TIME WARNER INC/
425, 2000-04-18
MOTION PICTURE & VIDEO TAPE PRODUCTION
Previous: HERTZ TECHNOLOGY GROUP INC, S-8, 2000-04-18
Next: TURBODYNE TECHNOLGIES INC, DEF 14A, 2000-04-18





                             Filed by Time Warner Inc.
                             Pursuant to Rule 425 under the
                             Securities Act of 1933
                             Subject Company: AOL Time Warner Inc.
                             Commission File Number: 333-30184


        The   following    communications   include   certain   "forward-looking
statements" within the meaning of the Private  Securities  Litigation Reform Act
of 1995. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are
naturally  subject to uncertainty and changes in  circumstances.  Actual results
may vary materially from the expectations  contained herein. The forward-looking
statements herein include statements about the proposed Time Warner Inc./America
Online,  Inc. merger.  The following factors,  among others,  could cause actual
results to differ  materially from those described  herein:  failure of the Time
Warner or America Online  stockholders to approve the merger;  the risk that the
Time Warner and America Online  businesses will not be integrated  successfully;
the costs related to the merger; inability to obtain, or meet conditions imposed
for,  governmental  approvals  for the  merger;  and other  economic,  business,
competitive  and/or  regulatory  factors  affecting  America  Online's  and Time
Warner's businesses generally.  More detailed information about those factors is
set forth in filings by Time  Warner,  AOL Time Warner Inc.  and America  Online
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Time Warner's most recent
Annual Report on Form 10-K and Current Reports on Form 8-K. Time Warner is under
no obligation to (and  expressly  disclaims  any such  obligation  to) update or
alter its  forward-looking  statements  whether as a result of new  information,
future events or otherwise.

                              **********************************

        AOL Time Warner Inc., together with Time Warner Inc. and America Online,
Inc.,  filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission a preliminary  joint
proxy  statement/   prospectus   regarding  the  proposed  business  combination
transaction  referenced  in the  following  information.  In addition,  AOL Time
Warner, Time Warner and America Online will prepare and file with the Commission
a definitive joint proxy  statement/prospectus and other documents regarding the
proposed  transaction.  Investors  and  security  holders  are urged to read the
definitive joint proxy statement/prospectus,  when it becomes available, because
it  will   contain   important   information.   The   definitive   joint   proxy
statement/prospectus  will be sent to  stockholders  of Time  Warner and America
Online  seeking  their  approval  of the  proposed  transaction.  Investors  and
security  holders  may  obtain  a  free  copy  of  the  definitive  joint  proxy
statement/prospectus  (when it is available) and other  documents filed with the
Commission  by AOL Time Warner Inc. and Time Warner (as well as America  Online)
at the  Commission's  web  site  at  www.sec.gov.  The  definitive  joint  proxy
statement/prospectus   and  other  documents  filed  by  Time  Warner  with  the
Commission may also be obtained for free from Time Warner by directing a request
to Time Warner Inc., 75 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, New York 10019,  Attention:
Shareholder Relations, telephone: (212) 484-6971, e-mail: [email protected].

        SET FORTH BELOW IS THE TRANSCRIPT OF A PRESENTATION  BY GERALD M. LEVIN,
CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE  OFFICER OF TIME WARNER INC., TO, AND PORTIONS OF A
QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION WITH,  ANALYSTS ON APRIL 12, 2000 IN CONNECTION WITH
THE RELEASE OF TIME WARNER'S FIRST QUARTER 2000 EARNINGS:


GERALD M. LEVIN,  CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE  OFFICER,  TIME WARNER INC.:
Good morning.  I'm Jerry Levin,  CEO of Time Warner.  Let me welcome all of you,
those of you who are in the room  today at the Time & Life  Building,  those who
are on the telephone,  and those around the world who are  participating  in our
web cast.

The materials that we made available this morning, I just want to emphasize, are
available  on-line so that the press  release,  the earnings  presentation,  the
first  quarter  trending  schedule,  and then one  presentation  that we will be
making today on AOL Time Warner initiatives is also available on-line.  So those
of you who are not in the room and didn't pick up the hard copy, have all of the
materials available so that you can follow the presentation.  I will outline the
order of the agenda.

I am very  pleased  with how we are  starting  off the  year  2000  both  from a
short-term  and a long- term  perspective  because we continue on our consistent
path of delivering solid ongoing operating results while at the same time we are
executing on our game plan of digitally  transforming  the company as it relates
to the AOL transaction.

And so today the way that  we've  lined up the  meeting,  we will  cover both of
those issues and give you an update. So this will be the agenda.  After I make a
few opening  remarks,  I will ask Dick Parsons and Rich Bressler to give you the
highlights that we are making on the progress of the merger between AOL and Time
Warner. That is the initiatives  presentation which, I think, will be helpful to
you. Then, Joan will take us through the quarter. The numbers are solid, and she
will give you the details on how we normalize the numbers so that we can reflect
fully the operating dynamic. Then we will open it to Q&A.

