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

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

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1.0 billion as of June 30, 2002.

__________________

As of January 31, 2003, 65,760,443 shares of Class B common stock were outstanding.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Changes in Amended Filing of Form 10-K

Our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 is being amended and refiled in its entirety to take into account the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation G governing the use of non-GAAP financial measures. Regulation G became effective March 28, 2003.

Disclosures that have been modified from the original filing are as follows:

Continental Airlines, Inc., a Delaware corporation, is a major United States air carrier engaged in the business of transporting passengers, cargo and mail. We are the fifth largest United States airline (as measured by the number of scheduled miles flown by revenue passengers, known as revenue passenger miles, in 2002) and, together with our indirect 53.1%-owned subsidiary, ExpressJet Airlines, Inc. (operating as Continental Express and referred to in this Form 10-K as "ExpressJet") and our wholly owned subsidiary, Continental Micronesia, Inc. ("CMI"), each a Delaware corporation, served 223 airports worldwide at January 31, 2003. As of January 31, 2003, we flew to 129 domestic and 94 international destinations and offered additional connecting service through alliances with domestic and foreign carriers. We directly served 15 European cities, seven South American cities, Tel Aviv, Hong Kong and Tokyo as of January 31, 2003, and are one of the leading airlines providing service to Mexico and Centra l America, serving 28 cities, more destinations than any other United States airline. Through our Guam hub, CMI provides extensive service in the western Pacific, including service to more Japanese cities than any other United States carrier.

General information about us can be found at www.continental.com/company/investor. Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, as well as any amendments and exhibits to those reports, are available free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we file them with, or furnish them to, the SEC.

This Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that are not limited to historical facts, but reflect our current beliefs, expectations or intentions regarding future events. All forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. For examples of such risks and uncertainties, please see the cautionary statements contained in Item 1. "Business - Risk Factors - Terrorist Attacks and International Hostilities", "Business - Risk Factors Relating to the Company" and "Business - Risk Factors Relating to the Airline Industry." We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this report.

As used in this Form 10-K, the terms "Continental", "we", "us", "our" and similar terms refer to Continental Airlines, Inc. and its subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.

The current U.S. domestic airline environment is the worst in our history. Prior to September 2001, we were profitable, although many U.S. air carriers were losing money and our profitability was declining. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 dramatically worsened the difficult financial environment and presented new and greater challenges for the airline industry. Since the terrorist attacks, several airlines, including United Air Lines and US Airways, have filed for bankruptcy. Although we have been able to raise capital, downsize our operations and reduce our expenses significantly, we have reported significant losses since the terrorist attacks, and current trends in the airline industry make it likely that we will continue to post significant losses for the foreseeable future. The revenue environment continues to be weak in light of changing pricing models, excess capacity in the market, reduced corporate travel spending and other issues. In addition, fuel prices have significantly escalated due to the threat of imminent military action against Iraq and continued political tension in Venezuela.

Absent adverse factors outside our control such as those described herein, we believe that our liquidity and access to cash will be sufficient to fund our current operations through 2003 (and beyond if we are successful in implementing our previously announced revenue generation and cost cutting measures, as well as additional measures currently being developed). However, we believe that the economic environment must improve for us to continue to operate at our current size and expense level beyond that time. We may find it necessary to further downsize our operations, ground additional aircraft and further reduce our expenses. We anticipate that our previously announced capacity and cost reductions, together with the capacity reductions announced by other carriers and capacity reductions that could come from restructurings within the industry, should result in a better financial environment by the end of 2003, absent adverse factors outside our control such as a further economic recession, additio nal terrorist attacks, a war affecting the United States, decreased consumer demand or sustained high fuel prices. However, we expect to incur a significant loss in 2003, regardless of such adverse factors.

Due in part to the lack of predictability of future traffic, business mix and yields, we are currently unable to estimate the long-term effect on us of the events of September 11, 2001, or the impact of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces against Iraq. However, given the magnitude of the unprecedented events of September 11, 2001 and their continuing aftermath, the adverse impact to our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and prospects may continue to be material, and our financial resources might not be sufficient to absorb it or that of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces if the war were prolonged.

See Item 1. "Business - Risk Factors" and Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview" for a discussion of perceived trends and factors affecting us and our industry. Also see Item 8. "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 17 - Segment Reporting", for financial information about each of our business segments.

We operate our domestic route system primarily through our hubs in the New York metropolitan area at Newark Liberty International Airport ("Liberty International" or "Newark"), in Houston, Texas at George Bush Intercontinental Airport ("Bush Intercontinental" or "Houston") and in Cleveland, Ohio at Hopkins International Airport ("Hopkins International" or "Cleveland"). Our hub system allows us to transport passengers between a large number of destinations with substantially more frequent service than if each route were served directly. The hub system also allows us to add service to a new destination from a large number of cities using only one or a limited number of aircraft. As of January 31, 2003, we operated 65% of the average daily jet departures from Liberty International, 83% of the average daily jet departures from Bush Intercontinental, and 65% of the average daily jet departures from Hopkins International (in each case including regional jets). Each of our domestic hubs is located in a l arge business and population center, contributing to a high volume of "origin and destination" traffic.

Our mainline jet service at each of our domestic hub cities is coordinated with ExpressJet, which operates new-generation regional jets. In April 2002, ExpressJet Holdings, Inc. ("Holdings"), our then wholly owned subsidiary and the sole stockholder of ExpressJet, sold 10 million shares of its common stock in an initial public offering and used the net proceeds to repay $147 million of ExpressJet's indebtedness to us. In addition, we sold 20 million of our shares of Holdings common stock in the offering for net proceeds of $300 million. In connection with the offering, our ownership of Holdings fell to 53.1%. We do not currently intend to remain a stockholder of Holdings over the long term. Subject to market conditions, we expect to sell or otherwise dispose of some or all of our shares of Holdings common stock in the future.

Effective January 1, 2001, we entered into a capacity purchase agreement with ExpressJet pursuant to which we currently purchase all of ExpressJet's available seat miles for a negotiated price. Under the agreement, ExpressJet has the right through December 31, 2005 to be our sole provider of regional jet service from our hubs. We have an agreement in principle with ExpressJet to extend this exclusivity agreement through December 31, 2006. We are responsible for all scheduling, pricing and seat inventories of ExpressJet's flights and are entitled to all revenue associated with those flights. We pay ExpressJet based on scheduled block hours (the hours from departure gate to arrival gate) in accordance with a formula designed to provide them with an operating margin of approximately 10% before taking into account variations in some costs and expenses that are generally controllable by ExpressJet. ExpressJet's overall operating margin was 13.6% in 2002. We assume the risk of revenue volatility assoc iated with fares and passenger traffic, price volatility for specified expense items such as fuel and the cost of all distribution and revenue-related costs. The capacity purchase agreement replaced our prior revenue-sharing arrangement.

As of January 31, 2003, ExpressJet served 96 destinations in the U.S., 13 cities in Mexico and five cities in Canada. Since December 2002, ExpressJet's fleet has been comprised entirely of regional jets. We believe ExpressJet's regional jet service complements our operations by carrying traffic that connects onto our mainline jets and allowing more frequent flights to smaller cities than could be provided economically with larger jet aircraft. We believe that ExpressJet's regional jets provide greater comfort and enjoy better customer acceptance than turboprop aircraft. The regional jets also allow ExpressJet to serve certain routes that cannot be served by turboprop aircraft. Additional commuter feed traffic is currently provided to us by other codesharing partners. See "Alliances" below.

We directly serve destinations throughout Europe, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America and the Caribbean, as well as Tel Aviv, Hong Kong and Tokyo. We also provide service to numerous other destinations through codesharing arrangements with other carriers and have extensive operations in the western Pacific conducted by CMI. As measured by 2002 available seat miles, approximately 39% of our mainline jet operations, including CMI, were dedicated to international traffic.

Our New York/Newark hub is a significant international gateway. From Liberty International at January 31, 2003, we served 15 European cities, five Canadian cities, six Mexican cities, six Central American cities, four South American cities, 14 Caribbean destinations, Tel Aviv, Hong Kong and Tokyo.

Our Houston hub is the focus of our operations in Mexico and Central America. As of January 31, 2003, we flew from Bush Intercontinental to 20 cities in Mexico, every country in Central America, six cities in South America, three cities in Canada, three cities in Europe, one Caribbean destination and Tokyo.

From our Cleveland hub, we flew to Montreal, Toronto, London, Cancun, Mexico and San Juan, Puerto Rico as of January 31, 2003.

From its hub operations based on the island of Guam, as of January 31, 2003, CMI provided service to eight cities in Japan, more than any other United States carrier, as well as other Pacific rim destinations, including Taiwan, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Australia and Indonesia. CMI is the principal air carrier in the Micronesian Islands, where it pioneered scheduled air service in 1968. CMI's route system is linked to the United States market through Hong Kong, Tokyo and Honolulu, each of which CMI serves non-stop from Guam. CMI and Continental also maintain a codesharing agreement and coordinate schedules on certain flights from the United States to Honolulu, and from Honolulu to Guam, to facilitate travel from the United States into CMI's route system.

See Item 8. "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 17 - Segment Reporting", for financial information by geographical area.

We have entered into alliance agreements, which are also referred to as codeshare agreements or cooperative marketing agreements, with other carriers. These relationships may include (a) codesharing (one carrier placing its name and flight number, or "code," on flights operated by the other carrier), (b) reciprocal frequent flyer program participation, reciprocal airport lounge access and other joint activities (such as seamless check-in at airports), and (c) block space arrangements (carriers agree to share capacity and bear economic risk for blocks of seats on certain routes). Most codeshare relationships are free-sell codeshares, where the marketing carrier sells seats on the operating carrier's flights from the operating carrier's inventory, but takes no inventory risk. In contrast, in a block space relationship, the marketing carrier is committed to purchase a set number of seats on the operating carrier, sells seats to the public from this purchased inventory and is at economic risk for the purchased seats that it is unable to sell. Some relationships may include other cooperative undertakings such as joint purchasing, joint corporate sales contracts, airport handling, facilities sharing or joint technology development.

We have a long-term global alliance with Northwest Airlines through 2025, subject to earlier termination by either of us in the event of certain changes in control of either Northwest or Continental. Our alliance with Northwest provides for each of us placing our code on a large number of the flights of the other, reciprocity of frequent flyer programs and airport lounge access, and other joint marketing activities. Together with Northwest, we also have joint contracts with major corporations and travel agents designed to create access to a broader product line encompassing the route systems of both carriers.

The Northwest alliance agreement also provides that subject to certain conditions, including the receipt by Northwest, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and us of an adequate grant of antitrust immunity, we will join, as an economic participant, a new transatlantic joint venture alliance with Northwest and KLM on terms to be negotiated by the parties in good faith. If the parties cannot resolve the terms of our entrance into such a joint venture, the terms of our entrance would be determined by arbitration in accordance with the alliance agreement's dispute resolution procedures. We have not yet applied for this antitrust immunity and neither we nor Northwest has sought to invoke the arbitration provisions relating to our joint venture participation.

We also have domestic codesharing agreements with Gulfstream International Airlines, Mesaba Aviation, Hawaiian Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Horizon Airlines, Champlain Enterprises, Inc. (CommutAir), Hyannis Air Service, Inc. (Cape Air) and American Eagle Airlines. In 2002, we introduced the first train-to-plane alliance in the United States with Amtrak. Our codeshare agreement with America West Airlines terminated in April 2002.

In response to the dramatic changes occurring in the airline industry, including a marketing alliance between United and US Airways, we entered into a marketing alliance with Northwest Airlines and Delta Air Lines in August 2002 to permit us to compete more effectively with other carriers and alliance groups. As with our alliance with Northwest, this alliance involves codesharing, reciprocal frequent flyer benefits, and reciprocal airport lounge privileges. Implementation of this marketing alliance is subject to a number of conditions and could be adversely impacted by the actions of the Department of Transportation ("DOT") as described below.

The Department of Justice, which is charged with enforcing the anti-trust laws of the United States, did not object to this marketing alliance and required only a limited number of conditions to implementation, to which the carriers agreed. However, DOT indicated that it would bring an enforcement proceeding against the carriers for "unfair competition" unless they agreed to a number of additional conditions, even though DOT had previously approved the United-US Airways alliance without trying to impose similar conditions. Although the carriers were prepared to accept some of DOT's conditions, others would have adversely affected a large portion of the consumer and economic benefits sought by the carriers. Consequently, we announced plans, together with Delta and Northwest, to begin implementing our alliance without meeting all of DOT's conditions in order to protect our rights, since we had exhausted the internal review mechanisms at DOT. As anticipated, DOT has announced that it intends to commence an enforcement proceeding against the carriers. We intend to begin implementing certain aspects of our agreement while vigorously defending it in any DOT enforcement proceeding; however, there can be no assurance that we will prevail in such proceeding or that we will be permitted to carry out our codeshare agreement in accordance with its terms, or at all.

In addition to our domestic alliances, we seek to develop international alliance relationships that complement our own route system and permit expanded service through our hubs to major international destinations. International alliances assist in the development of our route structure by enabling us to offer more frequencies in a market, provide passengers connecting service from our international flights to other destinations beyond an alliance partner's hub, and expand the product line that we may offer in a foreign destination.

In October 2001, we announced that we had signed a cooperative marketing agreement with KLM that includes extensive codesharing and reciprocal frequent flyer program participation and airport lounge access. On December 1, 2002, we placed our code on selected flights to more than 40 European destinations operated by KLM and KLM Cityhopper beyond its Amsterdam hub, and KLM placed its code on our flights between New York and Amsterdam, as well as on selected flights to U.S. destinations operated by us beyond our New York and Houston hubs. In addition, members of each carrier's frequent flyer program are able to earn mileage anywhere on the other's global route network, as well as the global network of Northwest. Our agreement terminates in May 2003, unless extended by the parties.

We also currently have international codesharing agreements with Air Europa, Air China, Emirates (the flag carrier of the United Arab Emirates), ACES (an airline based in Colombia), EVA Airways Corporation (an airline based in Taiwan), British European ("Flybe"), Virgin Atlantic Airways, and Copa Airlines of Panama. We own 49% of the common equity of Copa. Our codeshare agreement with Air France terminated in March 2002.

We and Virgin Atlantic exchange seat blocks on each other's flights between New York and London, and we purchase seat blocks on eight other routes flown by Virgin Atlantic between the United States and the United Kingdom.

As with other major domestic hub-and-spoke carriers, most tickets for travel on us are sold by travel agents. Although we generally no longer pay base commissions, we often negotiate compensation to travel agents based on their performance in selling our tickets. Commission expense was 2.7%, 4.3% and 5.7% of passenger revenue in 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively.

We are using the internet to provide services for our customers and to reduce our distribution costs. Our website, continental.com, recorded $641 million in ticket sales in 2002, compared with $487 million in ticket sales in 2001. The site offers customers direct access to information such as schedules, reservations, flight status, frequent flyer account information (including the ability to redeem reward travel), cargo tracking and Continental travel specials. Combined with sales by online travel agents, we recorded $1.4 billion in ticket sales on the internet during 2002, compared with $1 billion in 2001.

We, United, American, Delta and Northwest own a travel planning website, Orbitz, which offers customers unlimited access to a wide variety of travel options. To date, 42 U.S. and foreign carriers have joined the web-based travel service. Orbitz provides customers with online access to airline, hotel, car rental and other travel services in addition to internet offers. The site features published fares from most carriers worldwide, presented in a format not biased toward any airline. In addition, we have marketing agreements with other internet travel service companies such as Hotwire, Travelocity and Expedia.

In 2002, we continued to expand our electronic ticketing, or E-Ticket, product. E-Tickets result in lower distribution costs to us while providing us with enhanced customer and revenue information. We recorded over $5.7 billion in E-Ticket sales in both 2002 and 2001, representing 64% and 60%, respectively, of total sales. In 2002, we replaced our airport E-Ticket machines with new self-service kiosks for customer check-in. We have over 675 Continental kiosks at 113 airports throughout our system, and this spring we plan to add internet check-in capability as well. Continental and America West were the first U.S. airlines to implement interline E-Ticketing allowing customers to use electronic tickets when their itineraries include travel on both carriers. We now have interline E-Ticketing arrangements with America West, Northwest, United and US Airways, and plan to implement interline E-Ticketing with our other alliance partners and some of the other large U.S. carriers. We expect these features to contribute to an increase in E-Ticket usage and to further reduce distribution costs.

We maintain our "OnePass" frequent flyer program to encourage repeat travel on our system. OnePass allows passengers to earn mileage credits by flying us and certain other carriers, including Northwest, Alaska, KLM, Qantas and Copa. We also sell mileage credits to credit card companies, phone companies, hotels, car rental agencies and other entities participating in OnePass.

Due to the structure of the program and our belief that most of the redemption travel would not otherwise be revenue passengers, we believe that displacement of revenue passengers by passengers using flight rewards has historically been small. Revenue passenger miles represented by redemption travel accounted for 8.1% of our total revenue passenger miles in 2002.

As of December 31, 2002, we had approximately 43,900 full-time equivalent employees, including approximately 18,640 customer service agents, reservations agents, ramp and other airport personnel, 7,960 flight attendants, 6,770 management and clerical employees, 5,920 pilots, 4,430 mechanics and 180 dispatchers. Labor costs are a significant component of airline expenses and can substantially impact an airline's results. In 2002, labor costs (including employee incentives) constituted 34% of our total operating expenses. While there can be no assurance that our generally good labor relations and high labor productivity will continue, we have established as a significant component of our business strategy the preservation of good relations with our employees, approximately 43% of whom are represented by unions.

See Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Liquidity and Capital Resources" for a table of our principal collective bargaining agreements, and their respective amendable dates.

We operate under certificates of public convenience and necessity issued by DOT. Such certificates may be altered, amended, modified or suspended by DOT if public convenience and necessity so require, or may be revoked for intentional failure to comply with the terms and conditions of a certificate.

Airlines are also regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"), primarily in the areas of flight operations, maintenance, ground facilities and other technical matters. Pursuant to these regulations, we have established, and the FAA has approved, a maintenance program for each type of aircraft we operate that provides for the ongoing maintenance of such aircraft, ranging from frequent routine inspections to major overhauls.

In November 2001, the President signed into law the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (the "Aviation Security Act"). This law federalized substantially all aspects of civil aviation security, creating a new Transportation Security Administration ("TSA"). Under the Aviation Security Act, substantially all security screeners at airports are now federal employees, and significant other elements of airline and airport security are now overseen and performed by federal employees, including federal security managers, federal law enforcement officers, federal air marshals, and federal security screeners. Among other matters, the law mandates improved flight deck security, deployment of federal air marshals onboard flights, improved airport perimeter access security, airline crew security training, enhanced security screening of passengers, baggage, cargo, mail, employees and vendors, enhanced training and qualifications of security screening personnel, additional provision of passenger data to U.S. customs, and enhanced background checks. The law also required that all checked baggage be screened by explosive detection systems by December 31, 2002. Implementation of such screening has required, and will continue to require, significant equipment acquisitions by the government and changes to facility and baggage processes.

Airports from time to time seek to increase the rates charged to airlines, and the ability of airlines to contest such increases has been restricted by federal legislation, DOT regulations and judicial decisions. Most recently, under the Aviation Security Act, funding for airline and airport security is provided in part by a per enplanement ticket tax of $2.50, subject to a $5 per one-way trip cap. The Aviation Security Act also allows DOT to assess each airline fees up to the amount spent by that airline on screening services in 2000. Additionally, because of significantly higher security and other costs incurred by airports since September 11, 2001, and because reduced landing weights since September 11, 2001 have reduced the fees airlines pay to airports, many airports are significantly increasing their rates and charges to air carriers. Some public airports impose passenger facility charges of up to $4.50 per segment, subject to an $18 per roundtrip cap.

The DOT allows local airport authorities to implement procedures designed to abate special noise problems, provided such procedures do not unreasonably interfere with interstate or foreign commerce or the national transportation system. Certain airports, including the major airports at Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange County (California), Washington National, Denver and San Francisco, have established airport restrictions to limit noise, including restrictions on aircraft types to be used and limits on the number of hourly or daily operations or the time of such operations. In some instances, these restrictions have caused curtailments in services or increases in operating costs, and such restrictions could limit our ability to expand our operations at the affected airports. Local authorities at other airports could consider adopting similar noise regulations. Additionally, some foreign airports have similar restrictions.

The FAA has designated John F. Kennedy International Airport ("Kennedy") and LaGuardia Airport ("LaGuardia") in New York and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C. as "high density traffic airports" and has limited the number of departure and arrival slots at those airports. In April 2000, legislation was signed phasing out slot restrictions beginning in 2001 at LaGuardia and Kennedy. All slot restrictions at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago were eliminated in July 2002 and slot restrictions at LaGuardia and Kennedy are scheduled to be eliminated by 2007, although the FAA separately has imposed new slot controls at LaGuardia to reduce congestion. The elimination of slot restrictions has had no material impact on us.

The availability of international routes to U.S. carriers is regulated by treaties and related agreements between the United States and foreign governments. The United States typically follows the practice of encouraging foreign governments to accept multiple carrier designation on foreign routes, although certain countries have sought to limit the number of carriers allowed to fly these routes. Certain foreign governments impose limitations on the ability of air carriers to serve a particular city and/or airport within their country from the U.S. For a U.S. carrier to fly to any such international destination, it must first obtain approval from both the U.S. and the foreign country where the destination is located, which is referred to as a "foreign route authority". For those international routes where there is a limit to the number of carriers or frequency of flights (such as Heathrow airport in London), studies have shown these routes have more value than those without restrictions. Route auth orities to some international destinations can be sold between carriers, and hence their value can vary because of limits on accessibility. To the extent these foreign countries adopt "open skies" policies (meaning all carriers have access to the destination) liberalizing or eliminating restrictions on international routes would increase competition and potentially decrease the value of a route. We cannot predict what laws, treaties and regulations relating to international routes will be adopted or their impact, but the impact could be significant.

Many aspects of airlines' operations are subject to increasingly stringent federal, state and local laws protecting the environment. Future regulatory developments in the U.S. and abroad could adversely affect operations and increase operating costs in the airline industry. Potential future actions that may be taken by the U.S. government, foreign governments, or the International Civil Aviation Organization to limit the emission of greenhouse gases by the aviation sector are unknown at this time, but the adverse impact to us and our industry could be significant.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 involving commercial aircraft adversely affected our financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and the airline industry generally. Those effects continue, although they have been mitigated somewhat by increased traffic, the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (the "Stabilization Act") and our cost-cutting measures. Moreover, additional terrorist attacks, even if not made directly on the airline industry, or the fear of such attacks, particularly if military actions are taken against Iraq, could further negatively affect us and the airline industry. Any military action against Iraq may further decrease demand for air travel and cause fuel prices to increase even more, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Among the effects we experienced from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were significant flight disruption costs caused by the FAA-imposed grounding of the U.S. airline industry's fleet, significantly increased security, insurance and other costs, significantly higher ticket refunds, significantly reduced load factors (defined as revenue passenger miles divided by available seat miles), and significantly reduced yields. Further terrorist attacks against commercial aircraft could result in another grounding of our fleet, and would likely result in significant reductions in load factor and yields, along with increased ticket refunds and security, insurance and other costs. In addition, terrorist attacks not involving commercial aircraft, a war by United States forces against Iraq or other world events could result in decreased load factors and yields and could also result in increased costs for us and our industry. For instance, fuel costs rose significantly during 2002 and are at historically high levels. Even though we have hedged approximately 95% of our fuel requirements for the first quarter of 2003, a war with Iraq, other conflicts in the Middle East, political events in Venezuela, or significant events in other oil-producing nations could cause fuel prices to increase further or remain at current high levels and may reduce the availability of fuel. Premiums for aviation insurance have increased substantially, and could escalate further, or certain aviation insurance could become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage that are insufficient to comply with the levels of insurance coverage required by aircraft lenders and lessors or required by applicable government regulations. Additionally, war-risk coverage or other insurance might cease to be available to our vendors, or might be available only at significantly increased premiums or for reduced amounts of coverage, which could adversely affect our operations or costs.

Due in part to the lack of predictability of future traffic, business mix and yields, we are currently unable to estimate the long-term impact on us of the events of September 11, 2001 or the impact of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces against Iraq. However, given the magnitude of the unprecedented events of September 11, 2001 and their continuing aftermath, the adverse impact to our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and prospects may continue to be material, and our financial resources might not be sufficient to absorb it or that of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces if the war were prolonged.

We continue to experience significant losses. Since September 11, 2001, we have incurred significant losses. We recorded a loss of $451 million in 2002, and we expect to incur a significant loss in 2003. Passenger revenue per available seat mile for our mainline jet operations has continued to decline since September 11, 2001, dropping 4.1% for the year ended December 31, 2002 versus the same period in 2001, and our overall passenger revenue declined 7.0% during this same period. Business traffic in most markets continues to be weak, and carriers continue to offer reduced fares to attract passengers, which lowers our passenger revenue and yields and raises our break-even load factor. We cannot predict when business traffic or yields will increase. Further, the long-term impact of any changes in fare structures, most importantly in relation to business fares, booking patterns, low-cost competitor growth, increased usage of regional jets, competitor bankruptcies and other changes in industr y structure and conduct, cannot be predicted at this time, but could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In addition, our capacity purchase agreement with ExpressJet provides that we purchase, in advance, all of its available seat miles for a negotiated price, and we are at risk for reselling the available seat miles at market prices. We previously announced our intention to sell or otherwise dispose of our remaining interests in ExpressJet. If we do so, then we would report greater fixed costs, which could result in lower or more volatile earnings or both. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2002, our net loss of $451 million included net income for ExpressJet of $84 million.

Our high leverage may affect our ability to satisfy our significant financing needs or meet our obligations. As is the case with our principal competitors, we have a high proportion of debt compared to our equity capital. We also have significant operating leases and facility rental costs. In addition, we have fewer cash resources than some of our principal competitors and substantially all of our property and equipment is subject to liens securing indebtedness. Accordingly, we may be less able than some of our competitors to withstand a prolonged recession in the airline industry or respond as well to changing economic and competitive conditions. Moreover, competitors emerging from bankruptcy will likely have lower cost structures and greater operating flexibility after reorganizing their companies in bankruptcy.

As of December 31, 2002, we had approximately $5.7 billion (including current maturities) of long-term debt and capital lease obligations, $248 million liquidation amount of Continental-obligated mandatorily redeemable preferred securities of trust ($241 million net of unamortized discount), and $767 million of stockholders' equity. During 2002, the amount of our long-term debt increased 26%. We have substantial commitments for capital expenditures, including for the acquisition of new aircraft. As of December 31, 2002, we had firm commitments for 67 aircraft from Boeing, with an estimated cost of approximately $2.5 billion. The 67 aircraft are scheduled to be delivered between late 2003 and mid 2008, with four aircraft scheduled for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2003. In addition, at December 31, 2002, we had firm commitments to purchase 13 spare engines related to the new Boeing aircraft for approximately $79 million, which will be deliverable through March 2005. We do not have backstop fi nancing from Boeing or any other financing currently in place for the 67 aircraft or 13 spare engines.

As of December 31, 2002, ExpressJet had firm commitments for 86 regional jets from Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. ("Embraer"), with an estimated cost of approximately $1.7 billion. In February 2003, ExpressJet and Embraer agreed in principle to amend ExpressJet's purchase agreements to slow the pace of regional jet deliveries. Based on this agreement in principle, ExpressJet currently anticipates taking delivery of 36 regional jets in 2003. ExpressJet does not have an obligation to take any of these firm Embraer aircraft that are not financed by a third party and leased to them or us. In addition, ExpressJet plans to purchase 17 spare engines for approximately $47 million through the first quarter of 2005. ExpressJet would have no obligation to acquire the spare engines if the firm order aircraft are not delivered for any reason.

We also have significant operating lease and facility rental obligations. For the year ended December 31, 2002, annual aircraft and facility rental expense under operating leases approximated $1.3 billion.

Additional financing will be needed to satisfy our capital commitments. We cannot predict whether sufficient financing will be available. On several occasions subsequent to September 11, 2001, each of Moody's Investors Service, Standard and Poor's and Fitch IBCA, Duff & Phelps downgraded the credit ratings of a number of major airlines, including our credit ratings. Reductions in our credit ratings have increased the interest we pay and may increase the cost and reduce the availability of financing to us in the future.

Significant changes or extended periods of high fuel costs or fuel supply disruptions would materially affect our operating results. Fuel costs are currently at historically high levels and constitute a significant portion of our operating expense. Fuel costs represented approximately 11.7% of our operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2002 and 13.9% of our operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2001. Fuel prices and supplies are influenced significantly by international political and economic circumstances, such as the political crisis in Venezuela or a possible war with Iraq. From time to time we enter into petroleum swap contracts, petroleum call option contracts and/or jet fuel purchase commitments to provide some short-term protection (generally three to six months) against a sharp increase in jet fuel prices. Depending upon the hedging method employed, our strategy may limit our ability to benefit from declines in fuel prices. We have hedged approximately 95% of our fuel requirements for the first quarter of 2003 with petroleum call options at $33 per barrel. If a further fuel supply shortage were to arise from OPEC production curtailments, a disruption of oil imports, a war with Iraq or otherwise, higher fuel prices or further reduction of scheduled airline service could result. Significant changes in fuel costs would materially affect our operating results.

Labor costs impact our results of operations. Labor costs constitute a significant percentage of our total operating costs. Our mechanics, represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, ratified a new four-year collective bargaining agreement in December 2002. The mechanics agreement makes an adjustment to current pay and recognizes current industry conditions with a provision to re-open negotiations regarding wages, pension and health insurance provisions in January 2004. Work rules and other contract items are established through 2006. Collective bargaining agreements between us and our pilots and between ExpressJet and its pilots (both of whom are represented by the Air Line Pilots Association) became amendable in October 2002. After being deferred due to the economic uncertainty following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, negotiations recommenced in September 2002 and are continuing. Although we may incur increased labor costs in connection with the negotiation of the pilot collective bargaining agreements, the labor cost uncertainty associated with recent major hub-and-spoke carrier bankruptcies makes predicting the outcome of negotiations more difficult. US Airways and United have significantly decreased their labor costs may further decrease them in bankruptcy, and may emerge with significantly lower labor costs than ours. American Airlines, Delta and Northwest have each recently announced that they are seeking to decrease their labor costs significantly. Although we enjoy generally good relations with our employees, there can be no assurance that we will not experience labor disruptions in the future.

Our ability to utilize certain net operating loss carryforwards may be limited by certain events. At December 31, 2002, we had estimated net operating loss carryforwards ("NOLs") of $2.0 billion for federal income tax purposes that will expire through 2022. Due to a change in our ownership on April 27, 1993, the ultimate utilization of our NOLs may be limited, as described below.

Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code ("Section 382") imposes limitations on a corporation's ability to utilize NOLs if it experiences an "ownership change." In general terms, an ownership change may result from transactions increasing the ownership of certain stockholders in the stock of a corporation by more than 50 percentage points over a three-year period. In the event of an ownership change, utilization of our NOLs would be subject to an annual limitation under Section 382 determined by multiplying the value of our stock at the time of the ownership change by the applicable long-term tax-exempt rate (which is 4.65% for December 2002). Any unused annual limitation may be carried over to later years. The amount of the limitation may under certain circumstances be increased by the built-in gains in assets held by us at the time of the change that are recognized in the five-year period after the change. Under current conditions, if an ownership change were to occur, our annual NOL utilizati on would be limited to approximately $22 million per year other than through the recognition of future built-in gain transactions.

We believe that Holdings' initial public offering created a change in ownership limitation on the utilization of ExpressJet's NOLs. As a result, ExpressJet will be limited in the utilization of its NOLs to offset up to approximately $43 million of post-change taxable income per year. At December 31, 2002, ExpressJet's stand-alone NOLs were $105 million, which expire between 2004 and 2020. We do not expect this limitation to have any material impact on our financial condition.

Continental Micronesia's dependence on the Japanese economy may result in currency risk. Because the majority of CMI's traffic originates in Japan, its results of operations are substantially affected by the Japanese economy and changes in the value of the yen as compared to the U.S. dollar. To reduce the potential negative impact on CMI's earnings associated with fluctuations in currency, we have entered into option contracts as a hedge against a portion of our expected net yen cash flow position. As of December 31, 2002, we had entered into hedge contracts that cover 90% of the projected yen-denominated net cash flows for the first six months of 2003 at a weighted average rate of 123 yen to $1 US.

The airline industry is highly competitive. The airline industry is highly competitive and susceptible to price discounting. Carriers use discount fares to stimulate traffic during periods of slack demand, to generate cash flow and to increase market share. Some of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources or lower cost structures than we do, or both. In recent years, the market share held by low cost carriers has increased significantly.

Airline profit levels are highly sensitive to changes in fuel costs, fare levels and passenger demand. Passenger demand and fare levels are influenced by, among other things, the state of the global economy, domestic and international events, airline capacity and pricing actions taken by carriers. The weak U.S. economy, turbulent international events and extensive price discounting by carriers contributed to unprecedented losses for U.S. airlines from 1990 to 1993. Since September 11, 2001, these same factors, together with the effects of the terrorist attacks, have resulted in dramatic losses for us and the airline industry generally. We cannot predict when conditions will improve. US Airways, United and several small competitors have filed for bankruptcy protection, and others could follow. These carriers could operate under bankruptcy protection in a manner that would be adverse to us and could emerge from bankruptcy as more vigorous competitors with substantially lower costs.

In recent years, the major U.S. airlines have sought to form marketing alliances with other U.S. and foreign air carriers. Such alliances generally provide for codesharing, frequent flyer reciprocity, coordinated scheduling of flights of each alliance member to permit convenient connections and other joint marketing activities. Such arrangements permit an airline to market flights operated by other alliance members as its own. This increases the destinations, connections and frequencies offered by the airline, which provide an opportunity to increase traffic on its segment of flights connecting with its alliance partners. Our alliance with Northwest and our new alliance with Delta and Northwest are examples of such arrangements, and we have existing alliances with numerous other air carriers. Other major U.S. airlines have alliances or planned alliances more extensive than ours. We cannot predict the extent to which we will be disadvantaged by competing alliances.

Since its deregulation in 1978, the U.S. airline industry has undergone substantial consolidation, and it may in the future experience additional consolidation. We routinely monitor changes in the competitive landscape and engage in analysis and discussions regarding our strategic position, including alliances and business combination transactions. We have had, and expect to continue to have, discussions with third parties regarding strategic alternatives. The impact of any consolidation within the U.S. airline industry cannot be predicted at this time.

The Aviation Security Act will impose additional costs and may cause severe disruptions. The Aviation Security Act federalizes substantially all aspects of civil aviation security, creating the TSA. Among other things, the law required that all checked baggage be screened by explosive detection systems by December 31, 2002 (although during the implementation phase, other permitted methods of screening are being utilized and federal law permits individual airports to request extensions of such deadline). At some airports, the TSA has provided for temporary security measures which are less than optimum. Implementation of the requirements of the Aviation Security Act has resulted in increased costs for the airline industry and may result in additional costs, delays and disruptions in air travel.

Our business is subject to extensive government regulation. As evidenced by the enactment of the Aviation Security Act, airlines are subject to extensive regulatory and legal compliance requirements that result in significant costs. The FAA from time to time issues directives and other regulations relating to the maintenance and operation of aircraft that require significant expenditures. Some FAA requirements cover, among other things, retirement of older aircraft, security measures, collision avoidance systems, airborne windshear avoidance systems, noise abatement and other environmental concerns, commuter aircraft safety and increased inspections and maintenance procedures to be conducted on older aircraft. We expect to continue incurring expenses to comply with the FAA's regulations.

Additional laws, regulations, taxes and airport rates and charges have been proposed from time to time that could significantly increase the cost of airline operations or reduce revenue. Additionally, because of significantly higher security and other costs incurred by airports since September 11, 2001, and because reduced landing weights since September 11, 2001 have reduced the fees airlines pay to airports, many airports are significantly increasing their rates and charges to air carriers, including to us. Restrictions on the ownership and transfer of airline routes and takeoff and landing slots have also been proposed. See "Industry Regulation and Airport Access" above. The ability of U.S. carriers to operate international routes is subject to change because the applicable arrangements between the United States and foreign governments may be amended from time to time, or because appropriate slots or facilities are not made available. We cannot provide assurance that current laws and regulation s, or laws or regulations enacted in the future, will not adversely affect us.

Our operations are affected by the seasonality associated with the airline industry. Due to greater demand for air travel during the summer months, revenue in the airline industry in the second and third quarters of the year is generally stronger than revenue in the first and fourth quarters of the year for most U.S. air carriers. Our results of operations generally reflect this seasonality, but have also been impacted by numerous other factors that are not necessarily seasonal, including the extent and nature of competition from other airlines, fare actions, excise and similar taxes, security fees, changing levels of operations, fuel prices, weather, air traffic control delays, foreign currency exchange rates and general economic conditions.

As shown in the following table, our operating aircraft fleet consisted of 366 mainline jets and 188 regional jets at December 31, 2002, excluding aircraft out of service. Our purchase commitments (firm orders) for aircraft, as well as options to purchase additional aircraft as of December 31, 2002 are also shown below.

As of December 31, 2002, we had the following aircraft out of service:

The 30 owned out-of-service aircraft are being carried at an aggregate fair market value of $68 million. In November 2002, we agreed to sell the eight owned ATR-42-320s to a third party with delivery dates (and title transfer) in the first quarter of 2003. We currently sublease three of the leased out-of-service aircraft to third parties and are exploring sublease or sale opportunities for the remaining out-of-service aircraft that do not have near-term lease expirations. The timing of the disposition of these aircraft is dependent upon the stabilization of the economic environment in the airline industry as well as our ability to find purchasers or sublessees for the aircraft. We cannot predict when such stabilization will occur or if purchasers or sublessees can be found, and it is possible that our assets could suffer additional impairment.

Substantially all of the aircraft and engines we own are subject to mortgages. A significant portion of our spare parts inventory is also encumbered.

During 2002, we put into service a total of 20 new Boeing aircraft which consisted of 10 767-400ER aircraft, two 777-200ER aircraft, two 757-300 aircraft, two 737-900 aircraft and four 737-800 aircraft. ExpressJet took delivery of 33 ERJ-145 aircraft and 18 ERJ-145XR aircraft in 2002. We removed from service 14 MD-80 aircraft, one 737-500 aircraft and four 737-300 aircraft in 2002, primarily in conjunction with the expiration of their lease terms. ExpressJet removed from service 25 ATR-42 aircraft and eight EMB-120 aircraft in 2002.

We anticipate taking delivery of four Boeing 737-800 aircraft in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the remainder of our Boeing firm orders through 2008. Also in 2003, we plan to retire 16 mainline jet aircraft from service, 12 of which have leases that expire in 2003.

ExpressJet currently anticipates taking delivery of 36 Embraer regional jet aircraft in 2003 and the remainder of its firm orders through 2006.

See Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Liquidity and Capital Commitments" for a discussion of our firm orders for new aircraft and related financing arrangements.

Our principal facilities are located at Liberty International, Bush Intercontinental, Hopkins International and A.B. Won Pat International Airport in Guam. Substantially all of these facilities and many of our other facilities are leased on a long-term, net-rental basis, and we are responsible for maintenance, taxes, insurance and other facility-related expenses and services. At each of our three domestic hub cities and most other locations, our passenger and baggage handling space is leased directly from the airport authority on varying terms dependent on prevailing practice at each airport. We also maintain administrative offices, terminal, catering, cargo and other airport facilities, training facilities, maintenance facilities and other facilities related to the airline business in the cities we serve.

We have entered into agreements with the cities of Houston, Texas and Cleveland, Ohio, the New Jersey Economic Development Authority, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the Hawaii Department of Transportation, the Regional Airports Improvement Corporation (in Los Angeles, California), and the Harris County (Houston) Industrial Development Corporation to provide funds for constructing, improving and modifying facilities that have been or will be leased to us and for acquiring related equipment. In connection therewith, we have unconditionally guaranteed the principal and interest on tax-exempt bonds issued by these entities with a par value in an original principal amount of approximately $1.6 billion (excludes the City of Houston bonds and includes the US Airways contingent liability, both discussed below) and entered into long-term leases with the respective authorities under which rental payments will be sufficient to service the related bonds. The leases generally have terms ranging f rom 20 to 30 years.

In August 2001, the City of Houston completed the offering of $324 million aggregate principal amount of tax-exempt special facilities revenue bonds to finance the construction of Terminal E at Bush Intercontinental Airport. In connection therewith, we entered into a long-term lease with the City of Houston requiring that upon completion of construction, with limited exceptions, we will make rental payments sufficient to service the related tax-exempt bonds through their maturity in 2029. Approximately $105 million of the bond proceeds have been expended as of December 31, 2002. During the construction period, we retain certain risks related to our own actions or inactions while managing portions of the construction. Potential obligations associated with these risks are generally limited based upon certain percentages of construction costs incurred to date. We have also entered into a binding corporate guaranty with the bond trustee for the repayment of the principal and interest on the bonds that be comes effective upon the completion of construction, our failure to comply with the lease agreement (which is within our control), or our termination of the lease agreement. Further, we have not assumed any condemnation risk, any casualty event risk (unless caused by us), or risk related to certain cost overruns (and in the case of cost overruns, our liability for the project would be limited to 89.9% of the capitalized costs) during the construction period. Accordingly, we are not considered the owner of the project and, therefore, have not capitalized the construction costs or recorded the debt obligation in our consolidated financial statements. However, our potential obligation under the guarantee is for payment of the principal of $324 million and related-interest charges, at an annual rate of 6.78%.

We remain contingently liable until December 1, 2015, for US Airways' obligations under a lease agreement between US Airways and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey related to the East End Terminal at LaGuardia airport. These obligations include the payment of ground rentals to the Port Authority and the payment of principal and interest on $182 million par value special facilities revenue bonds issued by the Port Authority. US Airways has not yet decided whether to assume or reject the lease in its bankruptcy. US Airways is required to remain current on all obligations under the lease that arise after the filing of bankruptcy until they make such decision. If US Airways defaults on these obligations, we will be required to cure the default, and we would have the right to occupy the terminal after US Airways' interest in the lease has been terminated. If US Airways rejects the lease, we will become liable for all obligations under the lease and will have the immediate right to occupy th e terminal.

Sarah Futch Hall d/b/a/ Travel Specialists v. United Air Lines, et al. (U.S. D.C. Eastern District of North Carolina). This class action was filed in federal court on June 21, 2000 by a travel agent, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated U.S. travel agents, challenging the reduction and ultimate elimination of travel agent base commissions by certain air carriers, including Continental and other domestic and international air carriers. The amended complaint alleges an unlawful agreement among the airline defendants to reduce, cap or eliminate commissions in violation of federal antitrust laws during the years 1997 to 2002. The plaintiffs seek compensatory and treble damages, injunctive relief and their attorneys' fees. The class was certified on September 18, 2002. Discovery has been completed and the trial of this lawsuit is currently scheduled to begin on April 28, 2003. We believe the plaintiffs' claims are without merit and are vigorously defending this lawsuit. A final adver se court decision awarding substantial money damages, however, would have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Under the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (commonly known as "Superfund") and similar state environment cleanup laws, generators of waste disposed of at designated sites may, under certain circumstances, be subject to joint and several liability for investigation and remediation costs. We (including our predecessors) have been identified as a potentially responsible party at one federal site and one state site that are undergoing or have undergone investigation or remediation. We believe that, although applicable case law is evolving and some cases may be interpreted to the contrary, some or all of any liability claims associated with these sites were discharged by confirmation of our 1993 Plan of Reorganization, principally because our exposure is based on alleged offsite disposal known as of the date of confirmation. Even if any such claims were not discharged, on the basis of currently available information, we believe that our pote ntial liability for our allocable share of the cost to remedy each site (to the extent we are found to have liability) is not, in the aggregate, material; however, we have not been designated a "de minimis" contributor at either site.

We are also and may from time to time become involved in other environmental matters, including the investigation and/or remediation of environmental conditions at properties we use or previously used. We could potentially be responsible for environmental remediation costs primarily related to jet fuel and solvent contamination surrounding our aircraft maintenance hangar in Los Angeles. In 2001, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board mandated a field study of the site and it was completed in September 2001. We have established a reserve for estimated costs of environmental remediation at Los Angeles and elsewhere in our system, based primarily on third party environmental studies and estimates as to the extent of the contamination and nature of the required remedial actions. We have evaluated and recorded this accrual for environmental remediation costs separately from any related insurance recovery. We have recorded an insurance recovery receivable based on the recovery rate experien ced on other environmental matters. We have not recognized any receivables from insurers that denied coverage.

We expect our total losses from environmental matters, net of probable insurance recoveries, to be $37 million for which we were fully accrued at December 31, 2002. Although we believe, based on currently available information, that our reserves for potential environment remediation costs in excess of anticipated insurance proceeds are adequate, reserves could be adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change. We cannot currently calculate any increase that might be required in our environmental reserves or predict the outcome of our insurance dispute. However, we do not expect these items to materially impact our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Although we are not currently subject to any environmental cleanup orders imposed by regulatory authorities, we are undertaking voluntary investigation or remediation at certain properties in consultation with such authorities. The full nature and extent of any contamination at these properties and the parties responsible for such contamination have not been determined, but based on currently available information and our current reserves, we do not believe that any environmental liability associated with such properties will have a material adverse effect on us.

Various other claims and lawsuits against us are pending that are of the type generally consistent with our business. We cannot at this time reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss that could be experienced if any of the claims were successful. Many of such claims and lawsuits are covered in whole or in part by insurance. We do not believe that the foregoing matters will have a material adverse effect on us.

Not applicable.

Our common stock (Class B common stock) trades on the New York Stock Exchange. The table below shows the high and low sales prices for our common stock as reported in the consolidated transaction reporting system during 2002 and 2001.

As of January 31, 2003, there were approximately 21,903 holders of record of our common stock.

We have paid no cash dividends on our common stock and have no current intention of doing so. Certain of our credit agreements restrict our and some of our subsidiaries' ability to pay cash dividends or repurchase capital stock by imposing minimum unrestricted cash requirements on us and limiting the amount of any dividends and repurchases when aggregated with other payments or distributions.

Our certificate of incorporation provides that no shares of capital stock may be voted by or at the direction of persons who are not United States citizens unless the shares are registered on a separate stock record. Our bylaws further provide that no shares will be registered on the separate stock record if the amount so registered would exceed United States foreign ownership restrictions. United States law currently limits the voting power in us (and other U.S. airlines) of persons who are not citizens of the United States to 25%.

The table below provides information relating to our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2002:

1. The number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans includes 5,250 shares under the restricted stock provisions and 19 shares under the employee stock purchase plan.

The following discussion contains forward-looking statements that are not limited to historical facts, but reflect our current beliefs, expectations or intentions regarding future events. All forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. For examples of such risks and uncertainties, please see the cautionary statements contained in Item 1. "Business - Risk Factors - Terrorist Attacks and International Hostilities", "Business - Risk Factors Relating to the Company" and "Business - Risk Factors Relating to the Airline Industry". We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this report. Hereinafter, the terms "Continental", "we", "us", "our" and similar terms refer to Continental Airlines, Inc. and its subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.

We incurred a consolidated net loss of $451 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 as compared to a consolidated net loss of $95 million for the year ended December 31, 2001. Results for 2002 include a $242 million charge for the impairment of owned aircraft and the accrual of future obligations for leased aircraft permanently grounded. Results for 2001 included a $146 million charge for the impairment of owned aircraft and the accrual of future obligations for leased aircraft permanently grounded, costs associated with furloughs and company-offered leaves, and other charges related to special items. In addition, 2001 results included a $417 million grant under the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (the "Stabilization Act").

The current U.S. domestic airline environment is the worst in our history. Prior to September 2001, we were profitable, although many U.S. air carriers were losing money and our profitability was declining. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 dramatically worsened the difficult financial environment and presented new and greater challenges for the airline industry. Since the terrorist attacks, several airlines, including United Air Lines and US Airways, have filed for bankruptcy. Although we have been able to raise capital, downsize our operations and reduce our expenses significantly, we have reported significant losses since the terrorist attacks, and current trends in the airline industry make it likely that we will continue to post significant losses for the foreseeable future. The revenue environment continues to be weak in light of changing pricing models, excess capacity in the market, reduced corporate travel spending and other issues. In addition, fuel prices have significantly escalated due to the threat of imminent military action against Iraq and continued political tension in Venezuela.

Absent adverse factors outside our control such as those described herein, we believe that our liquidity and access to cash will be sufficient to fund our current operations through 2003 (and beyond if we are successful in implementing our previously announced revenue generation and cost cutting measures, as well as additional measures currently being developed). However, we believe that the economic environment must improve for us to continue to operate at our current size and expense level beyond that time. We may find it necessary to further downsize our operations, ground additional aircraft and further reduce our expenses. We anticipate that our previously announced capacity and cost reductions, together with the capacity reductions announced by other carriers and capacity reductions that could come from restructurings within the industry, should result in a better financial environment by the end of 2003, absent adverse factors outside our control such as a further economic recession, additio nal terrorist attacks, a war affecting the United States, decreased consumer demand or sustained high fuel prices. However, we expect to incur a significant loss in 2003, regardless of such adverse factors.

Due in part to the lack of predictability of future traffic, business mix and yields, we are currently unable to estimate the long-term effect on us of the events of September 11, 2001, or the impact of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces against Iraq. However, given the magnitude of the unprecedented events of September 11, 2001 and their continuing aftermath, the adverse impact to our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and prospects may continue to be material, and our financial resources might not be sufficient to absorb it or that of any further terrorist attacks or a war involving United States forces if the war were prolonged.

Among the many factors that threaten us and the airline industry generally are the following:

• A weak global and domestic economy has significantly decreased our revenue. Business traffic, our most profitable source of revenue, and yields are down significantly, as well as leisure traffic and yields. Some of our competitors are significantly changing all or a portion of their pricing structures in a manner that is revenue dilutive to us. Although we have been successful in decreasing our unit cost as our unit revenue has declined, we expect our operating margin to be negative for at least the first quarter of 2003 and to incur significant losses in that quarter and for the full year 2003.
• We believe that reduced demand persists not only because of the weak economy, but also because of some customers' concerns about further terrorist attacks and reprisals. The continued specter of a war with Iraq and unrest in the Middle East may decrease demand for air travel just as the Persian Gulf War did in 1990 and 1991. We believe that demand is further weakened by customer dissatisfaction with the hassles and delays of heightened airport security and screening procedures.
• Fuel costs rose significantly at the end of 2002 and are, and could remain, at historically high levels. Even though we have hedged approximately 95% of our fuel requirements for the first quarter of 2003, a war with Iraq, other conflicts in the Middle East, political events in Venezuela, or significant events in other oil-producing nations could cause fuel prices to increase further (or be sustained at current high levels) and may impact the availability of fuel. Based on gallons consumed in 2002, for every one dollar increase in the price of crude oil, our annual fuel expense would be approximately $40 million higher.
• The terrorist attacks of 2001 have caused security costs to increase significantly, many of which have been passed on to airlines. Security costs are likely to continue rising for the foreseeable future. In the current environment of lower consumer demand and discounted pricing, these costs cannot effectively be passed on to customers. Insurance costs have also risen sharply, in part due to greater perceived risks and in part due to the reduced availability of insurance coverage. We must absorb these additional expenses in the current pricing environment.
• Although we reduced some of our costs during the last year and continue to implement cost-cutting measures, our costs cannot be decreased as quickly as our revenue has declined. In addition, as is the case with many of our competitors, we are highly leveraged, and have few assets that remain unpledged to support any new debt. Combined with reduced access to the capital markets, themselves already weakened by the state of the economy, there is the potential for insufficient liquidity if current conditions continue unabated for a sufficiently long period of time. We had approximately $1.3 billion of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments at December 31, 2002. During the first quarter of 2003, we anticipate our cash balance will decline by approximately $1.5 million per day taking into account all expected sources and uses of cash, including required debt payments and capital expenditures. We continue to hold 53.1% of the outstanding stock of ExpressJet Holdings, Inc. ("Holdings"), the publi cly traded parent of our regional jet subsidiary, which stock is not pledged to creditors. We intend to sell or otherwise dispose of some or all of our interest in Holdings, subject to market conditions.
• The nature of the airline industry is changing dramatically as business travelers change their spending patterns and low-cost carriers continue to gain market share. We have announced and are implementing plans to modify our product for the large segment of our customers who are not willing to pay for a premium product, to reduce costs and to generate additional revenue. Other carriers have announced similar plans to create lower-cost products, or to offer separate low cost products (such as a low-cost "airline within an airline"). In addition, carriers emerging from bankruptcy will have significantly reduced cost structures and operational flexibility that will allow them to compete more effectively.
• Current conditions may cause consolidation of the airline industry, domestically and globally. The extremity of current conditions could result in a reduction of some of the regulatory hurdles that historically have limited consolidation. Depending on the nature of the consolidation, we could benefit from it or be harmed by it. We continue to monitor developments throughout the industry and recently entered into a marketing alliance (implementation of which is subject to certain conditions) with Northwest and Delta to permit us to compete more effectively with other carriers and alliance groups, although the DOT has announced that it intends to bring an enforcement proceeding against us with respect to the alliance.
• We are engaged in labor negotiations with the union representing our pilots. We cannot predict the outcome of these negotiations or the financial impact on us of any new labor contract with our pilots. Recent significant concession agreements with labor groups at US Airways and United Air Lines have had the effect of lowering industry standard wages and benefits, and our negotiations may be influenced by these and other labor cost developments.
• As a result of continuing declines in interest rates and the market value of our defined benefit pension plans' assets, we were required to increase the minimum pension liability and reduce stockholders' equity at December 31, 2002 by $250 million. This adjustment did not impact current earnings, the actual funding requirements of the plans, or our compliance with debt covenants. However, because of the decline in interest rates and the market value of the plans' assets, we anticipate that pension expense and required pension contributions will increase in 2003. Pension expense for the year 2002 was approximately $185 million. Pension expense for 2003 is expected to be approximately $326 million. We contributed $150 million of cash to our pension plans in 2002 and expect our cash contribution to our pension plans to be $141 million in 2003.
• Under our two principal bank loans, we are required to maintain a minimum unrestricted cash balance of $500 million and, beginning in June 2003, we will also be required to maintain a 1:1 ratio of EBITDAR (earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation, amortization and aircraft rentals) to fixed charges, which consist of interest expense, aircraft rental expense, cash income taxes and cash dividends, for the previous four quarters. These bank loans had an outstanding balance of $250 million at December 31, 2002. We anticipate that the outstanding balance will be approximately $158 million at the time the EBITDAR to fixed charges ratio covenant becomes effective and $74 million at December 31, 2003. If we are unable to meet the required ratio and are unsuccessful in renegotiating the terms of these bank loans, we will have the option of repaying the debt at that time.

The following discussion provides an analysis of our results of operations and reasons for material changes therein for the three years ended December 31, 2002.

Comparison of 2002 to 2001. Passenger revenue decreased 7.0%, $595 million, during 2002 as compared to 2001, which was principally due to a decrease in both traffic and yields subsequent to the September 11, 2001 attacks, as well as the continuing weak economy. Yield was 6.4% lower in 2002 compared to 2001.

Comparisons of passenger revenue, revenue per available seat mile (RASM) and available seat miles (ASMs) by geographic region for our mainline jet and regional jet and turboprop (which were removed entirely from our fleet in 2002) operations are shown below:

Increase (Decrease) for Year Ended December 31, 2002 vs. December 31, 2001

Cargo, mail and other revenue increased 5.5%, $28 million, in 2002 compared to 2001, primarily due to increased charter revenue and passenger related fees, offset by new security restrictions that reduced mail volumes.

Wages, salaries and related costs decreased 2.1%, $62 million, during 2002 as compared to 2001, primarily due to a reduction in the average number of employees and lower employee incentives, partially offset by higher wage rates.

Aircraft fuel expense decreased 16.8%, $206 million, in 2002 as compared to 2001. The average price per gallon decreased 10.6% from 78.24 cents in 2001 to 69.97 cents in 2002. Jet fuel consumption decreased 9.1% principally reflecting decreased flight operations due to the current industry environment and the fuel efficiency of our younger fleet.

Aircraft rentals decreased 0.1%, $1 million, in 2002 compared to 2001, due to aircraft rent on grounded aircraft no longer requiring accrual since such amounts have been recognized as part of the fleet impairment charge, offset by increased rental expense related to the delivery of new aircraft.

Landing fees and other rentals increased 9.0%, $52 million, in 2002 as compared to 2001 primarily due to higher landing fees resulting from rate increases and higher facilities rent, partially attributable to the completion of substantial portions of the Global Gateway project at Newark Liberty International Airport.

Maintenance, materials and repairs expense decreased 16.2%, $92 million, during 2002 as compared to 2001 primarily due to the replacement of older aircraft with new aircraft that generally require less maintenance.

Depreciation and amortization expense decreased 4.9%, $23 million, in 2002 compared to 2001, primarily due to lower depreciation expense on grounded aircraft which have been written down to fair market value and $22 million related to the discontinuation of amortization of routes following the adoption of SFAS 142, partially offset by the addition of new owned aircraft and related spare parts.

Reservations and sales expense decreased 14.6%, $65 million, in 2002 as compared to 2001 principally due to lower credit card fees as a result of lower revenue.

Commissions expense decreased 41.8%, $152 million, in 2002 compared to 2001 due to elimination of domestic base commissions and lower revenue.

Passenger services expense decreased 14.7%, $51 million, in 2002 as compared to 2001 primarily due to improved baggage performance and a decrease in food costs caused by a decrease in passengers.

Fleet impairment, severance and other special charges in 2002 consisted of a $242 million charge primarily related to the impairment (owned aircraft) and accrual of lease exit costs (leased aircraft) of our DC-10-30, MD-80 and turboprop fleets. Fleet impairment, severance and other special charges in 2001 totaling $124 million include costs associated with impairment of various owned aircraft and spare engines, furloughs and company-offered leaves, a charge for environmental remediation and costs associated with the closure and under-utilization of certain facilities and for certain uncollectible receivables.

We recorded a $417 million Stabilization Act grant in 2001 for direct losses incurred beginning on September 11, 2001 through December 31, 2001 as a result of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and a $12 million charge in 2002 resulting from the write down of our receivable related to the finalization of the grant.

Interest expense increased 20.7%, $61 million, in 2002 compared to 2001 due to an increase in long-term debt primarily resulting from the purchase of new aircraft.

Interest income decreased 46.7%, $21 million, in 2002 compared to 2001 due to lower interest rates.

Other nonoperating income (expense) in 2001 included approximately $22 million of special charges related to the impairment of investments in two of our affiliates and the uncollectibility of related notes receivable as a consequence of the events of September 11, 2001, and $20 million of losses in certain of our investments in unconsolidated affiliates.

Our effective tax rates differ from the federal statutory rate of 35% primarily due to expenses that are not deductible for federal income tax purposes, state income taxes and the accrual of income tax expense on our share of ExpressJet's net income. We are required to accrue income tax expense on our share of ExpressJet's net income after the initial public offering in all periods where we either consolidate their operations or account for our investment under the equity method of accounting. The accrual of this income tax expense reduced our tax benefit by approximately $12 million during 2002.

Minority interest of $28 million in 2002 represents the portion of Holdings' net income attributable to the 46.9% of Holdings that we do not own. This amount is based on Holdings' results of operations under the capacity purchase agreement. Under this agreement, we pay Holdings for scheduled block hours based on an agreed upon formula. Transactions between us and Holdings under the capacity purchase agreement are otherwise eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.

Comparison of 2001 to 2000. Passenger revenue decreased 9.1%, $851 million, during 2001 as compared to 2000, which was principally due to a decrease in both traffic and yields subsequent to the September 11, 2001 attacks, as well as lower yields that had been affecting our business traffic prior to the attacks.

Comparisons of passenger revenue, RASM and ASMs by geographic region for our mainline jet and regional jet and turboprop operations are shown below:

Cargo, mail and other revenue decreased 13.4%, $79 million, in 2001 compared to 2000 primarily due to lower contract revenue from outside ground handling, lower freight and mail due to lower international volumes and security restrictions on our ability to carry freight and mail after the terrorist attacks.

Wages, salaries and related costs increased 5.1%, $146 million, during 2001 as compared to 2000, primarily due to higher wage rates. Due to the attacks of September 11, 2001, we reduced headcount by approximately 8,000 through furloughs and leaves of absence. Severance costs and related company-offered benefits are included in fleet impairment losses, severance and other special charges in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

Aircraft fuel expense decreased 11.8%, $164 million, in 2001 as compared to 2000. The average price per gallon decreased 7.1% from 84.21 cents in 2000 to 78.24 cents in 2001. Jet fuel consumption decreased 7.0% principally reflecting decreased flight operations after September 11, 2001 and the fuel efficiency of our younger fleet.

Aircraft rentals increased 7.0%, $59 million, in 2001 compared to 2000, due to the delivery of new aircraft.

Landing fees and other rentals increased 9.2%, $49 million, in 2001 as compared to 2000 primarily due to higher facilities rent and landing fees resulting from increased operations prior to September 11, 2001.

Maintenance, materials and repairs expense decreased 12.1%, $78 million, during 2001 as compared to 2000 due to the volume and timing of aircraft overhauls as part of our ongoing maintenance program, the mix of aircraft and the grounding of aircraft subsequent to September 11, 2001.

Depreciation and amortization expense increased 16.2%, $65 million, in 2001 compared to 2000 due principally to the addition of new owned aircraft and related spare parts.

Reservations and sales expense decreased 2.2%, $10 million, in 2001 as compared to 2000 principally due to lower credit card fees as a result of lower revenue.

Commissions expense decreased 30.8%, $162 million, in 2001 compared to 2000 due principally to lower revenue and lower base commissions due to commission caps.

Passenger servicing expense decreased 4.1%, $15 million, in 2001 as compared to 2000 primarily due to improved baggage performance and a decrease in food costs caused by a decrease in passengers.

Fleet impairment, severance and other special charges in 2001 of $124 million include costs associated with impairment of various owned aircraft and spare engines, furloughs and company-offered leaves, a charge for environmental remediation and costs associated with the closure and under-utilization of certain facilities and for certain uncollectible receivables.

We recorded a $417 million Stabilization Act grant in 2001 for direct losses incurred beginning on September 11, 2001 through December 31, 2001 as a result of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Interest expense increased 17.5%, $44 million, in 2001 compared to 2000 due to an increase in long-term debt primarily resulting from the purchase of new aircraft, partially offset by lower rates on variable debt.

Interest income decreased 48.3%, $42 million, in 2001 compared to 2000 due to lower average balances of cash and lower interest rates.

Other nonoperating income (expense) in 2001 included approximately $22 million of special charges related to the impairment of investments in two of our affiliates and the uncollectibility of related notes receivable as a consequence of the events of September 11, 2001, and $20 million of losses in certain of our investments in unconsolidated affiliates. Other nonoperating income (expense) in 2000 included net losses of $44 million related to the portion of fuel hedges excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness (primarily option time value).

For a discussion of a number of factors that may impact our liquidity and the sufficiency of our capital resources, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview.

As of December 31, 2002, we had $1.3 billion in cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, which is $210 million higher than at December 31, 2001. Cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2002 included $62 million of restricted cash held by us and $121 million of cash held by ExpressJet. Cash flows used in operations for the year ended December 31, 2002 were $78 million compared to cash flows provided by operations of $545 million in 2001, due primarily to a $456 million decline in operating income over that time. Cash flows used in investing activities, primarily capital expenditures offset by purchase deposits refunded in connection with aircraft delivered, were $544 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Cash flows provided by financing activities, primarily the proceeds from Holdings' initial public offering and the issuance of long-term debt, offset by payments on long-term debt and capital lease obligations, were $683 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.

Our net cash flows for the first quarter of 2003 are currently expected to be negative at approximately $1.5 million per day, including required debt payments and capital expenditures. We currently expect to incur a significant loss in the first quarter of 2003 and the full year 2003.

On several occasions subsequent to September 11, 2001, each of Moody's, Standard and Poor's and Fitch, IBCA, Duff & Phelps downgraded the credit ratings of a number of major airlines, including our credit ratings. Reductions in our credit ratings have increased the interest we pay and may increase the cost and reduce the availability of financing to us in the future.

We do not have any debt obligations that would be accelerated as a result of a credit rating downgrade, but under two letters of credit securing our worker's compensation program, we could be required to substitute approximately $67 million of cash collateral for spare engines that currently serve as collateral as a result of future downgrades.

At December 31, 2002, under the most restrictive provisions of our debt and credit facility agreements, we are required to maintain a minimum unrestricted cash balance of $500 million and beginning in June 2003, a minimum 1:1 ratio of EBITDAR (earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and aircraft rentals) to fixed charges, which consist of interest expense, aircraft rental expense, cash income taxes and cash dividends, for the previous four quarters. These credit facilities had an outstanding balance of $250 million at December 31, 2002. We anticipate that the outstanding balance will be approximately $158 million at the time the EBITDAR to fixed charges ratio covenant becomes effective and $74 million at December 31, 2003. If we are unable to meet the required ratio and are unsuccessful in renegotiating the terms of these bank loans, we will have the option of repaying the debt at that time.

As of December 31, 2002, we had approximately $5.7 billion (including current maturities) of long-term debt and capital lease obligations and $248 million of liquidation amount of Continental-obligated mandatorily redeemable preferred securities of trust ($241 million net of unamortized discount).

At December 31, 2002, including ExpressJet, we had 453 aircraft under operating leases (52 of which have been removed from service). These leases have remaining lease terms ranging from one month to 22-1/2 years. In addition, we have non-aircraft operating leases, principally related to airport and terminal facilities and related equipment. The obligations for these operating leases are not included in our consolidated balance sheet. Our total rental expense for aircraft and non-aircraft operating leases, net of sublease rentals, was $902 million and $409 million, respectively, in 2002.

We do not currently have any undrawn lines of credit and substantially all of our otherwise readily financeable assets are encumbered.

General 2002 Financings. In the first quarter of 2002, we issued $200 million of 4.5% convertible notes due February 1, 2007 for net proceeds of $195 million. The notes are convertible into our common stock at an initial conversion price of $40 per share. The notes are redeemable at our option on or after February 5, 2005, at specified redemption prices. The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes.

In April 2002, we received net proceeds of $447 million from Holdings' initial public offering and the sale of our shares of Holdings common stock. We contributed $150 million of our proceeds to our defined benefit pension plan and used the remainder of our proceeds for general corporate purposes. In connection with the offering, our ownership of Holdings fell to 53.1%. We do not currently intend to remain a stockholder of Holdings over the long term. Subject to market conditions, we intend to sell some or all of our shares of Holdings common stock in the future.

In December 2002, we closed an offering of $200 million of floating rate secured notes due December 2007 at a current annual interest rate of less than 3.5 percent, including all costs and fees. The notes are secured by certain of our spare parts inventory. The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes.

Aircraft and Facilities Financings. In March 2002, we completed the public offering of $329 million of pass-through certificates along with the private placement of $176 million of pass-through certificates, the proceeds of which were used to finance the acquisition cost of seven new owned aircraft delivered in the first half of 2002.

We have entered into agreements with the cities of Houston, Texas and Cleveland, Ohio, the New Jersey Economic Development Authority, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the Hawaii Department of Transportation, the Regional Airports Improvement Corporation (in Los Angeles, California), and the Harris County (Houston) Industrial Development Corporation to provide funds for constructing, improving and modifying facilities that have been or will be leased to us and for acquiring related equipment. In connection therewith, we have unconditionally guaranteed the principal and interest on tax-exempt bonds issued by these entities with a par value in an original principal amount of approximately $1.6 billion (excludes the City of Houston bonds and includes the US Airways contingent liability, both discussed below) and entered into long-term leases with the respective authorities under which rental payments will be sufficient to service the related bonds. The leases generally have terms ranging f rom 20 to 30 years. These leasing arrangements are accounted for as operating leases in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

We remain contingently liable until December 1, 2015, for US Airways' obligations under a lease agreement between US Airways and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey related to the East End Terminal at LaGuardia airport. These obligations include the payment of ground rentals to the Port Authority and the payment of principal and interest on $182 million par value special facilities revenue bonds issued by the Port Authority. US Airways has not yet decided whether to assume or reject the lease in its bankruptcy. US Airways is required to remain current on all obligations under the lease that arise after the filing of bankruptcy until they make such decision. If US Airways defaults on these obligations, we will be required to cure the default, and we would have the right to occupy the terminal after US Airways' interest in the lease has been terminated. If US Airways rejects the lease, we will become liable for all obligations under the lease and will have the immediate right to occupy th e terminal.

Purchase Commitments. We have substantial commitments for capital expenditures, including for the acquisition of new aircraft. As of December 31, 2002, we had firm commitments for 67 aircraft from Boeing, with an estimated cost of approximately $2.5 billion. The 67 aircraft are scheduled to be delivered between late 2003 and mid 2008, with four aircraft scheduled for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2003. We do not have backstop financing from Boeing or any other financing currently in place for the 67 aircraft. In addition, at December 31, 2002, we had firm, but unfinanced, commitments to purchase 13 spare engines related to the new Boeing aircraft for approximately $79 million, which will be deliverable through March 2005. Financing will be needed to satisfy our capital commitments for our aircraft and aircraft-related expenditures such as engines, spare parts and related items. There can be no assurance that sufficient financing will be available for all aircraft and other capital ex penditures. Deliveries of new Boeing aircraft are expected to increase aircraft rental, depreciation and interest costs while generating cost savings in the areas of maintenance, fuel and pilot training.

As of December 31, 2002, the estimated aggregate cost of ExpressJet's firm commitments for 86 Embraer regional jets was approximately $1.7 billion. In February 2003, ExpressJet and Embraer agreed in principle to amend ExpressJet's purchase agreement to slow the pace of regional jet deliveries. Based on this agreement in principle, ExpressJet currently anticipates taking delivery of 36 regional jets in 2003. ExpressJet also holds options for an additional 100 Embraer regional jets exercisable through 2007. ExpressJet does not have any obligation to take delivery of any of these firm Embraer aircraft that are not financed by a third party and leased to them or us. In addition, ExpressJet expects to purchase 17 spare engines for approximately $47 million through the first quarter of 2005. ExpressJet would have no obligation to acquire the spare engines if the firm order aircraft were not delivered for any reason.

Capital expenditures for 2003 are expected to be $330 million. Including net purchase deposits paid of $30 million, net capital expenditures for 2003 are expected to be $360 million.

We expect to fund our future capital commitments through internally generated funds together with general company financings and aircraft financing transactions. However, there can be no assurance that sufficient financing will be available for all aircraft and other capital expenditures or that, if necessary, we will be able to defer or otherwise renegotiate our capital commitments.

The following table summarizes the effect that minimum debt, lease and other material noncancelable commitments listed below are expected to have on our cash flow in the future periods set forth below (in millions):

Capacity Purchase Agreement. Our capacity purchase agreement with ExpressJet provides that we purchase, in advance, all of its available seat miles for a negotiated price, and we are at risk for reselling the available seat miles at market prices. Under the agreement, ExpressJet has the right through December 31, 2005 to be our sole provider of regional jet service from our hubs. We have an agreement in principle with ExpressJet to extend this exclusivity agreement through December 31, 2006. We previously announced our intention to sell or otherwise dispose of our remaining interests in ExpressJet. If we do so, we would report greater fixed costs, which could result in lower or more volatile earnings or both. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2002, our net loss of $451 million included net income for ExpressJet of $84 million.

General Guarantees and Indemnifications. We are the lessee under many real estate leases. It is common in such commercial lease transactions for us as the lessee to agree to indemnify the lessor and other related third parties for tort liabilities that arise out of or relate to our use or occupancy of the leased premises. In some cases, this indemnity extends to related liabilities arising from the negligence of the indemnified parties, but usually excludes any liabilities caused by their gross negligence or willful misconduct. Additionally, we typically indemnify such parties for any environmental liability that arises out of or relates to our use of the leased premises.

In our aircraft financing agreements, we typically indemnify the financing parties, trustees acting on their behalf and other related parties against liabilities that arise from the manufacture, design, ownership, financing, use, operation and maintenance of the aircraft and for tort liability, whether or not these liabilities arise out of or relate to the negligence of these indemnified parties, except for their gross negligence or willful misconduct.

We expect that we would be covered by insurance (subject to deductibles) for most tort liabilities and related indemnities described above with respect to real estate we lease and aircraft we operate.

In our financing transactions that include loans from banks in which the interest rate is based on LIBOR, we typically agree to reimburse the lenders for certain increased costs that they incur in carrying these loans as a result of any change in law and for any reduced returns with respect to these loans due to any change in capital requirements. We had $1.4 billion of floating rate debt at December 31, 2002. In several financing transactions, with an aggregate carrying value of $1.1 billion, involving loans from non-U.S. banks, export-import banks, and certain other lenders secured by aircraft, we bear the risk of any change in tax laws that would subject loan payments thereunder to non-U.S. lenders to withholding taxes. In addition, in cross-border aircraft lease agreements for two 757 aircraft, we bear the risk of any change in U.S. tax laws that would subject lease payments made by us to a resident of Japan to U.S. taxes. Our lease obligations for these two aircraft totaled $77 million at Dec ember 31, 2002.

We cannot estimate the potential amount of future payments under the foregoing indemnities and agreements.

Deferred Tax Assets. We have not paid federal income taxes in the last two years. As of December 31, 2002, we had a net non-current deferred tax liability of $520 million including gross deferred tax assets aggregating $1,801 million, $704 million related to net operating losses ("NOLs"), and a valuation allowance of $603 million.

At December 31, 2002, we had estimated tax NOLs of $2.0 billion for federal income tax purposes that will expire through 2022. Due to our ownership change on April 27, 1993, the ultimate utilization of our NOLs may be limited. Reflecting this limitation, we had a valuation allowance of $219 million and $245 million at December 31, 2002 and 2001. The change in valuation allowance during 2002 relates to previously reserved credits that expired in 2002 resulting in removal of both the deferred tax asset and the related valuation allowance.

Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code ("Section 382") imposes limitations on a corporation's ability to utilize NOLs if it experiences an "ownership change." In general terms, an ownership change may result from transactions increasing the ownership of certain stockholders in the stock of a corporation by more than 50 percentage points over a three-year period. In the event of an ownership change, utilization of our NOLs would be subject to an annual limitation under Section 382 determined by multiplying the value of our stock at the time of the ownership change by the applicable long-term tax exempt rate (which was 4.65% for December 2002). Any unused annual limitation may be carried over to later years. The amount of the limitation may under certain circumstances be increased by the built-in gains in assets that we held at the time of the change that are recognized in the five-year period after the change. Under current conditions, if an ownership change were to occur, our annual NOL utiliza tion would be limited to approximately $22 million per year other than through the recognition of future built-in gain transactions.

We believe that Holdings' initial public offering created a change in ownership limitation on the utilization of ExpressJet's NOLs. As a result, ExpressJet will be limited in the utilization of its NOLs to offset up to approximately $43 million of post-change taxable income per year. At December 31, 2002, ExpressJet's stand-alone NOLs were $105 million, which expire between 2004 and 2020. We do not expect this limitation to have any material impact on our financial condition.

Employees. The following table reflects the principal collective bargaining agreements, and their respective amendable dates, of Continental, ExpressJet and Continental Micronesia, Inc. ("CMI"):

In December 2002, our mechanics, represented by the Teamsters, ratified a new four-year collective bargaining agreement. The mechanics agreement makes an adjustment to current pay and recognizes current industry conditions with a provision to re-open negotiations regarding wages, pension and health insurance provisions in January 2004. Work rules and other contract items are established through 2006.

Collective bargaining agreements between both us and ExpressJet and our respective pilots (who are represented by ALPA) became amendable in October 2002. After being deferred due to the economic uncertainty following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, negotiations recommenced with ALPA in September 2002 and are continuing.

Environmental Matters. We could potentially be responsible for environmental remediation costs primarily related to jet fuel and solvent contamination surrounding our aircraft maintenance hangar in Los Angeles. In 2001, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board mandated a field study of the site and it was completed in September 2001. We have established a reserve for estimated costs of environmental remediation at Los Angeles and elsewhere in our system, based primarily on third party environmental studies and estimates as to the extent of the contamination and nature of required remedial actions. We have evaluated and recorded this accrual for environmental remediation costs separately from any related insurance recovery. We have recorded an insurance recovery receivable based on the recovery rate experienced on other environmental matters. We have not recognized any receivables from insurers that denied coverage.

We expect our total losses from environmental matters, net of probable insurance recoveries, to be $37 million for which we were fully accrued at December 31, 2002. Although we believe, based on currently available information, that our reserves for potential environmental remediation costs in excess of anticipated insurance proceeds are adequate, reserves could be adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change. We cannot currently calculate any increase that might be required in our environmental reserves or predict the outcome of our insurance dispute. However, we do not expect these items to materially impact our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Critical Accounting Policies. The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Critical accounting policies are defined as those that are reflective of significant judgments and uncertainties, and potentially result in materially different results under different assumptions and conditions. We believe that our critical accounting policies are limited to those described below. For a detailed discussion on the application of these and other accounting policies, see Item 8. "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies".

• Pension Plans. We account for our defined benefit pension plans using Statement of Financial Accounting Standards 87, "Employer's Accounting for Pensions" ("SFAS 87"). Under SFAS 87, pension expense is recognized on an accrual basis over employees' approximate service periods. Pension expense calculated under SFAS 87 is generally independent of funding decisions or requirements. We recognized expense for our defined benefit pension plans of $185 million, $127 million, and $124 million in 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. We expect our pension expense to be approximately $326 million in 2003.

• Revenue Recognition. We recognize passenger revenue and related commissions, if any, when transportation is provided or when the ticket expires unused rather than when a ticket is sold. Effective October 1, 2002, unused nonrefundable tickets expire on the date of intended flight unless the date is extended by payment of a change fee. Prior to October 1, 2002, unused nonrefundable tickets expired one year from the date the ticket was sold, or for partially used tickets, the date of first flight. The amount of passenger ticket sales and commissions not yet recognized as revenue is reflected as air traffic liability and prepaid commissions, respectively, in our consolidated balance sheet. We perform periodic evaluations of this estimated liability and any adjustments, which can be significant, are included in results of operations for the periods in which the evaluations are completed. These adjustments relate primarily to differences between our statistical estimation of certain revenue transa ctions and the related sales price, as well as refunds, exchanges, interline transactions, and other items for which final settlement occurs in periods subsequent to the sale of the related tickets at amounts other than the original sales price. These amounts have been materially consistent from year to year.

• Impairments of Long-Lived Assets. We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations, primarily property and equipment and airport operating rights, when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the carrying amount of those items. Our cash flow estimates are based on historical results adjusted to reflect our best estimate of future market and operating conditions. The net carrying value of assets not recoverable is reduced to fair value. Our estimates of fair value represent our best estimate based on industry trends and reference to market rates and transactions.

• Frequent Flyer Accounting. We utilize a number of estimates in accounting for our OnePass frequent flyer program which are consistent with industry practices.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards. In June 2002, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards 146, "Accounting for Costs Associated with Disposal or Exit Activities" ("SFAS 146"). SFAS 146 requires that liabilities for the costs associated with exit or disposal activities be recognized when the liabilities are incurred, rather than when an entity commits to an exit plan. We adopted SFAS 146 on January 1, 2003. The new rules will change the timing of liability and expense recognition related to exit or disposal activities, but not the ultimate amount of such expenses.

In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation 45, "Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others" ("FIN 45"). FIN 45 requires a guarantor to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair value of the obligation undertaken in issuing the guarantee. FIN 45 also expands the disclosures required to be made by a guarantor about its obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. Initial recognition and measurement provisions of FIN 45 are applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees issued or modified. The disclosure requirements are effective immediately and are provided in Item 8. "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 15 - Commitments and Contingencies". We do not expect FIN 45 to have a material effect on our results of operations.

In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation 46 - "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities" ("FIN 46"). FIN 46 requires that companies that control another entity through interests other than voting interests should consolidate the controlled entity. FIN 46 applies to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and to variable interest entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest in after that date. The related disclosure requirements are effective immediately. We are evaluating the impact of the new interpretation.

Related Party Transactions. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 16 in the notes to consolidated financial statements for a discussion of related party transactions.

We are subject to certain market risks, including commodity price risk (i.e., aircraft fuel prices), interest rate risk, foreign currency risk and price changes related to investments in equity and debt securities. The adverse effects of potential changes in these market risks are discussed below. The sensitivity analyses presented do not consider the effects that such adverse changes may have on overall economic activity nor do they consider additional actions we may take to mitigate our exposure to such changes. Actual results may differ. See the notes to the consolidated financial statements for a description of our accounting policies and other information related to these financial instruments. We do not hold or issue derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.

Aircraft Fuel. Our results of operations are significantly impacted by changes in the price of aircraft fuel. During 2002 and 2001, aircraft fuel accounted for 11.7% and 13.9%, respectively, of our operating expenses. From time to time we enter into petroleum swap contracts, petroleum call option contracts and/or jet fuel purchase commitments to provide some short-term protection (generally three to six months) against a sharp increase in jet fuel prices. Depending on the hedging method employed, our strategy may limit our ability to benefit from declines in fuel prices. We have hedged approximately 95% of our fuel requirements for the first quarter of 2003 with petroleum call options at $33 per barrel, which would not limit our ability to benefit from a decline in oil prices. As of December 31, 2002, we had approximately 23% of our projected 2003 fuel requirements hedged as compared to no fuel hedges in place as of December 31, 2001. We estimate that a 10% increase in the price per gallo n of aircraft fuel would result in a $10 million increase in the fair value of the petroleum call options existing at December 31, 2002.

Foreign Currency. We are exposed to the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on the U.S. dollar value of foreign currency denominated operating revenue and expenses. We attempt to mitigate the effect of certain potential foreign currency losses by entering into forward and option contracts that effectively enable us to sell Japanese yen expected to be received from yen-denominated net cash flows over the next six to 12 months at specified exchange rates. As of December 31, 2002, we had entered into option contracts to hedge approximately 90% of our projected yen-denominated net cash flows for the first six months of 2003, as compared to having in place forward contracts to hedge approximately 80% of our full-year 2002 projected yen-denominated net cash flows at December 31, 2001. We estimate that at December 31, 2002, a 10% strengthening in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the yen would have increased the fair value of the existing option contracts by $4 million, offset by a corresp onding loss on the underlying 2003 Japanese yen exposure of $15 million, resulting in a net $11 million loss as compared to a $10 million increase in the fair value of existing forward contracts offset by a corresponding loss on the underlying exposure of $12 million resulting in a net $2 million loss at December 31, 2001.

Interest Rates. Our results of operations are affected by fluctuations in interest rates (e.g., interest expense on variable-rate debt and interest income earned on short-term investments).

We had approximately $1.4 billion and $1.0 billion of variable-rate debt as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively. We have mitigated our exposure on certain variable-rate debt by entering into interest rate cap and swap agreements. Our interest rate cap, which limited the amount of potential increase in the LIBOR rate component of our floating rate debt to a maximum of 9% over the term of the contract, expired July 31, 2002. The interest rate swap outstanding at December 31, 2002 and 2001 had notional amounts of $162 million and $170 million, respectively. The interest rate swap effectively locks us into paying a fixed rate of interest on a portion of our floating rate debt securities through 2005. If average interest rates increased by 100 basis points during 2003 as compared to 2002, our projected 2003 interest expense would increase by approximately $11 million, net of interest rate swap. At December 31, 2001, an interest rate increase of 100 basis points during 2002 as compared to 2001 was projected to increase 2002 interest expense by approximately $8 million, net of interest rate cap and swap.

As of December 31, 2002 and 2001, we estimated the fair value of $3.3 billion and $2.7 billion (carrying value) of our fixed-rate debt to be $2.6 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively, based upon discounted future cash flows using our current incremental borrowing rates for similar types of instruments or market prices. Market risk, estimated as the potential increase in fair value resulting from a hypothetical 100 basis points decrease in interest rates, was approximately $107 million and $115 million as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively. The fair value of the remaining fixed-rate debt at December 31, 2002 and 2001, (with a carrying value of $684 million and $526 million, respectively), was not practicable to estimate.

If 2003 average short-term interest rates decreased by 100 basis points over 2002 average rates, our projected interest income from cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments would decrease by approximately $11 million during 2003, compared to an estimated $11 million decrease during 2002 measured at December 31, 2001.

Investments in Equity Securities. We have a 49% equity investment in Copa Airlines of Panama ("Copa") and a 13% equity interest in Orbitz which are also subject to price risk. However, since a readily determinable market value does not exist for either Copa or Orbitz (each is privately held), we are unable to quantify the amount of price risk sensitivity inherent in these investments. At December 31, 2002 and 2001, the carrying value of the investment in Copa was $66 million and $53 million, respectively. At December 31, 2002 and 2001, the carrying value of our investment in Orbitz was $8 million and $12 million, respectively.

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors and Stockholders

Continental Airlines, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Continental Airlines, Inc. (the "Company") as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of operations, common stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2002. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Company at December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2002, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 2002, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets".

ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Houston, Texas

January 15, 2003

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.

(continued on next page)

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.