Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Altice USA Q4 and Full Year 2019 Earnings Presentation. [Operator Instructions] I'd now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Nick Brown. Thank you. Please go ahead, sir.

Hello, everyone, and thank you for joining. In a moment, I'll hand you over to Altice USA's CEO, Dexter Goei; and CFO, Mike Grau, who will take you through the presentation, and then we'll move to Q&A. As today's presentation may contain forward-looking statements, please read the disclaimer on Page 2. The slides are available on the company's website, and a replay of the call will be available after the call. And now I'll hand over to Dexter.

Thanks, Nick. Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining. I'm going to jump right into Slide 3. Revenue growth for 2019 was 2%, with adjusted EBITDA growth of 2.5% or 3.4%, excluding mobile launch costs. Following our strength in the first half of the year when we were growing north of 3%, we saw a temporary slowdown in Q3 and the first part of Q4 due to a few factors we shared in November, including lapping a prior year rate event, the impact from higher-than-normal promotional roll-offs and some disruption from our recent BSS/OSS integration. However, we saw stronger-than-expected turnaround in operational performance in December. Specifically, we saw a significant rebound in customer and broadband net additions, leading to a 7,000 net broadband additions for the quarter with normalized trends continuing so far in Q1. Even with the temporary uptick in churn in the early part of Q4, broadband and video customer trends for the whole year in 2019 were in line with prior years, as I'll show you in a minute. News and Advertising growth is still being driven by a4 and Cheddar and the offset we saw from the political cycle is expected to reverse in 2020. Altice Mobile has been ramping up since we launched in September as we continue to expand our handset lineup and have opened multiple sales channels. We are excited for the launch of new handsets this year, which we think will drive our strong switching cycle. Also, we are very happy and supportive of the T-Mo-Sprint decision, which we believe will be a very good now long-term partnership for us. On the network side, we increased investment to ramp up our fiber build during 2019 and simultaneously deployed DOCSIS 3.1, all of this to serve to drive a differentiated connectivity experience for our…

Thank you, Dexter. Turning to Slide 10. You will see our free cash flow in more detail as we generated $397 million of free cash flow in the fourth quarter. Cash CapEx was modestly lower than Q3 at $323 million, and you will remember, cash interest is lower in the second and fourth quarters because of the timing of coupon payments. Cash tax payments were just $4 million in Q4 and we still do not expect to be a significant cash taxpayer until 2021 with the remaining NOLs that we have. You can see from the other operating cash outflow of $95 million that we did not see full reversal of the working capital outflow we saw in Q3. And this is the main reason we fell slightly short of our annual free cash flow target for the year at $1.2 billion. In particular, this included temporary outflows related to the BSS/OSS transition; an extra payroll cycle in 2019, which was accelerated into Q4 from January; and working capital outflows from mobile activities, specifically handset inventory and financed handset receivables. Both the BSS/OSS payments and the extra payroll cycle will not be drags on free cash going forward. And we expect to see free cash flow growth in 2020, driven by continued revenue and EBITDA growth. We also have some large bonds becoming callable later in 2020, which should bring further cash interest savings into 2021, if the debt markets remain as supportive as they have been recently. We do not repurchase any shares in Q4, given our commitments to our bondholders to maintain leverage ratios at close to 5x at year-end. Even so, we already exceeded our initial target of $1.5 billion for 2019. Recall, we purchased $1.7 billion of stock. We repurchased $1.7 billion of stock at an…

And your first question comes from the line of Philip Cusick with JPMorgan.

Thinking about the revenue guidance and the price increase you've already announced, it seems like there's a lot of video loss in the model. Can you help us think about the model going forward? Fourth quarter, I assume, was pretty well dragged because of all the things that were dragging, broadband. I'm wondering if first quarter has rebound from there. But in general, how you're thinking about video losses here? And also, how you think about 1Q '19 as a comp to this quarter for video and broadband?

Yes. Listen -- thanks, Phil. I think on the revenue guidance, it's fair to say that we are being conservative in our guidance, given that 2 big factors are swing factors, one being mobile handsets and the second being political on the advertising side. 2 things which caught us a little offside in the second half of the fourth quarter. And so instead of being ahead of the curve, we wanted to be thoughtful and build our momentum through on revenue guidance. I'll tell you that our initial perspectives in the early part of Q1 is we saw a very good performance on the rebound of December, very good performance in January continuing into February. So it's business as usual. On the actual RGU guidance on Q1 '19 versus Q1 2020, we did have a stronger-than-expected performance in Q1 of 2019, particularly on the broadband side. I don't anticipate us matching exactly where we are next -- last year in Q1. But we do feel very good about the annual number of 72,000 for 2019 and what we did in 2018, also plus 72,000 broadband RGUs. So I think for the year, we feel very good about that target. The question really will be how that gets phased in over the quarter. And since we had such an exceptional quarter last year, Q1, I don't want to necessarily say we're going to hit that number today. On video losses, we saw the uptick in video losses of some of our peers. I think it's too early to call that today for us. But given our revenue guidance, we're being cautious that, that could come through over the year, given what the industry is seeing. We do know, clearly, as we look at the economics, though, the margin impact, particularly on gross margin is small. And as we flow through down to EBITDA and particularly down to free cash flow, it actually gets down to positive on a free cash flow basis. So we'll monitor that and we'll flag it on the revenue side specifically. But the free cash flows, we feel very, very good about it, irrespective of what happens on video.

Your next question comes from the line of Craig Moffett with MoffettNathanson.

Dexter, can you talk a little bit more about the wireless business and the changes that you expect now that the Sprint T-Mobile deal looks like it will happen. It looks as though you're ending the [Audio Gap] I'm just trying to get a sense of whether you think the business can be profitable at the current pricing long term. Or whether the change in the $20 pricing suggests that there's a different picture for the breakeven for that business than you previously thought.

Thanks, Craig. Listen, I think we feel very, very relieved and very supportive of the decision to approve the merger. I mean obviously, I guess it's not over until it closes. So we'll see if there's any subsequent appeals here in the process. But as we had flagged in our discussions and decisions and commentary around the FCC and DoJ, one, access to 5G was clearly delineated and access to the new T-Mo network; and secondly, the extension of our transaction to the consent period, which is 7 years from closing is a significant win for us. So we feel really good about the opportunities to work with new T-Mo. Obviously, there's a bunch of things to work on in terms of the transition of the network and the establishment of the 5G services. But we're very cautiously optimistic and excited about having a very long-term partnership now with the new T-Mo. In terms of the economics, our gross margin economics are good. As you know, as we flagged, the question really is the OpEx dynamics of cost on the distribution side. And this is where we're going to be thoughtful on our profitability is trying to drive volume by spending more OpEx or trying to balance a much more thoughtful view on cash flow to make sure that we're thoughtful around shareholder value and creation. So that whole balance of mix, I don't think it's -- I'm going to talk about it today. I think as we see through the year, and push through on our price increase on the mobile, even though we continue to have a very attractive unlimited package, we're just going to raise prices by $10 will be good.

Your next question comes from John Hodulik with UBS.

Great. Dexter, could you characterize the price increase you guys put through in January and maybe compared to what you've done in the past and maybe the timing? And any early reads on what the reaction has been in the subscriber base? And similarly, Verizon's got some new mix and match plans on the FiOS side. Any impact or sort of reaction from a competitive standpoint to what that could do to your business and volumes going forward?

Sure. Listen, on the price increase, I think we had a slight uptick on price increases really driven by pushing more of the programming costs on to our subscribers. So the range across the subscriber base was a price increase of 4% to 5% as opposed to, on average, about 3%, 3.5% historically. We have -- obviously, we're about 2 weeks into that price increase. Letters went out for some of our franchisees already in December. So we have seen some volume on our call centers, but nothing exceptional. No differentiator, let's call it, reaction from our customer base so far into mid-February. So we'll monitor that very closely. But to date, we've had a kind of a normalized reaction to our price increases. In terms of FiOS, just to be clear, they went out and separated video from broadband. And it's had 2 effects. I mean their headline promotional price looks more attractive on the broadband side. But if you see through to the fact that they give you an autopay discount of $10 and on top of that, their cost of equipment is more expensive than ours, the price points on their 200 meg prom -- not promo, but the 200 meg everyday pricing for single broadband is actually more expensive than our 300 megabit product today, which is on promo, but as you know, promos tend to be pretty much the existing prices. So if you look at it, they're at $39.99, plus $10 discount for autopay, so it's $49.99 and another $12, I believe, for their equipment or $15 for the equipment. So they are around closer to $65 for standard, single 200 meg broadband versus our 300 megabit broadband, which is $39.99, plus $10 plus $3.50 for our network access charge. So we're at more like $53.50 versus their $65 or if you take the autopay, it's $53.50 versus $55. So we're not seeing any impacts on volume today. And as I've mentioned, we had a very good January, and we see good trends here in February. And then when you put the bundle together, our bundle pricing is a lot more attractive than their bundle pricing when you add their single broadband plus their single video. So that's really not been today a competitive impact on our business.

Your next question comes from the line of Doug Mitchelson with Crédit Suisse.

Two questions. One is just looking for a little bit more detail on the fiber rollout, the timing of the triple play box, how many homes you're marketing today. I don't think you're doing much. But I do think customers can sign up, right? And any experience you've had so far? But when do you really light up those 600,000 households? And then separately, the comment about the wireless losses for the full year, I think you've previously, Dexter, said that you would be breakeven or profitable late in the calendar year. Is that still accurate? Is there sort of quarter-to-quarter improvement in losses that head you towards that prior target?

So on the fiber rollout, we're really trying to drive that in the second quarter of this year, and it will be across the entire 600,000 footprint. Actually, it will be more than that at the time of launch, given that we continue to light up homes ready for service every month pretty much at a pace of 50,000 plus a month based on 2020. In terms of today, we are marketing our single-play fiber product across several hundreds of thousands of homes, really continuing to test the network, test the drop dynamics and the efficiency of it. We don't really talk about the number of subscribers we have there. But we feel very good about the performance of the network and so we're ready to launch that triple play once the triple play box is available, which we expect to be able to do that in the second quarter of this year. In terms of wireless losses, I think I touched upon it a little bit in my answer to Craig, which is we like the gross profit dynamics we have right now. It's really a question of how hard we're going to push on the OpEx cost, which is really sales and marketing costs, right, both distribution on the sales side and how heavy we want to be on the marketing side. And so that guidance in terms of when we are going to be breakeven is really going to be driven by our desire on volume and how we think that impacts our fixed line business. So I think we'll continue to monitor that and happy to continue to answer that question every quarter here as we get through to the end of the year.

If I could just follow-up on that, Dexter. Is that based on needing more experience with wireless and the benefits in terms of churn and sort of operating dynamics? Or is that you sort of already have an idea in mind and you just -- you sort of want more proof around the market effectiveness as you go forward?

Yes. I think it's really the second. We've got plenty of experience on the wireless and what we think the wireless impact is on our existing subscribers on fixed line. I think the real question is the cost dynamics of distributing our mobile, which has various different elements, which are a little bit different than some of the other markets that we have. So as we continue to push forward, we're 4 months into this, and we're penetrating at a pace that's 2x what our peers did when they launched. So we are ahead of the curve, but we also are mindful that we don't want to spend the amount of money that we've seen some other people spend early on. So we're being mindful of being very good -- having a good balance there on our numbers.

Your next question comes from the line of Brett Feldman with Goldman Sachs.

And just maybe to come back, talk a little bit more about residential customer ARPU, you highlighted in the presentation, you've had 2 consecutive years here where you've grown at a pretty steady rate. You just talked about some of the rate adjustments and the up-tiering on broadband. Is it fair to say that your outlook for this year assumes steady type of growth performance in that metric, like we've seen the last 2 years? And then just one more. You've always talked about capital returns like buybacks kind of being the best way to drive value, absent an opportunity to invest in the business, for example, through M&A. You announced your buyback, but you also announced a deal. So first, I'm wondering, should we be thinking about the combination of those 2 amounts as really being the total capital you're putting to work? Or in other words, the buyback could have been bigger if you didn't have M&A? And then, can you maybe just give us an update on what the M&A opportunity set looks like out there right now?

That's a mouthful. It's like 10 questions, Brett.

One long question.

Listen, I think on the ARPU side, very consistent. We saw ARPU grow 1.3% in '18 and 1.3% in '19, right? And so the mix of the ARPU is pretty much the same trend where video ARPU was flat to slightly down, down by 0.8%, and broadband ARPU up 9.7%, right? So I think we're forecasting in our revenue guidance to be pretty consistent. I think, as Phil mentioned in his first question, we're mindful as to what revenue impact video could have, even though from a cash flow standpoint, it's got probably a positive effect on things. So I think that's why we're being cautious on our revenue guidance, just as we kind of want to see and feel through the first couple of quarters here to see where we think video trends are there. But on a profitability standpoint, we feel very good about that. In terms of buybacks, yes, listen, we -- the numbers are pretty straightforward. I think as you go through your model and you lever our EBITDA growth and you look at our free cash flow, the buyback number is there to maybe even slightly higher. Then the question really is on M&A. Yes, we announced this deal. I mean if we had hundreds of these deals, we'd love to have them because they're very, very profitable and accretive to us. It's contiguous to our business, a great area in Sparta, New Jersey and its surrounding areas. There are no over builders in that area. And it's also an underdeveloped broadband network, so we can continue to upgrade those networks and drive increased speeds. So we think the synergy opportunity on the cost side and the revenue side is significant. Even if you take that $150 million and you take it out, but you have to add some type of pro forma EBITDA coming in once we get that online 3 months from now, the impact is not going to be a significant reduction in our buyback capacity. And obviously, we think that on an LTQA basis, if we can drive the synergies quickly, we may have a limit -- very limited impact on our buyback capacity in terms of our guidance of $1.7 billion. We don't have a pipeline of a lot of these. They come -- they are -- if they're available, we pounce and we try and go very quickly. But I think we're very much like our fellow brethren in cable, which is there are not a lot of sellers out there. And when there are, they're interesting. But in terms of size, we don't see anything sizable right now that's available.

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Rollins with Citi.

When you look at the broadband business, can you unpack a little bit of the mix of rate plans that your broadband-only subscribers are taking relative to those that are on bundles? And are you seeing any resistance points in what customers are willing to spend on broadband regardless of their bandwidth consumption? If I could just tag on one other question, if there's an update on the explorations for the fiber infrastructure business that you own.

I'm not so sure I understand the first question fully. If you could just give me some more pointers there.

Yes. So you mentioned earlier in the call that the broadband customers, the broadband-only they're consuming a lot more gigabytes per month than the bundled broadband customers. And so I'm curious if those customers that are broadband-only that are consuming more bandwidth are on a different mix of rate plans in terms of the speed tiers that they're taking relative to what a, your bundled customer might take? And then as you look at what customers spend over time, are there just resistance points that customers hit regardless of what bandwidth they take, they just don't want to spend more than X dollars a month on broadband?

Okay. Sorry. That makes a lot of sense. I'm just a little thick. On -- listen, I think the -- there's 2 dynamics. One is, one we start cord shaving of people from bundled to a single broadband. Those people are up-tiering automatically because of the tremendous amount of savings they're getting from a revenue standpoint on video. They're spending that extra $10 to $20 to go up to the next tier pretty much automatically as they down tier and cord shave. So by definition, the single broadband player who is cord shaving is going to a higher speed. In terms of the adoption on the gross add standpoint, most of the gross adds who take a bundled product take a promo bundle, which tends to be a 200-meg product or a 300-meg product. Very few go in for a 1-gig product on a bundle. And where we see the higher tiers of people on gross adds on the single bundle perspective are in singles -- single data. So people will take 3, 4, 1-gig on single products much more often they do on a bundled basis. So we will always -- we are seeing definitely higher speeds taken for people on a single data subscription, whether it's someone who cord shaved or someone who gross added just on a single basis. Do we see resistance levels? No. We've consistently seen very nice growth in our broadband. We're on average broadband ARPU of about $65, and we continue to see that 9% to 10% growth year-over-year here. We don't see any slowdown going to -- particularly as we drive now on the Optimum footprint to 1-gig. And then with the fiber footprint and Optimum to be able to do 1-gig and beyond, we think we've got a very good revenue broadband road map to continue to push ARPUs on broadband further.

And just on the fiber infrastructure business, if there's an update on the exploration.

Yes. Listen, we're in talks with a couple of guys which we continue to work on there in the diligence phase on that. So I mean I can't call it. We've been asked about this and updated people regularly that this is something that people have been quite proactive and reaching out to us. And so we'll talk to them if they hit a handful of parameters that we're looking for. And so there's a couple of people who are doing that right now. And so I think that we'd be in a position to talk about this probably a couple of months from now with more clarity as to how far they get to.

Your next question comes from the line of James Ratcliffe with Evercore ISI.

Two, if I could. First of all, it looks like you re-upped MSG in the quarter and/or just early this year. What are your thoughts on RSNs in general? You have the most expensive RSN market in the country here in New York. And what sort of returns those are -- that sort of investment is giving you? And secondly, on broadband, we're seeing across the industry, cable providers trying to compete on more than just speed and adding advanced WiFi. Any thoughts on offering a, things such a cord cutter integration product stand-alone something like Comcast Flex to -- so that you could be the front end for somebody who's just buying video from multiple providers?

Sure. Listen, on the broadband side, you're right, we are competing with other things in speed so the Smart WiFi product has been very, very successful in its early stages, and we think we'll continue to drive that. It's something, particularly on the SMB side, that is getting very, very strong early adoption. So we'll continue to drive that and see how it's going. But I think from the residential customers, that's something that -- speeds continue to go and you continue to attach more and more devices to your network. The Smart WiFi is going to be very popular. I think on the video side, yes, we think the Flex product is very interesting. We obviously are developing a similar type product as well. It's not something that we are spending a huge amount of resources doing given the amount of OTT product that's out there. But the Altice One platform really is the platform that is in place to allow for a lot of OTT integration that -- to the extent that a customer is not a video subscriber can have a very good experience through the Altice One platform. And as we go on to the fiber, have this gateway configuration that will be even more attractive in terms of the way we'll be able to interact and adopt OTT platform. So I'm not saying that we will have a Flex-like product or Flex, but very, very focused on making sure that we're open and making all the OTT products available to our customers in a very seamless and user-friendly way. On the RSN side, just on the RSN side, yes, well, listen, we had a very good reup with MSG probably better than we expected. I do think that, that model, and I've probably said this historically, is under pressure. It's just -- it's a little unnatural in general to have that in the basic package. But it's New York and New York likes their sports, and we want to be good partners to our local sports teams and to our fans and customers. But if you ran the statistics, the power ratio is just not a very attractive power ratio in terms of the amount of people who spend a lot of time watching live sports relative to the cost of the live sports. So that's a model that is challenging. I think you've seen it in some of the numbers where affiliate fees are up, but the subscriber numbers are probably falling faster than the affiliate fees growth. And that's a challenging model over the long term.

Your next question comes from the line of Kannan Venkateshwar with Barclays.

So Dexter, on broadband pricing, the 9% to 10% growth that you're able to get on ARPUs, I guess, there are a couple of components to that. You, of course, have upgrades to faster speeds and you have price increases, and you also have downgrades of people who are cutting the cord and therefore, have to take faster speeds. If you could just help us understand the breakdown in that 9% to 10% of how much of it is driven by upgrades versus downgrades. And then I guess the second question is, when you think about the Verizon offer, they've obviously made it easier at the lower end of the market to get a broadband-only product. And like you mentioned, video is free cash flow negative. So losing video was actually accretive overall. Why not replicate that offer more widely, so that your back book, which is forced essentially to take a bundle, can also be more competitive versus the new Verizon offers?

Well, on the first part on broadband ARPU growth, it's really twofold. The vast majority is up-tiering of people, whether it's proactive up-tiering or people cord shaving and up-tiering thereafter. And then secondly, as you may know, when you start doing the accounting allocation for broadband ARPU, if you are giving a -- let's call it, a $69.99 promo on a double play, that's onboarding at $120 on 200 megs, and you change that promo to a $69.99 at 300 megs, that allocation of the revenue increases to broadband and decreases the video. So dollar amounts don't change, but the accounting makes us push more revenue towards the broadband because you've got 300 megs instead of 200 megs. And so that's something that's very difficult for you guys to model. And so -- but that is one of the effects as you see us and our peers come up with larger broadband packages in our bundles, the accounting allocation becomes heavy on broadband. So it's not real true ARPU, let's call it, but it's accounting ARPU, and it's reflective of the rack rates versus the bundled rate and you're giving -- allocating more. In terms of your FiOS comments, I think I mentioned to one of your colleagues who talked about it, they are not more competitive than we are today. On the broadband single play, they're more expensive than we are, and they're much more expensive on a bundled double play. So we feel as if our price points are in the right spots, cheaper than theirs both on the single and on the double play side.

Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Beale with Arete Research.

I was just trying to get a better understanding of the M&A trends. So I was just wondering if you could help us with the revenue contribution from Cheddar in the fourth quarter. And what the full year revenues might have been there. And then secondly, just also wondering about the process that you expect and time line for going from the Sprint MVNO agreement to a new T-Mobile agreement as that deal closes? And do you expect any change in the core per gig pricing there? There seems to have been some commentary from their side that they think you might pay more for better coverage, but the court papers yesterday seem to suggest that the DoJ was insisting on DISH having a relationship between T-Mobile's expanding capacity and lower wholesale pricing. So I just wondered if you had any thoughts as you head into that negotiation.

So on the M&A side, just off the top of my head, I think Cheddar contributed about $10 million of revenue in the fourth quarter and for the year, somewhere around $20 million, $25 million. And that's not the full year, that's the accounting year. So we close in June. So I guess on a full year basis, it's probably closer to $35-ish million, $40 million as to what it would contribute. In terms -- and just to maybe give you a heads-up in terms of the revenue contribution of the small cable operator, Service Electric of New Jersey, that's a $45 million to $50 million revenue for a full year. So whenever that closes, we'll get the pro rata for that year coming into our accounts. That's not in our revenue guidance. So you can add that to whatever -- whenever that is, it's probably somewhere around 20 bps of additional revenue coming in this year. In terms of or -- I think I didn't catch the entire length of your question, Andrew, on the second relative to the DoJ and DISH.

Yes. In the court papers, it basically said that DoJ had insisted on a sort of a -- of lower wholesale prices. The capacity of the new T-Mobile network increased. So just sort of weighing that up against some of the things that we've heard, T-Mobile will talk about on the agreement as it migrates to them.

Well, listen, I think we've gone to an agreement in place with Sprint. We expect that agreement to move on to the new T-Mo. We obviously have price discussions -- we had on 5G. So I don't -- we are obviously going to work through our contract and also work through the DoJ and FCC directives with them on stuff. But I don't think anything to do with DoJ and DISH is reflective of what our expectations are necessarily.

Your next question comes from the line of Peter Supino with Bernstein.

Two related questions both on marketing. So the improvement in November and December of Internet subscribers, did that come more from sign-ups or from churn improvement? And what did you do specifically to achieve that sharp improvement? And then looking forward, could you discuss marketing from kind of a more philosophical perspective? We've really struggled to reconcile Price for Life in 2019 and some of the 2-year promos that we used in 2017 with the company's broader focus on driving price and cash flow maximization. So I appreciate your thoughts on both.

Sure. In terms of the December impact, one, we saw churn normalized relative to what we saw in December of 2018. The increased impact, and that's probably, let's call it, December of 2018 was an 8,000 to 10,000 broadband net add month as opposed to a 17,000, which we saw in December. That incremental 7,000 to 9,000, let's call it, some of it, as I mentioned, was backlog related to BSS/OSS. So we lost customers on BSS/OSS for things like we didn't bill them because we lost their credit card numbers or the transfers of credit card numbers didn't go as seamlessly as it should have gone, and then obviously, they reconnected. And some of it was just better retention going to December as the promotional roll off volumes fell off dramatically. And so we saw continued trends similarly to that in terms of like-for-like performance year-over-year being very good in January of 2020 versus January of 2019, and we didn't have any more really BSS/OSS impact there. So that's really the one-off effects of December, which is catching up on some of the effects -- of the negative effects on October and November. In terms of the marketing, our view on Price for Life is not so much trying to hamstring ourselves relative to the ability to grow ARPUs with our clients. It's really to allow our clients to feel good about not being hit with a big promotional roll off sequentially year-over-year. While at the same time, we know that a lot of our clients are proactively upgrading their broadband. So whenever you do change your broadband or change any mix in your video package, if you're a bundle then your price changes and goes back to a new price. So our anticipation, we see that even with some of our early Price for Life people that started in June as the people are proactively changing their packages and lose the Price for Life. But they like the fact that they know they're not going to get hit by that $15 to $20 promotional roll-off, which is a lot higher than the price increase that happens on an annual basis, off-cycle relative to the price increase, which becomes a double whammy, right? And that's something that drives a significant amount of call volume, which we're trying to eliminate.

And your final question comes from the line of Ben Swinburne with Morgan Stanley.

Two questions. Dexter, on the 1-gig rollout, can you give us a sense for sort of how much of your footprint you are marketing that service? I think you mentioned the Bronx and your fiber footprint within Optimum and kind of what that goes to in 2020. Just trying to get a sense for how much that may be a tailwind to customer growth. And then secondly, I think earlier in the call, you mentioned you expect revenue per customer growth in the 1% to 1.5% range for '20. I just want to come back and confirm that, given the price increase of 4 to 5, I thought more might convert over to ARPU yields. I just wanted to make sure I heard that correctly.

So just to hit on your second question first. I don't think we talked about volumes growing 1% to 1.5%.

No. I mean ARPU. If I said volumes, it's ARPU per customer.

Okay. Yes. So ARPU trends, right? We had an ARPU or at least, let's call it, B2C revenues of 1.5%, 1.6% growth in the last 2 years, which was broken out 1.3% in price and 0.3% in volume. I think it's fair to say to talk around those same numbers, excluding any acceleration of video losses. So that would be our anticipation. You're right in saying that our price increase is higher and assuming we get the same retention numbers in terms of percentages of that going forward, we could see some higher impact on the 1.3% maybe being a little bit higher. So -- but again, we're being a little bit conservative here relative to -- we just want to see what the impacts of video will be throughout the year. In terms of the 1-gig rollout, the Bronx is, what, 800,000 homes passed, and we have about half of that market in terms of penetration. And in terms of the amount of fiber footprint that we have rolled out 1-gig through today that we market to, it's about 200,000, 250,000 homes. So today, we're marketing around just over 1 million homes on 1-gig. I don't think we are modeling in, let's call it, expecting a dramatic improvement in penetration of 1-gig that's driving broadband revenue growth this year. But the rest -- the entire Optimum footprint will be 1-gig ready this year. So we will be marketing 1-gig across the entire Optimum footprint this year.

This concludes the question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn the call back to the presenters for any closing remarks.

Thank you very much for joining, everyone. Do let us know if you've got any follow-up questions, and we look forward to catching up with you in the next few weeks. Thank you.

Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.