Graham Holdings Co

Previous wording

• Changes in International Laws and Regulations, Travel Restrictions and Sanctions.

Current wording

• Changes in International Laws and Regulations, Related Policy Announcements, Travel Restrictions and Sanctions.

Previous wording

• Changes in U.K. Tax Laws.

Current wording

• Changes in U.K. and International Tax Laws.

Previous wording

• Changing Perceptions About the Effectiveness of Television Broadcasting in Delivering Advertising.

Current wording

• Changing Perceptions About the Effectiveness of Television Broadcasting in Delivering Advertising and Competition from Digital Platforms.

Previous wording

•Failure by Saatchi Art Group, Society6 and WGB to Attract and Retain Artists, Customers and Visitors, and Successfully Drive Traffic to their Marketplaces and Media Properties.

Current wording

•Failure by Saatchi Art to Attract and Retain Artists and Customers and Convert Visitors to Customers.

Previous wording

• System Disruptions and Security Threats to the Company’s Information Technology Infrastructure.

Current wording

• System Disruptions and Security Threats to the Company’s Information Technology Infrastructure or Those of Third Parties.

Previous wording

•Changes in International Laws and Regulations and Travel Restrictions Have Materially Adversely Affected and Together with Changes in Immigration Laws or Sanctions Could Continue to Materially Adversely Affect International Student Enrollments and Kaplan’s Business.

Current wording

•Changes in International Laws and Regulations and Travel Restrictions and Related Policy Announcements, Have Materially Adversely Affected and Together with Changes in Immigration Laws or Sanctions Could Continue to Materially Adversely Affect International Student Enrollments and Kaplan’s Business.

Previous wording

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments imposed student travel restrictions (applicable to exit and entry), made recommendations for their students to return home and closed physical campus locations, and many state and professional bodies postponed or canceled examination dates related to state examinations and professional education programs, all of which have materially adversely affected Kaplan International’s operations and resulted in significant losses at Kaplan Languages Group during the pandemic. The emergence of new variants of COVID-19, and consequential changes to travel and study arrangements could further negatively affect Kaplan International and its operating results.

Current wording

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments imposed student travel restrictions (applicable to exit and entry), made recommendations for their students to return home and closed physical campus locations, and many state and professional bodies postponed or canceled examination dates related to state examinations and professional education programs, all of which have materially adversely affected Kaplan International’s operations and resulted in significant losses at Kaplan Languages Group during the pandemic. The emergence of new pandemics and consequential changes to travel and study arrangements in one or more countries could negatively affect Kaplan International and its operating results.

Previous wording

Further changes to the regulatory environment, including changes to government policy or practice in oversight and enforcement, or other factors, including geopolitical instability, imposition or extension of international sanctions, a natural disaster or a pandemic in either the students’ countries of origin or countries in which they desire to study, could continue to negatively affect Kaplan’s ability to attract and retain students and negatively affect Kaplan’s operating results. Additionally, increasingly, governments have begun imposing sales taxes on digital services, such as education, offered in their jurisdictions by foreign providers. Any significant changes to the availability of government funding for education, visa policies for students and their dependents, or other administrative immigration requirements, or the tax environment, including changes to tax laws, policies and practices, in any one or more countries in which KI operates or makes its services available could negatively affect its operating results. KI’s operations, institutions and programs in the U.S. may be subject to state-level regulation and oversight by state regulatory agencies, whose approval or exemption from approval is necessary to allow an institution to operate in the state. These agencies may establish standards for instruction, qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities, financial policies and responsibilities and other operational matters. Institutions that seek to admit international students are required to be federally certified and legally authorized to operate in the state in which the institution is physically located in order to be allowed to issue the relevant documentation to permit international students to obtain a visa.

Current wording

Further changes to the regulatory environment, including changes to government policy or practice in oversight and enforcement, or other factors, including war, civil unrest, geopolitical instability, imposition or extension of international sanctions, a natural disaster or a pandemic in either the students’ countries of origin or countries in which they desire to study, could continue to negatively affect Kaplan’s ability to attract and retain students and negatively affect Kaplan’s operating results. Increasingly, governments have begun imposing sales taxes on digital services, such as education, offered in their jurisdictions by foreign providers. Any significant changes to the availability of government funding for education or training, visa policies for students and their dependents, or other administrative immigration requirements, or the tax environment, including changes to tax laws, policies and practices, in any one or more countries in which KI operates or makes its services available could negatively affect its operating results. KI’s operations, institutions and programs in the U.S. may be subject to state-level regulation and oversight by state regulatory agencies, whose approval or exemption from approval is necessary to allow an institution to operate in the state. These agencies may establish standards for instruction, qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities, financial policies and responsibilities and other operational matters. Institutions that seek to admit international students are required to be federally certified and legally authorized to operate in the state in which the institution is physically located in order to be allowed to issue the relevant documentation to permit international students to obtain a visa. Agencies at both local and national levels in other countries may also impose similar requirements on Kaplan International’s operations outside the U.S.

Previous wording

A substantial portion of KI’s revenue comes from programs that prepare international students to study and travel in English-speaking countries. In 2023, university preparation programs were principally delivered in Australia, Singapore and the U.K. KI’s ability to enroll students in these programs is directly dependent on its ability to comply with complex regulatory environments.

Current wording

A substantial portion of KI’s revenue comes from programs that prepare international students to study and travel in English-speaking countries. In 2024, university preparation programs were principally delivered in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and the U.K. KI’s ability to enroll students in these programs is directly dependent on its ability to comply with complex regulatory environments.

Previous wording

KI’s ability to enroll international students in programs in the U.K., Singapore, Australia, and other countries and to recruit students for study with KI’s partners is directly dependent on the laws and regulations governing student immigration. Changes have already been proposed to Australian and Canadian student immigration rules, and are under consideration for the U.K. Overall, there is a trend of tightening of student immigration regulations and access to student visas worldwide.

Current wording

KI’s ability to enroll international students in programs in the U.K., U.S., Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and other countries and to recruit students for study with KI’s partners is directly dependent on the laws and regulations governing student immigration. Changes to Australian and Canadian student immigration rules have impacted, and will continue to impact, KI’s ability to recruit students for study at its own colleges and its partner universities. Overall, there is a trend of tightening of student immigration regulations and access to student visas worldwide, including, most recently, an Australian Government international indicative student visa approval target for post-secondary education providers. Since entering office in January 2025, the new U.S. presidential administration has issued executive orders and announced policy changes that may affect international student entry to, or ability to study in, the U.S., including increased visa vetting for individuals seeking to enter the U.S. and restrictions on conduct while in the U.S. Negative perceptions regarding travel to the U.S., as well as the legal and regulatory environment’s susceptibility to change by the new administration, could have a negative impact on KI’s ability to recruit international students, which could materially adversely affect Kaplan’s U.S. Pathways business as well as the U.S.-based Kaplan Languages Group.

Previous wording

Changes to levels of direct and indirect government funding for international education programs would also materially affect the success of KI’s operations. For example, if access to student loans or other funding were to be lost for KI operations that admit students who are entitled to receive the benefit of this funding, Kaplan’s operating results could be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

Changes to levels of direct and indirect government funding for international education programs would also materially affect the success of KI’s operations. For example, if access to student loans or other funding were to be lost for KI operations that admit students who are entitled to receive the benefit of this funding, Kaplan’s operating results could be materially adversely affected. The U.K. government is considering a reduction to funding for the Level 7 apprenticeship (L7) in 2025. Presently, these apprenticeships, equivalent to masters degree level study, can be funded from U.K. employer apprenticeship levy payments. The apprenticeship levy are payments to the government by U.K. employers of a certain minimum size calculated as a percentage of the employer’s tax bill. The U.K. government is proposing to restrict the ability of employers to access their levy funds so that these can no longer be used to fund apprenticeships at L7. If such a change were implemented, this would impact Kaplan Financial (a division of Kaplan Professional UK), an apprenticeship training provider whose U.K. apprenticeship business represents nearly 50% of Kaplan Professional UK’s total revenue. Kaplan anticipates that employers would fund a significant portion of L7 outside of the levy paid for apprenticeships. The extent and timing of the proposed funding changes is not yet clear.

Previous wording

•Difficulties of Managing Properties in the U.K. Could Materially Impact Kaplan’s Expenses

Current wording

•Difficulties and Expenses in Connection with Managing Properties in England and Scotland Could Materially Impact Kaplan’s Expenses.

Previous wording

Kaplan has a number of real estate investments in the U.K., usually on long-term leases. The U.K. has substantially updated its building and fire safety laws in the last few years. As the tenant, Kaplan is required to keep the buildings in repair. Kaplan usually benefits from a package of contractor and subcontractor arrangements in relation to defects that arise as a result of poor construction or failure to adhere to property regulations. If, however, the entities who have entered into these collateral agreements become insolvent, Kaplan, as the tenant, may be expected to remedy the relevant defect. The relevant costs may be material.

Current wording

Kaplan has a number of real estate investments in England and Scotland, usually on long-term leases. As the tenant, Kaplan is required to keep the buildings in repair. Kaplan usually benefits from a package of contractor and subcontractor arrangements in relation to defects in the buildings due to poor construction or failure to adhere to property regulations during construction of the properties. If, however, the entities who have entered into these collateral agreements become insolvent or successfully assert another defense to a claim from Kaplan under the relevant agreement, Kaplan, as the tenant, may be expected to carry out work related to the relevant defect and/or bear the relevant cost of such work. The relevant costs may be material. Kaplan’s ability to enforce collateral agreements may also be impacted by other factors, including but not limited to, the operation of Scottish law on time periods permitted to bring a claim. Kaplan may be required to bear some or all of the costs of work at two of its residences, the scope of which, and Kaplan’s legal responsibility for undertaking it, is yet to be established.

Previous wording

Kaplan has operations and investments in a growing number of foreign countries and regions, including Australia, Canada, the People’s Republic of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, the U.K. and the United Arab Emirates. Operating in foreign countries and regions presents a number of inherent risks, including the difficulties of complying with unfamiliar laws and regulations, effectively managing and staffing foreign operations, successfully navigating local customs and practices, preparing for potential political and economic instability and adapting to currency exchange rate fluctuations. Countries have also increasingly begun imposing national data protection laws, which increases compliance costs and creates additional legal risk in relation to operating internationally. Failure to effectively manage these risks could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s operating results.

Current wording

Kaplan has operations and investments in a growing number of foreign countries and regions, including Australia, Canada, the People’s Republic of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, the U.K. and the United Arab Emirates. Operating in foreign countries and regions presents a number of inherent risks, including the difficulties of complying with unfamiliar laws and regulations, effectively managing and staffing foreign operations, successfully navigating local customs and practices, preparing for potential political and economic instability and adapting to currency exchange rate fluctuations. Countries have also increasingly begun imposing national data protection laws, which increases compliance costs and creates additional legal risk in relation to operating internationally. New privacy or data protection legislation placing restrictions on the processing or export of personal information enacted in a jurisdiction where Kaplan operates could have a material and adverse effect should Kaplan be unable to process personal information needed to provide the services Kaplan offers or plans to offer. Failure to effectively manage these risks could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s operating results.

Previous wording

•Changes in U.K. Tax Laws Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on Kaplan International.

Current wording

•Changes in U.K. and International Tax Laws Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on Kaplan International.

Previous wording

The Glasgow College is not currently included in the OfS registration as it is located in Scotland. Under a different statutory VAT exemption, bodies that qualify for VAT purposes as “colleges of a university” are able to exempt their tuition fees from VAT, and UK Pathways Glasgow International College applies this status. In 2019, a tax case was determined by the U.K. Supreme Court on the meaning of “college of a university.” The U.K. Supreme Court decided the case in the college’s favor. The result was more favorable to private providers working in collaboration with a university. The U.K. Supreme Court emphasized five principal tests for a private provider to meet, for it to be sufficiently integrated with a university, to qualify as a “college of a university” even if it does not have a constitutional link to the university. Although the focus on these five tests has now been incorporated into official His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) guidance, it is not yet clear how HMRC will apply the Supreme Court judgment and the five key tests in practice. If the HMRC’s application of the Supreme Court judgment and the five key tests deem Glasgow International College not to constitute a “college of a university” and not entitled to a VAT exemption, KI Pathways Colleges’ financial results may be materially adversely impacted if they are not able to meet any new requirements.

Current wording

The Glasgow College is not currently included in the OfS registration as it is located in Scotland. Under a different statutory VAT exemption, bodies that qualify for VAT purposes as “colleges of a university” are able to exempt their tuition fees from VAT, and UK Pathways Glasgow International College applies this status. In 2019, a tax case was determined by the U.K. Supreme Court on the meaning of “college of a university.” The U.K. Supreme Court decided the case in the college’s favor. The result was more favorable to private providers working in collaboration with a university. The U.K. Supreme Court emphasized five principal tests for a private provider to meet, for it to be sufficiently integrated with a university, to qualify as a “college of a university,” even if it does not have a constitutional link to the university. Although the focus on these five tests has now been incorporated into official His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) guidance, it is not yet clear how HMRC will apply the Supreme Court judgment and the five key tests in practice. If HMRC’s application of the Supreme Court judgment and the five key tests deem Glasgow International College not to constitute a “college of a university” and not entitled to a VAT exemption, KI Pathways Colleges’ financial results may be materially adversely impacted if they are not able to meet any new requirements.

Previous wording

Following the departure of the U.K. from the European Union (EU) on December 31, 2020, the U.K. may further develop its VAT rules in this complex area separate from the EU rules but has not yet done so. Kaplan continues to closely monitor this area.

Current wording

Following the departure of the U.K. from the European Union (EU) on December 31, 2020, the U.K. may further develop its VAT rules in this complex area separate from the EU rules. Kaplan continues to closely monitor this area.

Previous wording

Under the ED’s incentive compensation rule, an institution participating in Title IV programs may not provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment to any person or entity engaged in any student recruiting or admission activities or in making decisions regarding the awarding of Title IV funds if such payment is based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or financial aid. KNA is a third party providing bundled services to Title IV participating institutions, including recruiting and, in the case of Purdue Global, financial aid services. As such, KNA is also subject to the incentive compensation rule and cannot provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment to any covered employees, subcontractors or other parties engaged in certain student recruiting, admission or financial aid activities based on success in securing enrollments or financial aid. In addition, KNA’s client Title IV institutions’ payments to KNA (including payments under the TOSA with Purdue Global) must comply with revenue sharing guidance provided by the ED related to bundled services agreements. In 2011 guidance, the ED provided that in certain arrangements with Title IV participating institutions where student recruiting services are “bundled” with other non-recruiting services, revenue sharing may be allowable despite the incentive compensation rule’s general prohibition on such revenue sharing with entities or individuals that provide recruiting services. Because this guidance is not codified in any rule or law, but is instead ED guidance on the applicability of the incentive compensation rule, such guidance can be revoked at any time and without notice. The ED has indicated it is considering a change to this guidance as some lawmakers and states, such as California, have publicly called for the revocation of this guidance or sought to introduce federal and state legislation seeking to prevent any such revenue sharing with entities that engage in recruiting students. The change of control of the executive branch in 2021 increased the likelihood of changes to this guidance and to the incentive compensation rule or limitations on the bundled service allowance through additional federal rulemaking. As previously described, the TOSA revenue sharing provisions are deferred purchase price payments rather than payments for services. KNA’s services under the TOSA are paid for as a percentage of KNA’s costs of delivering those services to Purdue Global. KNA cannot predict how the ED or a federal court will interpret, revise or enforce all aspects of the incentive compensation rule or the bundled service revenue sharing guidance in the future or how they would be applied to the TOSA or any of KNA’s agreements by the ED or in any litigation. Any revisions or changes in interpretation or enforcement could require KNA and its client institutions to change their practices or renegotiate the tuition revenue sharing payment terms of KNA’s agreements w…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Under the ED’s incentive compensation rule, an institution participating in Title IV programs may not provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment to any person or entity engaged in any student recruiting or admission activities or in making decisions regarding the awarding of Title IV funds if such payment is based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or financial aid. KNA is a third party providing bundled services to Title IV participating institutions, including recruiting and, in the case of Purdue Global, financial aid services. As such, KNA is also subject to the incentive compensation rule and cannot provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment to any covered employees, subcontractors or other parties engaged in certain student recruiting, admission or financial aid activities based on success in securing enrollments or financial aid. In addition, KNA’s client Title IV institutions’ payments to KNA (including payments under the TOSA with Purdue Global) must comply with revenue sharing guidance provided by the ED related to bundled services agreements. In 2011 guidance, the ED provided that in certain arrangements with Title IV participating institutions where student recruiting services are “bundled” with other non-recruiting services, revenue sharing may be allowable despite the incentive compensation rule’s general prohibition on such revenue sharing with entities or individuals that provide recruiting services. Because this guidance is not codified in any rule or law but is instead ED guidance on the applicability of the incentive compensation rule, such guidance can be revoked at any time and without notice. The ED has indicated it is considering a change to this guidance as some lawmakers and states, such as California, have publicly called for the revocation of this guidance or sought to introduce federal and state legislation seeking to prevent any such revenue sharing with entities that engage in recruiting students. The change of control of the executive branch in 2025 decreased the likelihood of changes to this guidance and to the incentive compensation rule or limitations on the bundled service allowance through additional federal rulemaking. As previously described, the TOSA revenue sharing provisions are deferred purchase price payments rather than payments for services. KNA’s services under the TOSA are paid for as a percentage of KNA’s costs of delivering those services to Purdue Global. KNA cannot predict how the ED or a federal court will interpret, revise or enforce all aspects of the incentive compensation rule or the bundled service revenue sharing guidance in the future or how they would be applied to the TOSA or any of KNA’s agreements by the ED or in any litigation. Any revisions or changes in interpretation or enforcement could require KNA and its client institutions to change their practices or renegotiate the tuition revenue sharing payment terms of KNA’s agreements wi…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

In May 2021, Kaplan received notice from the ED that it would be conducting a fact-finding process pursuant to the borrower defense to repayment regulations to determine the validity of borrower defense to repayment claims and a request for documents related to several of Kaplan’s previously owned schools. In 2021, Kaplan received claims and related information requests seeking discharge of approximately $35 million in loans, excluding interest, from former Kaplan University students. Kaplan believes it has defenses that would bar any student discharge or school liability including that the claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, unproven, incomplete and fail to meet regulatory filing requirements. The ED’s process for adjudicating these claims is subject to the borrower defense regulations but it is not clear to what extent the ED will exclude claims based on the underlying statutes of limitations, evidence provided by Kaplan, or any prior investigation related to schools attended by the student applicants. On August 16, 2022, the ED announced the approval of discharges for just under 100 borrowers who had enrolled in the medical assistant or medical billing and coding program at Kaplan Career Institute’s Kenmore Square location in Massachusetts from July 1, 2011 to February 16, 2012, when the institution stopped enrolling new students. These are borrowers the Massachusetts Attorney General identified as part of an investigation in 2013-2015. The location closed in February 2013. To date, the ED has not sought to recoup any discharged amount from Kaplan. Although the ED did not announce the total amount discharged, Kaplan believes it to be approximately $200,000. Kaplan believes that each of the students subject to discharge was likely previously covered by Kaplan’s prior settlement with the Massachusetts Attorney General through which they should have received refunds of all or part of their tuition.

Current wording

In May 2021, Kaplan received notice from the ED that it would be conducting a fact-finding process pursuant to the BDTR regulations to determine the validity of BDTR claims and a request for documents related to several of Kaplan’s previously owned schools. In 2021, Kaplan received claims and related information requests seeking discharge of approximately $35 million in loans, excluding interest, from former Kaplan University students. Kaplan believes it has defenses that would bar any student discharge or school liability including that the claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, unproven, incomplete and fail to meet regulatory filing requirements. The ED’s process for adjudicating these claims is subject to the borrower defense regulations but it is not clear to what extent the ED will exclude claims based on the underlying statutes of limitations, evidence provided by Kaplan, or any prior investigation related to schools attended by the student applicants. On August 16, 2022, the ED announced the approval of discharges for just under 100 borrowers who had enrolled in the medical assistant or medical billing and coding program at Kaplan Career Institute’s Kenmore Square location in Massachusetts from July 1, 2011 to February 16, 2012, when the institution stopped enrolling new students. These are borrowers the Massachusetts Attorney General identified as part of an investigation in 2013-2015. The location closed in February 2013. To date, the ED has not sought to recoup any discharged amount from Kaplan. Although the ED did not announce the total amount discharged, Kaplan believes it to be approximately $200,000. Kaplan believes that each of the students subject to discharge was likely previously covered by Kaplan’s prior settlement with the Massachusetts Attorney General through which they should have received refunds of all or part of their tuition.

Previous wording

The settlement agreement in Sweet v. Cardona, a case brought by plaintiffs against the ED and described below, discharges all pending BDTR claims against Kaplan filed through the date of the settlement agreement in June 2022. Although the ED may argue that it has the right to separately adjudicate those BDTR claims to attempt to seek recoupment from Kaplan, it is not clear whether a federal court would hold that the Sweet settlement resolves or moots all such claims. As noted above, the Sweet settlement also applies to claims filed prior to November 15, 2022. Although those post-June 23, 2022 claims were not automatically discharged, the settlement commits the ED to adjudicate those claims prior to January 2026.

Current wording

The settlement agreement in Sweet v. Cardona, a case brought by plaintiffs against the ED and discharges all pending BDTR claims against Kaplan filed through the date of the settlement agreement in June 2022. Although the ED may argue that it has the right to separately adjudicate those BDTR claims to attempt to seek recoupment from Kaplan, it is not clear whether a federal court would hold that the Sweet settlement resolves or moots all such claims. As noted above, the Sweet settlement also applies to claims filed prior to November 15, 2022. Although those post-June 23, 2022 claims were not automatically discharged, the settlement commits the ED to adjudicate those claims prior to January 2026.

Previous wording

KNA currently provides services to higher education institutions that are heavily regulated by federal and state laws and regulations and by accrediting bodies. Currently, a substantial portion of KNA’s revenue is attributable to service fees and deferred purchase price payments it receives under its agreement with Purdue Global, which, in the case of the deferred purchase price, are dependent upon revenue generated by Purdue Global and upon Purdue Global’s eligibility to participate in the Title IV federal student aid program. To maintain Title IV eligibility, Purdue Global and KNA’s other client institutions must be certified by the ED as eligible institutions, maintain authorizations by applicable state education agencies and be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED. Purdue Global and KNA’s other client institutions must also comply with the extensive statutory and regulatory requirements of the Higher Education Act and other state and federal laws and accrediting standards relating to their financial aid management, educational programs, financial strength, disbursement and return of Title IV funds, facilities, recruiting practices, representations made by the school and other parties, and various other matters. Additionally, Purdue Global and other client institutions are subject to laws and regulations that, among other things, limit student default rates on the repayment of Title IV loans; permit borrower defenses to repayment of Title IV loans based on certain conduct of the institution; establish specific measures of financial responsibility and administrative capability; regulate the addition of new campuses and programs and other institutional changes; require compliance with state professional licensure board requirements to the extent applicable to institutional programs; require compliance with the Title IV definition of nonprofit institution; and require state authorization and institutional and programmatic accreditation. In addition, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and subsequent guidance from the ED have created changes in the administration of federal financial assistance programs, the interpretation of which may not yet be fully understood.

Current wording

KNA currently provides services to higher education institutions that are heavily regulated by federal and state laws and regulations and by accrediting bodies. Currently, a substantial portion of KNA’s revenue is attributable to service fees and deferred purchase price payments it receives under its agreement with Purdue Global, which, in the case of the deferred purchase price, are dependent upon revenue generated by Purdue Global and upon Purdue Global’s eligibility to participate in the Title IV federal student aid program. To maintain Title IV eligibility, Purdue Global and KNA’s other client institutions must be certified by the ED as eligible institutions, maintain authorizations by applicable state education agencies and be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED. Purdue Global and KNA’s other client institutions must also comply with the extensive statutory and regulatory requirements of the Higher Education Act and other state and federal laws and accrediting standards relating to their financial aid management, educational programs, financial strength, disbursement and return of Title IV funds, facilities, recruiting practices, representations made by the school and other parties, and various other matters. Additionally, Purdue Global and other client institutions are subject to laws and regulations that, among other things, limit student default rates on the repayment of Title IV loans; permit BDTR of Title IV loans based on certain conduct of the institution; establish specific measures of financial responsibility and administrative capability; regulate the addition of new campuses and programs and other institutional changes; require compliance with state professional licensure board requirements to the extent applicable to institutional programs; require compliance with the Title IV definition of nonprofit institution; and require state authorization and institutional and programmatic accreditation. In addition, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and subsequent guidance from the ED have created changes in the administration of federal financial assistance programs, the interpretation of which may not yet be fully understood.

Previous wording

If the ED finds that Purdue Global or any other KNA client institution has failed to comply with Title IV requirements or improperly disbursed or retained Title IV program funds, it may take one or more of a number of actions, including: fining the school, requiring the school to repay Title IV program funds, limiting or terminating the school’s eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, initiating an emergency action to suspend the school’s participation in the Title IV programs without prior notice or opportunity for a hearing, transferring the school to a method of Title IV payment that would adversely affect the timing of the institution’s receipt of Title IV funds, requiring the school to submit a letter of credit, denying or refusing to consider the school’s application for renewal of its certification to participate in the Title IV programs or for approval to add a new campus or educational program, requiring the institution to comply with additional regulatory requirements reserved for schools not meeting the definition of a nonprofit institution including 90/10 and Gainful Employment requirements, and/or referring the matter for possible civil or criminal investigation. There can be no assurance that the ED will not take any of these or other actions in the future, whether as a result of lawsuits, program reviews or otherwise. In addition, on August 18, 2022 the ED granted Purdue Global a new provisional certification (“PPPA”) until June 30, 2024. Under this most recent PPPA, Purdue Global must apply for and receive approval for expansion or any substantial change before it may award, disburse or distribute Title IV funds based on the substantial change. Substantial changes generally include, but are not limited to: (a) the establishment of an additional location; (b) an increase in the level of academic offering beyond those listed in the institution’s Eligibility and Certification Approval Report; (c) the addition of any educational program (including degree, non-degree or short-term training programs), or (d) the addition of any new degree program. In addition, the institution must pay any liabilities found in a currently open program review prior to the expiration of the PPPA. Purdue Global must also quarterly inform the ED of any governmental investigations involving the university as well as provide a summary of any student complaints. The provisional certification ends upon the ED’s notification to the institution of the ED’s decision to grant or deny a six-year certification to participate in the Title IV, Higher Education Act programs. If Purdue Global or another KNA client institution loses or has limits placed on its Title IV eligibility, accreditation or state licensure, or if Purdue Global or another KNA client institution is subject to fines, repayment obligations or other adverse actions owing to its or Kaplan’s noncompliance with Title IV regulations, accreditor or state agency requirements, or other state or federa…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

If the ED finds that Purdue Global or any other KNA client institution has failed to comply with Title IV requirements or improperly disbursed or retained Title IV program funds, it may take one or more of a number of actions, including: fining the school, requiring the school to repay Title IV program funds, limiting or terminating the school’s eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, initiating an emergency action to suspend the school’s participation in the Title IV programs without prior notice or opportunity for a hearing, transferring the school to a method of Title IV payment that would adversely affect the timing of the institution’s receipt of Title IV funds, requiring the school to submit a letter of credit, denying or refusing to consider the school’s application for renewal of its certification to participate in the Title IV programs or for approval to add a new campus or educational program, requiring the institution to comply with additional regulatory requirements reserved for schools not meeting the definition of a nonprofit institution including 90/10 and Gainful Employment requirements, and/or referring the matter for possible civil or criminal investigation. There can be no assurance that the ED will not take any of these or other actions in the future, whether as a result of lawsuits, program reviews or otherwise. On November 25, 2024, the ED approved Purdue Global’s Application for Participation in the Title IV program and granted a full Program Participation Agreement. This Program Participation Agreement expires on December 31, 2028 and will need to be renewed prior to that date pursuant to federal regulations. Pursuant to the terms of the Program Participation Agreement Purdue Global must report to the ED any accreditation or governmental agency action or class action lawsuit. If Purdue Global or another KNA client institution loses or has limits placed on its Title IV eligibility, accreditation or state licensure, or if Purdue Global or another KNA client institution is subject to fines, repayment obligations or other adverse actions owing to its or Kaplan’s noncompliance with Title IV regulations, accreditor or state agency requirements, or other state or federal laws, Kaplan’s financial results of operations could be adversely affected. Additionally, as a prior owner of Title IV institutions, KNA may retain certain liability for student loans related to the current or future BDTR applications described above or future similar applications.

Previous wording

Kaplan’s ability to realize the anticipated benefits of the Purdue Global transaction will depend, in part, on its ability to successfully and efficiently provide services to Purdue Global. Achieving the anticipated benefits is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether the services can be provided in the manner and at the cost Kaplan anticipated and whether Purdue Global is able to realize anticipated student enrollment levels. If Kaplan is unable to effectively execute its post-transaction strategy, it may take longer than anticipated to achieve the benefits of the transaction or it may not realize those benefits at all. In 2022 Purdue Global began working with KNA to provide certain human resources, finance and accounting, facility management, and communications services itself, in-house. The TOSA (Kaplan’s service agreement with Purdue Global) acknowledges that the Purdue Global Board of Trustees controls the university. While the TOSA provides financial protections to Kaplan to ensure payment of certain of its fees, actions by Purdue Global that change university policies, direct the provision of certain non- academic service functions, or increase costs associated with the non-academic service functions could impact Kaplan’s ability to achieve the benefits of the transaction.

Current wording

Kaplan’s ability to realize the anticipated benefits of the Purdue Global transaction will depend, in part, on its ability to successfully and efficiently provide services to Purdue Global. Achieving the anticipated benefits is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether the services can be provided in the manner and at the cost Kaplan anticipated and whether Purdue Global is able to realize anticipated student enrollment levels. If Kaplan is unable to effectively execute its post-transaction strategy, it may take longer than anticipated to achieve the benefits of the transaction or it may not realize those benefits at all. In 2022, pursuant to the TOSA, Purdue Global began providing certain functions previously provided by KNA in-house. Those functions include human resources, finance and accounting, facility management, and communications services. The TOSA (Kaplan’s service agreement with Purdue Global) acknowledges that the Purdue Global Board of Trustees controls the university. While the TOSA provides financial protections to Kaplan to ensure payment of certain of its fees, actions by Purdue Global that change university policies, direct the provision of certain non-academic service functions, or increase costs associated with the non-academic service functions could impact Kaplan’s ability to achieve the benefits of the transaction.

Previous wording

The laws, regulations and other requirements applicable to KNA or any KNA client institutions are subject to change and to interpretation. Regulations drafted as a result of the 2021 Negotiated Rulemaking and released in 2022 and effective in July 2023 include restrictions on revenue-sharing arrangements between universities and former university owners, as discussed above. This could impact KNA Higher Education managed service provider contracts with Purdue Global. In addition, any change in general to the currently allowed revenue sharing requirements or limitations could impact other KNA client institutions such as Wake Forest, Purdue, Creighton, or Lynn (or others). These and other regulatory, policy or legal changes could include imposing outcome metrics on universities, a form of free community college, and changes to the financial aid system, including broad loan forgiveness. In addition, the 2021 Negotiated Rulemaking also resulted in new rules that cover, in part, rules related to the borrower defense to repayment adjudication process and recovery from institutions, closed school loan discharges, disability loan discharges, public loan forgiveness, income-driven repayment plans and arbitration agreements. The ED also changed the Title IV definition of “nonprofit” institution to generally exclude from that definition any institution that is an obligor on a debt owed to a former owner of the institution or maintains a revenue-based service agreement with a former owner of the institution. Such regulatory changes as well as those described above could subject Purdue Global to additional regulatory requirements. The new rules and changes to existing rules became effective July 1, 2023. In addition, there are other factors related to Purdue Global’s and other client institutions’ compliance with federal, state and accrediting agency requirements—many of which are largely outside of Kaplan’s control—that could have a material adverse effect on Purdue Global’s and other client institutions’ revenues and, in turn, on Kaplan’s operating results, including, for example:

Current wording

The laws, regulations and other requirements applicable to KNA or any KNA client institutions are subject to change and to interpretation. Regulations enacted as a result of a 2021 Negotiated Rulemaking, that became effective in July 2023 (July 2023 Regulations), include restrictions on revenue-sharing arrangements between universities and former university owners, as discussed above. This could impact KNA Higher Education managed service provider contracts with Purdue Global and other KNA client institutions such as Wake Forest, Purdue, Creighton, Lynn or others. In addition, the July 2023 Regulations included new rules and changes to existing rules related to the ability of student borrowers to obtain discharges of their obligations to repay certain Title IV loans that were first disbursed on or after July 1, 2023; the BDTR adjudication process; recoupment of BDTR discharges from institutions; closed school loan discharges; disability loan discharges; public loan forgiveness; income-driven repayment plans; colleges and universities undergoing changes in ownership; and arbitration agreements. The ED also changed the Title IV definition of “nonprofit” institution to generally exclude from that definition any institution that is an obligor on a debt owed to a former owner of the institution or maintains a revenue-based service agreement with a former owner of the institution. Such regulatory changes as well as those described above could subject Purdue Global and other KNA client institutions to additional regulatory requirements. Additionally, the application of the July 2023 Regulations related to BDTR to KNA for loans disbursed between July 1, 2017 and March 22, 2018, the close of the Purdue Global transaction, could materially affect Kaplan’s revenues. Further, the changes to the ability of students to discharge loans owed as a result of prior school closures could impose liability on Kaplan for loans made to students at institutions previously owned by Kaplan and closed during Kaplan’s ownership. These and other regulatory, policy or legal changes could include the imposition of outcome metrics on universities, a form of free community college, and changes to the financial aid system, including broad loan forgiveness. Other regulatory requirements or developments could have a material adverse effect on Purdue Global’s and other client institutions’ revenues and, in turn, on Kaplan’s operating results, including, for example:

Previous wording

Reduction in Title IV or other federal, state or private financial assistance: KNA receives revenue based on its agreements with client institutions and particularly revenue from Purdue Global under the TOSA. Purdue Global is expected to derive a significant percentage of its tuition revenues from its participation in Title IV programs. Any legislative, regulatory or other development that materially reduces the amount of Title IV, federal, state or private financial assistance available to the students of Purdue Global and other client institutions could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations. In addition, any development that makes the terms of such financial assistance less attractive could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations.

Current wording

Reductions in Title IV or other federal, state or private financial assistance: KNA receives revenue based on its agreements with client institutions and particularly revenue from Purdue Global under the TOSA. Purdue Global is expected to derive a significant percentage of its tuition revenues from its participation in Title IV programs. Any legislative, regulatory or other development that materially reduces the amount of Title IV, federal, state or private financial assistance available to the students of Purdue Global and other client institutions could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations. In addition, any development that makes the terms of such financial assistance less attractive could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations.

Previous wording

Legislative and regulatory change: Congress periodically revises the Higher Education Act and other laws and enacts new laws governing the Title IV programs and annually determines the funding level for each Title IV program and may make changes in the laws at any time. The ED and other federal and state agencies may also issue new regulations and guidance or change their interpretation of regulations at any time. For example, on October 27, 2022 and October 31, 2022 the ED released new final regulations (effective July 1, 2023) that further change the borrower defense regulations, including changes affecting the ability of student borrowers to obtain discharges of their obligations to repay certain Title IV loans that were first disbursed on or after July 1, 2023; relating to recoupment of BDTR discharges from institutions; adding a new definition for nonprofit institutions that limits the ability of such institutions to contract with former owners; and, establishing new accountability rules for colleges and universities undergoing changes in ownership. The application of these regulations to KNA for loans disbursed between July 1, 2017, and March 22, 2018, the close of the Purdue Global transaction, could materially affect Kaplan’s revenues. Additionally, changes to the ability of students to discharge loans owing to prior school closures could impose liability on Kaplan for loans made to students at institutions previously owned by Kaplan and closed during Kaplan’s ownership. Any action by Congress or the ED that significantly reduces funding for Title IV programs or the ability of Purdue Global or other client institutions to receive funding through these programs could reduce Purdue Global’s or other client institutions’ enrollments and tuition revenues and, in turn, the revenues KNA receives under the TOSA or other agreements. Any action by Congress or the ED that impacts the ability of Purdue Global to contract with KNA to receive a share of revenue as deferred payment for the sale of Kaplan University or the ability of KNA to contract with any client institution to provide bundled services in exchange for a share of tuition revenue could require KNA to modify the TOSA, other agreements or its practices and could impact the revenues KNA may receive under such agreements. Congress, the ED and other federal and state regulators may create new laws or take actions that may require Purdue Global, other client institutions or KNA to modify practices in ways that could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations.

Current wording

Changes in legislation, regulations or interpretations: Congress periodically revises the Higher Education Act and other laws and enacts new laws governing the Title IV programs and annually determines the funding level for each Title IV program and may make changes in the laws at any time. The ED and other federal and state agencies may also issue new regulations and guidance or change their interpretation of regulations at any time. In addition, any action by Congress or the ED that impacts the ability of Purdue Global to contract with KNA to receive a share of revenue as deferred payment for the sale of Kaplan University or the ability of KNA to contract with any client institution to provide bundled services in exchange for a share of tuition revenue could require KNA to modify the TOSA, other agreements or its practices and could impact the revenues KNA may receive under such agreements. Congress, the ED and other federal and state regulators may create new laws or take actions that may require Purdue Global, other client institutions or KNA to modify practices in ways that could have a material adverse effect on Kaplan’s business and results of operations.

Previous wording

Increased regulatory scrutiny of postsecondary education and service providers: The increased scrutiny of online schools that offer programs similar to those offered by Purdue Global or other client institutions and of service providers that provide services similar to Kaplan’s has resulted, and may continue to result, in additional enforcement actions, investigations and lawsuits by the ED, other federal agencies, Congress, state Attorneys General and state licensing agencies, or private plaintiffs. Recent enforcement actions have resulted in substantial liabilities, restrictions and sanctions and in some cases have led to the loss of Title IV eligibility and closure of institutions. The change of control of the executive branch and Congress in 2021 could increase the amount of regulation and scrutiny of service companies like Kaplan and online schools like Kaplan’s client institutions, and has resulted in new regulations as described in part above. This increased activity and other current and future activity may result in further legislation, rulemaking and other governmental actions affecting the amount of student financial assistance for which Purdue Global’s or other client institutions’ students are eligible, or Kaplan’s participation in Title IV programs as a third-party servicer to Purdue Global or such other client institutions. In addition, increased scrutiny and legislative proposals restricting the ability of entities like KNA that provide certain admissions-related services to Title IV participating institutions under revenue sharing arrangements could impact KNA agreements. Such scrutiny could result in requests to Kaplan for information or negative publicity that could adversely affect KNA and its client institutions.

Current wording

Increases in regulatory scrutiny of postsecondary education and service providers: The increased scrutiny of online schools that offer programs similar to those offered by Purdue Global or other client institutions and of service providers that provide services similar to Kaplan’s has resulted, and may continue to result, in additional enforcement actions, investigations and lawsuits by the ED, other federal agencies, Congress, state Attorneys General and state licensing agencies, or private plaintiffs. Recent enforcement actions have resulted in substantial liabilities, restrictions and sanctions and in some cases have led to the loss of Title IV eligibility and closure of institutions. The change of control of the executive branch and Congress in 2025 could decrease the amount of regulation of service companies like Kaplan and online schools like Kaplan’s client institutions. However, new legislation or regulation could affect Kaplan’s participation in Title IV programs as a third-party servicer to Purdue Global or such other client institutions. In addition, legislative proposals that restrict the ability of entities like KNA to provide certain admissions-related services to Title IV participating institutions under revenue sharing arrangements could impact KNA agreements.

Previous wording

• Changing Perceptions About the Effectiveness of Television Broadcasting in Delivering Advertising Could Adversely Affect the Profitability of Television Broadcasting.

Current wording

• Changing Perceptions About the Effectiveness of Television Broadcasting in Delivering Advertising and Competition from Digital Platforms Could Adversely Affect the Profitability of Television Broadcasting.

Previous wording

Historically, television broadcasting has been viewed as a cost-effective method of delivering various forms of advertising. There can be no guarantee that this historical perception will guide future decisions by advertisers. To the extent that advertisers shift advertising expenditures, including local advertising, away from broadcast television to other media outlets, including digital distribution platforms, the profitability of the Company’s television broadcasting business could be adversely affected.

Current wording

Historically, television broadcasting has been viewed as a cost-effective method of delivering various forms of advertising, particularly local advertising. There can be no guarantee that this historical perception will guide future decisions by advertisers. To the extent that advertisers shift advertising expenditures, including local advertising, away from broadcast television to other media outlets, including digital distribution platforms, the profitability of the Company’s television broadcasting business could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

• Increased Competition Resulting from Technological Innovations in News, Information and Video Programming Distribution Systems and Changing Consumer Behavior Could Adversely Affect the Company’s Operating Results.

Current wording

• Increased Competition Resulting from Technological Innovations in Video Programming Distribution Systems and Changing Consumer Behavior Could Adversely Affect the Company’s Operating Results.

Previous wording

The continuing growth and technological expansion of internet-based services has increased competitive pressure on the Company’s media businesses. Examples of such developments include delivery of programming via online platforms, including both ad-supported and subscription video programming services and the national broadcast networks’ direct-to-consumer services, technologies that enable users to fast-forward or skip advertisements, and devices that allow users to consume content on demand and in remote locations while avoiding traditional commercial advertisements or cable and satellite subscriptions. Changing consumer behavior may also put pressure on the Company’s media businesses to change traditional distribution methods. The Company obtains significant revenue from its retransmission consent agreements with traditional cable and satellite distributors. These payments are calculated on a per-subscriber basis, so that payments to the Company may decrease as customers “cut the cord” and cancel their cable and satellite subscriptions. The Company also receives payments for the distribution of its stations’ signals on certain internet-based services; however, these revenues may be less than those received from traditional cable and satellite distribution. Anticipating and adapting to changes in technology and consumer behavior on a timely basis will affect the ability of the Company’s media businesses to continue to increase their revenue. The development and deployment of new technologies and changing consumer behavior have the potential to negatively and significantly affect the Company’s media businesses in ways that cannot now be reliably predicted and that may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operating results.

Current wording

In many cases, internet-based platforms and services compete with GMG’s broadcast stations for both viewers and advertising revenues. Changing consumer behavior may also put pressure on the Company’s media businesses to alter traditional distribution methods. The Company obtains significant revenue from its retransmission consent agreements with traditional cable and satellite distributors. These payments are calculated on a per-subscriber basis, so that payments to the Company may decrease as customers “cut the cord” and cancel their cable and satellite subscriptions. The Company also receives payments for the distribution of its stations’ signals on certain internet-based services (through “opt-in” agreements negotiated by the national networks and agreements with the networks for distribution of local programming on network-owned direct-to-consumer platforms); however, these revenues may be less than those received from traditional cable and satellite distribution. Anticipating and adapting to changes in technology and consumer behavior on a timely basis will affect the ability of the Company’s media businesses to continue to increase their revenue. The development and deployment of new technologies and changing consumer behavior have the potential to negatively and significantly affect the Company’s media businesses in ways that cannot now be reliably predicted and that may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operating results.

Previous wording

The Company cannot predict how the market will evolve as the new broadcast television station technical standard, ATSC 3.0, is made available in a growing number of television markets across the country; today, ATSC 3.0 streams are available in more than 70 markets. Competing stations that transition to ATSC 3.0 may increase competition for the Company’s stations and/or create competitive pressure for the Company’s stations to launch ATSC 3.0 streams. As noted above, GMG stations WDIV-TV, WKMG-TV, WSLS-TV, and KPRC-TV have begun broadcasting ATSC 3.0 streams, and it is anticipated that KSAT-TV, WJXT-TV and WCWJ-TV will launch ATSC 3.0 streams this year. The pace of transition to the ATSC 3.0 broadcasting standard may also be affected by the availability of ATSC 3.0-capable consumer devices. Equipment manufacturers began releasing certain TV models with built-in ATSC 3.0-capable receivers in 2020, and an increasing number of external tuners or converter boxes are available, but ATSC 3.0-capable consumer devices are not yet widely available or in use in the U.S. The ongoing transition to ATSC 3.0 may cause the Company to incur substantial costs over time. More generally, the deployment of ATSC 3.0 may have other material effects on the Company’s media businesses that cannot now be reliably predicted and that may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operating results.

Current wording

The Company cannot predict how the market will evolve as the new broadcast television station technical standard, ATSC 3.0, is made available in a growing number of television markets across the country; today, ATSC 3.0 streams are available in more than 75 markets. Competing stations that transition to ATSC 3.0 may increase competition for the Company’s stations and/or create competitive pressure for the Company’s stations to launch ATSC 3.0 streams. As noted above, all of GMG stations have begun broadcasting ATSC 3.0 streams. The pace of transition to and consumer adoption of the ATSC 3.0 broadcasting standard may also be affected by the availability of ATSC 3.0-capable consumer devices. Equipment manufacturers began releasing certain TV models with built-in ATSC 3.0-capable receivers in 2020, and an increasing number of external tuners or converter boxes are available, but ATSC 3.0-capable consumer devices are not yet widely available or in use in the U.S. The ongoing transition to ATSC 3.0 may have material effects on the Company’s media businesses that cannot now be reliably predicted and that may have an adverse effect on the Company’s operating results.

Previous wording

As the number of subscribers to traditional cable, satellite and telecommunications services declines, the Company faces the possibility of declining revenues under its existing retransmission agreements, which typically provide for payment to the Company on a per-subscriber basis. Those subscribers who “cut the cord” and move to internet-based streaming services may not generate the same revenues as the Company receives under its existing retransmission consent agreements, because the distribution agreements that apply to “virtual” MVPDs are negotiated by the national networks, and the per-subscriber fees paid to network-affiliated stations are determined by the network rather than by the Company in direct negotiation with those distributors.

Current wording

As the number of subscribers to traditional cable, satellite and telecommunications services continues to decline, GMG faces the possibility of declining revenues under its existing retransmission agreements, which typically provide for payment to GMG on a per-subscriber basis. Those subscribers who “cut the cord” and move to internet-based subscription streaming services may not generate the same revenues as GMG receives under its existing retransmission consent agreements, because, as discussed above, the per-subscriber fees paid to network-affiliated stations under the distribution agreements that apply to vMVPDs may be less than the fees paid by traditional MVPDs under GMG’s retransmission consent agreements.

Previous wording

At the same time, the Company’s network affiliation agreements typically require payments to the networks with which GMG stations are affiliated in the form of “reverse retransmission consent fees,” which require the Company to share a specified portion of retransmission consent fees with the respective networks. As reverse retransmission consent fee payments required to be paid to the networks escalate, the Company potentially could retain smaller shares of revenues generated by its retransmission consent agreements. The reverse retransmission consent fee obligations are sometimes structured as annual flat fees. In those cases, as the number of subscribers to traditional MVPD platforms decreases, the Company alone bears the costs and risks of declining retransmission consent revenues.

Current wording

At the same time, GMG’s network affiliation agreements typically require payments to the networks with which GMG stations are affiliated in the form of “reverse retransmission consent fees,” which require GMG to share a specified portion of its retransmission consent revenues with the respective networks. As reverse retransmission consent fee payments required to be paid to the networks escalate, GMG potentially could retain smaller shares of revenues generated by its retransmission consent agreements. The reverse retransmission consent fee obligations are sometimes structured as annual flat fees. In those cases, as the number of subscribers to traditional MVPD platforms decreases, GMG bears the costs and risks of declining retransmission consent revenues.

Previous wording

As the national networks have launched and continue to invest in their direct-to-consumer platforms, an increasing amount of network programming that was once available exclusively on an in-market network-affiliated station is now being made available on ad-supported or subscription services, either exclusively or simultaneously with its over-the-air broadcast. The diminishing program exclusivity provided by network affiliation could decrease local broadcasters’ leverage in retransmission consent negotiations with MVPDs.

Current wording

As the national networks have launched and continue to market and invest in their direct-to-consumer platforms, an increasing amount of network programming, including valuable sports programming, that was once available exclusively on an in-market network-affiliated station is now being made available on ad-supported or subscription services such as Paramount+ (CBS) and Peacock (NBC), either exclusively or simultaneously with its over-the-air broadcast. Disney has announced it is planning to launch new direct-to-consumer sports programming service ESPN Flagship in 2025. The diminishing program exclusivity provided by network affiliation could decrease local broadcasters’ leverage in retransmission consent negotiations with MVPDs. This paradigm could create a growing imbalance for GMG, as “reverse retrans” payments to the networks increase at the same time network-affiliated stations’ exclusivity–and with it, the revenues generated by retransmission consent agreements–continues to decline.

Previous wording

The Company’s manufacturing operations are experiencing a highly competitive market for production labor that may limit its ability to meet customer demand. If staffing cannot be hired at a cost-efficient wage rate relative to product pricing, volume will be impacted.

Current wording

The Company’s manufacturing operations have experienced in recent years a highly competitive market for production labor. While the market has improved, competitiveness in the industrial sector for experienced skilled workers will continue, which may limit its ability to meet customer demand. If staffing cannot be hired at a cost-efficient wage rate relative to product pricing, volume will be impacted.

Previous wording

Managed-care organizations, hospitals, physician practices and other third-party payors continue to consolidate in response to the evolving regulatory environment, thereby enhancing their ability to influence the delivery of healthcare services and decreasing the number of organizations serving patients. This consolidation could adversely impact GHG’s businesses if they are unable to maintain their ability to participate in established networks. In addition, CSI Pharmacy and Weiss Medical both face risks from manufacturer supply shortages, competitive vertical integration and pricing power, and government intervention on drug pricing.

Current wording

Managed-care organizations, hospitals, physician practices and other third-party payors continue to consolidate in response to the evolving regulatory environment, thereby enhancing their ability to influence the delivery of healthcare services and decreasing the number of organizations serving patients. This consolidation could adversely impact GHG’s businesses if they are unable to maintain their ability to participate in established networks.

Previous wording

GHG is also subject to periodic and routine reviews, audits and investigations by federal and state government agencies and private payors, which could result in negative findings that adversely impact the business. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) increasingly uses third-party, for-profit contractors to conduct these reviews, many of which share in the amounts that CMS denies. These reviews, audits and investigations consume significant staff and financial resources and may take years to resolve.

Current wording

GHG is also subject to periodic and routine reviews, audits and investigations by federal and state government agencies and private payors, which could result in negative findings that adversely impact the business. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) increasingly uses third-party, for-profit contractors to conduct these reviews, many of which share in the amounts that CMS denies. These reviews, audits and investigations consume significant staff and financial resources and may take years to resolve. The costs associated with these actions as well as potential negative outcome could materially adversely affect GHG’s results of operations.

Previous wording

Both private and government payors are increasingly looking to value-based purchasing to lower costs. Value-based purchasing focuses on quality of outcomes and care efficiency, rather than quantity of care. Effective January 1, 2023, under the 2022 Home Health final rule for Medicare home health providers, value-based purchasing was expanded to all 50 states. Under the expanded model, home health agencies receive adjustments to their Medicare fee-for-service payments based on their performance against a set of quality measures, relative to their peers’ performance. Performance on these quality measures in a specified year (performance year) impacts payment adjustments in a later year (payment year). The Home Health Final Rule for 2024, published on November 1, 2023, contained many changes that will impact the home health value-based purchasing model in 2025. However, the value-based purchasing model will remain unchanged in 2024, with the baseline year of 2022 still in effect. CMS could also create a similar plan for hospice providers in the future. Private and government payors’ implementation of value-based purchasing requirements could negatively impact Medicare reimbursement and have an adverse effect on GHG’s financial condition, results of operations and overall cash flows.

Current wording

Both private and government payors are increasingly looking to value-based purchasing to lower costs. Value-based purchasing focuses on quality of outcomes and care efficiency, rather than quantity of care. Effective January 1, 2023, under the 2022 Home Health final rule for Medicare home health providers, value-based purchasing was expanded to all 50 states. Under the expanded model, home health agencies receive adjustments to their Medicare fee-for-service payments based on their performance against a set of quality measures, relative to their peers’ performance. Performance on these quality measures in a specified year (performance year) impacts payment adjustments in a later year (payment year). The Home Health Final Rule for 2024, published on November 1, 2023, introduced significant updates that will take effect in 2025, altering the risk profile for home health providers. These changes include a redefined set of quality measures, updated performance benchmarks, and adjustments to payment methodologies, potentially intensifying the financial and operational pressures on providers. CMS could also create a similar plan for hospice providers in the future. Private and government payors’ implementation of value-based purchasing requirements could negatively impact Medicare reimbursement and have an adverse effect on GHG’s financial condition, results of operations and overall cash flows.

Previous wording

Medicare is the primary payor for the Company’s Healthcare business and rates are established through federal legislation. Additionally, non-Medicare rates are difficult to negotiate because such payors are under pressure to reduce their own costs. As a result, the Healthcare business must manage costs in order to achieve a desired level of profitability including, but not limited to, centralization of various processes, utilization of technology and management of the number of employees utilized. If the Healthcare business is unable to streamline its processes and reduce costs, its business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

Medicare is the primary payor for the Company’s Healthcare business and rates are established through federal legislation. Additionally, non-Medicare rates are difficult to negotiate because such payors are under pressure to reduce their own costs. As a result, the Healthcare business must manage costs in order to achieve a desired level of profitability including, but not limited to, centralization of various processes, utilization of technology/automation and management of the number of employees utilized. If the Healthcare business is unable to streamline its processes and reduce costs, its business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.