In addition to Dick and Rich,  Joan Sumner and myself,  also available to answer
your questions are Joe Collins,  CEO of our cable company, Joe Ripp our CFO, Tim
Boggs,our regulatory guru, Chris Bogart, our General Counsel.

I also want to invite all of you here in the room and on-line to experience  our
annual report,  because this year I think that we have done something different.
It is very much a  multi-media  annual  report  because in  addition to the more
simplified  printed copy, if you log onto  timewarner-2000.com  you can not only
get more extensive material, but you can get, instead of having a normal picture
of an annual report, we have video interviews with all of our senior executives.
And then we actually  have nice video  snippets of the range of things that they
are talking about. So it really blends very nicely with the normal concept of an
annual  report.  It has been up and running  since we've been  distributing  the
annual report.  For those of you who didn't have a chance coming in here,  we've
set up a number of PC's so that after the  meeting if you would like to do it or
haven't  already done it or for some reason it is prohibited  in your  workplace
from doing it.

I should give the initial  caution,  it is in all of the  materials.  We will be
making  forward-looking  statements,  naturally  such  statements are subject to
uncertainty  and changed  circumstances.  I won't read all of the language,  but
everything we say is qualified by that necessary, but liberating, caution.

And so,  let's go to the  number I think  that  you've  all  been  waiting  for.
Sopranos-- at 9:00 on Sunday night had a rating of 17.6, a 23 share,  beat every
other program including Millionaire or Fail Safe in HBO homes. It is the highest
score  that we've had for any form of  programming  since  Titanic.  And what is
really  remarkable  about this, the previous episode for those who are following
very closely,  the one where Janice shot Richie,  the way that we look at it and
evaluate  it  there  are  four  showings.  And that  penultimate  episode  had a
cumulative  rating of 39 for four episodes which is truly  remarkable.  Even the
highest  grossing film in the history of Warner  Brothers,  "The Matrix",  which
played on Saturday night at 9:00 did a very good 13.3 rating,  22 share, but the
Sopranos  ....topped even that. And so, again, we are a creative company as well
as a distribution company.

We've  made a very solid  start to the year.  I think that those of you who know
the rhythm of our  businesses,  the first  quarter is always  the  smallest  and
usually the  slowest.  But this is a very solid start.  On a  normalized  basis,
growth was 13%. Even the revenue growth, which normalizes at 8%, was higher than
the last two years. The stength, from my operating  perspective,  was across the
board because all of the divisions posted records, with the exception of music.

And interestingly,  another way that I look at the numbers, if you look at cable
growth rate and the growth rate of  everything  else which I will call  content,
each came in at the 13% growth rate,  which is a very healthy sign. Based on the
continuing  performance  that we see, it is my view that we remain on target for
Time Warner to deliver the  normalized  growth of 13 to 15% and that is the zone
that we've said to you, for the full year of 2000.  As a matter of fact,  as you
go through  each of the  businesses  you will see that even their first  quarter
performance  is right in line with the zones that we've been giving  you.  Cable
networks,  15 to  20%,  cable  13  to  15%,  publishing  12 to  14%,  and  it is
interesting.

I want to just  focus for a second on one  statistic,  and that is  advertising.
Because in its broadest  definition it is a very important  growth  catalyst for
the company.  I just will  mention  again why I think it is for the new company.
The total  advertising  in the first quarter  which,  again,  is a slow quarter,
increased more than 20% to $1.2 billion.  Advertising represented in the quarter
nearly 20% of our total revenues. For the year, it is clearly going to be around
20%.

When you look at our publishing and cable networks, obviously they represent the
bulk  of  our  advertising   revenues  for  the  quarter,  a  little  more  than
three-quarters of our overall ad revenues. But even those two are growing at the
very high  teens.  But the  fastest  area of our growth is coming from our cable
systems--33%, from barter syndication which is well in excess of 50%, as well as
revenues  from the WB. So if I just added those three  together they are growing
on a combined basis at 37%. The reason that I am emphasizing this is that I know
that when we laid out the snapshot dynamic of AOL Time Warner, 40% subscription,
20% advertising and e-commerce,  and 40% content.  I said that the growth engine
was going to be the central  core.  And I hesitate  to even call it  advertising
e-commerce,  because what it really  represents  is in its broadest  sense,  the
third  party  financing  of a footprint  or  content.  And that is a part of the
dynamism  that we will have in the new  company.  But you can see it  already in
Time Warner.

Now, just a little progress report on AOL Time Warner. It should be clear to you
that both  companies  remain focused on business  today,  while at the same time
planning  for our merger.  We are quite  capable of  multi-tasking.  AOL will be
putting out its first quarter results next Tuesday.  I have to say to you that I
like the  continuing  strong  trends at AOL. And over the last few months,  both
companies have been developing their businesses.

Last week,  for  example,  at  Internet  World,  Steve  Case and Barry  Schuler,
together with Jim Martin,  made several  announcements about the next generation
of Netscape which is Netscape 6, very  interesting  digital  dashboard with side
bar  information  panel with  compelling  skins,  what is known as a  persistent
presence  tool.  And then at the same time they talk  about  with  Gateway  some
specialized  internet  appliances which have the  characteristic of instant AOL.
One of them in the kitchen,  and another  wireless,  which again underscores the
focus  on just  making  all of this  easy to use and  really  understanding  the
consumer's  behavior and  implementing  a very simple  strategy of AOL Anywhere.
Whether it is in the kitchen, wireless, on the television set, AOL Europe.

While that is taking place we also, since we last met,  announced an MOU between
Time Warner and AOL for the  concept of multiple  ISPs over the Time Warner high
speed cable  infrastructure.  I consider this to be quite significant,  not only
because there were some elements in there that went beyond the prior positioning
in the cable  industry.  For example,  that we would allow ISPs to have a direct
relationship with the customer, that we would really take the limitations off of
video  streaming,  and we would like to drive this change,  and, in fact,  offer
multiple  ISPs even  faster  than our  current  contractual  arrangements  would
suggest.

I say that not because of any regulatory  issue,  and frankly not because of the
AOL transaction,  but because of my strong business belief that now that we know
what the capacity is, we know how to manage it and deploy it. It is very similar
in my mind to the early  development of pay television which was exclusive for a
while in the 70's to particular cable systems, and then as we developed capacity
and the ability to manage it and there was consumer  demand for more choice,  we
had multi pay.  And what is always  illustrative  of the cable  industry  is the
ability to develop  affiliation  agreements  that make the  appropriate  splits,
whether it is for subscription fees or advertising.  The industry blossomed with
multi  pay,  and it is my view  that the  cable  broadband  infrastructure  will
flourish  with  multiple  ISPs.  That will be very  good  business,  giving  the
consumer not only that choice, but when you have multiple parties marketing your
systems,  and I think  that you have a  built-in  advantage  in the  ability  to
deliver video streaming,  this is good for the cable industry.  And obviously, I
think  that it is good  for the  ISPs  including  AOL,  including  Road  Runner,
including Excite At Home. I think the recent  restructuring of Excite At Home is
another  indication of the drive towards  non-exclusive  multiple ISPs. It is my
expectation  that we will have  terms  between  Time  Warner  Cable and AOL done
before the conclusion of this quarter.

Now,  in terms of the merger  itself,  we are on track from every  aspect.  With
respect to the regulatory  process,  we don't see anything that should slow down
our game plan to close  some  time in the fall.  On the  integration  side,  the
four-man team of Bob Pittman,  Ken Novack,  Dick Parsons,  and Rich Bressler are
effectively  operating 24 x 7, and that is all of the time.  They are focused on
developing the new company's strategic and operating game plan, and we are using
these  months well before the close of the  transaction  really to put the right
plans in place. And we want to be bold about that.

That group working with me and with Steve Case,  they are  spearheading a number
of working  teams who are focused on an array of new  businesses.  You will hear
some of that in their  presentation.  But a lot of the business activities and a
lot of the business successes,  while some individually might be modest they are
beginning to set the tone for the new company.  And  probably  most  importantly
people are working naturally together.  They are excited.  There is what I would
call a rolling thunder, and that is, the more ideas, the more meetings, the more
excitement,  the more that people are developing ideas and possibilities that we
couldn't have thought of on January 10th of this year.

QUESTION AND ANSWER PORTION

RICHARD BILOTTI:  Good morning.  Your cable  performance has been  significantly
better than the rest of the industry, both in terms of the fact that your EBITDA
growth is stronger than the typical range and you're showing margin  improvement
which is unique I think.  I don't think there is another  cable  company that is
showing that.  Could you discuss,  one, what your pricing strategy is across all
of your  product and how that  influences  this  performance?  And two, is there
something  unique in the fact that Time  Warner is an  integrated  company  that
allows it to have more efficient  costs,  for instance,  in the marketing  side,
than some of its peers that would suggest why the margin  direction is different
for you all from the industry as a whole?

LEVIN:  Probably I should start and then ask Joe. It would be  self-serving  for
Joe to start. You know, first of all, I've said many times, and your question of
increased margins illustrates it, that not all cable companies are the same, not
all  companies  are the same.  Time Warner  Cable is really an amalgam of six or
seven  major  MSO's over a course of 25 to 30 years.  Fortunately  the two of us
have been there that  entire  time.  Obviously  there is a process of  Darwinian
natural  selection.  And so what you end up with is an amazing management group,
and so that is point number one. It does matter.

Secondly,  we were the first to cluster.  I remember  making the  decision to go
from centralized to decentralized in 1981 and to start clustering. And what that
meant was that we would get the marketing efficiencies.  But also we cared about
demographics.  Not all cable  systems are the same because they are in different
communities,  and you know this from the  broadcasting  business,  the newspaper
business.  And so we have actually specialized,  if you look at the geography of
Time Warner Cable, it is in very good  demographic  areas.  Carolinas,  Florida,
Texas, and, we happen to be sunbelt related. That is not an accident.

And then I'd have to say that we've been on a very steady program. You might say
that we were late to put  digital  boxes in,  that we only now really  have high
speed cable  modems up and  running.  We've spent a fair amount of time  waiting
because we wanted to build in the  capability  to do video on  demand,  which we
also now have up and running actually in a couple of systems.

So there is a very  methodical game plan here, and I think that it has paid off.
Because what we've done is that while others were upgrading in a certain way, we
were  upgrading  in a very  consistent  way.  And we held back even though there
might have been an advance of DBS during this  period.  Even though  others were
selling  a form of  digital  box,  so that  now we are at the  point  where  the
products that we have to offer are, I can tell you from the consumer demand, are
highly  competitive  as against DBS, as against  DSL, as against  forms of fixed
wireless, because it has now been brought together.

And then before I mention the  pricing  question,  the last thing is that we now
feel  comfortable that our management,  our management in the field,  because if
you have ever visited a cable  system it looks  nothing like what a cable system
looked like 25 years ago or 5 years ago. It is a major multi-media player in its
community. And that management, and I saw this when we had our annual management
meeting, they are up and ready for digital television, video on demand, multiple
ISPs.  Again,  the  reason  that I've  embraced  multiple  ISPs is  because  the
management  is in effect  saying that we can do it. As a matter of fact,  all of
these things tend to increase the perception of the cable system.

Now, two last things.  On pricing,  we've  decided on basic  pricing and to keep
within  this 5% zone.  But what that  masks is the fact  that we are  constantly
offering new services.  That the relief in deregulation  enabled us to now price
all of these  additional  services,  and the consumer demand for digital set top
boxes, and we believe for video on demand,  and for high speed cable modems,  is
as strong as anything that we have ever seen in the cable industry. So, in fact,
the increase in unit growth for the first time is going to occur this year.  The
first time in five years.  And so we want to keep basic charge fairly stable and
generate  our high  returns,  and that is why you are  seeing  margin  increase,
because the returns on digital boxes,  we've said this before, and cable modems,
the return on our  capital,  is on an after tax basis  higher  than 30%.  You've
never had that in the cable industry.

And lastly, I will give you a generalization. Because it will now apply not only
to the cable company, but to AOL Time Warner. And that is the ability to go into
the interstices and make cash out of places that no one else seems to be able to
do.  And that is the skill in the cable  company.  It has to do with the kind of
not only  day-to-day  management  decisions but the  affiliation  agreements you
make, and it is just to be able to go in there and find cash,  cash driven.  And
so this whole  concept of monetizing  footprint,  that is  essentially  what the
cable company does. That is what AOL Time Warner wants to do.

Joe, do you want to pick up on that?

JOSEPH J. COLLINS, CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIME WARNER CABLE:
Well,  like he said, I think that we've said it every time that we've been asked
a similar question,  is that we do have a great inventory and we've been working
on them for a long time on a pretty  consistent  plan.  And so we are now at the
point where we are in the last year of the major rebuild of these  systems.  The
architecture  is basically done, it is there. So our people can focus on selling
the people these new products. And the people love these new products.  They are
literally  jumping out the door,  and that  generates a lot of enthusiasm on the
part of our people. Right now it is all working very well.

JILL KRUTICK: Thank you. Good morning. Three unrelated questions. First, I would
be curious about getting an update on the  EMI/Warner  transaction,  how that is
progressing?  And if you anticipate any  regulatory  hurdles  emerging from that
deal?  Secondly,  on the up front market,  if you are still  confident in the $1
billion shift for the Turner  Network.  And finally,  on AOL TV, how that is all
coming  together  from a content  perspective  in  integrating  the Time  Warner
content and any other content?

LEVIN: All right,  well let me start, and then everyone can add to it. An update
on Warner EMI  Music--we are where we thought we would be at this point in terms
of the  regulatory  process  that is  necessary.  We are shooting for a year-end
close, and so that is that. On the up front, we are very  comfortable.  Recently
you had the advantage of the presentation from Steve Heyer. We like not only the
concept of the billion dollar shift, but we are really moving,  as he indicated,
past the notion  that  there is a cable  marketplace  and there is a  television
marketplace. It is about as bold as anything that I've seen. You know that it is
just clear that people have to advertise,  as Joan mentioned,  our four networks
there. TBS, TNT, CNN, and Cartoon. And so we feel good about that.

On AOL TV--I will just say a word.  Obviously  this is another  case where there
will be a mutual benefit because in fact Time Warner Cable has been working both
on the technology,  as well as the consumer demand  characteristic for all forms
of   interactive   television.   AOL,  of  course,   has  been  working  on  it.
Interestingly,  Barry  Schuler  who is  leading  the  charge  worked  on,  and I
mentioned  this  before,  he did  one  of the  navigators  for  our  interactive
television  activity in Orlando  five years ago. He is quite  familiar  with the
process.  I think that the benefit of the impending  merger is the fact that AOL
can now get the  benefit of the  evolution  of the digital set top box in cable.
And Time Warner  Cable can get the benefit of the power of the AOL brand and the
power of the easy to use concept.

And so let me ask Dick and Rich, or Joe, if they want to add something.

RICHARD D.  PARSONS,  PRESIDENT,  TIME WARNER  INC.: I would only add on EMI and
remind the group that because we are market  competitors,  there is only so much
that we can do  together.  And so we can't  give you the kind of report  that we
gave on AOL.  But we do have  teams  working  on the parts  that we can,  and we
remain very confident.  We've got teams working on it. It is,  actually,  a more
complex  transaction even than AOL because it truly is global. But we are moving
along, and we are confident that we will get it done by, at or around, year end.

LEVIN:  Joe, do you want to add anything on AOL TV?

COLLINS:  Well, I think that when we talked before about the  advantages of what
is happening as these digital boxes are rolling out into the  environment,  what
we are doing is essentially  laying another set of tracks to bring more product.
And so we talked about the ones that we knew about,  and we knew that  consumers
wanted like Video On Demand which is going to be able to ride on that  platform.
AOL TV is going to be another  product that will be able to ride on that digital
platform  that we are  putting in place.  The cost of which is being  carried by
these other services.  And this will be, we think, a very exciting,  incremental
business.

JORDAN ROHAN: All right, thank you. Before the merger is finalized,  how are you
going to account for the incremental  promotions on the AOL properties?  Will it
show up on your  income  statements?  And  then  finally,  given  the  increased
promotion,  are you comfortable  predicting  accelerating  growth at publishing,
music, filmed entertainment,  cable networks,  beyond what you set forth in your
five-year plan?

JOAN N.  SUMNER,  SENIOR VICE  PRESIDENT,  TIME WARNER INC.: I was just going to
answer mechanically the first part of the question.  We are doing business today
on commercial terms. And so accounting-wise  you will see it represented the way
that two stand-alone companies transact business with each other.

LEVIN:  That is why we are calling  them  commercial  arrangements.  Your second
question  is a good segue for me because  I'm not  looking at AOL Time Warner as
simple mathematical  increases in the subscription dynamic, the publishing,  the
transformation  of the  marketing  of movies,  the  addition  of the upside of a
digital  management  system  for  music  rights,  and an  SDMI  secured  digital
distribution system. And therefore, a new form of revenue generation.

I'm stepping back and saying that this is not just  collapsing  these things and
now  let's do a  calculation  of  increased  growth  rates at each  pre-existing
business.  I want a bold restatement of what AOL Time Warner is. And that is why
the last time I indicated that it is better to look at the levers that drive the
growth of the company.  And so instead of looking at how the AOL member  service
can be benefited,  and the Time Inc.  magazines  can be  benefited,  think about
subscriptions.  Think about the power of subscriptions. They are going to be 40%
on snapshot taken right now of the company. And think of the dynamism that comes
from changing the acquisition metrics, increasing the retention characteristics,
and then  applying  that  subtle  chemistry  as to how you  price  and  increase
subscription  pricing.  When do you do it?  How much  more  value do you have to
give? But think of it in that sense.

And then,  when I talked  about  advertising  e-commerce,  I didn't want to talk
about measured media advertising,  or promotional spending, or direct marketing.
But all budgets,  coming from everybody,  all third parties, as to how they move
goods and services. That is enormous. And I think that we are positioned. And so
I can't say "well,  let's look at barter  syndication,  or Bob  Pittman and Myer
Berlow, what Steve Heyer is doing, or Don Logan". But let's look at it much more
broadly because that central core, when I get to content which is kind of 40% of
the company, this content is going to pour over into this central core. Not just
because of digital  downloading,  but the whole financing just broadly speaking.
The financing of material through third party activity is going to change.  That
is going to apply to music, movies, and I don't mean to be generic or mysterious
about it. But that is the way that I look at it.

And so if you look at it that way,  then you should look at a business  plan for
AOL Time  Warner the way that we are now looking at it.  We've put some  metrics
out since we didn't have any comparable real estate  transactions  for people to
latch on to, you know you  needed to get some  bearings.  And so we put  metrics
out. We talked  about what the year 2001 might look like,  $40 billion  north in
revenues  and $11 billion  EBITDA.  We talked about a free cash flow growth rate
number.  And a lot of that came from taking the pre-existing plans and work that
Mike Kelly and Joe Ripp have done.

But now what we are doing is putting a plan  together  that isn't kind of simple
math,  the way and I respect the question  that you've  asked.  Now let's take a
look at what is the dynamic of this new company.  What levers do you press?  And
therefore  we don't just look at it in terms of cost  management,  there will be
that. Or revenue enhancement, and there will certainly be that. But really about
a new opportunity to deliver what ultimately is really free cash flow growth.

And I will go back to an earlier  statement.  All,  this is connected in my mind
and it may not be in yours yet. The question on cable, and I said the ability to
go into the interstices and pull cash out because it is just smart.  And whether
you want to use the euphemism of first mover,  getting out there first,  we have
an open ball field here.  Because I know that when you do your  metrics many are
taking a little  haircut  called  execution  risk.  I don't mind  that.  I'm not
defensive about that, because in fact it is quite the opposite.  We are the only
ones on this playing  field.  And so anything that could be  characterized  as a
mistake is actually an advance.

And so that is the kind of thinking  about this,  just the  ability.  And by the
way,  it  ultimately  gets  down to not just the  asset  base,  which is  pretty
substantial  here,  it is all about smart people being able to go in there,  get
there first,  take cash out. That is what the business is about.  Kind of a long
answer, but that is the way I look at the company.  This is going to be a growth
company.  But it is  going  to have  to be  dramatically  organized  in a way to
deliver that growth, and not in a conventional way.

KATHY  STYPONIAS:  Jerry,  I have two  questions.  The first is  regarding  your
digital  EBITDA losses for this year,  $250 million is the guidance that we were
given  before  the AOL  transaction  was  announced.  And that  was  going to be
revisited  after some point  afterwards  with the AOL team.  I'm just  wondering
whether that is still the right number?  Whether we could  potentially  see that
come down? Or will there just be a redistribution and potentially reinvesting in
areas other than you initially thought of?

And then my second question is with respect to your advertising  numbers.  Could
you tell us what percent are coming from dot com's? And could you look into your
crystal  ball and tell us what you sort of see  that,  what sort of trend do you
see for dot com advertising sort of playing into traditional  media companies in
the near term, over the next twelve months or so?

LEVIN: First, with respect to digital media spending, Rich Bressler and his team
together with around the Time Warner company and AOL, are essentially doing what
you would expect.  And that is revisiting all of the plans. I think that the one
general  statement  that we will make is that the number  will  definitely  come
down.

On the other hand, what I would also say, and there are just obvious areas where
that is the case in terms of  infrastructure,  etc.  But there are also  several
areas of continuing  spending that enhance or supplement,  or do things that AOL
doesn't do. And so it is a very  constructive  process.  But the number won't be
$250 million.

With respect to dot com  advertising,  I don't have the statistic.  It is not as
large a percentage as you would think.  And  essentially  what is happening now,
there are a couple of trends. A, the non, if you want to call them that, the non
dot com companies have increased their advertising essentially because the world
is shifting to such a great extent.  I believe that that is a permanent  change.
Not in the more  traditional  sense that brand image  advertising is going to be
the only benchmark,  but more in the sense that it is just more  competitive out
there, but more efficient. And you now have the ability to take, instead of just
more traditional advertising,  measured media advertising,  but take all of your
spending and lead from image to information, to transaction.

So, in fact, I don't think it is because of the venture  capital  money going to
dot com  which is then all  flowing  into  advertising.  If you look at the Time
Warner  advertiser  list it is still very similar to what it has always been. It
is a very small percentage.

SUMNER:  The  statistic  on that,  I can  give  you for the two big  advertising
businesses  that Jerry has  highlighted at our company is our publishing and our
Turner  operations.  And so take those two combined which is the lion's share of
our  advertising.  Dot com companies last year  represented  less than 5% of the
total, to Jerry's point.

LEVIN:  And  actually  what  will  be  interesting,  again I will  use the  word
advertising but remember my central core is a much broader definition.  But just
staying with advertising,  the influx of the Time Warner advertising psyche into
the AOL  advertising  activity will be a big boost also.  Just in a conventional
sense, before we get to monetizing some really interesting reach characteristics
that we have.

I  believe,  and  it is  not  just  because  of  dot  com,  business  is  really
transforming  itself.  And we are not,  I don't  think  that we are the old time
cycle where based on where the GNP is going, the general  economy,  that you can
kind of test where  advertising  is going.  I think that we really are,  because
companies are now managing  themselves in a very  different  way. And we are not
back to well, the first thing to go is advertising. You can't afford to cut back
on this broader definition of spending money for the marketing of your goods and
services.  That is the  change  that has  occurred.  And so this  definition  of
advertising, I think is going to be the driver not only for our company, but you
will see a lot of other  companies,  who as media companies are going to benefit
from it.

DENNIS LEIBOWITZ:  On both digital video and video on demand, can you talk about
what  the  incremental  revenue  per  subscriber  is?  What  proportion  of  the
subscriber  base will it be available to by the end of the year?  And  secondly,
could you talk  about  whether  there has been any  progress  on the  subject of
telephony on cable?

LEVIN: We will let Joe actually answer it. Because digital services, we've given
a per sub number and he can talk about availability. But I think that by the end
of this year that we pretty much will have the digital set top box  available in
almost all of our systems.

With respect to video on demand,  I will be  interested  to hear Joe's answer to
what the number is. We believe that the  manipulation of full motion video which
is essentially  what video on demand is. We know that it is a multiplier  affect
on the delivery of movies.  And so the next big assignment for our cable company
will be to work with the movie studios to deal with the window,  and to get that
window  co-extensive  with the video cassette  window.  Now, we are on the other
side of that issue which is a great  thing  again  because we will make money on
every part of the  stream.  But that is the issue.  And we pretty much know that
even as against near video on demand that this is why we've been driven for five
years to build the capability.  That you get a multiplier  affect on the pay per
view  purchases.  Because the  ability to kind of get this  movie,  and stop and
start it, and go backwards and forwards is a wonderful convenience.

What we don't know,  and why I don't know what the number will be, is that while
we can talk about video on demand for movies, now we are into a new zone. So now
let's apply AOL's knowledge, where the world has gone, the ability to manipulate
video.  Let's  expose  that to a lot of dynamic  people and see really  what the
capacity is because to me it was the ultimate goal, that everything from news on
demand to ordering  pizzas all  required the ability to  manipulate  full motion
video.  So I think that that is one of the unexplored  high growth areas,  and I
would say again, as a company,  whether we are AOL, HBO, or CNN, we are going to
go through every  distribution  system.  But the ability to manipulate video and
all of these video streams, I think the cable architecture is fully capable.

Joe, why don't you answer that question and then we will come back to telephony.
I will do telephony, but why don't you supplement that answer.

COLLINS:  Well,  we are  going  to have  digital  boxes  pretty  much  available
everywhere  during the course of this year.  And pretty much they are  available
virtually everywhere right now with a pretty small amount of the rebuild left to
go for the rest of the year.

In terms of video on demand,  right now  anywhere  on the island of Oahu you can
get video on demand, which is most of our Hawaiian system and so that is about a
quarter  of a million  homes.  And we are going to have it  available  also this
year, and in fact, probably in the second quarter in our Tampa system and in our
Austin  system.  And so the total  availability  by the end of this year will be
well over a million homes.

And then we hope next year based on whatever  tuning that we do to this business
in those markets that we will be able to make it pretty widely  available across
our universe. Because we know that it is a product that the consumer is going to
want and is going to use.

LEVIN:  You are looking for buy rates?

COLLINS: It is a little early to say exactly what the buy rates are going to be.

LEVIN: I think that we should just stick with our experience,  which, based on a
lot of  testing,  is that the buy rates for near video on demand,  which you see
more accurately in the DBS environment,  that there is a multiplier  affect when
you offer video on demand.  And so is that two times?  Three times? That is what
we will see. But it is there.

With respect to  telephony.  A lot has  happened,  but if you break it down into
several  categories,  I don't  think  that my view  has  changed.  First of all,
circuit  switched  telephony,  the ability of the cable plant to deliver  robust
telephony  remains.  The  question  for us is if someone  wants us to execute on
that, we are fully  prepared to do that.  And so if AT&T,  for example,  does in
fact want to have facilities  based access in certain markets in the competition
for  local  and  long  distance,  we are  prepared  to do  that  on  terms  that
essentially pay us to do that.

The more  interesting  development,  and I think that everyone  would agree with
this, is really IP  telephony.  Now, I will give you my layman's take on it, but
contained  in that as my  strategic  view.  There are two forms.  One is general
stuff that goes on the internet. You can do it now with Net 2Phone. And so it is
my view that every ISP that is offering  full  service will have some form of IP
telephony  that will be either an add on or included in however that ISP charges
for its service.  This is, however you want to  characterize  it, it is a second
line  service,  it is not  powered,  it is  not  perfect.  But  it is  certainly
sufficient for many purposes. And so, again, that is part of my excitement about
multiple ISPs. Contained in that is an interesting service.

Then there is what we'll call powered IP  telephony  that uses this initial link
and not the RBOC link. But then transposes that into a switched network like the
AT&T  network so that it is more robust.  It might be powered.  And that I would
put, I think that is exciting  because that can ride on top of the platform that
Joe Collins is building. And, again, that would require whatever the right split
or  arrangement  is. So we are really  quite  interested  in seeing  this happen
because it just enhances existing services.

Having said that,  I do have one changed  view.  And that is because of AOL Time
Warner it is just  clear  that  communications  are being  redefined  every day.
Because the close to billion  messages  that occur  through the AOL system,  you
know twice what the post office delivers.  The power of instant messaging,  ICQ,
buddy lists, and not just on the AOL member service platform,  is enormous.  And
it is convenient.

So the addition of voice to text, and then pictures, and then selling things and
providing  information,  all comes together so that I don't look at telephony as
something that is a separate defined business strategy.  It is all wrapped up in
what  I  just   described  but  it  is  subsumed  in  a  much  broader  form  of
communications.

And in that sense AOL Time Warner will add the word  communications to media and
entertainment  in terms of the businesses that we are in. And I think that it is
transforming the way that people communicate,  the concept of community,  and so
even the  definition of what the telephone  business is is going to have to give
way to that. And so, I like our position.

ALAN GOULD:  Thank you.  Jerry,  given the scale of the AOL Time  Warner  merged
company,  the balance  sheet,  the free cash flow, and the fact that you will be
completing  your cable  upgrade this year on your existing  cable plant,  do you
have an appetite now to expand your cable footprint?

LEVIN:  Well,  let me give you two sides to the answer.  The first is that it is
clear that AOL Time  Warner will have a powerful  balance  sheet.  We've  talked
about a growth rate on free cash flow that looks like 50% a year coming off of a
pretty  good base in the year  2001.  And if we are going to keep our,  as we've
done with Time Warner,  put this financial envelope around it and be a solid BBB
company it means that there is a lot of capacity in cash to be measured  against
a very high  return  characteristic  including  how does this  stack up  against
buying back your stock and doing other things.  This suggests a very  aggressive
company.

Now, adding to the cable footprint is both a current and historical question for
us.  We've always tried to  determine  what is the optimum  size.  Now I am just
talking  domestically.  And a lot of that had to do with an earlier answer about
the quality of our footprint. There are certain geographic areas that would make
obvious  sense for our cable  company.  Whether that is done through  additional
acquisition,  or through trades,  or realigning some of the inventory remains to
be seen. But I'm not unhappy with cable  footprint that passes 20% of the homes.
I think it is  sufficient  for the  laboratory  that it  represents.  I like the
demography.  There are just maybe one or two cable companies that I have coveted
for my entire career in the business,  and that hasn't  changed.  But, you know,
there is nothing  that says that we need to go out and buy more  cable  right at
the moment.

ELLEN GIBBS:  This is one of the few meetings that I've attended  recently where
you  haven't  talked  about  wireless  access to the  internet.  And given  your
comments   earlier  about  the  merger  with  AOL  redefining   your  notion  of
communications,  where  does  wireless  fit into  that?  And does  your new debt
capacity or acquisition  ability make that a possibility after the close of this
deal?

LEVIN:  Wireless is obviously the most exciting  development  on the horizon for
the AOL  Anywhere  strategy,  but also for the CNN anywhere  strategy,  too. And
obviously  we are seeing it outside of the United  States in much more  dramatic
form,  whether it is iMode from DoCoMo in Japan,  or what we are seeing with the
aggregation with Vodafone and Mannesmann, and the systems in Europe.

I will make a couple of  statements.  It looks like outside of the United States
that  wireless  capability  is going to grow faster than the  tethered  computer
attached to a telephone or some form of wire line  system.  Just like outside of
the United States it hasn't been cable, it has been usually  satellite.  I think
that is pretty clear. As a company we will be there because of the power,  first
of all, of the AOL habit structure  because remember things like ICQ and instant
messaging and some of the statistics that Dick gave earlier, this is a worldwide
network system. And so the habit structure is already being developed around the
world for the AOL characteristics.

At the same time as we get into the next generation of wireless, we're the third
generation,  more  capacity for video,  as well as audio and  pictures,  that is
basically  what we do. I will make the broad side  statement  that this powerful
capacity that AOL Time Warner will have,  other than the cable laboratory in the
United  States we don't  intend  to be an  infrastructure  company.  But we will
partner, make creative deals in order to ensure that the AOL and the Time Warner
system and services get fully distributed.

And so,  I view  what we will  call the  wireless  explosion  as a  tremendously
positive event for AOL Time Warner because it means that this is going to grow a
lot faster,  that is the community and the transactions  with the internet,  but
what it also says, and keep this in mind, that with the wireless, just like I've
got one  buzzing in my pants  right now, I have to return to my home base to get
my full text of things and a full video. So it is a terrific thing.  But it will
also relate to,  again,  what I am calling a home base  activity,  where I think
that AOL reigns supreme.

Time for one more question.

LEVIN:  This will be the penultimate question.

[inaudible]

SUMNER:  The question for those  listening in was from Mario Gabelli asking if
we were going to be bidding on spectrum?

LEVIN: The answer is no. Just as Time Warner hasn't, you won't see AOL Time
Warner doing it. So do we have a last question? If not, thank you very much.


© 2022 IncJournal is not affiliated with or endorsed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission