Back to GetFilings.com

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

OR

For the transition period from              to             

Commission file number: 000-30110

SBA COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (561) 995-7670

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Class A common stock, $.01 par value

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2.)     Yes  x    No  ¨

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $164.6 million as of June 30, 2004.

The number of shares outstanding of the Registrant’s common stock (as of March 8, 2005):

Class A common stock—65,377,083 shares

Documents Incorporated By Reference

Portions of the Registrant’s definitive proxy statement for its 2005 annual meeting of shareholders, which proxy statement will be filed no later than 120 days after the close of the Registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, are hereby incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

General

We are a leading independent owner and operator of wireless communications towers in the Eastern third of the United States. We generate revenues from our two businesses, site leasing and site development. In our site leasing business, we lease antenna space to wireless service providers on towers and other structures that we own, manage or lease from others. The towers that we own have been constructed by us at the request of a carrier, built or constructed based on our own initiative or acquired. As of December 31, 2004, we owned 3,060 towers in continuing operations, approximately 60% of which we have built ourselves. In our site development business, we offer wireless service providers assistance in developing and maintaining their own wireless service networks. Since our founding in 1989, we have participated in the development of more than 25,000 antenna sites in 49 of the 51 major wireless markets in the United States.

Site Leasing Services

Our primary focus is the leasing of antenna space on our multi-tenant towers to a variety of wireless service providers under long-term lease contracts. Our site leasing business generates substantially all of our gross profit. Our activities are focused in the Eastern third of the United States where substantially all of our towers are located. We believe that over the long term our site leasing revenues will continue to grow as wireless service providers lease additional antenna space on our towers due to increasing minutes of network use and network coverage requirements. We lease antenna space on the towers we have constructed, the towers we have acquired, and the towers we lease, sublease and/or manage for third parties. Our site leasing revenue comes from a variety of wireless carrier tenants, including ALLTEL, Cingular, Nextel, Sprint PCS, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless, and we believe our current tower portfolio positions us to take advantage of wireless carriers’ antenna and equipment deployment. We believe our site leasing business is characterized by stable and long-term recurring revenues, predictable operating costs and minimal capital expenditures. Due to the relatively young age and mix of our tower portfolio, we expect future expenditures required to maintain these towers will be minimal. Consequently, we expect to grow our cash flows by adding tenants to our towers at minimal incremental costs by using existing tower capacity or requiring carriers to bear all or a portion of the cost of tower modifications. Because our towers are strategically positioned and our customers typically do not re-locate, we have historically experienced low customer churn as a percentage of revenue. Our lease contracts typically have terms of five years or more with multiple term tenant renewal options and provide for annual rent escalators.

During 2004 we announced our intention to re-commence, on a limited basis, our new build program. The towers under our new build program will be constructed either under build-to-suit arrangements or in locations chosen by us. Under our build-to-suit arrangements, we will build towers for a wireless service provider on a location of their direction. We retain ownership of the tower and the exclusive right to co-locate additional tenants on the tower. In addition, we intend on building towers on locations chosen by us. Based on our knowledge of our customers’ needs, we seek to identify attractive locations for new towers and complete pre-construction procedures necessary to secure the site concurrently with our leasing efforts. Our intent is that each of our new builds will have at least one tenant on the day that it is completed and we expect that many will have multiple tenants. We expect to build a total of 50 to 75 new towers during 2005.

The table below provides information regarding the development and status of our tower portfolio over the past five years.

1

As of December 31, 2004, we had 7,257 tenants on our 3,060 towers included in continuing operations.

At December 31, 2004, our same tower revenue growth (defined as year over year growth on towers owned at December 31, 2003 that were still owned by the Company at December 31, 2004) was 14% and our same tower site leasing gross profit growth was 20% on the 3,053 towers we owned as of December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004 in continuing operations.

The following chart includes details regarding our site leasing revenue and gross profit percentage:

To help maximize the revenue and profit we earn from our capital investment in our towers, we provide services at our tower locations beyond the leasing of antenna space. The services we provide, or may provide in the future, include generator provisioning, antenna installation, equipment installation, maintenance, and backhaul, which is the transport of the wireless signals transmitted or received by an antenna to a carrier’s network. Some of these services are part of our site leasing services (e.g., the generator provisioning) and are recurring in nature, and are contracted for by a wireless carrier or other user in a manner similar to the way they lease antenna space.

Site Development Services

Our site development business consists of two segments, site development consulting and site development construction, through which we provide wireless service providers a full range of end-to-end services. In the consulting segment of our site development business, we offer clients the following services: (1) network pre-design; (2) site audits; (3) identification of potential locations for towers and antennas; (4) support in buying or leasing of the location; and (5) assistance in obtaining zoning approvals and permits. In the construction segment of our site development business we provide a number of services, including, but not limited to the following: (1) tower and related site construction; (2) antenna installation; and (3) radio equipment installation, commissioning and maintenance. During 2004, we completed our previously announced plan to exit the services business in the Western portion of the United States based on our determination that this business was no longer beneficial to our site leasing business. Consequently, our services business is focused in the Northeast and Southeast regions of the U.S. In these regions we are involved in major projects with most of the major wireless communications and services companies. Our site development customers include Bechtel Corporation, Cingular, General Dynamics, Nextel, Sprint PCS, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless.

Business Strategy

Our primary strategy is to capture the maximum benefits from our position as a leading owner and operator of wireless communications towers. Key elements of our strategy include:

Focusing on Site Leasing Business with Stable, Recurring Revenues. We intend to continue to focus on and allocate substantially all of our capital resources to expanding our site leasing business due to its attractive characteristics such as long-term contracts, built-in rent escalators, high operating margins and low customer churn. The long-term nature of the revenue stream of our site leasing business makes it less volatile than our site development business, which is more reactive to changes in industry conditions. By focusing on our site leasing business, we believe that we can maintain a stable, recurring cash flow stream and reduce our exposure to cyclical changes in customer spending.

Maximizing Use of Tower Capacity. We generally have constructed our towers to accommodate multiple tenants and a substantial majority of our towers are high capacity lattice or guyed towers. Most of our towers have significant capacity available for additional antennas and we believe that increased use of our towers can be achieved at a low incremental cost. We actively market space on our towers through our internal sales force.

2

Geographically Focusing our Tower Ownership. We have decided to focus our tower ownership geographically in the Eastern third of the United States. We believe that focusing our site leasing activities in this smaller geographic area, where we have a higher concentration of towers, will improve our operating efficiencies and reduce our overhead expenses and procure higher revenue per tower.

Disciplined Capital Expenditures While Reducing our Leverage. Over the last two years, we have successfully reduced our leverage and implemented a disciplined level of capital expenditures. While we plan on selectively investing in new tower builds and/or tower acquisitions that we believe present good business opportunities, we intend that these investments will be consistent with our commitment to proactively manage our level of capital expenditures and reduce our leverage below current levels.

Using our Local Presence to Build Strong Relationships with Major Wireless Service Providers. Given the nature of towers as location specific communications facilities, we believe that substantially all of what we do is best done locally. Consequently, we have a broad field organization that allows us to develop and capitalize on our experience, expertise and relationships in each of our local markets which in turn enhances our customer relationships. Due to our presence in local markets, we believe we are well positioned to capture additional site leasing business and new tower build opportunities in our markets and identify and participate in site development projects across our markets.

Capturing Other Revenues That Flow From our Tower Ownership. To help maximize the revenue and profit we earn from capital investment in our towers, we provide services at our tower locations beyond the leasing of antenna space, including antenna installation and equipment installation. Because of our ownership of the tower, our control of the tower site and experience and capabilities in providing installation services, we believe that we are well positioned to perform more of these services and capture the related revenue.

Capitalizing on our Management Experience. Our management team has extensive experience in site leasing and site development services. Management believes that its industry expertise and strong relationships with wireless carriers will allow us to expand our position as a leading provider of site leasing and site development services.

Company Services

We provide our services on a local basis, through regional offices, territory offices and project offices, some of which are opened and closed on a project-by-project basis. Operationally, we are divided into two regions in the Eastern portion of the United States, run by vice presidents. Each region is divided into geographic territories run by local managers. Within each manager’s geographic area of responsibility, he or she is responsible for all site development operations, including hiring employees and opening or closing project offices, and a substantial portion of the sales in such area.

Our executive, corporate development, accounting, finance, human resources, legal and regulatory, information technology and site administration personnel, and our network operations center are located in our headquarters in Boca Raton, Florida. Certain sales, new tower build support and tower maintenance personnel are also located in our Boca Raton office.

Customers

Since commencing operations, we have performed site leasing and site development services for most of the largest wireless service providers. The majority of our contracts have been for PCS, enhanced specialized mobile radio, or ESMR, and cellular providers of wireless telephony services. We also serve wireless data and Internet, paging, PCS narrowband, specialized mobile radio, multi-channel multi-point distribution service, or MMDS, and multi-point distribution service, or MDS, wireless providers. In both our site development and site leasing businesses, we work with large national providers and smaller local, regional or private operators. We depend on a relatively small number of customers for our site leasing and site development revenues. The following customers represented at least 10% of our total revenues during at least one of the last three years:

3

During the past two years, we provided services for a number of customers, including:

Sales and Marketing

Our sales and marketing goals are to:

We approach sales on a company-wide basis, involving many of our employees. We have a dedicated sales force that is supplemented by members of our executive management team. Our dedicated salespeople are based regionally as well as in the corporate office. We also rely on our regional vice presidents, general managers and other operations personnel to sell our services and cultivate customers. Our strategy is to delegate sales efforts to those employees of ours who have the best relationships with our customers. Most wireless service providers have national corporate headquarters with regional and local offices. We believe that providers make most decisions for site development and site leasing services at the regional and local levels with input from their corporate headquarters. Our sales representatives work with provider representatives at the regional and local levels and at the national level when appropriate. Our sales staff compensation is heavily weighted to incentive-based goals and measurements. A substantial number of our operations personnel have revenue and gross profit-based incentive components in their compensation plans.

In addition to our marketing and sales staff, we rely upon our executive and operations personnel at the regional and territory office levels to identify sales opportunities within existing customer accounts.

Our primary marketing and sales support is centralized and directed from our headquarters office in Boca Raton, Florida and is supplemented by our regional and territory offices. We have a full-time staff dedicated to our marketing efforts. The marketing and sales support staff is charged with implementing our marketing strategies, prospecting and producing sales presentation materials and proposals.

Competition

We compete with:

Wireless service providers that own and operate their own tower networks and several of the other tower companies generally are substantially larger and have greater financial resources than we do. We believe that tower location and capacity, quality of service, density within a geographic market and, to a lesser extent, price historically have been and will continue to be the most significant competitive factors affecting the site leasing business.

4

Our primary competitors for our site leasing activities and generating new tower assets are five large independent tower companies, American Tower Corporation, Crown Castle International Corp., Global Signal, Inc., SpectraSite, Inc., and AAT Communications Corp., and a large number of smaller independent tower owners. In addition, we compete with wireless service providers who currently market excess space on their owned towers to other wireless service providers.

We believe that the majority of our competitors in the site development business operate within local market areas exclusively, while some firms appear to offer their services nationally, including American Tower Corporation, Alcoa Fujikura Ltd., Bechtel Corporation, Black & Veach Corporation, General Dynamics Corporation, LCC International, Inc. and Wireless Facilities, Inc. The market includes participants from a variety of market segments offering individual, or combinations of, competing services. The field of competitors includes site development consultants, zoning consultants, real estate firms, right-of-way consulting firms, construction companies, tower owners/managers, radio frequency engineering consultants, telecommunications equipment vendors, which provide end-to-end site development services through multiple subcontractors, and providers’ internal staff. We believe that providers base their decisions for site development services on a number of criteria, including a company’s experience, track record, local reputation, price and time for completion of a project. We believe that we compete favorably in these areas.

Employees

As of December 31, 2004, we had approximately 475 employees, none of whom is represented by a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our employee relations to be good.

Regulatory and Environmental Matters

Federal Regulations. Both the Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC”) and the Federal Aviation Administration (the “FAA”) regulate antenna towers and structures that support wireless communications and radio or television antennas. Many FAA requirements are implemented in FCC regulations. These regulations govern the construction, lighting and painting or other marking of towers and structures and may, depending on the characteristics of particular towers or structures, require prior approval and registration of towers or structures. Wireless communications equipment and radio or television stations operating on towers or structures are separately regulated and may require independent licensing depending upon the particular frequency or frequency band used.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, the FCC, in conjunction with the FAA, has developed standards to consider proposals involving new or modified antenna towers or structures. These standards mandate that the FCC and the FAA consider the height of the proposed tower or structure, the relationship of the tower or structure to existing natural or man-made obstructions and the proximity of the tower or structure to runways and airports. Proposals to construct or to modify existing towers or structures above certain heights must be reviewed by the FAA to ensure the structure will not present a hazard to air navigation. The FAA may condition its issuance of a no-hazard determination upon compliance with specified lighting and/or painting requirements. Antenna towers that meet certain height and location criteria must also be registered with the FCC. A tower or structure that requires FAA clearance will not be registered by the FCC until it is cleared by the FAA. Upon registration, the FCC may also require special lighting and/or painting. Owners of wireless communications antenna towers and structures may have an obligation to maintain painting and lighting or other marking in conformance with FAA and FCC standards. Antenna tower and structure owners and licensees that operate on those towers or structures also bear the responsibility of monitoring any lighting systems and notifying the FAA of any lighting outage or malfunction. In addition, any applicant for an FCC antenna tower or structure registration must certify that, consistent with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, neither the applicant nor its principals are subject to a denial of Federal benefits because of a conviction for the possession or distribution of a controlled substance. We generally indemnify our customers against any failure to comply with applicable regulatory standards. Failure to comply with the applicable requirements may lead to civil penalties.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 amended the Communications Act of 1934 by preserving state and local zoning authorities’ jurisdiction over the construction, modification and placement of towers. The law, however, limits local zoning authority by prohibiting any action that would (1) discriminate among different providers of personal wireless services or (2) ban altogether the construction, modification or placement of radio communication towers. Finally, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the federal government to help licensees for wireless communications services gain access to preferred sites for their facilities. This may require that federal agencies and departments work directly with licensees to make federal property available for tower facilities.

Owners and operators of antenna towers and structures may be subject to, and therefore must comply with, environmental laws. Any licensed radio facility on an antenna tower or structure is subject to environmental review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, among other statutes, which requires federal agencies to evaluate the

5

environmental impact of their decisions under certain circumstances. The FCC has issued regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. These regulations place responsibility on applicants to investigate potential environmental effects of their operations and to disclose any potential significant effects on the environment in an environmental assessment prior to constructing or modifying an antenna tower or structure and prior to commencing certain operation of wireless communications or radio or television stations from the tower or structure. In the event the FCC determines the proposed structure or operation would have a significant environmental impact based on the standards the FCC has developed, the FCC would be required to prepare an environmental impact statement, which will be subject to public comment. This process could significantly delay the registration of a particular tower or structure.

As an owner and operator of real property, we are subject to certain environmental laws that impose strict, joint and several liability for the cleanup of on-site or off-site contamination and related personal or property damage. We are also subject to certain environmental laws that govern tower or structure placement, including pre-construction environmental studies. Operators of towers or structures must also take into consideration certain radio frequency (“RF”) emissions regulations that impose a variety of procedural and operating requirements. Certain proposals to operate wireless communications and radio or television stations from antenna towers and structures are also reviewed by the FCC to ensure compliance with requirements relating to human exposure to RF emissions. Exposure to high levels of RF energy can produce negative health effects. The potential connection between low-level RF energy and certain negative health effects, including some forms of cancer, has been the subject of substantial study by the scientific community in recent years. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with and we have no material liability under any applicable environmental laws. These costs of compliance with existing or future environmental laws and liability related thereto may have a material adverse effect on our prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

State and Local Regulations. Most states regulate certain aspects of real estate acquisition, leasing activities and construction activities. Where required, we conduct the site acquisition portions of our site development services business through licensed real estate brokers’ agents, who may be our employees or hired as independent contractors, and conduct the construction portions of our site development services through licensed contractors, who may be our employees or independent contractors. Local regulations include city and other local ordinances, zoning restrictions and restrictive covenants imposed by community developers. These regulations vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but typically require tower and structure owners to obtain approval from local officials or community standards organizations, or certain other entities prior to tower or structure construction and establish regulations regarding maintenance and removal of towers or structures. In addition, many local zoning authorities require tower and structure owners to post bonds or cash collateral to secure their removal obligations. Local zoning authorities generally have been unreceptive to construction of new antenna towers and structures in their communities because of the height and visibility of the towers or structures, and have, in some instances, instituted moratoria.

Backlog

Our backlog of pending leases for antenna space on our towers varies from time to time and reflects the relatively short-cycle of three to six months of the antenna space leasing process. Leasing backlogs vary widely within a fiscal quarter, and are generally lowest on the last day of a quarter as our customers strive to meet their own quarterly antenna site deployment goals. Backlog related to our site leasing business consists of lease agreements and amendments which have been executed with customers but have not begun generating revenue. As of December 31, 2004 we had 113 new leases and 4 amendments which had been executed with customers but which had not begun generating revenue. These leases contractually provided for approximately $2.5 million of annual revenue. As of December 31, 2003 we had 116 new leases and 15 amendments which had been executed with customers but which had not begun generating revenue. These leases contractually provided for approximately $2.6 million of annual revenue.

Backlog related to our site development services business consists of work under contracts executed with customers that have not yet commenced and thus have not begun generating revenue. Our backlog for site development services was approximately $62 million of contractually committed revenue as of December 31, 2004 as compared to approximately $80 million as of December 31, 2003. The decrease in 2004 is attributable to a 2003 contract signed with Sprint for site development work which is expected to be completed by mid 2006. This contract represented approximately $46 million in backlog as of December 31, 2004 and approximately $60 million in backlog as of December 31, 2003.

Backlog related to our tower acquisition efforts consists of pending acquisitions under signed purchase agreements which have not yet closed. Our backlog for pending tower acquisitions as of December 31, 2004 was approximately $8.1 million. We did not have any pending acquisitions as of December 31, 2003.

Risks Related to Our Business

We may not be able to service our substantial indebtedness.

As indicated below, we have and will continue to have a significant amount of indebtedness relative to our equity.

6

Our ability to service our debt obligations will depend on our future operating performance. Our earnings were insufficient to cover our fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 2004 by $143.3 million and $173.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Based on our outstanding debt at December 31, 2004 we would require approximately $46.0 million of cash flow from operating activities (before net cash interest expenses) to discharge our cash interest and principal obligations for the year ending December 31, 2005. By comparison, for the year ended December 31, 2004, we generated $93.2 million of cash flow from operating activities (before net cash interest expenses). In order to manage our substantial amount of indebtedness, we may from time to time sell assets, issue equity, or repurchase, restructure or refinance some or all of our debt (all of which we have done at various times in the last two years). In 2003, we sold 784 towers located in the Western two-thirds of the United States and realized gross proceeds of $196.7 million. We may not be able to effectuate any of these alternative strategies on satisfactory terms in the future, if at all. The implementation of any of these alternative strategies may dilute our current shareholders or subject us to additional costs or restrictions on our ability to manage our business and as a result could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and growth strategy.

