of the first 5% of participant contributions. The Company made contributions to the 401(k) plan totaling $7 million, $7 million and $8 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued the revised SFAS No. 123, Share — Based Payment, which addresses the accounting for share-based payment transactions in which a company receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of that company or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the company’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of such equity instruments. This statement will be effective for the Company beginning July 1, 2005. Because Charter adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 on January 1, 2003, the Company does not expect this revised standard to have a material impact on its financial statements.

Charter does not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would have a material effect on the Company’s accompanying financial statements.

As the result of limitations on, and prohibitions of, distributions, substantially all of the net assets of the consolidated subsidiaries are restricted from distribution to Charter, the parent company. The following condensed parent-only financial statements of Charter account for the investment in Charter Holdco under the equity method of accounting. The financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of the Company and notes thereto.

The following table presents quarterly data for the periods presented on the consolidated statement of operations:

The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that the shares of Charter’s Class A common stock offered pursuant to this prospectus are not being offered to, and may not be purchased by, any person who has an open short position in Charter’s Class A common stock.

Each purchaser of Charter’s Class A common stock hereby represents and agrees that, at the time it received an offer to purchase the shares and at the time of its purchase of the shares:



	•	it did not have an open short position in Charter’s Class A common stock; and



	•	it is not purchasing the shares on behalf of, or for the account of, any person described in the first bullet above, and has no arrangement or understanding to resell, lend or otherwise transfer (directly or indirectly) the shares to any such person.

For purposes of the foregoing, an “open short position” means any contractual or other arrangement whereby a holder is economically “short” Class A common stock, including any so-called “synthetic short position.”

Each purchaser of Charter’s Class A common stock in this offering must execute and deliver this Investor Acknowledgement to Citigroup by facsimile to (212) - .

The following table sets forth the various expenses to be incurred in connection with the sale and distribution of the securities covered by this prospectus, all of which will be borne by the registrant. All amounts shown are estimates except the SEC filing fee.

Indemnification Under the Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of Charter Communications, Inc.

Charter Communications, Inc.’s certificate of incorporation provides that a director of Charter Communications, Inc. shall not be personally liable to Charter Communications, Inc. or its shareholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability: (i) for any breach of the directors’ duty of loyalty to Charter Communications, Inc. or its shareholders; (ii) for acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; (iii) under Section 174 of the Delaware General Corporation law; or (iv) for any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit. Charter Communications, Inc.’s bylaws require Charter Communications, Inc., to the fullest extent authorized by the Delaware General Corporation Law, to indemnify any person who was or is made a party or is threatened to be made a party or is otherwise involved in any action, suit or proceeding by reason of the fact that he is or was a director or officer of Charter Communications, Inc. or is or was serving at the request of Charter Communications, Inc. as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, employee benefit plan or other entity or enterprise, in each case, against all expense, liability and loss (including attorneys’ fees, judgments, amounts paid in settlement, fines, ERISA excise taxes or penalties) reasonably incurred or suffered by such person in connection therewith.

Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, authorizes a corporation to indemnify any person who was or is a party, or is threatened to be made a party, to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative, by reason of the fact that the person is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses, including attorneys’ fees, judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the person in connection with such action, suit or proceeding, if the person acted in good faith and in a manner the person reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the corporation and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe the person’s conduct was unlawful. In addition, the Delaware General Corporation Law does not permit indemnification in any threatened, pending or completed action or suit by or in the right of the corporation in respect of any claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged to be liable to the corporation, unless and only to the extent that the court in which such action or suit was brought shall determine upon application that, despite the adjudication of liability, but in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses, which such court shall deem proper. To the extent that a present or former director or officer of a corporation has been successful on the merits or otherwise in defense of any action, suit or proceeding referred to above, or in defense of any claim, issue or matter, such person shall be indemnified against expenses, including attorneys’ fees, actually and reasonably incurred by such person. Indemnity is


	(i) for any breach of the director’s duty of loyalty to the corporation or its shareholders,

	(ii) for acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law,

	(iii) for unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock purchases or redemptions, or

	(iv) for any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit. These provisions will not limit the liability of directors or officers under the federal securities laws of the United States.

Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933 may be permitted to directors, officers or persons controlling the registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, the registrant has been informed that in the opinion of the SEC such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Act and is therefore unenforceable.

On March 29, 2004, Charter Communications, Inc. issued 2,385,705 shares of its Class A common stock in exchange for $10 million aggregate principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 in a privately negotiated transaction. The shares of Class A common stock issued in this exchange were exempt from registration under Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933.

On May 6, 2004, Charter Communications, Inc. issued 4,867,113 shares of its Class A common stock in exchange for $20 million aggregate principal amount of Charter’s 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 in a privately negotiated transaction. The shares of Class A common stock issued in this exchange were exempt from registration under Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933.

On November 22, 2004, Charter Communications, Inc. issued and sold $862.5 million original principal amount of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009. The notes were sold in a private transaction to qualified institutional buyers, and the sale was exempt from registration by virtue of Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506 of Regulation D. The notes were eligible for resale to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933. The initial conversion rate, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances, will be 413.2231 shares of Charter’s Class A common stock per $1,000 original principal amount of notes, which represents a conversion price of approximately $2.42 per share. Consequently, the notes are convertible into an aggregate of approximately 356,405,000 shares of Class A common stock. A portion of the net proceeds from the sale of the notes were used to purchase a portfolio of U.S. Treasury securities which are pledged as security for the notes and which Charter expects to use to fund the first six scheduled interest payments on the notes. Charter also intends to use a portion of the net proceeds to redeem outstanding indebtedness in the aggregate principal amount of $588 million. Excess proceeds will be used for general corporate purposes.

In December 2003, subject to certain conditions and finalizing appropriate documentation, Charter agreed to issue 18,638 shares of Class A common stock in exchange for cancellation of an option to purchase 186,385 shares which was issued in 2001 as compensation for services. The exchange is scheduled to be consummated in 2005. In addition, we agreed to issue to the same holder a new option to purchase an additional 289,268 shares of Class A common stock for an exercise price of $3.905 per share. The issuances were in exchange for services rendered or to be rendered, and were exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506 of Regulation D.

On July 8, 2005, pursuant to a court approved settlement of certain class action claims brought against Charter and various individuals, Charter issued 13.4 million shares of its Class A common stock to a claims administrator to be held in escrow for the benefit of the class pending any appeals of the court approval. The issuance of the shares is exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.


	(1) For purpose of determining any liability under the Securities Act of 1933, the information omitted from the form of prospectus filed as part of this registration statement in reliance upon Rule 430A and contained in a form of prospectus filed by the registrant pursuant to Rule 424(b)(2) or (4) or 497(h) under the Securities Act shall be deemed to be part of this registration statement as of the time it was declared effective;

	(2) For the purpose of determining any liability under the Securities Act of 1933, each post-effective amendment that contains a form of prospectus shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to the securities offered therein, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof.

Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933 may be permitted to directors, officers and controlling persons of the registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the registrant has been advised that in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer or controlling person of the registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such director, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, the registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the registrant has duly caused this Amendment No. 4 to the registration statement on Form S-1 to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the city of St. Louis, State of Missouri, on July 8, 2005.


	By:	/s/ Paul E. Martin



	Name: Paul E. Martin


	Title:	Senior Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this registration statement has been signed below by the following persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


Delaware	4841	43-1857213
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code Number)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)


	to the required return of the issued mirror units upon return of the shares offered hereby pursuant to the share lending agreement. See “Share Lending Agreement.”


(4)	In June 2005, Charter Operating issued approximately $62 million of additional notes in exchange for $62 million of Charter Holdings senior notes. See “— Recent Events.”



(5)	Represents 100% of the preferred membership interests in CC VIII, LLC, a subsidiary of CC V Holdings, LLC. An issue has arisen regarding the ultimate ownership of such CC VIII, LLC membership interests following Mr. Allen’s acquisition of those interests on June 6, 2003. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions — Transactions Arising out of Our Organizational Structure and Mr. Allen’s Investment in Charter Communications, Inc. and Its Subsidiaries — Equity Put Rights — CC VIII.”


2005	High		Low

First Quarter	$	2.30	$	1.35
Second Quarter	$	1.53	$	0.90
Third Quarter through July 7		1.26		1.20


2004	High		Low

First Quarter	$	5.43	$	3.99
Second Quarter	$	4.70	$	3.61
Third Quarter	$	3.90	$	2.61
Fourth Quarter	$	3.01	$	2.03


2003	High		Low

First Quarter	$	1.73	$	0.76
Second Quarter	$	4.18	$	0.94
Third Quarter	$	5.50	$	3.32
Fourth Quarter	$	4.71	$	3.72


Alvin G. Segel, Esq. Irell & Manella LLP 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, California 90067-4276 (310) 277-1010		Jeremy W. Dickens Brian A. Haskel Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153 (212) 310-8000


Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking Statements		i
Additional Information		ii
Notice to Investors		ii
Summary		1
Risk Factors		10
Use of Proceeds		27
Price Range of Common Stock and Dividend Policy		28
Capitalization		29
Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements		31
Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data		36
Supplementary Quarterly Financial Data		38
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		39
Business		73
Regulation and Legislation		92
Management		97
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management		114
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions		118
Description of Certain Indebtedness		138
Description of Capital Stock and Membership Units		160
Shares Eligible for Future Sale		169
Certain United States Tax Considerations for Non-United States Holders		171
Share Lending Agreement		173
Underwriting		178
Legal Matters		179
Experts		179
Index to Financial Statements		F-1
Form of Investor Acknowledgment		A-1
UNDERWRITING AGREEMENT
CONSENT OF KPMG LLP


	•	the December 2004 sale by our subsidiaries, CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Holdings Capital Corp., of $550 million of senior floating rate notes due 2010;

	•	the November 2004 sale of the $862.5 million of 5.875% convertible senior notes due 2009;

	•	the December 2004 redemption of all of our 5.75% convertible senior notes due 2005 ($588 million principal amount);

	•	the April 2004 sale of $1.5 billion of senior second lien notes by our subsidiary, Charter Communications Operating, LLC (“Charter Operating”), together with the concurrent refinancing of its credit facilities; and


	•	the sale in the first half of 2004 of non-core cable systems for a total of $735 million, the proceeds of which were used to reduce indebtedness.



(1)	Charter acts as the sole manager of Charter Holdco and its direct and indirect limited liability company subsidiaries. Charter’s certificate of incorporation requires that its principal assets be securities of Charter Holdco, the terms of which mirror the terms of securities issued by Charter. See “Description of Capital Stock and Membership Units.” Since March 31, 2005 Charter repurchased $97 million in principal amount of the convertible notes then outstanding.


(2)	These membership units are held by Charter Investment, Inc. and Vulcan Cable III Inc., each of which is 100% owned by Paul G. Allen, our Chairman and controlling shareholder. They are exchangeable at any time on a one-for-one basis for shares of Charter Class A common stock.

(3)	The percentages shown in this table reflect the issuance of the 150 million shares of Class A common stock offered hereby and the corresponding issuance of an equal number of mirror membership units by Charter Holdco to Charter. However, for accounting purposes, Charter’s common equity interest in Charter Holdco will remain at 47%, and Paul G. Allen’s ownership of Charter Holdco will remain at 53%. These percentages exclude the 150 million mirror membership units issued to Charter due


	We and our subsidiaries have a significant amount of existing debt and may incur substantial additional debt in the future, which could adversely affect our financial health and our ability to react to changes in our business.


	The agreements and instruments governing our debt and the debt of our subsidiaries contain restrictions and limitations that could significantly affect our ability to operate our business and adversely affect you, as a shareholder.


	*We may not generate sufficient cash flow to fund our capital expenditures, ongoing operations and debt obligations.*


	Charter Operating may not be able to access funds under its credit facilities if it fails to satisfy the covenant restrictions in its credit facilities, which could adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to conduct our business.


	All of our and our subsidiaries’ outstanding debt is subject to change of control provisions. We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to fulfill our obligations under our indebtedness following a change of control, which would place us in default under the applicable debt instruments.


	*Paul G. Allen and his affiliates are not obligated to purchase equity from, contribute to or loan funds to us or any of our subsidiaries in the future.*


	We operate in a very competitive business environment, which affects our ability to attract and retain customers and can adversely affect our business and operations. We have lost a significant number of customers to direct broadcast satellite competition, and further loss of customers could have a material negative impact on our business.


	Our dispute with Paul G. Allen concerning the ownership of an interest in CC VIII, LLC could adversely impact the value of our common stock, our ability to repay our debt and our ability to obtain future financing.


	*We are currently the subject of certain lawsuits and other legal matters, the unfavorable outcome of which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.*


	*We have a history of net losses and expect to continue to experience net losses. Consequently, we may not have the ability to finance future operations.*


	*We may not have the ability to pass our increasing programming costs on to our customers, which would adversely affect our cash flow and operating margins.*


	*If our required capital expenditures exceed our projections, we may not have sufficient funding, which could adversely affect our growth, financial condition and results of operations.*


	*Our inability to respond to technological developments and meet customer demand for new products and services could limit our ability to compete effectively.*


	*We may not be able to carry out our strategy to improve operating results by standardizing and streamlining operations and procedures.*


	*Malicious and abusive Internet practices could impair our high-speed data services.*


	We could be deemed an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act of 1940. This would impose significant restrictions on us and would be likely to have a material adverse impact on our growth, financial condition and results of operation.


	*The failure by Mr. Allen to maintain a minimum voting and economic interest in us could trigger a change of control default under our subsidiary’s credit facilities.*


	*Mr. Allen controls our stockholder voting and may have interests that conflict with your interests.*


	*The loss of Mr. Allen’s services could adversely affect our ability to manage our business.*


	The special tax allocation provisions of the Charter Holdco limited liability company agreement may cause us in some circumstances to pay more taxes than if the special tax allocation provisions were not in effect.


	The issuance of our Class A common stock offered hereby pursuant to the share lending agreement, as well as possible future conversions of our convertible notes, significantly increase the risk that we will experience an ownership change in the future for tax purposes, resulting in a material limitation on the use of a substantial amount of our existing net operating loss carryforwards.


	*Our business is subject to extensive governmental legislation and regulation, which could adversely affect our business.*


	Our cable systems are operated under franchises that are subject to non-renewal or termination. The failure to renew a franchise in one or more key markets could adversely affect our business.


	*Local franchise authorities have the ability to impose additional regulatory constraints on our business, which could further increase our expenses.*


	Further regulation of the cable industry could cause us to delay or cancel service or programming enhancements or impair our ability to raise rates to cover our increasing costs, resulting in increased losses.


	*Actions by pole owners might subject us to significantly increased pole attachment costs.*