Item 1A. Risk Factors

Telesat’s profitability may be adversely affected by swings in the global financial markets, which may have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s customers and suppliers.

Swings in the global financial markets that include illiquidity, market volatility, changes in interest rates and currency exchange fluctuations can be difficult to predict and negatively affect the ability of certain customers to make payments when due. Such swings may materially and adversely affect us due to the potential insolvency of Telesat’s suppliers and customers, inability of customers to obtain financing for their transponder leases, decreased customer demand, delays in supplier performance and contract terminations. Telesat’s customers may not have access to capital or a willingness to spend capital on transponder leases, or their levels of cash liquidity with which to pay for transponder leases may be adversely affected. Access of Telesat’s suppliers to capital and liquidity with which to maintain their inventories, production levels or product quality may be adversely affected, which could cause them to raise prices or cease operations. As a result, we may experience a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. These potential effects of swings in the global financial markets are difficult to forecast and mitigate.

Our equity investment in Telesat may be at risk because of Telesat’s leverage.

At December 31, 2012, Telesat had outstanding indebtedness of CAD 3.5 billion and additional borrowing capacity of CAD 140 million under its revolving facility, based on a U.S. dollar/Canadian dollar exchange rate of $1.00/CAD 0.9921. Approximately $2.6 billion of this total borrowing capacity is debt that is secured by substantially all of the assets of Telesat. This indebtedness represents a significant amount of indebtedness for a company the size of Telesat. The agreements governing this indebtedness impose operating and financial restrictions on Telesat’s activities. These restrictions on Telesat’s ability to operate its business could seriously harm its business by, among other things, limiting its ability to take advantage of financing, merger and acquisition and other corporate opportunities, which could in time adversely affect the value of our investment in Telesat.

Borrowings under Telesat’s Senior Secured Credit Facilities are at variable rates of interest and expose Telesat to interest rate risk. Assuming all revolving loans are fully drawn, each quarter point change in interest rates would result in a CAD 6.3 million change in annual interest expense on indebtedness under the Senior Secured Credit Facilities. Telesat has entered into, and in the future it may enter into, interest rate swaps that involve the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments in order to reduce interest rate volatility. Telesat may not, however, maintain interest rate swaps with respect to all of its variable rate indebtedness, and any swaps Telesat enters into may not fully mitigate its interest rate risk, may prove disadvantageous or may create additional risks.

Telesat’s indebtedness includes $1.8 billion that is denominated in U.S. dollars and is unhedged with respect to foreign exchange rates. Changes in exchange rates impact the amount that Telesat pays in interest and may significantly increase the amount that Telesat is required to pay in Canadian dollar terms to redeem the indebtedness either at maturity, or earlier if redemption rights are exercised or other events occur which require Telesat to offer to purchase the indebtedness prior to maturity, and to repay funds drawn under its US-dollar denominated facility. Unfavorable exchange rate changes could affect Telesat’s ability to repay or refinance this debt.

A breach of the covenants contained in any of Telesat’s loan agreements, including without limitation, a failure to maintain the financial ratios required under such agreements, could result in an event of default. If an event of default were to occur, Telesat’s lenders would be able to accelerate repayment of the related indebtedness, and it may also trigger a cross default under other Telesat indebtedness.

If Telesat is unable to repay or refinance its secured indebtedness when due (whether at the maturity date or upon acceleration as a result of a default), the lenders will have the right to proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure such indebtedness, which consists of substantially all of the assets of Telesat and its subsidiaries. Telesat’s ability to make payments on, or repay or refinance, its debt, will depend largely upon its future operating performance and market conditions. Disruptions in the financial markets similar to those that occurred in 2008 could make it more difficult to renew or extend Telesat’s facilities at current commitment levels on similar terms or at all. In the event that Telesat is not able to service or refinance its indebtedness, there would be a material adverse effect on the value of our equity investment in Telesat.

Telesat’s financial results and our U.S. dollar reporting of Telesat’s financial results will be affected by volatility in the Canadian/U.S. dollar exchange rate.

Portions of Telesat’s revenue, expenses and debt are denominated in U.S. dollars and changes in the U.S. dollar/Canadian dollar exchange rate may have a negative impact on Telesat’s financial results and affect the ability of Telesat to repay or refinance its borrowings. Telesat’s main currency exposures as of December 31, 2012 lie in its U.S. dollar denominated cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and debt financing. The most significant impact of variations on the exchange rate is on the U.S. dollar denominated debt financing. As of December 31, 2012, a five percent increase (decrease) in the Canadian dollar against the U.S. dollar would have increased (decreased) Telesat’s net income by approximately CAD 147 million. This analysis assumes all other variables, in particular interest rates, remain constant.

Loral reports its investment in Telesat in U.S. dollars while Telesat reports its financial results in Canadian dollars. Loral reports its investment in Telesat using the equity method of accounting. As a result, Telesat’s results of operations are subject to conversion from Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars. Changes in the U.S. dollar relationship to the Canadian dollar affect how our financial results as they relate to Telesat are reported in our consolidated financial statements. During 2012, the exchange rate moved from US$1.00/CAD 1.0213 at December 31, 2011 to US$1.00/CAD 0.9921 at December 31, 2012.

While we own 62.8% of Telesat on an economic basis, we own only 33 ¹ / ₃ % of its voting stock and therefore do not have the right to elect or appoint a majority of its Board of Directors and our interests and those of the other Telesat shareholders may diverge or conflict.

While we own 62.8% of the economic interests in Telesat, we hold only 33 ¹ / ₃ % of its voting interests. Although the restrictions on foreign ownership of Canadian satellites have been removed by the government of Canada, we are still subject to our shareholders agreement with the Public Sector Pension Investment Board (“PSP”) and the articles of incorporation of Telesat Holdco, which do not allow us to own more voting stock of Telesat Holdco than we currently own. Also, under our shareholders agreement, the governance and management of Telesat is vested in its 10-member Board of Directors, comprised of three Loral-appointed directors, three PSP appointed directors and four independent directors, two of whom also own Telesat shares with nominal economic value and 30% and 6 ² / ₃ % of the voting interests for Telesat directors, respectively. While we own a greater voting interest in Telesat than any other single stockholder with respect to election of directors and we and PSP, which owns 30% of the voting interests for directors and 66 ² / ₃ % of the voting interests for all other matters, together own a majority of Telesat’s voting power, circumstances may occur where our interests and those of PSP diverge or are in conflict. For example, it is likely that any strategic transaction involving our ownership interests in Telesat that we wish to pursue will require the cooperation of PSP, and PSP may not share our objectives or wish to pursue transactions in which we are interested or any transaction at all. In the event that our interests differ from those of PSP, PSP, with the agreement of at least three of the four independent directors, may, subject to veto rights that we have under Telesat’s shareholders agreement, cause Telesat to take actions contrary to our wishes. These veto rights are, however, limited to certain extraordinary actions — for example, the incurrence of more than $100 million of indebtedness or the purchase of assets at a cost in excess of $100 million. Moreover, our right to block these actions under the shareholders agreement falls away if, subject to certain exceptions, either (i) ownership or control, directly or indirectly by Dr. Mark H. Rachesky (President of MHR Fund Management LLC, or MHR, which, through its affiliated funds is our largest stockholder) of our voting stock falls below certain levels or (ii) there is a change in the composition of a majority of the members of Loral’s board of directors over a consecutive two-year period.

We may face indemnification claims from our sale of SS/L.

In the fourth quarter of 2012, we completed the Sale of our subsidiary, SS/L, to MDA pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. Under the terms of the Purchase Agreement, we are obligated to indemnify MDA for (1) pre-closing taxes; (2) Covered Litigation Costs and Covered Litigation Damages (as such terms are defined in the Purchase Agreement) relating to the ViaSat lawsuit, subject to certain sharing formulas and caps; and (3) certain breaches of representations, warranties and covenants, subject to certain limitations on survival of claims, deductibles and caps. MDA has the right to offset against payments due to us under the Land Note amounts that have been finally determined to be due pursuant to those indemnification claims. In certain circumstances, MDA has the right to deposit amounts due to us under the Land Note in escrow until pending indemnification claims are resolved. Indemnification claims under the Purchase Agreement could exceed amounts due to us pursuant to the Land Note requiring us to use our existing liquidity to pay such claims. To date, other than with respect to sharing of Covered Litigation Costs, MDA has submitted one claim for indemnification which relates to pre-closing taxes. We intend to vigorously contest the underlying tax assessment, but there can be no assurance that we will be successful. We may not be able to settle indemnification claims at or below the recorded value in our financial statements, and indemnification claims under the Purchase Agreement, whether pending now or made in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, including liquidity, and results of operations.

Loral Space & Communications Inc., the parent company, is a holding company with no current operations; we are dependent on cash flow from our affiliates to meet our financial obligations.

The parent company is a holding company with ownership interests in Telesat and XTAR. The parent company has no independent operations or operating assets and has ongoing cash requirements. The ability of Telesat and XTAR to make payments or distributions to the parent company, whether as dividends or as payments under applicable management and consulting agreements or otherwise, will depend on their operating results, including their ability to satisfy their own cash flow requirements and obligations including, without limitation, their debt service obligations. Moreover, covenants contained in the debt agreements of Telesat impose limitations on its ability to dividend funds to the parent company. Even if the applicable debt covenants would permit Telesat to pay dividends, the parent company will not have the ability to cause Telesat to do so. See above “While we own 62.8% of Telesat on an economic basis, we own only 33 ¹ / ₃ % of its voting stock and therefore do not have the right to elect or appoint a majority of its Board of Directors and our interests and those of the other Telesat shareholders may diverge or conflict.” Likewise, any dividend payments by XTAR would require the prior consent of our Spanish partner in the joint venture.

The parent company earns a consulting fee of $5 million a year from Telesat. Telesat’s loan documents permit this consulting fee from Telesat to be paid to the parent company only when Telesat’s ratio of consolidated total debt to consolidated EBITDA is less than 5.0 to 1.0. When the ratio is not less than 5.0 to 1.0, the consulting fee is paid through the issuance of promissory notes to Loral with an interest rate of 7% and a maturity date of October 31, 2018. Prepayment of these promissory notes may be made only if there is a sufficient capacity under a restricted payment basket, which is based on a formula of cumulative consolidated EBITDA less 1.4 times cumulative consolidated interest expense. Whether Telesat meets the financial performance criteria to enable payment is dependent upon, among other things, foreign exchange rates which are constantly fluctuating. During the fourth quarter of 2012, Telesat paid its note payable to Loral of $24 million as of September 30, 2012 in cash in full, including interest. Telesat did not pay the consulting fee for the fourth quarter of 2012. It is uncertain at this time whether Telesat will be permitted to pay the consulting fee for 2013.

In connection with our assignment in March 2011 to Telesat of our interest in the Canadian payload on the Viasat-1 satellite, Telesat agreed that, if it obtains certain supplemental capacity on the payload, Loral will be entitled to receive one-half of any net revenue actually earned by Telesat in connection with the leasing of such supplemental capacity to its customers during the first four years after the commencement of service using the supplemental capacity. There can be no assurance that Loral will receive significant revenues under this agreement.

XTAR has not generated sufficient revenues to meet all of its contractual obligations, which are substantial.

XTAR’s take-up rate in its service has been slower than anticipated. As a result, it has deferred certain payments owed to us, Hisdesat and Telesat, including payments due under an agreement with Hisdesat to lease certain transponders on the Spainsat satellite. These lease obligations were $24 million in 2012 with increases thereafter to a maximum of $28 million per year through the end of the useful life of the satellite, which is estimated to be in 2022. In addition, XTAR has entered into an agreement with Hisdesat whereby the past due balance on the Spainsat transponders of $32.3 million as of December 31, 2008, together with a deferral of $6.7 million in payments due in 2009, became payable to Hisdesat over 12 years through annual payments of $5 million. XTAR’s lease and other obligations to Hisdesat, which will aggregate in excess of $376 million over the life of the satellite, are substantial, especially in light of XTAR’s limited revenues to date. XTAR has agreed that most of its excess cash balance would be applied towards making limited payments on these obligations, as well as payments of other amounts owed to us, Hisdesat and Telesat in respect of services provided by them to XTAR. Unless XTAR is able to generate a substantial increase in its revenues, these obligations will continue to accrue and grow, which may have a material and adverse effect on our equity interest in XTAR. As of December 31, 2012, $5 million was due to Loral from XTAR.

The soundness of financial institutions and counterparties could adversely affect Telesat or us.

We and Telesat have exposure to many different financial institutions and counterparties (including those under credit, financing and insurance arrangements), including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, insurance providers and other institutions and industry participants. We and Telesat are exposed to risk, including credit risk resulting from many of the transactions executed in connection with hedging activities, in the event that any lenders or counterparties, including insurance providers, are unable to honor their commitments or otherwise default under an agreement with Telesat or us.

We have explored and expect in the future to explore various strategic transactions; this process may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations whether or not a transaction is ultimately consummated.

We have previously explored potential strategic transactions, including strategic transactions involving Telesat. In the future, we expect to pursue these or other strategic alternatives with the goal of maximizing shareholder value. The process of pursuing a strategic transaction will result in transaction costs and may result in the diversion of the attention of operating management of Telesat from business operations, the disclosure of confidential information to competitors or potential customers as part of a due diligence process and an adverse perception of Telesat in the marketplace which could, among other things, adversely affect Telesat’s ability to win new business. Any of such results could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations whether or not a strategic transaction is consummated. There can be no assurance whether or when any transaction involving Loral or Telesat will occur, and, even if a transaction is consummated, there can be no assurance as to whether or to what degree such a transaction will be successful in maximizing value to our shareholders.

We may explore and evaluate possible strategic transactions and alliances which require financing which may not be available at all or on favorable terms.

Loral may, from time to time, explore and evaluate possible strategic transactions and alliances which may include joint ventures and strategic relationships as well as business combinations or the acquisition of assets. Should Loral determine to pursue any of these opportunities, additional funds are likely to be required. There can be no assurance that we will enter into additional strategic transactions or alliances, nor do we know if we will be able to obtain the necessary financing for these transactions on favorable terms, if at all.

As part of our business strategy, we may complete acquisitions or dispositions, undertake restructuring efforts or engage in other strategic transactions. These actions could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

As part of our business strategy, we may engage in discussions with third parties regarding, or enter into agreements relating to, acquisitions, dispositions, restructuring efforts or other strategic transactions in order to manage our product and technology portfolios or further our strategic objectives. In order to pursue this strategy successfully, we must identify suitable acquisition or alliance candidates and complete these transactions, some of which may be large and complex. Any of these activities may result in disruptions to our business and may not produce the full efficiency and cost reduction benefits anticipated.

Instability in financial markets could adversely affect our ability to access additional capital.

In recent years, the volatility and disruption in the capital and credit markets have reached unprecedented levels. If these conditions continue or worsen, there can be no assurance that we will not experience a material adverse effect on our ability to borrow money or have access to capital, if needed. Lenders may be unable or unwilling to lend money. In addition, if we determine that it is appropriate or necessary to raise capital in the future, the future cost of raising funds through the debt or equity markets may be expensive or those markets may be unavailable. If we were unable to raise funds through debt or equity markets, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The Telesat information in this report other than the information included in the audited financial statements is based solely on information provided to us by Telesat.

Because we do not control Telesat, we do not have the same control and certification processes with respect to the information contained in this report on our satellite services segment that we had for the reporting on our satellite manufacturing segment. We are also not involved in managing Telesat’s day-to-day operations. Accordingly, the Telesat information contained in this report other than the information included in the audited financial statements is based solely on information provided to us by Telesat and has not been separately verified by us.

II. Risk Factors Associated With Satellite Services

Telesat’s in-orbit satellites may fail to operate as expected due to operational anomalies resulting in lost revenues, increased costs and/or termination of contracts.

Satellites utilize highly complex technology and operate in the harsh environment of space and therefore are subject to significant operational risks while in orbit. The risks include in-orbit equipment failures, malfunctions and other kinds of problems commonly referred to as anomalies. Satellite anomalies include, for example, circuit failures, transponder failures, solar array failures, telemetry transmitter failures, battery cell and other power system failures, satellite control system failures and propulsion system failures. Some of Telesat’s satellites have had malfunctions and other anomalies in the past. Acts of war, terrorism, magnetic, electrostatic or solar storms, space debris, satellite conjunctions or micrometeoroids could also damage Telesat’s satellites.

Despite working closely with satellite manufacturers to determine the causes of anomalies and mitigate them in new satellites and to provide for intrasatellite redundancies for certain critical components to minimize or eliminate service disruptions in the event of failure, anomalies are likely to be experienced in the future, whether due to the types of anomalies described above or arising from the failure of other systems or components, and intrasatellite redundancy may not be available upon the occurrence of such anomalies. There can be no assurance that, in these cases, it will be possible to restore normal operations. Where service cannot be restored, the failure could cause the satellite to have less capacity available for sale, to suffer performance degradation, or to cease operating prematurely, either in whole or in part. For example, if the damaged solar array on Telstar 14R/Estrela do Sul 2 were to deploy unexpectedly in the future, this could result in a loss of capability to provide service.

Any single anomaly or series of anomalies or other failure (whether full or partial) of any of Telesat’s satellites could cause Telesat’s revenues, cash flows and backlog to decline materially, could require Telesat to repay prepayments made by customers of the affected satellite and could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s relationships with current customers and its ability to attract new customers for satellite services. A failure could result in a customer terminating its contract for service on the affected satellite. If Telesat is unable to provide alternate capacity to an affected customer, the customer may decide to procure all or a portion of its future satellite services from an alternate supplier or the customer’s business may be so adversely affected by the satellite failure that it may not have the financial ability to procure future satellite services. In addition, an anomaly that has a material adverse effect on a satellite’s overall performance or expected orbital maneuver life could require Telesat to recognize an impairment loss, which in turn would adversely affect us. It may also require Telesat to expedite its planned replacement program, adversely affecting its profitability and increasing its financing needs and limiting the availability of funds for other business purposes. Finally, the occurrence of anomalies may adversely affect Telesat’s ability to insure satellites at commercially reasonable premiums, if at all, and may cause insurers to demand additional exclusions in policies they issue.

The actual orbital maneuver lives of Telesat’s satellites may be shorter than Telesat anticipates and Telesat may be required to reduce available capacity on its satellites prior to the end of their orbital maneuver lives.

Telesat anticipates that its satellites will have the end of orbital maneuver life dates described above in Item1-Business. For all but one of Telesat’s satellites, the expected end-of orbital maneuver life date goes beyond the manufacturer’s end-of-service life date. A number of factors will affect the actual commercial service lives of Telesat’s satellites, including:

Telesat has been forced to remove satellites from service prematurely in the past due to an unexpected reduction in their previously anticipated end-of-orbital maneuver life. It is possible that the actual orbital maneuver lives of one or more of Telesat’s existing satellites may also be shorter than originally anticipated. Further, on some of Telesat’s satellites it is anticipated that the total payload capacity may need to be reduced prior to the satellite reaching its end-of-orbital maneuver life.

Telesat periodically reviews expected orbital maneuver lives of each of its satellites using current engineering data. A reduction in the orbital maneuver life of any of Telesat’s satellites could result in a reduction of the revenues generated by that satellite, the recognition of an impairment loss and an acceleration of capital expenditures. To the extent Telesat is required to reduce payload capacity prior to the end of a satellite’s orbital maneuver life, its revenues from the satellite would be reduced.

Telesat’s satellite launches may be delayed, it may suffer launch failures or its satellites may fail to reach their planned orbital locations. Any such issue could result in the loss of a satellite or cause significant delays in the deployment of the satellite which could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

Delays in launching satellites and in the deployment of satellites are not uncommon and result from construction delays, the unavailability of reliable launch opportunities with suppliers, delays in obtaining required regulatory approvals and launch failures. If satellite construction schedules are not met, a launch opportunity may not be available at the time the satellite is ready to be launched. Satellites are also subject to certain risks related to failed launches. Launch vehicles may fail. Launch failures result in significant delays in the deployment of satellites because of the need to construct replacement satellites, which typically takes up to 30 months or longer, and to obtain another launch vehicle. A delay or perceived delay in launching a satellite, or replacing a satellite, may cause Telesat’s current customers to move to another satellite provider if they determine that the delay may cause an interruption in continuous service. In addition, Telesat’s contracts with customers who purchase or reserve satellite capacity may allow the customers to terminate their contracts in the event of a delay. Any such termination would require Telesat to refund any prepayment it may have received, and would result in a reduction in Telesat’s contracted backlog and would delay or prevent Telesat from securing the commercial benefits of the new satellite. The launch vehicle scheduled to be used by Telesat to launch Anik G1 has experienced several launch anomalies and failures in the past when used to launch satellites of other operators, and those anomalies and failures have delayed the launch of Anik G1 and may continue to delay its launch. Launch vehicles may also underperform, in which case the satellite may be lost or, if it can be placed into service by using its onboard propulsion systems to reach the desired orbital location, will have a shorter useful life.  Certain of Telesat’s satellites are nearing their expected end-of-orbital maneuver lives. Any launch failure, underperformance, delay or perceived delay could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

Telesat’s insurance will not protect it against all satellite-related losses. Further, Telesat may not be able to renew insurance on its existing satellites or obtain insurance on future satellites on acceptable terms or at all, and for certain of Telesat’s existing satellites, Telesat has elected to forego obtaining insurance.

Telesat’s current satellite insurance does not protect it against all satellite-related losses that it may experience, and it does not have in-orbit insurance coverage for all of the satellites in its fleet. As of December 31, 2012, the total net book value of Telesat’s five in-orbit satellites for which it does not have insurance is approximately CAD 115 million. Telesat’s insurance does not protect it against business interruption, loss of revenues or delay of revenues. In addition, Telesat does not insure the net book value of performance incentives that may be payable to a satellite’s manufacturer as these are payable only to the extent that the satellite operates in accordance with contracted technical specifications. Telesat’s existing launch and in-orbit insurance policies include, and any future policies that Telesat obtains can be expected to include, specified exclusions, deductibles and material change limitations. Typically, these insurance policies exclude coverage for damage or losses arising from acts of war, anti-satellite devices, electromagnetic or radio frequency interference and other similar potential risks for which exclusions are customary in the industry at the time the policy is written. In addition, they typically exclude coverage for satellite health-related problems affecting Telesat’s satellites that are known at the time the policy is written or renewed. Any claims under existing policies are subject to settlement with the insurers and may, in some instances, be payable to Telesat’s customers.

The price, terms and availability of satellite insurance has fluctuated significantly in recent years. These fluctuations may be affected by recent satellite launch or in-orbit failures and general conditions in the insurance industry. Launch and in-orbit policies on satellites may not continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. To the extent Telesat experiences a launch or in-orbit failure that is not fully insured, or for which insurance proceeds are delayed or disputed, it may not have sufficient resources to replace the affected satellite. In addition, higher premiums on insurance policies increase Telesat’s costs, thereby reducing its profitability. In addition to higher premiums, insurance policies may provide for higher deductibles, shorter coverage periods, higher loss percentages required for constructive total loss claims and additional satellite health-related policy exclusions. There can be no assurance that, upon the expiration of an in-orbit insurance policy, which typically has a term of one year, Telesat will be able to renew the policy on terms acceptable to it.

Subject to the requirements contained in the indentures governing Telesat’s senior notes and senior subordinated notes and in its senior credit agreement, Telesat may elect to reduce or eliminate insurance coverage for certain of its existing satellites, or elect not to obtain insurance policies for its future satellites, especially if exclusions make such policies ineffective, the costs of coverage make such insurance impractical or if self-insurance is deemed more effective.

Replacing a satellite upon the end of its service life will require Telesat to make significant expenditures and may require Telesat to obtain shareholder approval.

To ensure no disruption in Telesat’s business and to prevent loss of its customers, Telesat will be required to commence construction of a replacement satellite approximately three to five years prior to the expected end of service life of the satellite then in orbit. Typically, it costs in the range of $250 million to $300 million to construct, launch and insure a satellite. There can be no assurance that Telesat will have sufficient cash, cash flow or be able to obtain third party or shareholder financing to fund such expenditures on favorable terms, if at all, or that Telesat will obtain shareholder approval, where required, to procure replacement satellites. Certain of Telesat’s satellites are nearing their expected end-of-orbital maneuver lives. Should Telesat not have sufficient funds available to replace those satellites or should Telesat not receive approval from its shareholders, where required, to purchase replacement satellites, it could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

Telesat is subject to significant and intensifying competition. Telesat experiences competition both within the satellite industry and from other providers of communications capacity. Telesat’s failure to compete effectively would result in a loss of revenues and a decline in profitability, which would adversely affect Telesat’s business and results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

Telesat provides point-to-point and point-to-multipoint services for voice, data and video communications and for high-speed Internet access. A trend toward consolidation of major FSS providers has resulted in the creation of global competitors who are substantially larger than Telesat in terms of both the number of satellites they have in orbit as well as in terms of their revenues. Due to their larger sizes, these operators are able to take advantage of greater economies of scale, may be more attractive to customers, may (depending on the specific satellite and orbital location in question) have greater flexibility to restore service to their customers in the event of a partial or total satellite failure and may be able to offer expansion capacity for future requirements. Telesat also competes against regional satellite operators who may enjoy competitive advantages in their local markets. As a condition of Telesat’s licenses for certain satellites, Telesat is required by Industry Canada, the governmental department overseeing Canadian investment innovation and economic development, to invest in research and development related to satellite communication activities. Telesat’s global competitors may not face this additional financial burden.

Telesat expects a substantial portion of its ongoing business will continue to be in the Canadian domestic market. This market is characterized by increasing competition among satellite providers and rapid technological development. Historically, the Canadian regulatory framework has required the use of Canadian-licensed satellites for the delivery of direct-to-home (“DTH”) programming in Canada. It is possible that this framework could change and allow non-Canadian satellite operators that have adequate service coverage in Canadian territory to compete for future business from Telesat’s DTH customers. In 2007, Industry Canada awarded a spectrum which is suitable for providing services to Canadian customers, including DTH, to Ciel Satellite Group which was at the time Canadian controlled but has since become controlled by a foreign entity, SES S.A. the world’s second largest FSS satellite operator and a non-Canadian. In addition, in 2009, Industry Canada authorized FreeHD Canada to use a foreign-based satellite for the provision for DTH services on an interim basis. Industry Canada subsequently awarded FreeHD a license to use 12 and 14 GHz spectrum at the 95.5°W orbital position to operate an interim satellite. Industry Canada also provided approval in principle to 95°W Canadian Satellite Communications Inc. to develop and operate a 17 GHz broadcasting service satellite at 95°W.

Telesat’s business is also subject to competition from ground based forms of communications technology. For many point-to-point and other services, the offerings provided by terrestrial companies can be more competitive than the services offered via satellite. A number of companies are increasing their ability to transmit signals on existing terrestrial infrastructures, such as fiber optic cable, DSL (digital subscriber line) and terrestrial wireless transmitters often with funding and other incentives provided by government. The ability of any of these companies to significantly increase their capacity and/or the reach of their network likely would result in a decrease in the demand for Telesat’s services. Increasing availability of capacity from other forms of communications technology can create an excess supply of telecommunications capacity, decreasing the prices Telesat would be able to charge for its services under new service contracts and thereby negatively affecting Telesat’s profitability. New technology could render satellite-based services less competitive by satisfying consumer demand in other ways. Telesat also competes for local regulatory approval in places where more than one provider may want to operate and with other satellite operators for scarce frequency assignments and a limited supply of orbital locations. Telesat’s failure to compete effectively could result in a loss of revenues and a decline in profitability, a decrease in the value of its business and a downgrade of its credit rating, which would restrict its access to the capital markets.

Fluctuations in available satellite capacity could adversely affect Telesat’s results.

The availability of satellite capacity has fluctuated over time, characterized by periods of undersupply of capacity, followed by periods of substantial new satellite construction which is, in turn, followed by an oversupply of available capacity. To the extent Telesat were to experience another period of oversupply of capacity as a result of new satellite construction or otherwise, it may be forced to decrease the prices it charges for services which would adversely affect its results.

Reductions in government spending could reduce demand for Telesat’s services.

Governments, in particular the U.S. government, purchase a substantial amount of satellite services from commercial satellite operators, including Telesat. To the extent these governments reduce spending on satellite services, as a result of the need to reduce overall spending during periods of fiscal restraint, to reduce budget deficits or otherwise, demand for Telesat’s services could decrease which could adversely affect Telesat’s revenue, the prices it is able to charge for services and its results.

Changes in technology, video distribution methods and demand could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

The implementation of new technologies or the improvement of existing technologies may reduce the transponder capacity needed to transmit a given amount of information thereby reducing the total demand for capacity. For example, improvements in signal compression could allow Telesat’s customers to transmit the same amount of data using a reduced amount of capacity. The introduction of Ka-band, high throughput satellites, such as ViaSat-1, which are able to transmit substantially more content per transponder than pre-existing Ka-band satellites, may decrease demand and/or prices for pre-existing Ka-band capacity as well as C-band and Ku-band capacity. While Telesat owns the Canadian Payload on ViaSat-1, if other operators introduce more Ka-band, high throughput satellites into the markets in which Telesat participates, it could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

Telesat’s business may be negatively impacted by the growth of ‘‘over-the-top’’ (OTT) video distribution (e.g., Netflix). This type of distribution involves delivery of broadcasting services through an internet service provider that is not involved in the control or distribution of the content itself. The growth of OTT distribution may have a negative impact on the demand for the services of some of Telesat’s large customers in the video distribution business and could result in lessened demand for Telesat’s satellite capacity.

Developments that Telesat expects to support the growth in demand for satellite services, such as continued growth in corporate data and internet traffic, the continued proliferation of HDTV and continued economic growth in Latin America may fail to materialize or may not occur in the manner or to the extent Telesat anticipates.

Telesat derives a substantial amount of its revenues from only a few of its customers. A loss of, or default by, one or more of these major customers, or a material adverse change in any such customer’s business or financial condition, could materially reduce Telesat’s future revenues and contracted backlog.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, Telesat’s top five customers together accounted for approximately 53% of its revenues. At December 31, 2012, Telesat’s top five backlog customers together accounted for approximately 87% of its backlog. If any of Telesat’s major customers chose to not renew its contract or contracts at the expiration of the existing terms or sought to negotiate concessions, particularly on price, that could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition. Telesat’s customers could experience a downturn in their business or find themselves in financial difficulties, which could result in their ceasing or reducing their use of Telesat’s services (or becoming unable to pay for services they had contracted to buy). In addition, some of Telesat’s customers’ industries are undergoing significant consolidation, and Telesat’s customers may be acquired by each other or other companies, including by Telesat’s competitors. Such acquisitions could adversely affect Telesat’s ability to sell services to such customers and to any end-users whom they serve. Some customers have in the past defaulted, and Telesat’s customers may in the future default, on their obligations to Telesat due to bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failure or other reasons. Such defaults could adversely affect Telesat’s revenue, operating margins and cash flows. If Telesat’s contracted revenue backlog is reduced due to the financial difficulties of its customers, Telesat’s revenue, operating margins and cash flows would be further negatively impacted.

Telesat operates in a highly regulated industry and government regulations may adversely affect its ability to sell its services, or increase the expense of such services or otherwise limit Telesat’s ability to operate or grow its business.

As an operator of a global satellite system, Telesat is regulated by government authorities in Canada, the United States and other countries in which it operates.

In Canada, Telesat’s operations are subject to regulation and licensing by Industry Canada pursuant to the Radiocommunication Act (Canada) and by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (‘‘CRTC’’), under the Telecommunications Act (Canada). Industry Canada has the authority to issue licenses, establish standards, assign Canadian orbital locations, and plan the allocation and use of the radio frequency spectrum, including the radio frequencies upon which Telesat’s satellites and earth stations depend. The Minister responsible for Industry Canada has broad discretion in exercising this authority to issue licenses, fix and amend conditions of licenses, and to suspend or even revoke them. The CRTC has authority over the allocation (and reallocation) of satellite capacity to particular broadcasting undertakings. Some of Telesat’s service agreements are subject to CRTC approval. Telesat is required to pay different forms of ‘‘universal service’’ charges in Canada and have certain research and development obligations that do not apply to other satellite operators with which it competes. These rates and obligations could change at any time.

In the United States, the Federal Communications Commission (‘‘FCC’’) regulates the provision of satellite services to, from, or within the United States. Certain of Telesat’s satellites are owned and operated through a US subsidiary and are regulated by the FCC. In addition, to facilitate the provision of FSS satellite services in C-, Ku- and Ka-band frequencies in the United States market, foreign licensed operators can apply to have their satellites placed on the FCC’s Permitted Space Station List. Telesat’s Anik Fl, Anik FlR, Anik F2, Anik F3 and Telstar 14R/Estrela do Sul 2 satellites are currently on this list. The export from the United States of satellites and technical information related to satellites, earth station equipment and provision of services to certain countries are subject to State Department, Commerce Department and Treasury Department regulations, in particular the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”) which currently includes satellites on the list of items requiring export permits. These ITAR provisions have constrained Telesat’s access to technical information and have had a negative impact on its international consulting revenues. In addition, Telesat and its satellite manufacturers may not be able to obtain and maintain necessary export authorizations which could adversely affect its ability to procure new United States-manufactured satellites; control its existing satellites; acquire launch services; obtain insurance and pursue its rights under insurance policies; or conduct its satellite-related operations and consulting activities.

Telesat also operates satellites through licenses granted by, and are subject to regulations in, countries other than Canada and the United States. For example, the Brazilian national telecommunications agency, ANATEL, has authorized Telesat, through its subsidiary, Telesat Brasil Capacidade de Satélites Ltda. (‘‘TBCS’’), to operate Telstar 14R/Estrela do Sul 2, a Ku-band FSS satellite at 63° WL pursuant to a Concession Agreement. Telstar 18 operates at the 138° EL orbital location under an agreement with APT, which has been granted the right to use the 138° EL orbital location by The Kingdom of Tonga. Although Telesat’s agreement with APT provides it with renewal rights with respect to a replacement satellite at this orbital location, Telesat is relying on third parties to secure those orbital location rights and there can be no assurance that they will be granted at all or on a timely basis. Should Telesat be unsuccessful in obtaining renewal rights for the orbital location, because of the control over the orbital location exercised by Tonga or for other reasons, or Telesat otherwise fail to enter into agreements with APT with respect to such replacement satellite, all revenues obtained from Telstar 18 would cease and could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

In addition to regulatory requirements governing the use of orbital locations, most countries regulate transmission of signals to and from their territory, and Telesat is required to obtain and maintain authorizations to carry on business in the countries in which Telesat operates.

If Telesat fails to obtain or maintain particular authorizations on acceptable terms, such failure could delay or prevent Telesat from offering some or all of its services and adversely affect its results of operations, business prospects and financial condition. In particular, Telesat may not be able to obtain all of the required regulatory authorizations for the construction, launch and operation of any of its future satellites, for the orbital locations and spectrum for these satellites and for its ground infrastructure, on acceptable term or at all. Even if Telesat were able to obtain the necessary authorizations and orbital locations, the licenses Telesat obtains may impose significant operational restrictions, or not protect Telesat from interference that could affect the use of its satellites. Countries or their regulatory authorities may adopt new laws, policies or regulations, or change their interpretation of existing laws, policies or regulations, that could cause Telesat’s existing authorizations to be changed or cancelled, require Telesat to incur additional costs, impose or change existing pricing, or otherwise adversely affect its operations or revenues. As a result, any currently held regulatory authorizations are subject to rescission and renewal and may not remain sufficient or additional authorizations may be necessary that Telesat may not be able to obtain on a timely basis or on terms that are not unduly costly or burdensome. Further, because the regulatory schemes vary by country, Telesat may be subject to regulations in foreign countries of which Telesat is not presently aware that it is not in compliance with, and as a result could be subject to sanctions by a foreign government.

Telesat’s operations may be limited or precluded by ITU rules or processes, and Telesat is required to coordinate its operations with those of other satellite operators.

The International Telecommunication Union (“ITU”), a specialized United Nations agency, regulates the global allocation of radio frequency spectrum and the registration of radio frequency assignments and any associated orbital location in the geostationary satellite orbit. Telesat participates in the activities of the ITU. Only national administrations, however, have full standing as ITU members. Consequently, Telesat must rely on the relevant government administrations to represent its interests.

The ITU establishes the Radio Regulations, an international treaty which contains the rules concerning frequency allocations and the priority to, coordination of, and use of, radio frequency assignments. The ITU Radio Regulations define the allocation of radio frequencies to specific uses. The ITU Radio Regulations are periodically reviewed and revised at World Radiocommunication Conferences (‘‘WRC’’), which take place typically every three to four years. As a result, Telesat cannot guarantee that the ITU will not change its allocation decisions and rules in the future in a way that could limit or preclude Telesat’s use of some or all of its existing or future orbital locations or spectrum.

The ITU Radio Regulations also establish operating procedures for satellite networks and prescribe detailed coordination, notification and recording procedures. With respect to the frequencies used by commercial geostationary satellites, the ITU Radio Regulations set forth a process for protecting earlier-registered satellite systems from interference from later-registered satellite systems. In order to comply with these rules, Telesat must coordinate the operation of its satellites, including any replacement satellite that has performance characteristics that are different from those of the satellite it replaces, with other satellites. This process requires potentially lengthy and costly negotiations with parties who operate or intend to operate satellites that could affect or be affected by Telesat’s satellites. For example, as part of Telesat’s coordination effort on Telstar 12, Telesat agreed to provide four 54 MHz transponders on Telstar 12 to Eutelsat S.A. (“Eutelsat”) for the life of the satellite and has retained risk of loss with respect to those transponders. Telesat also granted Eutelsat the right to acquire, at cost, four transponders on the replacement satellite for Telstar 12. Telesat has leased back from Eutelsat three of the four transponders to provide service to its customers. In addition, the Russian Satellite Communications Company (“RSCC”) has announced that it has commenced construction of a satellite which it intends to launch and operate at 14° WL, adjacent to the location of Telesat’s Telstar 12 at 15° WL. RSCC’s ITU rights over certain frequencies at 14° WL have priority over Telesat’s use of these same frequencies on Telstar 12. Telesat has had discussions with RSCC to resolve this issue but, to date, those discussions have not been successful. Failure to reach an appropriate arrangement with RSCC may result in restrictions on the use and operation of Telstar 12 which could materially restrict Telesat’s ability to earn revenue from Telstar 12. In addition, Telstar 12 is approaching the end of its commercial service life and Telesat will soon need to commence construction of its replacement. The continued uncertainty over Telesat’s ability to reach an agreement with RSCC, or the failure to reach an agreement, could prejudice Telesat’s ability to replace Telstar 12 on a timely basis, materially restrict Telesat’s ability to earn revenue from any replacement satellite or may make a replacement satellite not economically viable.

In certain countries, a failure to resolve coordination issues is used by regulators as a justification to limit or condition market access by foreign satellite operators. In addition, while the ITU Radio Regulations require later-in-time systems to coordinate their operations with Telesat, Telesat cannot guarantee that other operators will conduct their operations so as to avoid transmitting any signals that would cause harmful interference to the signals that Telesat, or its customers, transmit. This interference could require Telesat to take steps, or pay or refund amounts to its customers, that could have a material adverse effect on Telesat’s results of operations, business prospects and financial condition. The ITU’s Radio Regulations do not contain mandatory dispute resolution or enforcement regulations and neither the ITU specifically, nor international law generally, provides clear remedies if the ITU coordination process fails. Failure to coordinate Telesat’s satellites’ frequencies successfully or to obtain or maintain other required regulatory approvals could have an adverse effect on Telesat’s business operations, prospects and financial condition, as well as on the value of its business.

If Telesat does not occupy unused orbital locations by specified deadlines, or does not maintain satellites in orbital locations it currently uses, those orbital locations may become available for other satellite operators to use.

Telesat’s in-orbit satellites do not currently occupy all of the orbital locations for which it has obtained regulatory authorizations. In some cases, the Telesat satellite that occupies an orbital location is not designed to use all of the frequencies for which Telesat has been authorized.

In accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations, governments have rights to use certain orbital locations and frequencies. Certain of these governments have in turn authorized Telesat to use several orbital locations and radio frequencies in addition to those used by its current satellites. Under the ITU Radio Regulations, Telesat must bring into use (“BIU”) these orbital locations and frequencies within a fixed period of time, or the governments in question would lose their priority rights and the orbital location, and frequencies likely would become available for use by another satellite operator. Prior to the WRC which took place in February 2012, the ITU Radio Regulations did not expressly address the manner of use or duration of use required to BIU an orbital location. At the 2012 WRC the ITU Radio Regulations were amended to expressly require, among other things, a minimum duration that a suitable satellite must be deployed and maintained at an orbital location to BIU frequency assignments at that location. In view of these requirements, it may be more difficult and/or costly to preserve unused orbital locations and frequencies and Telesat may not be able to do so. In addition, the governments that have authorized Telesat to use these orbital locations have generally conditioned such use on Telesat meeting certain milestones, including making use of the orbital location by a specified time. If Telesat is unable to place satellites into currently unused orbital locations by specified deadlines and in a manner that satisfies the ITU Radio Regulations, national regulatory requirements, or if Telesat is unable to maintain satellites at the orbital locations that it currently uses, Telesat may lose its rights to use these orbital locations and the locations could become available for other satellite operators to use. The loss of one or more of Telesat’s orbital locations could negatively affect its plans and its ability to implement its business strategy.

Telesat’s business is capital intensive, and Telesat may not be able to raise adequate capital to finance its business strategies, or Telesat may be able to do so only on terms that significantly restrict its ability to operate its business.

Implementation of Telesat’s business strategy requires a substantial outlay of capital. As Telesat pursues its business strategies and seeks to respond to developments in its business and opportunities and trends in its industry, its actual capital expenditures may differ from its expected capital expenditures. There can be no assurance that Telesat will be able to satisfy its capital requirements in the future. In addition, if one of Telesat’s satellites failed unexpectedly, there can be no assurance of insurance recovery or the timing thereof and Telesat may need to exhaust or significantly draw upon its revolving credit facility or obtain additional financing to replace the satellite. If Telesat determines that it needs to obtain additional funds through external financing and is unable to do so, Telesat may be prevented from fully implementing its business strategy.

The availability and cost to Telesat of external financing depends on a number of factors, including its credit rating and financial performance and general market conditions. Telesat’s ability to obtain financing generally may be influenced by the supply and demand characteristics of the telecommunications sector in general and of the FSS sector in particular. Declines in Telesat’s expected future revenues under contracts with customers and challenging business conditions faced by its customers are among the other factors that may adversely affect Telesat’s credit and access to the capital markets. Other factors that could impact Telesat’s credit rating include the amount of debt in its current or future capital structure, activities associated with strategic initiatives, the health of its satellites, the success or failure of its planned launches, its expected future cash flows and the capital expenditures required to execute its business strategy. The overall impact on Telesat’s financial condition of any transaction that it pursues may be negative or may be negatively perceived by the financial markets and rating agencies and may result in adverse rating agency actions with respect to its credit rating and access to the capital markets. Long-term disruptions in the capital or credit markets as a result of uncertainty or recession, changing or increased regulation or failures of significant financial institutions could adversely affect Telesat’s access to capital. A credit rating downgrade or deterioration in Telesat’s financial performance or general market conditions could limit its ability to obtain financing or could result in any such financing being available only at greater cost or on more restrictive terms than might otherwise be available and, in either case, could result in Telesat deferring or reducing capital expenditures including on new or replacement satellites. In certain circumstances, Telesat is required to obtain the approval of its shareholders to incur additional indebtedness. There can be no assurances that Telesat will receive such approval, if required.

Market conditions may make it difficult for Telesat to extend the maturity of or refinance its existing indebtedness, and any failure to do so could have a material adverse effect on its business.

As of December 31, 2012, Telesat had outstanding Senior Secured Credit Facilities consisting of: a CAD 500 million Term Loan A maturing in March 2017; a CAD 174 million Term Loan B maturing in March 2019; and a $1.716 billion Term Loan B maturing in March 2019. Together with Telesat’s CAD 140 million Revolving Credit Facility, the US Term Loan B is subject to a springing maturity which will occur on February 13, 2017 if Telesat’s Senior Notes are not refinanced. Telesat will need to refinance all or a portion of this indebtedness on or before maturity. Disruptions in the financial markets similar to those that occurred in 2008 could make it more difficult to renew or extend the facilities at current commitment levels, on similar terms or at all. A reduced commitment from the lenders, increased borrowing costs or modification to the financial covenant would result in an increase in Telesat’s financing costs and/or a decrease in its liquidity, which could adversely affect Telesat’s growth, its financial condition, its results of operations and its ability to make debt payments, including repayments on the Notes when they become due.

Telesat may experience a failure of ground operations infrastructure or interference with its satellite signals that impairs the commercial performance of, or the services delivered over, its satellites or the satellites of other operators for whom it provides ground services, which could result in a material loss of revenues.

Telesat operates an extensive ground infrastructure including a satellite control center in Ottawa, its main earth station and back up satellite control facility at Allan Park, nine earth stations throughout Canada, one teleport located in the United States and one in Brazil and its telemetry, tracking and control (“TT&C”) facility in Perth, Australia. These ground facilities are used for controlling Telesat’s satellites and for the provision of end-to-end services to Telesat’s customers.

Telesat may experience a partial or total loss of one or more of these facilities due to natural disasters (tornado, flood, hurricane or other such acts of God), fire, acts of war or terrorism or other catastrophic events. A failure at any of these facilities would cause a significant loss of service for Telesat customers. Additionally, Telesat may experience a failure in the necessary equipment at the satellite control center, at the back-up facility, or in the communication links between these facilities and remote earth station facilities. A failure or operator error affecting tracking, telemetry and control operations might lead to a break-down in the ability to communicate with one or more satellites or cause the transmission of incorrect instructions to the affected satellite(s), which could lead to a temporary or permanent degradation in satellite performance or to the loss of one or more satellites. Intentional or non-intentional electromagnetic or radio frequency interference could result in a failure of Telesat’s ability to deliver satellite services to its customers. A failure at any of Telesat’s facilities or in the communications links between its facilities or interference with its satellite signal could cause its revenues and backlog to decline materially and could adversely affect its ability to market its services and generate future revenues and profit.

Telesat purchases equipment from third party suppliers and depends on those suppliers to deliver, maintain and support these products to the contracted specifications in order for Telesat to meet its service commitments to its customers. Telesat may experience difficulty if these suppliers do not meet their obligations to deliver and support this equipment. Telesat may also experience difficulty or failure when implementing, operating and maintaining this equipment or when providing services using this equipment. This difficulty or failure may lead to delays in implementing services, service interruptions or degradations in service, which could cause Telesat’s revenues and backlog to decline materially and could adversely affect Telesat’s ability to market its services and generate future revenues and profit.

Telesat’s dependence on outside contractors could result in delays related to the design, manufacture and launch of its new satellites, which could in turn adversely affect Telesat’s operating results and prospects.

Any delays in the design, construction or launch of Telesat’s satellites could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations. There are a limited number of manufacturers that are able to design and build satellites according to the technical specifications and standards of quality Telesat requires, including EADS Astrium, Thales Alenia Space, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Orbital and SS/L. There are also a limited number of suppliers able to launch such satellites, including International Launch Services, Arianespace, Lockheed Martin and Sea Launch. Should any of Telesat’s suppliers’ businesses fail, it would reduce competition and could increase the cost of satellites and launch services. Adverse events with respect to any of Telesat’s manufacturers or launch suppliers could also result in the delay of the design, construction or launch of its satellites. General economic conditions may also affect the ability of Telesat’s manufacturers and launch suppliers to provide services on commercially reasonable terms or to fulfill their obligations in terms of manufacturing schedules, launch dates, pricing or other items. Even where alternate suppliers for such services are available, Telesat may have difficulty identifying them in a timely manner, it may incur significant additional expense in changing suppliers, and this could result in difficulties or delays in the design, construction or launch of its satellites.

A natural disaster could diminish Telesat’s ability to provide communications service.

Natural disasters could damage or destroy Telesat’s ground stations resulting in a disruption of service to its customers. Telesat has in place certain operational procedures designed to protect its antennas and ground stations during natural disasters such as a hurricane, but these procedures may not be sufficient and the collateral effects of such disasters such as flooding may impair the functioning of its ground equipment and its ability to control its satellites. If a future natural disaster impairs or destroys any of Telesat’s ground facilities, Telesat may be unable to provide service to its customers in the affected area for a period of time.

Telesat’s future reported net income could be adversely affected by impairments of the value of certain intangible assets.

The assets on Telesat’s consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2012 include goodwill valued at approximately CAD 2,447 million and other intangible assets valued at approximately CAD 859 million. Goodwill and other intangible assets (such as orbital locations) with indefinite useful lives were recorded as a result of the acquisition of Telesat and an assessment of their valuation is undertaken on an annual basis, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount is likely to exceed their recoverable amount. Telesat measures for impairment using a projected discounted cash flow method and confirms the assessment using other valuation methods. If the asset’s carrying value is more than its recoverable amount, the difference is recorded as a reduction in the amount of the asset on the balance sheet and an impairment charge in the statement of earnings. Testing for impairment requires significant subjective judgments by management. Any changes in the estimates used could have a material impact on the calculation of the recoverable amount and result in an impairment charge. Telesat cannot predict whether an event that triggers impairment will occur, when it will occur or how it will affect the reported asset values. If Telesat’s goodwill or other intangible assets are deemed to be impaired in whole or in part, it could be required to reduce or write off such assets, which could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition.

The content of third-party transmissions over Telesat’s satellites may affect Telesat since Telesat could be subject to sanctions by various governmental entities for the transmission of certain content.

Telesat provides satellite capacity for transmissions by third parties. Telesat does not decide what content is transmitted over its satellites, although its contracts generally provide it with rights to prohibit certain types of content or to cease transmission or permit Telesat to require its customers to cease their transmissions under certain circumstances. A governmental body or other entity may object to some of the content carried over Telesat’s satellites, such as ‘‘adult services’’ video channels or content deemed political in nature. Issues arising from the content of transmissions by these third parties over Telesat’s satellites could affect its future revenues, operations or relationship with certain governments or customers.

Telesat’s failure to maintain or obtain authorizations under and comply with the U.S. export control and trade sanctions laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, business prospects and financial condition.

The export of satellites and technical data related to satellites, earth station equipment and provision of services are subject to U.S. export control and economic sanctions laws, implemented by U.S. State Department, Commerce Department and Treasury Department regulations. If Telesat does not maintain its existing authorizations or obtain necessary future authorizations under the export control laws and regulations of the United States, it may be unable to export technical data or equipment to non-U.S. persons and companies, including to Telesat’s own non-U.S. employees, as required to fulfill existing contracts. If Telesat does not maintain its existing authorizations or obtain necessary future authorizations under and comply with the trade sanctions laws and regulations of the United States, it may not be able to provide satellite capacity and related administrative services to certain of its customers. Violations of these laws and regulations can also result in civil and criminal sanctions or penalties. Telesat’s ability to acquire new satellites, launch new satellites or operate its satellites could also be negatively affected if its suppliers do not obtain required U.S. export authorizations.

Telesat is subject to risks associated with doing business internationally.

Telesat’s operations internationally are subject to risks that are inherent in conducting business globally. Telesat is subject to compliance with the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and other similar anti-corruption laws, which generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to foreign government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. While Telesat’s employees are required to comply with these laws, Telesat cannot be sure that its internal policies and procedures will always protect it from violations of these laws, despite Telesat’s commitment to legal compliance and corporate ethics. Violations of these laws may result in severe criminal and civil sanctions as well as other penalties, and the SEC and U.S. Department of Justice have increased their enforcement activities with respect to the FCPA. The occurrence or allegation of these types of risks may adversely affect Telesat’s business, performance, financial condition and results of operations.

III. Litigation and Disputes

We and SS/L are involved in a patent infringement and breach of contract lawsuit with ViaSat, which, if adversely decided, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We and SS/L are involved in a patent infringement and breach of contract lawsuit with ViaSat, details of which can be found in Note 17 to the Loral consolidated financial statements. Under the terms of the Purchase Agreement relating to our sale of SS/L, we are obligated to indemnify SS/L for all Covered Litigation Costs and Covered Litigation Damages (as such terms are defined in the Purchase Agreement), subject to certain capped cost-sharing by SS/L. There can be no assurance that our or SS/L’s defenses and counterclaims will be successful with respect to all or some of ViaSat’s claims or that SS/L will prevail with respect to its assertion that ViaSat has infringed SS/L patents. A decision against us or against SS/L in this lawsuit could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

IV. Other Risks

Third parties have significant rights with respect to our affiliates.

Third parties have significant rights with respect to, and we do not have control over management of, our affiliates. For example, while we own 62.8% of the participating shares of Telesat, we own only 33 ⅓ % of the voting power. Also, Hisdesat enjoys substantial approval rights in regard to XTAR, our X-band joint venture. The rights of these third parties and fiduciary duties under applicable law could result in others acting or failing to act in ways that are not in our best interest. For example, it is likely that any strategic transaction involving Telesat or XTAR that we wish to pursue will require the cooperation of our joint venture partners, and our partners may not share our objectives or wish to pursue a transaction in which we are interested or any transaction at all.

The loss of executive officers and our inability to retain other key personnel could materially adversely affect our operations or ability to pursue strategic alternatives.

Loral and Telesat rely on a number of key employees, including members of management and certain other employees possessing unique experience in technical and commercial aspects of the satellite services business. If Loral or Telesat are unable to retain these employees, it could be difficult to replace them. In addition, the business of Telesat, with its constant technological developments, must continue to attract highly qualified and technically skilled employees. In the future, the inability to retain or replace these employees, or the inability to attract new highly qualified employees, could have a material adverse effect on the results of operations, business prospects and financial condition of Loral or Telesat.

Also, we have retained Michael B. Targoff, our former chief executive officer and president, as a consultant, in particular to provide assistance and guidance in the oversight of strategic matters relating to Telesat and XTAR and the ViaSat lawsuit. The consulting agreement may be terminated by either the Company or Mr. Targoff at any time for any reason or for no reason on ten days prior notice. There can be no assurance that Mr. Targoff will not terminate the agreement, and, were he to do so, the ability of the Company to pursue strategic alternatives with regard to Telesat and XTAR and the outcome of the ViaSat lawsuit could be adversely affected.

Interruption or failure of, or cyber-attacks on, Telesat’s or our information technology and communications systems could hurt Telesat’s or our ability to operate our respective businesses effectively, which could harm Telesat’s or our business and operating results.

Telesat’s and our ability to operate our respective businesses depends, in part, on the continuing operation of Telesat’s and our information technology and communications systems, which are an integral part of Telesat’s and our businesses. We and Telesat rely on our information and communication systems, as well as software applications developed internally and externally to, among other things, effectively manage the accounting and financial functions, including maintaining internal controls, operate Telesat’s satellites and satellites for third parties, provide consulting services by Telesat to customers and transmit customer proprietary and/or confidential content and data. Although we and Telesat take steps to secure information and communications systems, including computer systems, intranet and internet sites, email and other telecommunications and data networks, the security measures implemented have not always been effective. While we and Telesat continue to bolster systems with additional security measures, and, working with external experts, mitigate the risk of security breaches, systems may be vulnerable to theft, loss, damage and interruption from a number of potential sources and events, including unauthorized access or security breaches, inclement weather, natural or man-made disasters, earthquakes, explosions, terrorist attacks, floods, fires, cyber-attacks, computer viruses, power loss, telecommunications or equipment failures, transportation interruptions, accidents or other disruptive events or attempts to harm our or Telesat’s systems. In addition, Telesat’s and our facilities are also potentially vulnerable to break-ins, sabotage and intentional acts of vandalism. Moreover, some of these systems are not fully redundant, and disaster recovery planning cannot account for all eventualities. Telesat’s and our business and operations could be adversely affected if, as a result of a significant cyber event or otherwise, operations are disrupted or shut down, confidential or proprietary information is stolen or disclosed, costs are incurred or fines are required in connection with confidential or export-controlled information that is disclosed, significant resources are dedicated to system repairs or to increase cyber security protection or we or Telesat otherwise incur significant litigation or other costs as a result of any such event. While Telesat’s or our insurance coverage could offset losses relating to some of these types of events, to the extent any such losses are not covered by insurance, a serious disruption to systems could significantly limit Telesat or our ability to manage and operate our business efficiently, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

MHR may be viewed as our controlling stockholder and may have conflicts of interest with us in the future.

As of December 31, 2012, various funds affiliated with MHR and Dr. Rachesky held approximately 38.3% of the outstanding voting common stock of Loral as well as all issued and outstanding shares of Loral non-voting common stock, which, when taken together, represent approximately 57.4% of the outstanding common equity of Loral as of December 31, 2012. As of February 15, 2013, a representative of MHR occupies one of the seven seats on our board of directors. One seat on our board is occupied by a former managing principal of MHR, and one seat, previously occupied by a former managing principal of MHR, is currently vacant. In addition, one of our other directors was selected by the creditors’ committee in our predecessor’s chapter 11 cases, in which MHR served as the chairman. Conflicts of interests may arise in the future between us and MHR. For example, MHR and its affiliated funds are in the business of making investments in companies and may acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. Under our agreement with PSP, subject to certain exceptions, in the event that either (i) ownership or control, directly or indirectly, by Dr. Mark H. Rachesky, President of MHR, of our voting stock falls below certain levels or (ii) there is a change in the composition of a majority of the members of the Loral board of directors over a consecutive two-year period, we will lose our veto rights relating to certain actions by Telesat. In addition, after either of these events, PSP will have certain rights to enable it to exit from its investment in Telesat, including a right to cause Telesat to conduct an initial public offering in which PSP’s shares would be the first shares offered or, if no such offering has occurred within one year due to a lack of cooperation from Loral or Telesat, to cause the sale of Telesat and to drag along the other shareholders in such sale, subject to our right to call PSP’s shares at fair market value.

There is a thin trading market for our voting common stock.

Trading activity in our voting common stock, which is listed on the NASDAQ National Market, has generally been light, averaging approximately 99,500 shares per day for the year ended December 31, 2012. Moreover, over 50% of our voting common stock is effectively held by MHR and several other stockholders. If any of our significant stockholders should sell some or all of their holdings, it will likely have an adverse effect on our share price. Although the funds affiliated with MHR have restrictions on their ability to sell our shares under U.S. securities laws, we have filed a shelf registration statement in respect of the voting common stock and non-voting common stock they hold in Loral that effectively eliminates such restrictions. Such funds also have other demand and piggyback registration rights in respect of their Loral voting common stock and non-voting common stock that would also, if exercised, effectively eliminate such restrictions. In addition, our board of directors has authorized a stock repurchase program pursuant to which the Company is authorized to purchase up to 800,000 shares of our voting common stock. To the extent the Company does repurchase shares (through 2012, we purchased 154,494 shares of voting common stock), the number of shares available for trading in the market will be reduced thereby increasing further the illiquidity of our stock.

The market for our voting common stock could be adversely affected by future issuance of significant amounts of our voting common stock.

As of December 31, 2012, 21,262,340 shares of our voting common stock and 9,505,673 shares of our non-voting common stock were outstanding. On that date, there were also outstanding 27,681 non-vested restricted stock units and 231,532 vested restricted stock units. These restricted stock units, which may be settled either in cash or Loral voting common stock at the Company’s option, vest over the next five months. As of December 31, 2012, 1,296,405 shares of our voting common stock were available for future grants under our stock incentive plan. The number of shares available for grant would be reduced if outstanding SS/L phantom stock appreciation rights are settled in Loral voting common stock. Moreover, we may further amend our stock incentive plan in the future to provide for additional increases in the number of shares available for grant thereunder.

Sales of significant amounts of our voting common stock to the public, or the perception that those sales could happen, could adversely affect the market for, and the trading price of, our voting common stock.

A public offering of stock in Telesat could adversely affect the market for, and price of, our common stock and the value of our interest in Telesat.

Our shareholders agreement with PSP regarding Telesat provides for either PSP or Loral to initiate the process of conducting an initial public offering of the equity shares of Telesat Holdco if an initial public offering has not been completed by October 31, 2011, the fourth anniversary of the Telesat transaction. In July 2012, PSP delivered to Telesat Holdco and Loral a notice initiating this process which PSP subsequently withdrew. In the event Telesat were to conduct a public offering of its equity securities, it is uncertain whether the offering would be a primary offering of shares by Telesat, a secondary offering of shares by either or both of the Telesat shareholders or a combination of both types of offerings. It is also uncertain what effect an offering (and any corporate restructuring required in connection with such offering under the terms of the Telesat shareholders agreement) would have on Loral’s governance rights in Telesat. Changes in our Telesat governance rights could adversely affect the value of our interest in Telesat and the price at which our common stock trades. In addition, a public market for Telesat equity would create a situation where there would be two separate public-market proxies for the value of Telesat – our stock and the Telesat stock. Telesat stock would represent a direct interest in Telesat, whereas the value of the common shares of Loral would also include other assets and liabilities, many of which are difficult to value. Having both Telesat stock and our stock trading publicly could create confusion in the market and could adversely affect the liquidity and/or trading values of either our or Telesat’s common stock.

Changes in tax rates or policies or changes to our tax liabilities could affect operating results.

We are subject to U.S. federal, state and local income taxation on our worldwide income and foreign taxes on certain income from sources outside the United States. Significant judgment is required to determine and estimate our tax liabilities, and our future annual and quarterly tax rates could be affected by numerous factors, including changes in the applicable tax laws, composition of earnings in countries or states with differing tax rates or our valuation and utilization of deferred tax assets and liabilities. In addition, we are subject to regular examination of our income tax returns by the Internal Revenue Service and other taxing authorities. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, we regularly evaluate the adequacy of our provision for income taxes, and there can be no assurance that any final determination by a taxing authority will not result in additional tax liability which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

The future use of tax attributes is limited.

As of December 31, 2012, we had federal net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, of approximately $290 million and state NOLs, primarily California, of approximately $73 million, that are available to offset future taxable income (see Notes 2 and 11 to the Loral consolidated financial statements for a description of the accounting treatment of such NOLs). As our reorganization on November 21, 2005 constituted an “ownership change” under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, our ability to use these NOLs, as well as certain other tax attributes existing at such effective date, is subject to an annual limitation of approximately $32.6 million, subject to increase or decrease based on certain factors. If Loral experiences an additional “ownership change” during any three-year period after November 21, 2005, future use of these tax attributes may become further limited. An ownership change may be triggered by sales or acquisitions of Loral equity interests in excess of 50% by shareholders owning five percent or more of our total equity value, i.e., the total market value of our equity interests, as determined on any applicable testing date. We would be adversely affected by an additional “ownership change” if, at the time of such change, the total market value of our equity multiplied by the federal applicable long-term tax exempt rate, which at December 31, 2012 was 2.87%, was less than $32.6 million. As of December 31, 2012, since the total market value of our equity ($1.7 billion) multiplied by the federal applicable long-term tax exempt rate was approximately $48 million an “ownership change” as of that date would not have had an adverse effect.

We are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

We are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, which generally prohibits U.S. companies and their intermediaries from making corrupt payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or keeping business or otherwise obtaining favorable treatment, and requires companies to maintain adequate record-keeping and internal accounting practices to accurately reflect the transactions of the company. The FCPA applies to companies, individual directors, officers, employees and agents. Under the FCPA, U.S. companies may be held liable for actions taken by strategic or local partners or representatives. If we or our intermediaries fail to comply with the requirements of the FCPA, governmental authorities in the United States could seek to impose civil and/or criminal penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial conditions and cash flows.

Accounting standards periodically change and the application of our accounting policies and methods may require management to make estimates about matters that are uncertain.

The regulatory bodies that establish accounting standards, including, among others, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or the FASB, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, periodically revise or issue new financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. The effect of such revised or new standards on our consolidated financial statements can be difficult to predict and can materially affect how we record and report our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, our management must exercise judgment in appropriately applying many of our accounting policies and methods so they comply with generally accepted accounting principles. In some cases, the accounting policy or method chosen might be reasonable under the circumstances and yet might result in our reporting materially different amounts than would have been reported if we had selected a different policy or method. Accounting policies are critical to fairly presenting our results of operations and financial condition and may require management to make difficult, subjective or complex judgments about matters that are uncertain.