We may not have sufficient liquidity or cash flow from operations to repay the remaining amount of our outstanding senior credit facility, our 9 ³/4% senior discount notes or our 8 ¹/2% senior notes upon their respective maturities. Therefore, prior to the maturity of our outstanding debt we may be required to refinance and/or restructure some or all of this debt. We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance or restructure this debt on acceptable terms or at all. If we were unable to refinance, restructure or otherwise repay the principal amount of this debt upon its maturity, we may need to sell assets, cease operations and/or file for protection under the bankruptcy laws.

As of December 31, 2004, we had approximately $36.5 million of additional borrowing capacity under our senior credit facility, subject to maintenance covenants, borrowing base limitations and other conditions. Furthermore, we and our subsidiaries may be able to incur significant additional indebtedness in the future, subject to the restrictions contained in our debt instruments, some of which may be secured debt.

We may not secure as many site leasing tenants as planned or our lease rates on new leases may decline.

If tenant demand for tower space or our lease rates on new leases decrease, we may not be able to successfully grow our site leasing business. This may have a material adverse effect on our strategy, revenue growth and our ability to satisfy our financial and other contractual obligations. Our plan for the growth of our site leasing business largely depends on our management’s expectations and assumptions concerning future tenant demand and potential lease rates for independently owned towers

If our wireless service provider customers combine their operations to a significant degree, our growth, our revenue and our ability to service our indebtedness could be adversely affected.

Demand for our services may decline if there is significant consolidation among our wireless service provider customers as they may then reduce capital expenditures in the aggregate because many of their existing networks and expansion plans overlap. In January 2003, the spectrum cap, which previously prohibited wireless carriers from owning more than 45 MHz of spectrum in any given geographical area, expired. Some wireless carriers have consolidated with each other and others may be encouraged to consolidate with each other as a result of this regulatory change and as a means to strengthen their financial condition. Economic conditions have resulted in the consolidation of several wireless service providers and this trend is likely to continue. To the extent that our customers consolidate, they may not renew any duplicative leases that they have on our towers and/or may not lease as many spaces on our towers in the future. This would adversely affect our growth, our revenue and our ability to service our indebtedness. In October 2004, Cingular acquired AT&T Wireless. As of December 31, 2004, Cingular and AT&T were both tenants on 355 of our 3,060 towers. The contractual revenue generated by both of these tenants on these 355 towers at December 31, 2004 was approximately $16 million. If, as a result of this transaction, Cingular were not to renew duplicate leases, we could lose up to 50% of such revenue. The average remaining contractual life of such duplicate leases was approximately two years.

In January 2005, Sprint PCS and Nextel agreed to merge, which is expected to be consummated in the second half of 2005. As of December 31, 2004, Sprint PCS and Nextel were both tenants on 349 of our 3,060 towers. The contractual revenue generated by both of these tenants on the 349 towers at December 31, 2004 was approximately $16 million. If this merger is consummated and either Sprint PCS or Nextel were not to renew duplicate leases, we could lose up to 50% of such revenue. The average remaining contractual life of such duplicate leases was approximately 2 years.

7

Similar consequences may occur if wireless service providers engage in extensive sharing or roaming or resale arrangements as an alternative to leasing our antenna space. Wireless voice service providers frequently enter into roaming agreements with competitors allowing them to use another’s wireless communications facilities to accommodate customers who are out of range of their home provider’s services. Wireless voice service providers may view these roaming agreements as a superior alternative to leasing antenna space on communications sites owned or controlled by us or others. The proliferation of these roaming agreements could have a material adverse effect on our revenue.

We depend on a relatively small number of customers for most of our revenue.

We derive a significant portion of our revenue from a small number of customers, particularly in our site development services business. The loss of any significant customer could have a material adverse effect on our revenue.

The following is a list of significant customers and the percentage of our total revenues for the specified time periods derived from these customers:

8

Revenues from these clients are derived from numerous different site leasing contracts and site development contracts. Each site leasing contract relates to the lease of space at an individual tower site and is generally for an initial term of five years renewable for five five-year periods at the option of the tenant. Our site development customers engage us on a project-by-project basis, and a customer can generally terminate an assignment at any time without penalty. In addition, a customer’s need for site development services can decrease, and we may not be successful in establishing relationships with new customers. Furthermore, our existing customers may not continue to engage us for additional projects.

Our substantial indebtedness may negatively impact our ability to implement our business plan.

Our substantial indebtedness may negatively impact our ability to implement our business plan. For example, it could:

We are dependent on the financial stability of our customers and any deterioration in their financial condition may reduce the demand for our services which would adversely affect our growth strategy, revenues and financial condition.

Our business depends on the financial stability of our customers. The economic slowdown and intense competition in the wireless and telecommunications industries over the past several years have impaired the financial condition of some of our customers, certain of which operate with substantial leverage and certain of which have filed or may file for bankruptcy. The financial uncertainties facing our customers could reduce demand for our communications sites, increase our bad debt expense and reduce prices on new customer contracts. This could affect our ability to satisfy our obligations.

In addition, we may be negatively impacted by our customers’ limited access to debt and equity capital. Recently when capital market conditions were difficult for the telecommunications industry, wireless service providers conserved capital by not spending as much as originally anticipated to finance expansion activities. This decrease adversely impacted demand for our services and consequently our financial condition. As a result, we adjusted our business during 2002 and early 2003 to significantly reduce and subsequently suspend any material investment for new towers and our site development activities. If our customers are not able to access the capital markets in the future, our growth strategy, revenues and financial condition may again be adversely affected.

Our debt instruments contain restrictive covenants that could adversely affect our business.

Our senior credit facility and the indentures governing our outstanding notes each contain certain restrictive covenants. Among other things, these covenants restrict our ability to:

If we fail to comply with these covenants, it could result in an event of default under one or all of these debt instruments. The acceleration of amounts due under one of our debt instruments would also cause a cross-default under our other debt instruments.

9

SBA Senior Finance Inc. (“SBA Senior Finance”), which owns, directly or indirectly, all of the common stock of our operating subsidiaries, is the borrower under our senior credit facility. The senior credit facility requires SBA Senior Finance to maintain specified financial ratios, including ratios regarding SBA Senior Finance’s debt to annualized operating cash flow, debt service, cash interest expense and fixed charges for each quarter. In addition, the senior credit facility contains additional negative covenants that, among other things, restrict our ability to commit to capital expenditures and build towers without anchor tenants. Our ability to meet these financial ratios and tests and comply with these covenants can be affected by events beyond our control, and we may not be able to do so. A breach of any of these covenants, if not remedied within the specified period, could result in an event of default under the senior credit facility.

Upon the occurrence of any default, our senior credit facility lenders can prevent us from borrowing any additional amounts under the senior credit facility. In addition, upon the occurrence of any event of default, other than certain bankruptcy events, senior credit facility lenders, by a majority vote, can elect to declare all amounts of principal outstanding under the senior credit facility, together with all accrued interest, to be immediately due and payable. The acceleration of amounts due under our senior credit facility would cause a cross-default under our indentures, thereby permitting the acceleration of such indebtedness. If the indebtedness under the senior credit facility and/or indebtedness under our outstanding notes were to be accelerated, our current assets would not be sufficient to repay in full the indebtedness. If we were unable to repay amounts that become due under the senior credit facility, the senior credit lenders could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure that indebtedness. Substantially all of our assets are pledged as security under the senior credit facility. In such an event of default, our assets may not be sufficient to satisfy our obligations under the notes.

Due to the long-term expectations of revenue from our tenant leases, we are very sensitive to the creditworthiness of our tenants.

Due to the long-term nature of our tenant leases, we, like others in the tower industry, are dependent on the continued financial strength of our tenants. Wireless service providers often operate with substantial leverage, and financial problems for our customers could result in uncollected accounts receivable, the loss of customers and lower than anticipated lease revenues. During the past three years, a number of our site leasing customers have filed for bankruptcy including almost all of our paging customers. Although these bankruptcies have not had a material adverse effect on our business or revenues, any future bankruptcies may have a material adverse effect on our business, revenues, and/or the collectability of our accounts receivable.

Our quarterly operating results for our site development services fluctuate and therefore should not be considered indicative of our long-term results.

The demand for our site development services fluctuates from quarter to quarter and should not be considered as indicative of long-term results. Numerous factors cause these fluctuations, including:

Although the demand for our site development services fluctuates, we incur significant fixed costs, such as maintaining a staff and office space in anticipation of future contracts. In addition, the timing of revenues is difficult to forecast because our sales cycle may be relatively long. Therefore, we may not be able to adjust our cost structure in a timely basis to adjust to market slowdowns.

We are not profitable and expect to continue to incur losses.

We are not profitable. The following chart shows the net losses we incurred for the periods indicated:

10

Our losses are principally due to significant interest expense and depreciation and amortization in each of the periods presented above. For the year ended December 31, 2004, we recorded an asset impairment charge of $7.1 million and a charge associated with the write-off of deferred financing fees and loss on the extinguishment of debt of $41.2 million. We recorded an asset impairment charge of $13.0 million, a charge associated with the loss from write-off of deferred financing fees and extinguishment of debt of $24.2 million, and a restructuring charge of $2.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2003. We recorded restructuring and other charges of $47.8 million, a $60.7 million charge related to the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle related to the adoption of SFAS No. 142, and an asset impairment charge of $24.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2002. We expect to continue to incur significant losses which may affect our ability to service our indebtedness.

Increasing competition in the tower industry may adversely affect us.

Our industry is highly competitive, particularly with respect to securing quality tower assets and adequate capital to support tower networks. Competitive pressures for tenants on their towers from these competitors could adversely affect our lease rates and services income. In addition, the loss of existing customers or the failure to attract new customers would lead to an accompanying adverse effect on our revenues, margins and financial condition. Increasing competition could also make the acquisition of quality tower assets more costly.

We compete with:

Wireless service providers that own and operate their own tower networks and several of the other tower companies generally are substantially larger and have greater financial resources than we do. We believe that tower location and capacity, quality of service, density within a geographic market and, to a lesser extent, price historically have been and will continue to be the most significant competitive factors affecting the site leasing business.

The site development market includes participants from a variety of market segments offering individual, or combinations of, competing services. We believe that a company’s experience, track record, local reputation, price and time for completion of a project have been and will continue to be the most significant competitive factors affecting the site development business.

We may not be able to build and/or acquire as many towers as we anticipate.

We currently intend to build 50 to 75 new towers during 2005 and to consummate a limited number of tower acquisitions. However, our ability to build these new towers is dependent upon (1) the availability of sufficient capital to fund construction, (2) our ability to locate, and acquire at commercially reasonable prices, attractive locations for such towers and (3) our ability to obtain the necessary zoning and permits.

Our ability to consummate tower acquisitions is also subject to risks. Specifically, these risks include (1) our ability to identify those towers that would be attractive to our clients and accretive to our revenues, (2) our ability to negotiate and consummate agreements to acquire such towers and (3) sufficient capital to fund such acquisitions. Due to these risks, it may take longer to complete our new tower builds than anticipated, the costs of constructing or acquiring these towers may be higher than we expect or we may not be able to add as many towers as we had planned in 2005. If we are not able to increase our tower portfolio as anticipated, it could negatively impact our ability to make our goals for site leasing revenue.

11

The loss of the services of certain of our key personnel or a significant number of our employees may negatively affect our business.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon performance and active participation of our key personnel. We cannot guarantee that we will be successful in retaining the services of these key personnel. We have employment agreements with Jeffrey A. Stoops, our President and Chief Executive Officer, Kurt L. Bagwell, our Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, and Thomas P. Hunt, our Senior Vice President and General Counsel. We do not have employment agreements with any of our other key personnel. If we were to lose any key personnel, we may not be able to find an appropriate replacement on a timely basis and our results of operations could be negatively affected. Further, the loss of a significant number of employees or our inability to hire a sufficient number of qualified employees could have a material adverse effect on our business.

New technologies and their use by carriers may have a material adverse effect on our growth rate and results of operations.

The emergence of new technologies could reduce the demand for space on our towers. For example, the development of and use of products that would permit multiple wireless carriers to use a single antenna, share networks or increase the range and capacity of an antenna could reduce the number of antennas needed by our customers. In addition, the deployment of WiFi and WiMax technologies could impact the network needs of our existing customers providing wireless telephony services. This could have a material adverse effect on our growth rate and results of operations.

Our costs could increase and our revenues could decrease due to perceived health risks from radio frequency (“RF”) energy.

The government imposes requirements and other guidelines on our towers relating to RF energy. Exposure to high levels of RF energy can cause negative health effects.

The potential connection between exposure to low levels of RF energy and certain negative health effects, including some forms of cancer, has been the subject of substantial study by the scientific community in recent years. According to the FCC, the results of these studies to date have been inconclusive. However, public perception of possible health risks associated with cellular and other wireless communications media could slow the growth of wireless companies, which could in turn slow our growth. In particular, negative public perception of, and regulations regarding, health risks could cause a decrease in the demand for wireless communications services. Moreover, if a connection between exposure to low levels of RF energy and possible negative health effects, including cancer, were demonstrated, we could be subject to numerous claims. If we were subject to claims relating to RF energy, even if such claims were not ultimately found to have merit, our financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

Our business is subject to government regulations and changes in current or future regulations could harm our business.

We are subject to federal, state and local regulation of our business. In particular, both the FCC and FAA regulate the construction and maintenance of antenna towers and structures that support wireless communications and radio and television antennas. In addition, the FCC separately licenses and regulates wireless communications equipment and television and radio stations operating from such towers and structures. FAA and FCC regulations govern construction, lighting, painting and marking of towers and structures and may, depending on the characteristics of the tower or structure, require registration of the tower or structure. Certain proposals to construct new towers or structures or to modify existing towers or structures are reviewed by the FAA to ensure that the tower or structure will not present a hazard to air navigation.

Antenna tower owners and antenna structure owners may have an obligation to mark or paint towers or structures or install lighting to conform to FAA standards and to maintain such marking, painting and lighting. Antenna tower owners and antenna structure owners may also bear the responsibility of notifying the FAA of any lighting outages. Certain proposals to operate wireless communications and radio or television stations from antenna towers and structures are also reviewed by the FCC to ensure compliance with environmental impact requirements. Failure to comply with existing or future applicable requirements may lead to civil penalties or other liabilities and may subject us to significant indemnification liability to our customers against any such failure to comply. In addition, new regulations may impose additional costly burdens on us, which may affect our revenues and cause delays in our growth.

Local regulations, including municipal or local ordinances, zoning restrictions and restrictive covenants imposed by community developers, vary greatly, but typically require antenna tower and structure owners to obtain approval from local officials or community standards organizations prior to tower or structure construction or modification. Local regulations can delay, prevent, or increase the cost of new construction, co-locations, or site upgrade projects, thereby limiting our ability to respond to customer demand. In addition, new regulations may be adopted that increase delays or result in additional costs to us. These factors could have a material adverse effect on our future growth and operations.

12

Our towers are subject to damage from natural disasters.

Our towers are subject to risks associated with natural disasters such as tornadoes and hurricanes. We maintain insurance to cover the estimated cost of replacing damaged towers, but these insurance policies are subject to loss limits and deductibles. We also maintain third party liability insurance, subject to deductibles, to protect us in the event of an accident involving a tower. A tower accident for which we are uninsured or underinsured, or damage to a significant number of our towers, could require us to make significant capital expenditures and may have a material adverse effect on our operations or financial condition.

We could have liability under environmental laws that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our operations, like those of other companies engaged in similar businesses, are subject to the requirements of various federal, state, local and foreign environmental and occupational safety and health laws and regulations, including those relating to the management, use, storage, disposal, emission and remediation of, and exposure to, hazardous and non-hazardous substances, materials, and wastes. As owner, lessee or operator of numerous tower sites, we may be liable for substantial costs of remediating soil and groundwater contaminated by hazardous materials, without regard to whether we, as the owner, lessee or operator, knew of or were responsible for the contamination. We may be subject to potentially significant fines or penalties if we fail to comply with any of these requirements. The current cost of complying with these laws is not material to our financial condition or results of operations. However, the requirements of these laws and regulations are complex, change frequently, and could become more stringent in the future. It is possible that these requirements will change or that liabilities will arise in the future in a manner that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our dependence on our subsidiaries for cash flow may negatively affect our business.

We are a holding company with no business operations of our own. Our only significant asset is and is expected to be the outstanding capital stock of our subsidiaries. We conduct, and expect to conduct, all of our business operations through our subsidiaries. Accordingly, our ability to pay our obligations, including the principal and interest, premium, if any, and additional interest, if any, on our outstanding 9¾% senior discount notes and our 8½% senior notes, is dependent upon dividends and other distribution from our subsidiaries to us. Other than amounts required to make interest and principal payments on the notes, we currently expect that the earnings and cash flow of our subsidiaries will be retained and used by them in their operations, including servicing their debt obligations. Our operating subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise to pay the principal, interest and other amounts on the notes or make any funds available to us for payment. The ability of our operating subsidiaries to pay dividends or transfer assets to us may be restricted by applicable state law and contractual restrictions, including the terms of the senior credit facility. Although the indenture governing the notes will limit the ability of our operating subsidiaries to enter into consensual restrictions on their ability to pay dividends to us, these limitations are subject to a number of significant qualifications and exceptions.

Availability of Reports and Other Information

Our corporate website is www.sbasite.com. We make available, free of charge, access to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A and amendments to those materials filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 on our website under “Investor Relations—SEC Filings,” as soon as reasonably practicable after we file electronically such material with, or furnish it to, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”). In addition, the Commission’s website is www.sec.gov. The Commission makes available on this website, free of charge, reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, such as us, that file electronically with the Commission. Additionally, our reports, proxy and information statements may be read and copied at the Commission’s public reference room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. Information on our website or the Commission’s website is not part of this document.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We are headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida, where we currently lease approximately 73,000 square feet of space. We have entered into long-term leases for regional and certain site development office locations where we expect our activities to be longer-term. We open and close project offices from time to time in connection with our site development business, and offices for new tower build projects are generally leased for periods not to exceed 18 months.

Our interests in towers are comprised of a variety of fee interests, leasehold interests created by long-term lease agreements, private easements, easements and licenses or rights-of-way granted by government entities. Of the 3,060 towers in our portfolio, approximately 10% are located on parcels of land that we own and approximately 90% are located on parcels of land that have leasehold interests created by long-term lease agreements, private easements and easements, licenses or

13

right-of-way granted by government entities. In rural areas, a wireless communications site typically consists of up to a 10,000 square foot tract, which supports towers, equipment shelters and guy wires to stabilize the structure. Less than 2,500 square feet is required for a monopole or self-supporting tower structure of the kind typically used in metropolitan areas for wireless communication tower sites. Land leases generally have an initial term of five years with five or more additional automatic renewal periods of five years, for a total of thirty years or more. In some instances, we have entered into 99 year ground leases.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are involved in various legal proceedings relating to claims arising in the ordinary course of business. We do not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matter was submitted to the vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

The Class A common stock commenced trading under the symbol “SBAC” on The Nasdaq National Market System (“Nasdaq”) on June 16, 1999. The following table presents the high and low bid price for the Class A common stock for the periods indicated:

As of March 8, 2005, there were 174 record holders of our Class A common stock.

We have never paid a dividend on any class of common stock and anticipate that we will retain future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. Consequently, we do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. In addition, we are restricted under the senior credit facility, the 9¾% senior discount notes and the 8½% senior notes from paying dividends or making distributions and repurchasing, redeeming or otherwise acquiring any shares of common stock except under certain circumstances.

14

The following table gives information about our common stock that may be issued upon the exercise of options, warrants, and rights under all existing equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2004:

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table sets forth selected historical financial data as of and for each of the five years ended December 31, 2004. The financial data for fiscal year ended 2004 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. The financial data for the fiscal years ended 2003 and 2002 have been derived from, and are qualified by reference to, our restated audited consolidated financial statements. These restated financial statements include adjustments for a change in the method of accounting for certain types of ground leases underlying our tower sites. The financial data as of and for the fiscal years ended 2001 and 2000 have been derived from our restated unaudited consolidated financial statements. The unaudited financial data as of and for the year ended December 31, 2001 and 2000, have been derived from our books and records without audit and, in the opinion of management, include all adjustments, (consisting only of normal, recurring adjustments) that management considers necessary for a fair statement of results for these periods. The following consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to reflect the discontinued operations treatment of our western site development services and reclassification of 14 towers previously classified as discontinued operations into continuing operations. You should read the information set forth below in conjunction with our “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes to those consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K.

15

16

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the information contained in our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto. The following discussion includes forward-looking statements that involve certain risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, those described in the “Risks Related to Our Business” section of this annual report. Our actual results may differ materially from those discussed below. See “Forward-looking statements” and “Risks Related to Our Business.”

17

We are a leading independent owner and operator of wireless communications towers in the Eastern third of the United States. We generate revenues from our two businesses, site leasing and site development. In our site leasing business, we lease antenna space to wireless service providers on towers and other structures that we own, manage for or lease from others. The towers that we own have been constructed by us at the request of a carrier, built or constructed based on our own initiative or acquired. In our site development business, we offer wireless service providers assistance in developing and maintaining their own wireless service networks.

Revenues derived from the leasing of antenna space at, or on, communication towers continued to increase as a result of our emphasis on our site leasing business through the leasing and management of tower sites. We focus our leasing and site development activities in the Eastern third of the United States where substantially all of our towers are located. During 2004, we completed our previously announced plan of disposing of our services business in the Western third of the United States.

Operating results in prior periods may not be meaningful predictors of future results. You should be aware of the changes in the nature and scope of our business when reviewing the ensuing discussion of comparative historical results.

Restatement of Financial Results

On February 7, 2005, the Office of the Chief Accountant of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued a letter to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants expressing its views regarding certain operating lease accounting issues and their application under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”). In light of this letter, we initiated a review of our accounting practices and determined that we would adjust our method of accounting for certain types of ground leases underlying our tower sites and amortization of tower assets. As a result, we have restated our consolidated financial statements for each of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 included in this Report.

We had historically defined the minimum lease term of our ground leases underlying our tower sites as the initial term of the leases and had been straight lining all rental payments due to the lessor evenly over this term, which typically is five years in length. As a result of the February 7, 2005 letter from the SEC, we changed our rental expense recognition policy to redefine the minimum lease term as the period from lease inception through the end of the term in which all tenant lease obligations in existence at ground lease inception, including renewal periods, will be met. If no tenant lease obligations existed at the date of ground lease inception, the initial term of the ground lease is considered the minimum lease term. All rental obligations due to be paid out over the minimum lease term, including fixed escalations, have therefore been straight-lined evenly over the minimum lease term. Additionally, if the minimum lease term ends prior to the originally established depreciable life of the tower (typically 15 years), we have shortened the depreciable life of the tower to coincide with the minimum lease term of the ground lease.

As a result of the adjustments described above, the accompanying results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been adjusted to record additional rent expense (included in cost of sales on the statements of operations) of $5.7 million and $5.9 million, respectively; additional depreciation expense of $9.5 million and $10.1 million, respectively; a reduction of asset impairment charges of $4.0 million and $1.4 million, respectively; a decrease in provision for income taxes of $0.09 million and $0.01 million, respectively; and a (decrease) increase in loss from discontinued operations of ($8.1) million and $3.4 million, respectively.

The consolidated balance sheets have been adjusted to record additional straight line rent liabilities (included in other long term liabilities) of $2.4 million and $7.3 million, a reduction in fixed assets of $5.5 million and $8.8 million, as well as a decrease in assets held for sale of $0.02 million and $4.9 million, at December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Additionally, retained earnings (deficit) have been reduced by $45.5 million and $42.5 million at December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. These adjustments did not have any impact on the cash flows of the Company

See Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements of this Report for a summary of the effects of these changes on our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2003, as well as on our consolidated statements of operations and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. The accompanying Management’s Discussion and Analysis gives effect to these corrections.

18

Site Leasing Services

Site leasing revenues are received primarily from wireless communications companies. Revenues from these clients are derived from numerous different site leasing contracts. Each site leasing contract relates to the lease or use of space at an individual tower site and is generally for an initial term of five years, and is renewable for five 5-year periods at the option of the tenant. Almost all of our site leasing contracts contain specific rent escalators, which average 3-4% per year, including the renewal option periods. Site leasing contracts are generally paid on a monthly basis and revenue from site leasing is recorded monthly on a straight-line basis over the current term of the related lease agreements. Rental amounts received in advance are recorded in deferred revenue.

Cost of site leasing revenue primarily consists of:

For any given tower, such costs are relatively fixed over a monthly or an annual time period. As such, operating costs for owned towers do not generally increase significantly as a result of adding additional customers to the tower.

The table below details the percentage of total company revenues and gross profit contributed by site leasing services. Information regarding the total and percentage of assets used in our site leasing services business is included in Note 24 of our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report.

Site Development Services

Our site development services business consists of two segments, site development consulting and site development construction, through which we provide wireless service providers a full range of end-to-end services. In the consulting segment of our site development business, we offer clients the following services: (1) network pre-design; (2) site audits; (3) identification of potential locations for towers and antennas; (4) support in buying or leasing of the location; and (5) assistance in obtaining zoning approvals and permits. In the construction segment of our site development business, we provide a number of services, including, but not limited to the following: (1) tower and related site construction; (2) antenna installation; and (3) radio equipment installation, commissioning and maintenance.

Site development services revenues are received primarily from wireless communications companies or companies providing development or project management services to wireless communications companies. Our site development customers engage us on a project-by-project basis, and a customer can generally terminate an assignment at any time without penalty. Site development projects, both consulting and construction, include contracts on a time and materials basis or a fixed price basis. The majority of our site development services are billed on a fixed price basis. Time and materials based site development contracts are billed and revenue is recognized at contractual rates as the services are rendered. Our site development projects generally take from three to 12 months to complete. For those site development consulting contracts in which we perform work on a fixed price basis, we bill the client, and recognize revenue, based on the completion of agreed upon phases of this project on a per site basis. Upon the completion of each phase, we recognize the revenue related to that phase.

Our revenue from construction projects is recognized on the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, determined by the percentage of cost incurred to date compared to management’s estimated total anticipated cost for each contract. This method is used because management considers total cost to be the best available measure of progress on the contracts. These amounts are based on estimates, and the uncertainty inherent in the estimates initially is reduced as work on

19

the contracts nears completion. Revenue from our site development construction business may fluctuate from period to period depending on construction activities, which are a function of the timing and amount of our clients’ capital expenditures, the number and significance of active customer engagements during a period, weather and other factors.

Cost of site development consulting revenue and construction revenue include all costs of materials, salaries and labor costs, including payroll taxes, subcontract labor, vehicle expense and other costs directly and indirectly related to the projects. All costs related to site development consulting projects and construction projects are recognized as incurred.

The table below provides the percentage of total company revenues and gross profit contributed by site development services. Information regarding the total and percentage of assets used in our site development services businesses is included in Note 24 of our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report.

In May 2004, our Board of Directors approved a plan of disposition related to the Western site development services. In June 2004, two business units were sold, and two business units were closed within Western site development services. In the third quarter of 2004, the remaining two site development construction business units were sold. Gross proceeds realized from sales during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 were $0.4 million, and a loss on disposal of discontinued operations of $0.8 million was recorded, which is included in loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

We have identified the policies and significant estimation processes below as critical to our business operations and the understanding of our results of operations. The listing is not intended to be a comprehensive list. In many cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is specifically dictated by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, with no need for management’s judgment in their application. In other cases, management is required to exercise judgment in the application of accounting principles with respect to particular transactions. The impact and any associated risks related to these policies on our business operations is discussed throughout “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” where such policies affect reported and expected financial results. For a detailed discussion on the application of these and other accounting policies, see Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, included herein. Our preparation of our financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ from those estimates and such differences could be significant.

Construction Revenue

Revenue from construction projects is recognized on the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, determined by the percentage of cost incurred to date compared to management’s estimated total anticipated cost for each contract. This method is used because we consider total cost to be the best available measure of progress on each contract. These amounts are based on estimates, and the uncertainty inherent in the estimates initially is reduced as work on each contract nears completion. The asset “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts” represents expenses incurred and revenues recognized in excess of amounts billed. The liability “Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts” represents billings in excess of revenues recognized.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

We perform periodic credit evaluations of our customers. We continuously monitor collections and payments from our customers and maintain an allowance for estimated credit losses based upon our historical experience and any specific customer collection issues that we have identified. Establishing reserves against specific accounts receivable and the overall adequacy of our allowance is a matter of judgment.

20

Asset Impairment

We evaluate the potential impairment of individual long-lived assets, principally the tower sites. We record an impairment charge when we believe an investment in towers has been impaired, such that future undiscounted cash flows would not recover the then current carrying value of the investment in the tower site. We consider many factors and make certain assumptions when making this assessment, including but not limited to; general market and economic conditions, historical operating results, geographic location, lease-up potential, and expected timing of lease-up. In addition, we make certain assumptions in determining an asset’s fair value less costs to sell for purposes of calculating the amount of an impairment charge. Changes in those assumptions or market conditions may result in a fair value less costs to sell which is different from management’s estimates. Future adverse changes in market conditions could result in losses or an inability to recover the carrying value, thereby possibly requiring an impairment charge in the future. In addition, if our assumptions regarding future undiscounted cash flows and related assumptions are incorrect, a future impairment charge may be required.

Asset Retirement Obligations

Effective January 1, 2003, we adopted the provisions of SFAS 143. Under the new accounting principle, we recognize asset retirement obligations in the period in which they are incurred if a reasonable estimate of a fair value can be made and we accrete such liability through the obligation’s estimated settlement date. The associated asset retirement costs are capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the related tower fixed assets and depreciated over its estimated useful life.

Significant management estimates and assumptions are required in determining the scope and fair value of our obligations to restore leaseholds to their original condition upon termination of ground leases. In determining the scope and fair value of our obligations, assumptions were made with respect to the historical retirement experience as an indicator of future restoration probabilities, intent in renewing existing ground leases through lease termination dates, current and future value and timing of estimated restoration costs, and the credit adjusted risk-free rate used to discount future obligations. While we feel the assumptions were appropriate, there can be no assurances that actual costs and the probability of incurring obligations will not differ from estimates. We will review these assumptions periodically and we may need to adjust them as necessary. See Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Operating results in prior periods may not be meaningful predictors of future results as our gross profit mix shifts more towards site leasing. You should be aware of the dramatic changes in the nature and scope of our business in prior periods when reviewing the ensuing discussion of comparative historical results.

Year Ended 2004 Compared to Year Ended 2003

Revenues:

Site leasing revenue increased due to the increased number of tenants and the amount of equipment added to our towers. As of December 31, 2004 we had 7,257 tenants as compared to 6,847 tenants at December 31, 2003. During the year ended 2004, 88% of contractual revenues from new leases and amendments executed in 2004 were related to new tenant installation and 12% were related to additional equipment being added by existing tenants. During the year ended 2003, 89% of contractual revenues from new leases and amendments executed in 2003 were related to new tenant installation and 11% were related to additional equipment being added by existing tenants. Additionally, we have experienced, on average, higher rents per tenant due to higher rents from new tenants, higher rents upon renewal by existing tenants and additional equipment added by existing tenants.

Site development construction revenue increased primarily as a result of the significant services contract awarded by Sprint Spectrum L.P. in mid 2003, which increased our volume of activity for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period a year ago.

21

Cost of Revenues: