SBAコミュニケーションズ（SBAC）2026年第3四半期決算説明会：自社株買い、AFFOガイダンス引き上げ、周波数パイプライン

要点

• SBAコミュニケーションズの2026年第3四半期における1株あたりAFFOは3.90ドル、全社のタワーキャッシュフロー利益率は80%、調整後EBITDA利益率は69%となりました。
• 同社は配当と自社株買いを通じて約4億3,000万ドルを株主に還元しました。平均価格179.68ドルで170万株を3億ドルで取得し、自社株買いの承認残高は8億ドルとなっています。
• 経営陣は2026年の通期AFFO予想の中央値を200万ドル、1株あたりAFFO予想の中央値を0.08ドル引き上げました。為替変動ならびにチリおよびエクアドル事業の売却の影響を除くと、増額幅はそれぞれ500万ドルと0.11ドルとなります。
• 国内における新規リースおよび契約変更の請求額は合計約800万ドルとなり、海外における新規リースおよび契約変更の請求額は約500万ドルに達しました。
• SBAは南米3市場の約1,800か所の基地局サイトの売却に合意し、ブラジルを除く同地域からの撤退を完了しました。これらの資産は、年間リース収入で約4,300万ドル、年間調整後EBITDAで2,050万ドルに相当します。
• 経営陣は、アッパーCバンドを含む新たな周波数帯が将来のタワー展開を支えると期待しています。また、衛星関連の地上インフラやタワーサイトにおける分散型AIコンピューティングについても、より長期的な機会と捉えています。

主要財務データ

取締役会は1株あたり1.25ドルの四半期配当の実施を決定しました。2026年11月12日時点の株主に対し、2026年12月10日に支払われます。この配当金は前年同期比で約13%増加しており、通期1株あたりFFO予想の中央値に対して年換算で約41%の水準となります。

事業および業績の動向

米国におけるリースおよびネットワーク投資

米国の顧客アクティビティは2026年上半期をわずかに下回ったものの、経営陣の予想通りに推移しました。通信事業者がカバレッジの解消や容量拡張を進めたことで、新規リースが引き続きアクティビティの大部分を占めました。また、既存サイトにおいても、ミッドバンド周波数帯、Massive MIMO、より高容量の無線機器を含む5G関連のアップグレードが行われました。

経営陣によると、通信事業者のアクティビティには依然としてばらつきがあります。1社は非常に活発である一方、1社は緩やかに低調、もう1社は非常に低調となっています。全体としての申請件数は、顧客ミックスの変化は見られるものの、過去2年間の平均水準と概ね一致していると説明されました。

国内の実質的な解約（チャーン）は、特定の大手顧客固有の要因による影響を受けました。スプリント関連の解約額は第3四半期に1,600万ドルとなり、2026年の通期解約額は引き続き5,500万ドル〜5,600万ドルと予想されています。経営陣は2027年にスプリント関連の解約額が2,000万ドル未満に減少すると見込んでいます。エコーシスター関連の解約額は第3四半期に1,400万ドルで、2026年の合計は3,600万ドルに達する見込みです。

スプリントとエコーシスターを除くと、米国の標準化された解約率は時間をかけて約1%に向けて推移する可能性があると経営陣は語りました。

海外ポートフォリオの再編

SBAは2024年初頭に開始したポートフォリオの見直しを継続しました。第3四半期中、同社は南米3市場における約1,800か所のサイトの売却に合意しました。2件の取引はすでに完了しており、経営陣は残る市場からの撤退も年内に完了すると見込んでいます。

チリとエクアドルの売却により、2026年の業績予想はサイトリース収入で約1,000万ドル、タワーキャッシュフローで600万ドル、調整後EBITDAで400万ドル下方修正されました。本予想には、規制当局の承認待ちであり第4四半期に完了する見込みのペルーのタワー売却の影響は含まれていません。

SBAは当四半期中に中米およびアフリカを中心に約210基のタワーを建設しました。これは第2四半期の99基から2倍以上に増加しています。経営陣は、今後の四半期でも建設数がこの程度の水準を維持すると予想しています。

同社はアフリカ事業を維持し、投資を継続する計画です。経営陣は、南アフリカとタンザニアが力強いリターンを生み出しており、投資資本リターンは米国以外の同社拠点の中で最高水準であると説明しました。

周波数帯展開のパイプライン

経営陣は、アッパーCバンドを将来の重要な需要ドライバーとして強調しました。オークションは2027年4月に開始され、7月までに完了する予定です。これにより3.98GHz〜4.14GHzの160メガヘルツ帯が利用可能になります。ローワーCバンドと組み合わせることで、無線通信用に連続した440メガヘルツのミッドバンド周波数帯が創出されます。

SBAは、アッパーCバンドに関連するタワー運用の一部が、周波数帯の完全な空きを待たずに2028年に開始する可能性があると考えています。また、AT&Tが保有する600メガヘルツ帯やTモバイルのCバンドなど、通信事業者がすでに保有している周波数帯からの展開活動は、2027年中にもより早く始まると経営陣は見込んでいます。時期や業績への影響は、通信事業者の決定や既存の契約関係に依存します。

エッジコンピューティングとAIインフラ

SBA Edgeを通じて、同社はタワーサイトで利用可能な電力、ファイバー、セキュリティ、シェルター、敷地スペースを活用し、分散型コンピューティングを支援しています。すでにいくつかのサイトでは、分散型AI推論および計算能力を構築する企業と連携して運用されています。

経営陣によると、現在の運用の大半は200〜300キロワット程度を使用していますが、一部の施設では1メガワット以上を必要としています。これらのプロジェクトは空きスペースや余剰電力を利用するため、追加の資本要件は限定的なものにとどまっています。短期的収益は緩やかなものになると予想されていますが、経営陣はこのモデルを全米のタワーポートフォリオ全体に拡大できる可能性があると見ています。

経営陣による業績見通し（ガイダンス）

SBAは2026年のAFFO見通しの中央値を200万ドル、1株あたりAFFO見通しの中央値を0.08ドル引き上げました。為替変動の影響およびチリとエクアドルの事業売却を除くと、それぞれの増額幅は500万ドルおよび0.11ドルとなります。

経営陣は、この改善の主な要因として、純現金利息費用の減少、非裁量的設備投資の減少、および第3四半期の自社株買いに伴う発行済株式数の減少を挙げています。

為替変動ならびにチリとエクアドルの売却がなければ、サイトリース収入、タワーキャッシュフロー、調整後EBITDAの通期見通しはほぼ横ばいであっただろうと経営陣は語りました。

2026年の見通しには、決算発表日以降に完了した追加の自社株買いや、手続き中のペルーのタワー売却による影響は含まれていません。

各市場で通信事業者の統合、再編、ネットワーク最適化が進む中、海外の解約率は2027年も高水準で推移すると予想されています。経営陣は2028年に正常化が始まると見ており、長期的に標準化された海外解約率のレンジを約2%〜2.5%と試算しています。

リスクと注視すべき分野

• 通信事業者の申請件数には依然としてばらつきがあり、四半期ごとのリース活動に変動が生じています。
• スプリントとエコーシスターの解約が国内公表解約率の重荷となり続けており、海外における再編により海外解約率は2027年を通じて高水準が続く見込みです。
• ペルーのタワー売却は依然として規制当局の承認待ちとなっています。
• 周波数帯展開の時期は、オークション、空き容量化のプロセス、通信事業者の資本配分および商用展開の決定に依存します。
• エッジコンピューティングはまだ初期段階にあり、短期的収益は控えめと予想され、顧客による導入も発展途上です。
• 金利の高止まりにより今後のリファイナンス活動の時期に関する不確実性が生じていますが、経営陣は資金調達環境について引き続き堅調であると述べています。

アナリスト質疑応答のハイライト

DISHの設備と再利用の可能性

SBAは運用中であったDISHとのリース契約を約3,000件保有していました。破産訴訟に関連するリース契約解除を受け、関連設備は実質的に放棄され、現在はSBAが管理していると経営陣は語りました。大半の設備は設置されたままとなっていますが、電波は送信されていません。

複数の事業者がこの設備に関心を示しています。旧リース契約が自動的に引き継がれることはないため、新たな利用者はSBAと個別に交渉する必要があります。

衛星ネットワークと地上インフラ

スペースXとDISHに関する動向について尋ねられた際、経営陣は確認できる具体的な情報はないと回答しました。しかし、SBAは、どこでも利用可能な高品質のモバイルカバレッジを追求するプロバイダーであれば地上ネットワーク構成要素が必要になり、それがタワーインフラの需要を生み出す可能性があると考えています。

資本配分

経営陣は自社株買いを引き続き有意義かつ機動的に実施する見込みです。SBAは自社株買いから得られるリターンを、買収、新規タワー建設、その他の投資と比較します。経営陣は、現在の非公開インフラ資産の価格設定を踏まえると、公開市場での評価圧力が継続する場合、資産買収よりも自社株買いを優先する可能性があることを示唆しました。

負債のリファイナンス

SBAは、11億6,500万ドルのABS（資産担保証券）タワー証券を推定利率5.25%でリファイナンスする見込みです。2027年償還分について、経営陣は担保付きABSによる調達から、シニア社債や無担保タームローンAなど、投資適格の無担保金融商品へのシフトを拡大することを予想しています。

戦略的見直し

経営陣によると、戦略的見直しは海外資産の売却にとどまらず、すべての事業ラインと活動を網羅しています。大幅な進展は見られるものの、プロセスは完了していません。これには市場からの撤退と、ミリコムの買収を通じた中米での拡張などの追加投資の両方が含まれています。

決算説明会文字起こし全文

---

決算説明会の完全なトランスクリプト

経営陣による説明

Operator

Welcome, and thank you for joining the SBA Third Quarter 2026 results. [Operator Instructions]

With that, I'll turn the call over to Louis Friend, Vice President, Finance and Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Louis Friend

Good evening, and thank you for joining us for SBA's Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. Here with me today are Brendan Cavanagh, our President and Chief Executive Officer; and Marc Montagner, our Chief Financial Officer.

Some of the information we will discuss on this call is forward-looking, including, but not limited to, any guidance for 2026 and beyond. In today's press release, and in our SEC filings, we detail material risks that may cause our future results to differ from our expectations. Our statements are as of today, November 2, and we have no obligation to update any forward-looking statement we may make.

In addition, our comments will include non-GAAP financial measures and other key operating metrics. The reconciliation of and other information regarding these items can be found in our supplemental financial data package, which is located on the landing page of our Investor Relations website.

With that, I will now turn it over to Brendan to comment on the third quarter.

Brendan Cavanagh

Thanks, Louis. We had another great quarter with industry-leading AFFO per share, strong operating margins, continued progress on our portfolio review, over $430 million returned to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases, and a solid investment-grade balance sheet. In the U.S., the level of customer activity in the third quarter was slightly below what we saw in the first half of the year, but in line with our expectations. Our customers remain focused on investing in their wireless networks. The bulk of the activity continues to come from new leases as carriers address coverage gaps and add capacity.

In addition to new leases, payers are upgrading their existing leases with 5G-capable mid-band spectrum, including C-band and technological improvements such as massive MIMO and higher capacity radios. Fixed wireless access also continues to grow, with millions of new subscribers compared to just a few years ago. That growth, paired with steadily increasing mobile data traffic, is placing more and more strength on today's networks.

According to CTIA's 2026 annual survey released in September, in 2025, mobile data grew by 20% in the U.S. and expectations are for data demand to quadruple by 2032. Much of that fueled by AI and the continued growth in nonphone devices such as wearables and smart sensors. To help support this growth, we expect to see a new wave of spectrum come to market soon, including AT&T's 600 megahertz.

New spectrum has always been one of the most important drivers of our business. And looking further out, the spectrum pipeline continues to build, and I believe it is as strong as it has been in many years. The upper C-band auction is scheduled to begin in April of next year, with the FCC required to complete it by July. It will make 160 megahertz of spectrum between 3.98 and 4.14 gigahertz available and combined with the existing lower C-band create a large 440 megahertz of contiguous mid-band for wireless use. Whoever wins this spectrum, we'll have to put it into commercial service and putting it into service means new equipment on our towers.

Beyond the upper C-band, we see steady progress across several additional bands. Just lastly, the FCC proposed auctioning 25 megahertz of mid-band spectrum in the 1.6 and 2.0 gigahertz bands. Given the administration's plans to make up to 400 megahertz of spectrum available for commercial use by 2028, we expect proposed rulemaking for the 2.7 gigahertz and 7 gigahertz bands to come soon and continue to believe the FCC could auction the spectrum as early as 2028.

Additionally, the 4 gigahertz band is now being studied for full power commercial licensed use. And as the industry moves towards 6G, we expect a more balanced uplink and downlink network architecture, driven in part by AI applications, sending more data from devices back into the network. Each major spectrum auction over the last 2 decades has been followed by a meaningful deployment cycle on our towers. And our priority is to be ready for the next one with the right sites, the right people and the right processes to help our customers deploy quickly.

While the timing of carrier activity will move around from quarter-to-quarter, the long-term direction is very exciting. We believe this spectrum will be the foundation of sustained organic leasing growth well into the next decade.

Beyond our core customers, we see a real opportunity to expand our customer base to both satellite and edge providers. With regard to satellite providers, our view has not changed. Satellites are a complement to terrestrial wireless networks. This view is supported by a satellite provider's recent purchase of low band 800 megahertz spectrum, which is well suited for in-building coverage and enhanced capacity from the ground. We are confident that any provider looking to deliver ubiquitous, high-quality mobile service, particularly [indiscernible] loads that require low latency, storage capacity and a general need to sit closer to the end user.

The traditional data center industry is facing challenges around power availability, permitting and long construction time lines. Our tower sites are well positioned to address many of these needs. We already have power, fiber and security in place. Our sites are zoned and in many cases, they have existing shelters or ground space at the base of the tower that can be readily put to use. Through our SBA Edge entity, we offer access to the power and infrastructure needed so that AI customers can deploy quickly and efficiently.

We have several edge sites up and running with a handful of different companies building out distributed AI and print capacity. So far, the incremental capital remains minimal as these edge deployments use vacant space and excess power at our tower. It is still early, and the immediate revenue contribution will be modest, but the economics are very attractive, and the opportunity for much greater scale across our portfolio of U.S. towers is real. These initial sites give us an early framework for bringing compute to our sites. I'm excited about the potential of this business, and I look forward to updating you on our progress.

Internationally, we continue to execute on the portfolio review we began in early 2024. Our objective has been clear from the start to be a leading tower company in each market where we operate, to align ourselves with the leading wireless operators in those markets and to improve the overall durability of our cash flows. During the third quarter, we agreed to approximately 1,800 sites in 3 South American markets, representing a complete exit from that region outside of Brazil. Those 3 markets represent approximately $43 million of annual leasing revenue and $20.5 million of annual adjusted EBITDA.

Two markets have already closed, and we expect remaining market to close by year-end. This follows our exits from the Philippines and Colombia in early 2025 and from Canada last October. The steps we have taken allow us to have a more focused geographic concentration internationally. Our international strategy is focused on locking in long-term stable cash flow.

Internationally, we also built 210 new towers in the third quarter, more than double the 99 we built last quarter, primarily in Central America and Africa, and we expect our build program to remain at these levels over the coming quarters.

Turning now to capital allocation. It was a busy quarter. Following our inaugural investment-grade bond offering in July, which allowed us to fully repay our revolver and term loan, we resumed share repurchases, and we did so in a meaningful way. Since our last earnings report, we have repurchased 1.7 million shares at an average price of $179.68 per share for a total of $300 million. And as of today, we have $800 million remaining on our authorization.

Our priority is to allocate capital where it will generate the highest risk-adjusted return for our shareholders. And today, we believe our stock is a great value. With third quarter leverage at 6.4x net debt to adjusted EBITDA below the midpoint of our target range of 6x to 7x, we have the balance sheet capacity and cash on hand to opportunistically retire more shares. We believe in the strength of our business, our future growth potential and our ability to execute, and we will continue to allocate capital where we believe it will create the most value for our shareholders over the long term.

As I look ahead, I'm excited about where our industry is going. The network -- sorry, the networks being built today are only the beginning and 6G is around the corner. Add to that, the largest pipeline of new spectrum in many years new networks being built to work alongside satellites and AI workloads moving to the edge. SBA is well positioned for that future. We have a high-quality portfolio, an investment-grade balance sheet, a disciplined approach to capital allocation and the best team in the industry.

And finally, I'd like to thank our team members around the world. Their hard work and commitment are what allow us to pursue our vision to be our customers' first choice provider and the industry leader in quality infrastructure solutions, and they deliver on it every day. I'd also like to thank our customers for their continued trust and partnership and our shareholders for their ongoing support.

With that, I will now turn it over to Marc to comment on the third quarter results and 2026 outlook.

Marc Montagner

Thank you, Brendan. Our third quarter results were in line with our expectations and if not for changes in FX and the sale of our operations in Chile and Ecuador, our full year 2026 outlook for site leasing revenue, our cash flow and adjusted EBITDA would have been mostly unchanged. The sale of our towers in Chile and Ecuador reduced our full year outlook by approximately $10 million of site leasing revenue, $6 million of total cash flow and $4 million of adjusted EBITDA.

We're increasing the midpoint of 2026 guidance for AFFO, FFO per share by $2 million and $0.08, respectively. Excluding both FX and the sales of our operations in Chile and Ecuador, the midpoint of AFFO and FFO per share is up by $5 million and $0.11, respectively. These increases in AFFO and AFFO per share, mostly driven by lower net cash interest expenses, lower nondiscretionary capital expenditure along with the benefit of a lower share count from our third quarter share buyback.

Our outlook does not yet include any impact from the pending sales of our tower in Peru, which remains subject to regulatory approval and is expected to close in the fourth quarter.

In the third quarter, we continue to operate efficiently, controlling different costs and achieving company-wide tower cash flow margins of 80% and an adjusted EBITDA margin of 69%. AFFO per share was $3.90 and we paid a cash dividend of $1.25 per share.

Operationally, we added approximately $8 million of domestic new lease and amendment billings in the quarter. Spring-related churn was $16 million in the quarter, and we continue to expect $55 million to $56 million for the full year. We expect pre-churn in 2027 to be less than $20 million. EchoStar related churn was $14 million in the third quarter, and we expect $36 million for full year 2026.

Internationally, we added approximately $5 million of new lease and amendment billings in the quarter. We are seeing healthy leasing demand broadly across our international portfolio. The midpoint of our full year outlook for international churn remains at $38 million as key areas work through consolidation, restructuring and network realizations. We expect international churn to remain elevated in 2027, but to begin to normalize in 2028 when the impact of carrier consolidation is behind us.

Turning to investing activities. During the third quarter, we did 213 towers, and we spent $108 million to acquire 7 sites. We also spent $13.7 million to purchase land, Eastman and extend ground lease terms. Total cash expenditure for the quarter was $105.2 million which 14.1% was nondiscretionary.

Moving to the balance sheet. I'm very pleased with the progress we have made as an investment-grade company. In July, we issued a noncore $3.5 billion investment-grade bonds. In addition, on September 25, we established a [ $2 billion ] commercial paper program. These programs give us another flexible low-cost source of short-term liquidity. As of today, we have no amount outstanding under either our revolver for the commercial pay per program.

As we approach the maturity date on our $1.165 billion ABS tower security, we anticipate a complete refinancing of those securities at an estimated rate of 5.25% in the coming days. Our access to capital remains very robust and we will continue to look at ways to reduce our overall cost of debt. Our 2026 outlook does not include the impact of any additional share repurchase beyond those completed for the date of this call.

During the third quarter, we declared a cash dividend of $131.3 million or $1.25 per share. For our third quarter share buyback and dividend payout, we returned approximately $430 million of capital to our shareholders. And today, we will now our Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $1.25 per share, payable on December 10, 2026, to shareholders of record as of the close of business on November 12, 2026. This dividend represents an increase of approximately 13% over the dividend paid in the prior year period in an annualized rate of approximately 41% of the midpoint of our full year FFO per share outlook.

Let me now turn the call over to the operator for Q&A.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] All right. Let's go to our first caller, Ric Prentiss with Raymond James.

質疑応答

Ric Prentiss

A couple of questions if I could. Obviously, number doll and Tower land, rumors today, could there be a space and a dish Walk us through a little bit about what your thoughts as far as what the future might hold. And I got to admit, universe of 1 here, I have a hard time imagining an MVNO-only strategy and wanting to achieve 60%, 70% EBITDA margins. But just help us kind of unpack what you think might be happening there?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. Well, first, before I do that, Ric, let me just say, I think this is your last earnings call, and you've probably been on every earnings call that SBA had over the last or so. So we're going to miss you, and thank you for all of your service over the many years. We've enjoyed working together.

So to your question on SpaceX and DISH, I mean, obviously, I have no specific intel or insight into exactly what they may or may not be doing. So it's not really my place to comment on that. You should look to those parties to comment. I think if there's truth to it, I think what's good from our perspective is that it is an indicator -- another indicator, another data point that suggests the necessity of terrestrial components of any network that's going to be put out there to provide mobile coverage.

And that we feel like is ultimately going to be a good thing for us if that's the way that it goes, and that's our belief on what would be necessary for anybody that would look to provide that kind of coverage. So beyond that, it's hard for me to say what their specific plans are and whether there's any truth to that or not, but I would say ask those parties for their comments.

Ric Prentiss

Sure. It's actually hard for me also a vision what is bad news for having that SpaceX might be doing here. One other question related. We keep getting questions on the potential of DISH former sites. Can you let us though how many DISH sites you had actually gotten on air? And if, as we call it, the equipment formally known as DISH, is that still on your towers? And if so, has it been abandoned? And do you guys have done enough in on?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. We had approximately 3,000 leases that were on air with DISH. And the -- in terms of the equipment, it's basically been abandoned, and we do own it as we terminated those leases as part of the bankruptcy litigation. So it's there, and it's in our control at this point.

Ric Prentiss

Great. And one final one for me. Any thought on the litigation and the arbitration process? And does it feel like we might be getting close to something that it feels like maybe the industry is getting closer to understanding how that escolar might be divvied up, but it's complicated I get it. Just wondering any updated time line or thoughts on that.

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes, it's getting complicated. I mean, I guess, every day that goes by, we're a little closer to some resolution. But at this stage, we're in a stage of mediation. I think that's pretty well known as an industry group. And that's the process. We'll see how it shakes out and whether I can't guess exactly where that's going to end up. But it does allow for at least a dialogue to take place, and we'll see what the results of that are. But it's a little premature at this point, Ric, to say what might or might not happen.

Ric Prentiss

Great. Well, certainly, never dull. And my last 1 was that you guys was certainly no difference there, but I appreciate working with you guys all the years as well.

Operator

Moving on to our next call are Batya Levi, UBS.

Batya Levi

Can you provide a little bit more color on the application volume that you're seeing from the carriers? And if there is any indication that there could be an inflection in activity into next year? And maybe just a little bit more on your conversations with CSX. Would you characterize them as they have picked up more recently? And to the extent that you have to some look into what they might be looking to do, how quickly do you think the tower companies could benefit from that?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. On the application volume with the carriers, it's been -- I guess the way I'd characterize it is that each of the carriers are in a little bit of a different phase. And sometimes that happens where certain ones are perhaps more active than others, and that's kind of the environment that we're in right now. We have one that's been particularly active with us and one that's been modestly slow and 1 that's been really slow. And so the application volumes kind of took that as well.

So on an overall basis, our application volumes are, I'd say, relatively the same on average as they've been for the last couple of years. But the mix in terms of the makeup is a little bit different. And so we'll have to see how that continues to develop as we go into next year. And obviously, it's a little premature to talk about next year's numbers. I think next call, we'll be able to tell you exactly what we're thinking about that.

On the SpaceX piece, I can't really comment on any specific conversations that we have other than just to say that we have conversations with anybody that has an interest or a use for the infrastructure that we offer and the services that we offer. And you should expect that we talk to all parties that are interested in that. And that's what we will continue to do.

I mean timing, I would kind of refer you to their comments about what they're thinking about in terms of time line to build networks if they plan to go that route as a guide. But I can't really say at this stage what the time frame would be. Obviously, if anything ever really happened, at that point, we'd have something to talk about that's tangible.

Operator

Let's move on to Richard Choe, JPMorgan.

Richard Choe

I'll say Ric is the universal one for tower coverage. So [indiscernible]. Just following up, though, like where -- given where we are with DISH and the process, is there any way that another entity could back into leases or the equipment or adjustments? That the rights they had? Or was it just -- is it better to assume that it's just going to be a new negotiation with new priorities and new types of equipment?

And then it seems like we're in an extended period where there's been a lot of spectrum and efficiency on technology. But in the past, given the long history of towers and wireless technology, do you expect that to kind of pass at some point and this to pick up, and it seems like it's pretty long in the in that sense?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I'm sorry, Rich, on your second question there, you're talking about specific technology development.

Richard Choe

Just where we are today with 5G and -- have we seen this before? Have we gone through this before? And do you think it's different this time versus each other with 3G and 4G, there were kind of pauses in 1 time?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. So I'll take that one first because we ask for a clarification, and I'll go back to the other one on DISH. I think that there are -- as an overarching generational technology rollout, they tend to follow similar patterns. And I think that this isn't materially different in that regard. But each one has nuances that make them a little bit different.

And I think with 5G, some of the development of the applications and the timing of their availability and uptake by the end subscriber has perhaps been a little bit different than it was with 4G, for instance. And as a result, the behaviors of the carriers around the deployment of those networks have perhaps shifted a little bit.

But overall, the same dynamics exist. You kind of have an early significant rush to kind of go out and overlay existing networks with new technologies and then you have infill that takes place. And that's sort of where we are today. And we're seeing that, particularly with one of the customers that we have, we're seeing significant infill taking place. A lot of the growth that we're seeing today is new leases, and that's mostly infill and some expanded coverage. So I don't think it's that different than the others. I think other factors in terms of even cost of capital sometimes have an impact on the timing of deployments, but the general gist from a technology standpoint is the same.

In the case of the DISH question and what could or couldn't happen. I mean at this stage, it's hard to say for sure what might happen, but the equipment, as I said earlier, is now ours and within our control. And so anybody that wants to use that would obviously have to deal with us on that and the existing lease agreements wouldn't necessarily apply to a new party that would come in. So that would have to be just a separate discussion if somebody wanted to use it. And we have many parties that have expressed interest actually in that equipment. So we feel like there may be some opportunity, but we'll see.

In terms of other rights that may exist around stuff that DISH had, I can't really speak to that. That would be between the other parties in DISH. And obviously, they're in the middle of a bankruptcy proceeding as well, so that I'm sure that would complicate discussions too. So a lot remains to be seen. But I'm sure, over time, we'll see these things work out one way or another.

Operator

Moving on to Nick Del Deo from MoffettNathanson.

Nicholas Del Deo

First, with respect to the edge computing opportunity, you talked about Brendan, can you share what sort of experiences you've had with the utility companies when you go to them asking for power augmentation to a site?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. It's still somewhat early days for all of this stuff, Nick. And in many cases, what we've had available at the sites where we've done these smaller edge computing facilities has been adequate already. So we haven't always had to go back to the utilities. But in cases where we have. It's been -- we've gone through kind of a normal process that we would go through at any stage when building a new tower, for instance, and we're trying to bring power there. It's really not been materially different than that. So I wouldn't say there's anything that stands out. It's just a typical process of applying for the incremental power needs at a site and going through the steps at that particular utility requires. So nothing really to call out that's any different than what we usually do.

Nicholas Del Deo

Okay. Okay. And to confirm, to the extent that you're supplying power to these customers there, are they're planning, call it, couple hundred kilowatts. Is that the sort of magnitude you're dealing with?

Brendan Cavanagh

Typically, yes. Typically, it's -- I would say it's 200 to 300 kilowatts roughly. But we have some facilities that are a megawatt or even slightly more. So most of them though will be in the range, the 200 to 300-kilowatt range.

Nicholas Del Deo

Okay. Okay. Great. And then maybe switching to U.S. churn. Obviously, your underlying churn is much lower than your headline churn. I think it's about 1.4% if we take out Sprint and EchoStar. If we look at your peers, they're probably around 1%. Should we expect to see your churn kind of converge at that level? Or are there reasons why we should expect your return to remain different from what others are saying?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I think that, that's a reasonable expectation. When I get the detail and I get all the details of churn, as you might imagine, and obviously, we have the 2 big ones that kind of distort things right now. But the rest of it, it really is a list of cats and dogs. I mean there is all kinds of small stuff that's going on there. Most of it is not related to our core big customers. There's occasionally some here or there. We do have some U.S. Cellular T-Mobile overlap, for instance, that's in our churn right now that started.

So there's some of those things, but I think over time, I would expect to see that start to really fall off because there's really only so much of it -- so many of those customers that exist and there's not even that many of those smaller carriers that have some level of overlap that's existed in the past that remains. So I would expect somewhere in the 1% range to be a normalized level after we get through these bigger Sprint and DISH numbers.

Operator

Okay. Let's move on to Michael Rollins from Citi.

Michael Rollins

Just a few follow-ups. So the first is, I was just thinking about your answer earlier about. I think you said about 3,000 sites with DISH before they stopped. And I think you mentioned it was about $56 million of annualized rent. So just in very rough terms, it's a little under $1,600 a month, recognizing there's probably some rounding and stuff in there. But just curious, like, is that the right kind of Zipcode for that number?

And how do you think about rent for new colocation? Whether it's for -- with respect to that number, like whether it's should rents for new colo from the big 3 carriers typically trend significantly above that? Are there reasons for that? And if you have a new entrant coming in, is it -- do you get like a new entrant discount, so we should expect it being more like $1,600? Or were there like specific circumstances that drove the rent to where it was? And I have a couple of other follow-ups, if I talk afterwards.

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I mean there's a variety of factors that go into setting the rents. I mean one of the biggest ones is what are they actually doing? What's the usage at the tower sites. So as you might imagine, when it comes to DISH, when they were doing their deployments, they were materially less in terms of the capacity of the towers that they were taking up, the size, weight, surface area, all of that at the tower site and even on the ground was much, much smaller than the incumbent MNOs have at our towers on average. So that obviously results typically in a lower rent than you might see for a normally sized incumbent based installation because the capacity is just simply less. Also the height on the tower that they've taken if they're materially at a lower spot that sometimes has an impact as well.

But beyond all that, the way that the agreement is negotiated also matters. There's other terms that can have an impact as well. And some of those, I mean, for instance, you know we have an MLA with AT&T that we signed a few years ago. Well, the structure of that was very different and certain things were prioritized both by AT&T and by SBA that resulted in a structure and a price point that was different than might have happened at a different point in time. And so with the -- in the case of DISH, when we negotiated our agreement with them, certain minimum commitments that they might have made affected pricing certain terms that they agreed to, volume commitments, those sorts of things all have an impact.

And I would expect with anybody that we negotiate with on a master agreement type of level, there's some modest trade-off of volume minimum commitments for price. But it really -- there's so many factors that go into it that it's hard to say. But the basic one is the first one I mentioned. What are they actually using at the site? How much capacity they are taken up and that's probably the biggest one in terms of having an impact.

Michael Rollins

Really helpful. And just the second question is, just given where is in terms of just the relative maturation of the business, when you look at the amount of annual discretionary cash flow or AFFO that you generate, do you think that your company is in a better position to maximize shareholder value in the public markets? Or do you see a case where value maximization over time could be better in the private markets?

Brendan Cavanagh

That sounds like a trick question, Mike. I think that depending on a moment in time, valuations sometimes vary between public and private markets. And all I can tell you is that when we look at private assets in the U.S. specifically today and granted, they're smaller and so perhaps can be more competitively a bid after. The valuations are much, much higher than where SBA and the other public companies for that matter, are valued. But there was a time in our history here where I remember it being the opposite as well.

I think all of that is a little bit of trying to guess at a point in time. It doesn't really matter. We are a public company. We have the balance sheet that we have. It provides us plenty of flexibility. We do produce a lot of AFFO. So we have a lot of capital to put to work into the company, and I think it provides us the opportunity to use that capital effectively to create value for our shareholders, some by returning it directly to shareholders as we did this past quarter and in other cases, by investing it into incremental assets that we think are going to drive outsized returns. -- by being smart about how we allocate that capital. So I think there's plenty of opportunity for us ahead, and I look forward to continuing to run this business in a way that generates a lot of returns for our shareholders.

Operator

Moving on to Brendan Lynch from Barclays.

Brendan Lynch

I wanted to touch on international markets. So you exited everything in South America other than Brazil. Can you discuss your appetite for maintaining your exposure in Africa? And what the primary differences you see are in the African markets versus the South American markets that you've exited?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. Well, for -- just in terms of SBA-specific portfolio, we were much lower scale in the Andean markets that we just announced our exit from than we are in the 2 African markets where we operate. So we have -- we definitely have a greater scale in those 2 African markets. That's one difference.

The actual, I mean, the returns in those -- in both South Africa and Tanzania have been very, very strong for us. The return on invested capital is, frankly, the highest in the company outside of the U.S. and really that's only because the U.S. has a much longer standing history and much lower entry point back at the beginning. But it even rivals that in terms of incremental investments today, it's actually been better. So as long as we see our way clear to having a meaningful position in the markets where we're operating and we have relationships with the top carriers in those markets where we can feel comfortable in their future and their viability going forward and we can generate strong returns, we're happy to continue to operate and invest in those markets.

And particularly in Tanzania, you probably can see in our numbers that we built a lot of sites there this past quarter and really this year-to-date, and we continue to invest there because we see great opportunities. So there's some differences on an individual market basis but also on the existing portfolios that we have in those markets.

Brendan Lynch

Great. That's helpful. And you mentioned international churn should remain elevated in '27, then kind of normalize in 2028. Looking back over the past couple of years, it was around 5% to 7%. So maybe just help us think about what is a normal level of churn in international markets after you kind of get through this period.

Brendan Cavanagh

I would -- it's hard for me to say exactly because now we're looking out a little ways. But I think I'm going to take a guess, which I might be held taking a task for later. But I would say somewhere in the 2-ish percent, 2% to 2.5% range would be a normal level.

And the reason it's a little bit higher than, I think, the normal level here in the U.S. is that there's still a level of immaturity that exists in those markets and there's still some level of rationalization, I think, with smaller carriers and so forth that's taking place, and that has to kind of work through the system. So that's the only reason I think it would be a little higher than the normalized U.S. churn, but that's the number I'd circle.

Brendan Lynch

Okay. That's helpful. And then maybe just one other one on edge. Can you give us some sense of how you think the pace of edge deployments might scale and maybe a little bit on the nature of the companies that are doing trials. Are these start-ups or hyperscalers, neoclouds, et cetera?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I think we will see a very steady level of growth there. I think as we mentioned in our prepared comments, the contributions -- the financial contributions at this stage are relatively modest and probably will be for the near term, but I think the pace of growth will be at a healthy pace.

The types of customers that we're seeing. There's a mix of start-ups, I would say. Neoclouds are probably the primary users that would be interested in the types of facilities that we have because what we're really talking about here is the same kind of provisioning of compute power for, in particular, AI inferencing applications. The value of this is that it's able to get on air and available faster because of the distributed structure of it, where power behind-the-meter power is available more quickly. And while it's much smaller, tinier chunks, the accumulation of those and the fact that you can do it quicker can get you to meaningful contributions and there's a lot of demand for that today.

So I think who the end users are, who the customers are, and we have several different companies that we're engaged with today, I think that will continue to evolve over time. And it will become clearer who's kind of doing the best with that. And they'll start to have a higher -- bigger presence with companies like us as we help them roll it out.

Operator

Let's move on to Cameron McVeigh, Morgan Stanley.

Cameron McVeigh

Marc, I was just curious how we should think about the margin expansion opportunity over the next few years. You're buying land and ground leases, and your competitors have outlined a target for something of 200 to 300 basis points of expansion by 2030. So just curious how you're framing the opportunity and what the puts and takes might be.

Marc Montagner

Well, I think we have been doing land buyout for probably 15 years now. And I think we have been very aggressive earlier than our competitors. It's a way to derisk our business going forward, but also given the multiple arbitrage a way to increase margins over time. So you should expect us to keep doing this, both in the U.S. and internationally.

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. And I think that actually applies generally, not just on the land buyouts, but our overhead base, our cost base. We've actually been a leader in our industry with regard to those items. And that's good. And I think there's a lot of attention being paid to it by our peers, which fine. But I think what that means is they have a little more opportunity to squeeze some of that out than we do because I feel like we've actually operated as efficiently as anybody. Despite being the smallest company in the industry, we have been actually the most efficient from an overhead perspective. So we'll continue to do what we've always done.

Cameron McVeigh

Got it. That's great. And then secondly, just one on capital allocation. We repurchased $300 million in the quarter with $800 million remaining under the authorization. Just curious how you're thinking about the hurdle rate for buybacks versus some of the acquisitions, new builds, that reduction?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I think we did a large amount of buybacks this quarter. I would expect us to continue to be a meaningful share repurchase. But really, in many ways, it's opportunistic in terms of where we're valued relative to alternative uses of capital. And we have historically always had a mix of investing in assets as well as doing buybacks. And I think we'll continue to see that going forward. If our valuation remains under pressure as it's been relative to the value of assets I mentioned earlier in response to a different question about the high valuations of assets, particularly here in the U.S., I mean if that dynamic remains, I would expect we'll do more buybacks, then we will do new asset purchases.

But ideally, we'd like to do a mix of both, and we're going to have to just work harder to kind of find those selective opportunities we feel good about in terms of new assets. But it's really a comparative analysis.

Operator

Let's move on to Eric Luebchow, Wells Fargo.

Eric Luebchow

Brendan, you talked a lot about all the new spectrum that's coming to market, but I think some people still have questions around the time line of when you'll see activity on the tower side between AT&T 600, T-Mobile C-band and then the new auction spectrum that's coming -- starting with upper C-Band next year. So when do you think we'll start to see that activity on the site? Do you think it could come as early as 2028 sooner than that? Or will it be pushed a little further out?

Brendan Cavanagh

Well, I think that certain bands, we will start to see some activity in all likelihood in 2028. I mean it's hard to say for sure. But for instance, if you took the first upcoming auction that's ahead of us, which is the upper C-band, that's going to take place and be completed by middle of next year. Obviously, there's a whole process to clear that spectrum. But what we've seen in the past is some level of activity that actually runs ahead of that clearance process in order to be ready so that at the time that it's cleared, and I think there will be an effort to accelerate that clearance by the way. that leads to some level of activity around our sites that happens earlier.

So I'm hoping that we can see that by some time in '28. In terms of the spectrum though that's already in the hands of some of the parties like the 600 megahertz that AT&T has or the C-band that T-Mobile has, I expect that we'll definitely start to see those before that time frame. Hopefully, some of that will start to see next year. It's hard for me to say for sure, you'd have to ask the carriers, but I know AT&T has been vocal about starting to get out there and roll out their 600 megahertz. Its impact on us. will have to be seen. We obviously have an MLA that will have some level of restriction on how much we see out of that, but that MLA is up in about 1.5 years. So I think in some ways, the longer it takes maybe the better from our perspective.

Eric Luebchow

Great. And then just one final one for me. So you talked about handling the $1.1 billion debt maturity in the next couple of days at a 5.25% rate. As we look at maturities for 2027, I guess, given there's been a lot of volatility in interest rates the last couple of months, I mean, how are you thinking about kind of the refinancing wall that you have next year in terms of how you want to refinance it with like-for-like instruments or paying down some of the debt principal. What are kind of the options on the table?

Brendan Cavanagh

Sure. Yes. There's definitely a number of instruments that are coming up soon. In terms of the types of instruments we use to refinance it, in most cases, would not be like-for-like because a number of those maturities are ABS securities and with the shift to investment grade, you will see a little bit more of a shift towards unsecured debt. And obviously, those are secured instrument securities that will be maturing in many cases. And so with those, that would likely be replaced with some sort of unsecured instrument.

We have an unsecured senior note that is maturing in the first part of next year, during the first quarter. So that would be replaced with a similar unsecured senior note, I would expect. Although, again, it would be IG-rated and instead of the high yield instrument that it was before. We look at other potential securities that might work, too. They would all likely be unsecured instruments, for instance, perhaps an unsecured term loan A is something that we're looking at as well.

Really, what we're dealing with here is not so much what instruments to use. It's really the timing, and we're trying to manage this as finely as we can because, obviously, rates are elevated. It's not a certainty as to when that might change or if it will change. But if we can go a little bit shorter dated in terms of the tenor of these instruments and give ourselves an opportunity to perhaps catch a better window on refinancing, that's something that we ideally would like to do. But you can never beat some losers there on the timing. But in any case, we have plenty of access to capital, and we feel very good about refinancing. We'll just try to manage it as efficiently as we can.

Operator

Next caller is David Barden from New Street Research.

David Barden

Brendan, we get a lot about the auction spectrum that's coming up there's actually quite a bit of spectrum that's held in private hands that's coming up with build-out requirements that really start in the 2027 to '29 time frame. Specifically, I'm thinking about the 600 megahertz and 3.5 gigahertz. Have you seen conversations happening around those bands, people entertaining those possibilities of coming in to strategics and taking advantage of that opportunity?

And then in an adjacent question, similarly, in the 900 megahertz, it's a little bit more speculative, but there's also a lot working there as well. So kind of augmenting the entire spectrum buildup picture. There are a lot of other places, too. I was just wondering what, if anything, you're seeing there.

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I can't say too much about that, David, but I will say that in -- with some of those spectrum bands, we have been seeing some applications around those. But I don't know if there's enough there to point to as a holistic deployment yet. So I guess I'll be able to come back to you more on that as we get a little bit down the line. And then there -- some of the bands that you mentioned that we haven't really seen anything to date. So I would imagine that some of those parties are thinking about what their next steps are with regard to.

It's hard for me -- and this is just me speculating, I really have no idea for sure with any of these folks. But my belief is that it's hard to imagine that some of the parties would actually have any interest in actually building out something other than to do what they need to, to preserve their spectrum. So I think the FCC has become a lot more strict about deployment requirements around spectrum, the parties are holding and the penalties have become more severe. So I think you'll see a lot more firm decisions being made. People are either going to build it out and use it or they're going to sell it.

David Barden

Right. Sell it. And then it gets built out.

Brendan Cavanagh

Right. That's an important part, right, is that eventually, that environment is very good for us because whether it's those parties or somebody else and maybe better somebody else who's actually serious about it, it's a good dynamic for us to have because it will get built out.

David Barden

And so I just wanted to follow up Brendan, on a question I asked a couple of quarters ago, which was in response to what the decisions that DISH had made regarding its leases? Why a company like SBA wouldn't have sent out an army of engineers to go snip wires and start ripping down gear? And at the time, you said, "Well, you don't know what we're doing." And so now that you own whatever is left of whatever this is, could you tell us what have you done and what is left?

Brendan Cavanagh

Most of the sites still have the equipment left at them, David, but they're not actually -- there's nothing being broadcast through that equipment. So it's actually there. And to the extent that it is useful to another party that would find it helpful in their own deployments. And as I said, there are several that have actually contacted us in that regard. It's available, and it's something that we obviously can work through a discussion on how that would work.

Operator

And our final question from Matt Niknam, Truist.

Matthew Niknam

Brendan, can you hear me?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes, I can hear you. Go ahead.

Matthew Niknam

Okay. Great. Great. So my question is more around the strategic review. So I know this was initiated a while back. Is the strategic review process largely done? Are there other regions or businesses you'd consider exiting? Or are there other initiatives you'd look to target across the businesses?

Brendan Cavanagh

Yes. I mean the strategic review has tended to kind of become a name for international divestitures, but that's not really what it is. That's just one component. I mean it was really a review of all aspects of our business, which is what I think you're alluding to. It wasn't just international markets. it was other smaller business lines that we're in and other things that we're doing. We don't necessarily come out and talk about all of that on our earnings call. But we're looking at a wholesale review of everything that we do. We have done over the last several years. I wouldn't say it's done, but we've made a lot of progress. And so as we've gone through and check things off, I would say there's certainly less to do.

As it relates to the international markets, we've clearly exited a number of markets. We also, as part of that, made the decision to expand meaningfully in Central America, and we did that the Millicom acquisition. That was really part of it as well. So the decisions were not all about shrinking. They were also, in some cases, about investing more.

We continue to look at a couple of other things that we're involved with as well, and we'll see what the end result is. sometimes it's not just about the decision that's made, the steps to actually kind of effectuate that decision can take some time as you've seen. And so we'll continue to take the steps that we're taking. But I feel good about the direction that we've gone and our ability to now focus and prioritize the things that we think are going to be the most value creative for our shareholders.

Thank you all for joining the call, and we look forward to reporting our results next year.

Operator

Thank you to our speakers and everyone in the audience for joining us today. The call has concluded, and you may now disconnect.