Attachment letter

letter

LETTER submitted by SES Americom

letter

2004-06-29

This document pretains to SAT-MSC-20040210-00027 for Miscellaneous on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATMSC2004021000027_382150

PARTNERS RESIDENT IN WASHINGTON PAUL. WEISS. R I F K I N D . W H A R T O N 8 G A R R I S O N LLP HENK BRANDS PATRICK S. CAMPBELL DALE M. SARRO JOSEPH J. SIMONS I 2 6 5 AVENUE OF THE M C R ~ KENNETH A. GALLO PHILLIP 1. SPECTOR 1615 L SlREEf. N W ROBERT P. PARKER SWART 0. SEIN0OLO clan- ut I o o l ~ WARREN 0 . RUDMAN. O F COUNSEL WASHINOTON. DC 20036-5604 TELEPHONE (2 12) 37J-jooO TELLPIiOWL eo=,Z E * 7 3 0 0 FACSIMILE CZ I2) 757-5090 PARTNERS NOT RESIDENT IN WASHINGTON FACSIMILE I2021 22J-7420 __ 6 2 . RUE ._ DU ~~ FAUEOURQ SAINT-HONOR~ LLOYD K. QARRISON IW IW I) 75006 PARIS, FUANCE RANDOLPH E. PAUL <1948-1OS~l TELEPHONE (33I 1 53 43 1 4 14 SIMON H. RlFKlND (IOWIWS) FACSIMIE (33I I 53 43 00 23 LOUIS 5. WEISS ( 1027-I9501 JOHN F. WHARmN 11027-10773 NKOKU SLIME1 BUILDING 2-2 UCHISAIWAICHO 2-CHOME CHIYODA-KU. TOKYO IO0001 I, JAPAN TELEPHONE (01-31 35976101 FACSIMILE (61-3)350761 20 ORlEhTAL PLAZA. X W R E 3 WRITER’S DIRECT D I A L NUMBER SUITE I 2 0 5 NO. I EAST CHANG AN AVENUE DONQ CHENO OlSTRlcT 202-223-7340 EEIJINQ. I00736 WRITER’ S D I R ECT F A C S I M I L E PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA TELEPHONE (60-IO1 65 I 02760 FACSIMILE (60-10) 6 S l k 2 7 ~ 1 202-223-7440 WRITER’S DIRECT E-MAIL ADDRESS l2”M FLOOR. HONG KONQ CLU0 BUILDING 3 A CHATER ROAD. CENTRAL HOMO KONG pspector@paulweiss.com TELEPHONE (652) 95-3 FACSIMILE 1652) 26-22 ALDER ‘2A5lLE I O NOBLE STREET LONDON EC2V 7JU. U.K. TELEPHONE (44 2 0 ) 7307 1 0 0 0 FACSIMILE (44 E O ) 7367 I0 5 0 June 2,2004 *NOT AN ALTlM MEMBER OF TIlE M: BAR. Bv Hand Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission J(Jb2 9 2004 445 12th Street, N.W., TW-A325 Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: Inmarsat Ventures Limited, File No. SAT-MSC-20040210-00027 Dear Ms. Dortch: SES AMERICOM, Inc. (“SES AMERICOM’) submits this letter in response to a May 19,2004, letter that Intelsat filed with the Federal Communications Commission (the “Commission”) in the above-referenced proceeding.’ It is perhaps not surprising that Intelsat -- having “withdrawn” its long- planned initial public offering (“PO”) of equity and announced that it intends to “explore” an “acquisition,” presumably through a private equity transaction’ -- has decided now to support Inmarsat’s ORBIT Act effort^,^ seeking to force the “round -~ 1 Letter fiom Jennifer D. Hindin, Counsel for Intelsat, to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission (the “Intelsat Letter”). 2 “Intelsat Announces Decision to Withdraw Planned Initial Public Offering of Shares and Intention to Explore Strategic Alternatives,” Intelsat Press Release, May 2 1,2004. 3 See Letter from Jennifer D. Hindin, Counsel for Intelsat, to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, May 13,2004. Oddly, one week after telling FCC officials that they should “take expedited action to validate Inmarsat’s approach to the IPO obligation,” id., Intelsat told the Commission that Intelsat “takes no position” on Inmarsat’s ORBIT Act compliance, as the issue is raised in the instant proceeding. Intelsat Letter at 1.

P A U L , WEISS. RIFKIND. WHARTON a GARRISON LLP Page 2 peg” of a private equity buyout into the “square hole” of the ORBIT Act’s plain requirement that both companies conduct equity IPOs. But it is unfortunate that Intelsat has chosen to do so by casting aspersions on other parties raising legitimate issues about Inmarsat’s approach to ORBIT Act compliance. In its May 19 letter, Intelsat accused SES AMERICOM of an “inaccurate” characterization of recent public remarks by Intelsat’s CEO, Mr. Corny K ~ l l m a n .Intelsat ~ did not dispute the accuracy of the quotations &om Mr. Kullman provided by SES AMERICOM in a May 13,2004, letter to the Commission; instead, Intelsat argued that SES AMERICOM had distorted the meaning of these quotations.6 SES AMERTCOM does not have access to a full recording of Mr. Kullman’s remarks, because Intelsat -- while purporting to value accuracy’ -- has declined to provide such a recording.* Hence, SES AMERICOM must rely upon various media accounts of the remarks. The media unquestionably portrayed Mr. Kullman as having contrasted the ORBIT Act’s concept of an P O with the transactions effectuated by Inmarsat. For example, CommunicationsDaily reported that Mr. Kullman “said Intelsat considers the ORBIT Act P O requirement to be ‘quite clear,’ in comparison with Inmarsat which has asked the FCC to certify that a buyout of the company by private equity firms and a public debt offering are ‘consistent with’ the P O req~irement.”~ Likewise, The DeaZ reported Mr. Kullman to have “said . . . that [Intelsat] is not currently in discussions to sell the company. He said that under the ORBIT Act an P O is Intelsat’s only choice if it wants to be able to offer a full line of services in the U.S.”” Based on these reports, it was entirely reasonable for SES AMERICOM to interpret Mr. Kullman’s remarks to mean that he did not consider a private equity buyout to be an P O for ORBIT Act purposes, that he did not believe a transaction other than an equity P O would satisfy the ORBIT Act, and that Inmarsat’s private equity buyout therefore did not comply with the ORBIT Act. It is noteworthy that SES AMERICOM’s interpretation of Mr. Kullman’s remarks is shared by a reporter who listened to the conference call, and subsequently reviewed both SES AMERICOM’s and Intelsat’s accounts of the remarks. 4 Intelsat Letter at 2. 5 See Letter from Phillip L. Spector, Attorney for SES AMERICOM, Inc., to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal CommunicationsCommission. 6 Intelsat Letter at 2. 7 See id. 8 SES AMERICOM asked Intelsat for the complete recording of Mr. Kullman’s remarks so that SES AMERICOM could investigate Intelsat’s allegations of inaccuracy. Intelsat declined the request. 9 DAILY, COMMUNICATIONS May 12,2004, at 8. 10 THEDEAL,May 12,2004.

PAUL.WE\SS. RIFKIND, WHARTON 8 GARRISON LLP Page 3 Space News recently concluded, in an article comparing both accounts, that “Kullman appeared to say that Intelsat must proceed with an initial public offering (PO) of stock to satisfy U.S. regulations.” SES AMERICOM recognizes that Intelsat has much at stake in matters of ORBIT Act compliance. Nonetheless, Intelsat should refrain fiom making unfounded accusations in the course of advocating its position. Moreover, the Commission should recognize that -- in light of Intelsat’s withdrawal of its P O and its exploration of private equity alternatives -- Intelsat is a highly interested party with respect to the matters at issue in the instant Inmarsat proceeding. Respestfully submitted, Phillip L. Specior Patrick S. Campbell Brett M. Kitt Attorneys for SES AMERICOM, Inc. cc: Parties on attached service list I1 Legal Questions Remain After Intelsat Decides Against IPO, SPACENEWS,May 24, 2004.

# PAUL.W E N S . RIFKIND. W H A R T O N 8 G A R R I S O N LLP CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 2nd day of June, 2004, I caused a copy of the foregoing letter to be served by first-class mail on the following: Alan Auckenthaler Bruce A. Henoch Vice President & General Counsel Assistant General Counsel Inmarsat, Inc. Telenor Satellite Services, Inc. 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 1101 Wootton Parkway, 10th Floor Suite 1000 Rockville, MD 20852 Washington, D.C. 200036 Attorneyfor Telenor Satellite Services, Inc. Gary M. Epstein JohnP. Janka Lon C. Levin Alexander D. Hoehn-Saric Vice President Latham & Watkins LLP Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC 555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 1000 10802 Park Ridge Boulevard Washington, D.C. 20004-1304 Reston, VA 20191 Attorneys for Inmarsat Ventures Limited Bruce D. Jacobs David S. Konczal William M. Behan Shaw Pitman LLP Vice President, Washington Affairs 2300 N Street, N.W. John Deere Public Affairs Worldwide Washington, D.C. 20037 1808 I Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Attorneys for Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC Eliot J. Greenwald Swidler Berlin Shereff Friedman, LLP Jennifer D. Hindin 3000 K Street, N.W., Suite 300 Wiley Rein & Fielding, LLP Washington, D.C. 20007 1776 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Attorney for Deere & Company Attorney for Intelsat Alfied M. Mamlet Chun Hsiang Mah Steptoe & Johnson LLP 13330 Connecticut Ave, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Attorneys for Stratos Mobile Networks, Inc. and Stratos Communications, Inc. Kathleen Arnold -


Document Created: 2004-07-13 15:22:29
Document Modified: 2004-07-13 15:22:29
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC