Dear Stockholder:

You are cordially invited to attend our annual meeting of stockholders, which is being held on Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time at The Paley Center for Media, 25 West 52nd Street, New York, New York 10019.

The Company delivered strong financial results in 2017 and remains well positioned to capitalize on future opportunities. In addition, the Company continues to successfully develop outstanding original programming, with the following notable achievements:

Throughout the year, we continued to engage with our stockholders on a range of topics including the Company’s business strategy, Board, governance and executive compensation practices, as well as environmental and social matters with a focus on diversity. We are committed to maintaining an active dialogue with our stockholders and remain focused on creating stockholder value.

I look forward to seeing you at the meeting, where you will have an opportunity to ask questions and to meet your directors and executives.

April 26, 2018

NOTICE OF 2018 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

To the Stockholders of

AMC Networks Inc.

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of AMC Networks Inc. (the “Company”) will be held at The Paley Center for Media, 25 West 52nd Street, New York, New York 10019 on Tuesday, June 12, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time to consider and vote upon the following proposals:

Only stockholders of record on April 17, 2018 may vote at the meeting.

The Company is pleased to take advantage of the Securities and Exchange Commission rules that allow issuers to furnish proxy materials to their stockholders on the Internet. We believe these rules allow us to provide you with the information you need while lowering the costs of delivery and reducing the impact of the Company’s annual meeting on the environment.

Your vote is important. We urge you to vote as soon as possible by telephone, over the Internet or by mailing a proxy card. If you choose to vote by mail, please sign and return the proxy card in the envelope provided.

ADMISSION TICKET REQUIRED FOR ADMISSION TO THE ANNUAL MEETING

An admission ticket is required if you wish to attend the annual meeting in person. You can obtain and print your admission ticket at www.proxyvote.com or call 844-318-0137. You will need the 16-digit control number which can be found on your Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials, voter instruction form and proxy card. For more details, see General Information, “How do I attend the 2018 Annual Meeting in person? What do I need to bring?” of the Proxy Statement.

By order of the Board of Directors,

Anne G. Kelly Senior Vice President and Secretary

New York, New York

April 26, 2018

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

We present here a summary of important information in this proxy statement. Please review the complete proxy statement before you vote.

2017 Business Highlights

The Company delivered strong financial results in 2017 and remains well positioned to capitalize on future opportunities. Here are some key highlights (on a year-over-year basis):

Our television and film content continued to receive widespread critical praise and industry honors, with The Night Manager being the most awarded single program at the Golden Globes in 2017 and BBC AMERICA’s series, Planet Earth II, debuting as one of the biggest series launches in the network’s history, receiving a record 10 Emmy Award nominations and winning the Emmy Award for Outstanding Documentary/Nonfiction series. We continued to build and expand our international business into key markets across Europe and Latin America.

The Company continued to focus on its commitment to return value to its stockholders through Board approval of a stock repurchase program to repurchase up to $1 billion of the Company’s outstanding shares of Class A Common stock. As of February 23, 2018, the Company had repurchased 12.3 million shares of Class A Common Stock leaving approximately up to $322 million available for future repurchases. Our share repurchases are part of an overall capital allocation strategy overseen by our Board of Directors and designed to efficiently balance return of capital to shareholders with investment in our business.

Corporate Governance Highlights

We are committed to ensuring that our Board is accountable to, and acts in the best interests of, all our stockholders, notwithstanding our status as a controlled company. We have implemented a number of strong governance practices and policies to promote independent leadership in the boardroom and the protection of stockholder rights.

i

In addition to the above best practices, over the past few years, AMC Networks has focused on expanding its diversity and inclusion efforts, recognizing the importance of diversity and inclusivity to a successful and sustainable business. In 2016, the AMC/Sundance channels established a Diversity & Inclusion Employee Committee that has since designed and implemented relevant diversity-related programming, including speaker series, panels and mentorship programs. In 2017, the Chief Executive Officer decided to create the CEO Diversity & Inclusion Committee composed of senior officers to further promote and expand these values at AMC Networks. Over the next few years, AMC Networks plans to redouble these initial diversity and inclusion efforts through new programs and initiatives, and to expand these services to the broader AMC Networks family.

Director Nominees

The Board has nominated fourteen director candidates; five Class A nominees and nine Class B nominees. Each director is nominated for a term to expire at the 2019 annual meeting of the Company’s stockholders. Our Class A nominees are elected by our Class A stockholders and have significant business leadership and management experience, and extensive knowledge of the media industry. Our Class B nominees are elected by Class B stockholders and have significant industry and leadership experience, and a long history of institutional knowledge of the Company. The Board is comprised of 43% independent directors. See Proposal 1 — Election of Directors, “Directors Elected By Class A Common Stockholders” and “Directors Elected By Class B Common Stockholders” of the Proxy Statement for detailed information about each director’s background, skills and qualifications.

ii

Executive Compensation Highlights

We, as a Company, place a great importance on our ability to attract, retain, motivate and reward experienced executive officers. The Company strives to do so by developing executive compensation policies and programs that are consistent with, explicitly linked to, and supportive of, the strategic objectives of growing the Company’s businesses and maximizing stockholder value. In particular, we believe that the majority of compensation should be at risk and contingent on Company performance, with particular emphasis on long-term, equity-based incentive compensation.

The primary elements of 2017 executive compensation were base salary, an annual cash incentive award and long-term incentive awards in the form of RSUs, which vest ratably over three years, and PSUs that cliff vest based on the achievement of specified performance metrics over a three year performance period. In 2017, in-line with our commitment to aligning pay with Company performance, 90% of the CEO’s and 70% of our other NEOs’ total target compensation was “at-risk.” In this way, a significant portion of the value of compensation ultimately realized by the executive depended upon either the Company’s performance against key performance measures that align with our business strategy, or the direct performance of our stock and thus, the experience of our stockholders.

iii

2017 NEO Total Direct Compensation Program Structure

2017 CEO Annual Pay Mix

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON JUNE 12, 2018

BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRACTICES

In this proxy statement, the words “Company,” “we,” “us,” “our” and “AMC Networks” refer to AMC Networks Inc., a Delaware corporation. We refer to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as the “SEC” and The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC as “NASDAQ.” This proxy statement is first being sent to stockholders on April 26, 2018.

AMC Networks Inc. is a holding company and conducts substantially all of its operations through its subsidiaries. Our Class A Common Stock is listed on NASDAQ under the symbol “AMCX.” As a result, we are generally subject to NASDAQ corporate governance listing standards. Our Board of Directors oversees the business of AMC Networks and monitors the performance of management.

Corporate Governance Guidelines

The board of directors of AMC Networks Inc. (the “Board of Directors” or “Board”) has adopted our Corporate Governance Guidelines. These guidelines set forth our practices and policies with respect to Board composition and selection, Board meetings, executive sessions of the Board, Board committees, the expectations we have of our directors, selection of the Executive Chairman and the President and Chief Executive Officer, management succession, Board and executive compensation, and Board self-evaluation requirements. The full text of our Corporate Governance Guidelines may be viewed at our corporate website at http://investors.amcnetworks.com. A copy may be obtained by writing to AMC Networks Inc., 11 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

Engagement with our Stockholders

The Company values feedback from its stockholders and regularly engages with stockholders to keep informed on the evolving perspectives of the investor community. We engage with our stockholders on various matters, including business strategy and performance, Board, corporate governance and executive compensation practices as well as environmental and social matters with a focus on diversity. These stockholder dialogues, which are often focused on Board, governance and compensation matters, inform discussions in the boardroom and are a component of the Compensation Committee’s review and refinement of our executive compensation program.

Board Leadership Structure

Our Board has chosen to separate the roles of Executive Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. The Board believes that this is the optimal leadership structure as it recognizes both Mr. Charles F. Dolan’s senior executive role with the Company as well as his leadership position on the Company’s Board while the Company is also able to benefit from the experience of its President and Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”), Mr. Joshua W. Sapan, with responsibility for day-to-day management of the Company.

Board Oversight of Company Strategy

The Board and its Committees are involved in overseeing our corporate strategy, including major business and organizational initiatives, capital allocation priorities and potential business development opportunities. The Board engages in discussions regarding our corporate strategy at nearly every Board meeting and, at least annually, receives a formal update on the company’s short- and long-term objectives, including the company’s operating plan and long-term corporate strategic plan. The Board’s Committees oversee elements of our strategy associated with their respective areas of responsibility.

Board Self-Assessment

The Board conducts an annual self-assessment to determine whether the Board and its committees are functioning effectively. Among other things, the Board’s assessment process seeks input from the directors on whether they have the tools and access necessary to perform their oversight function as well as suggestions for improvement of the Board’s functioning. In addition, our Audit Committee and Compensation Committee each conduct its own annual self-assessment, which includes an assessment of the adequacy of their performance as compared to their respective charters.

Executive Sessions of Non-Management and Independent Board Members

Under our Corporate Governance Guidelines, our non-management directors may meet in executive sessions with no members of management present. The non-management directors may specify the procedure to designate the director who may preside at any such executive session. Non-management directors who are not independent under the rules of NASDAQ may participate in these executive sessions, but directors who are independent under the rules of NASDAQ must meet separately in regularly scheduled executive sessions at least twice each year.

Risk Management Oversight

The oversight of risk management is an important Board responsibility. The Audit Committee takes the lead on behalf of the Board in monitoring risk management. The Audit Committee discusses the process by which senior management of the Company and the relevant departments of the Company assess and manage the Company’s exposure to risk. The Committee also discusses the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. Furthermore, the Audit Committee reviews and receives regular briefings concerning the Company’s information security and technology risks (including cybersecurity), including discussions of the Company’s information security and cybersecurity risk management programs.

Our Compensation Committee also considers the issue of the Company’s exposure to risk in establishing and implementing our executive compensation programs. AMC Networks believes that its executive compensation program, with its emphasis on long-term performance, its close connection to Company-wide and divisional performance and its significant equity components, is designed to align the executives’ compensation with the Company’s long-term strategy and growth and, as a result, does not encourage excessive risk taking.

Communicating with Our Directors

Our Board has adopted policies designed to allow stockholders and other interested parties to communicate with our directors. Any interested party that wishes to communicate directly with the Board or any director or the non-management directors as a group should send communications in writing to the Chairman of the Audit Committee, AMC Networks Inc., 11 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001. Any person, whether or not an employee, who has a concern with respect to our accounting, internal accounting controls, auditing issues or

- 2 -

other matters, may, in a confidential or anonymous manner, communicate those concerns to our Audit Committee by contacting The Network, Inc., which has been designated to act as a confidential contact organization for these purposes, at 888-217-8076.

Code of Conduct and Ethics

Our Board has adopted a Code of Conduct and Ethics for our directors, officers and employees. A portion of this Code of Conduct and Ethics also serves as a code of conduct and ethics for our senior financial officers, including our principal accounting officer and controller. Among other things, our Code of Conduct and Ethics covers conflicts of interest, disclosure responsibilities, legal compliance, reporting and compliance under the Code of Conduct and Ethics, confidentiality, corporate opportunities, fair dealing, protection and proper use of Company assets, and equal employment opportunity and harassment. The full text of the code is available on our website at http://investor.amcnetworks.com. In addition, a copy may be obtained by writing to AMC Networks Inc., 11 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

Director Independence

Our Board has elected for the Company to be treated as a “controlled company” under NASDAQ’s corporate governance rules, and, as a result, the Company is not required to comply with the corporate governance rules of NASDAQ requiring: (i) a majority of independent directors on our Board of Directors, (ii) an independent compensation committee and (iii) an independent corporate governance and nominating committee. Our Board of Directors has elected not to comply with the NASDAQ requirement for a majority of independent directors on our board and an independent corporate governance and nominating committee because of our status as a controlled company. We do comply with the requirement for an independent compensation committee. Our Board elected not to comply with the requirement for a majority of independent directors on our Board because of our stockholder voting structure. Under the terms of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, the holders of the Company’s Class B Common Stock have the right to elect up to 75% of the members of our Board and there is no requirement that any of those directors be independent or be chosen independently.

Our Board has determined that each of the following non-employee directors is “independent” within the meaning of the rules of NASDAQ and the SEC: Messrs. Jonathan F. Miller, Vincent Tese, David E. Van Zandt, Carl E. Vogel, Robert C. Wright and Dr. Leonard Tow. In making the determination as to the independence of each director, the Board considered all relationships between that director and the Company and its affiliates. In reaching its determination with respect to Mr. Tese, the Board considered the fact that Mr. Tese serves as an outside director of The Madison Square Garden Company (“MSG”) and determined that this relationship is not material and that Mr. Tese is independent. The Board is comprised of 43% independent directors, well above the required 25% pursuant to our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation.

Director Nomination

As permitted under NASDAQ rules, we do not have a nominating committee and believe it is appropriate not to have one because of our stockholder voting structure. Under the terms of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, the holders of our Class B Common Stock currently have the right to elect up to 75% of the members of our Board. We believe that creating a committee consisting solely of independent directors charged with responsibility for recommending nominees for election as directors would be inconsistent with the vested rights of the holders of Class B Common Stock under our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide a mechanism for the selection of nominees for election as directors by the holders of our Class A Common Stock (“Class A Directors”) and by the holders of our Class B Common Stock (“Class B Directors”). The holders of our Class A Common Stock are currently entitled

- 3 -

to elect 25% of the members of our Board. Under our Corporate Governance Guidelines, nominees for election as Class A Directors shall be recommended to the Board by the Class A Directors then in office who were elected by the holders of our Class A Common Stock. Nominees for election as Class B Directors shall be recommended to our Board by the Class B Directors then in office who were elected by the holders of the Class B Common Stock.

Director Selection

Our directors have not set specific, minimum qualifications that nominees must meet in order for them to be nominated for election to the Board, but rather believe that each nominee should be evaluated based on his or her individual merits, taking into account, among other matters, the factors set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines under “Board Composition” and “Selection of Directors.” Those factors include:

The Class A Directors will evaluate possible candidates to recommend to the Board for nomination as Class A Directors and suggest individuals for the Board to explore in more depth. The Board also considers nominees for Class A Directors recommended by holders of our Class A Common Stock. Nominees recommended by stockholders are given appropriate consideration in the same manner as other nominees.

Stockholders who wish to submit nominees for consideration by the Board for election at our 2019 annual meeting of stockholders may do so by submitting in writing such nominees’ names, in compliance with the procedures and along with other information required by the Company’s By-laws. See Other Matters, “Stockholder Proposals for the 2019 Annual Meeting.”

The Class B Directors will consult from time to time with one or more of the holders of Class B Common Stock to assure that all Class B Director nominees recommended to the Board are individuals who will make a meaningful contribution as Board members and will be individuals likely to receive the approving vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding Class B Common Stock. The Class B Directors do not intend to consider unsolicited suggestions of nominees by holders of our Class A Common Stock. We believe that this is appropriate in light of the voting provisions of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, which vest exclusively in the holders of our Class B Common Stock the right to elect our Class B Directors.

Board Meetings

The Board met five times between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017. During that time, each of our directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and, as applicable, the committees of the Board on which he or she served during such time. We also encourage our directors to attend annual meetings of stockholders and believe that attendance at annual meetings is just as important as attendance at meetings of the Board. With the exception of Mr. William J. Bell, who was unable to attend the 2017 Annual Meeting due to unexpected medical reasons, all of the directors attended the 2017 Annual Meeting.

Board Committees

Our Board has two standing committees: the Audit Committee and the Compensation Committee.

- 4 -

Audit Committee

Committee Members: Mr. Vogel (Chair), Dr. Tow and Mr. Van Zandt

Meetings in 2017: 4

The primary purposes and responsibilities of our Audit Committee are to:

The text of our Audit Committee charter is available on our website at http://investors.amcnetworks.com/governance.cfm. A copy may be obtained by writing to AMC Networks Inc., 11 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

As discussed above, our Board has determined that each member of our Audit Committee is “independent” within the meaning of the rules of both NASDAQ and the SEC, and that each has not participated in the preparation of the financial statements of the Company or any current subsidiary of the Company at any time during the past three years and is able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, including balance sheets, income statements and cash flow statements. Our Board has also determined that each of Dr. Tow, Mr. Van Zandt and Mr. Vogel is an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of the rules of the SEC.

Our Board has established a procedure whereby complaints or concerns with respect to accounting, internal controls, auditing and other matters may be submitted to the Audit Committee. This procedure is described under Corporate Governance, “Communicating with Our Directors.”

- 5 -

Compensation Committee

Committee Members: Dr. Tow (Chair), Mr. Miller, Mr. Vogel (through April 17, 2018) and Mr. Tese (effective as of April 17, 2018)

Meetings in 2017: 7

The primary purposes of our Compensation Committee are to:

The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, delegate a portion of its duties and responsibilities to one or more subcommittees of the Compensation Committee. For example, the Compensation Committee may delegate the approval of certain transactions to a subcommittee consisting solely of members of the Compensation Committee who are (i) “non-employee directors” for the purposes of Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act, and (ii) “outside directors” for the purposes of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, as in effect from time to time. The text of our Compensation Committee charter is available on our website at http://investors.amcnetworks.com/governance.cfm. A copy may be obtained by writing to AMC Networks Inc., 11 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001; Attention: Corporate Secretary.

The Compensation Committee reviews the performance of the Executive Chairman and CEO, evaluates their performance in light of the corporate goals and objectives relevant to their compensation and determines and approves the compensation levels for the Executive Chairman and CEO based on this evaluation. In determining the long-term incentive component compensation for the Executive Chairman and CEO, the Compensation Committee considers, among other factors, the Company’s performance, the value of similar incentive awards to executives in similar positions at comparable companies and the awards given to the Executive Chairman and to the CEO in past years.

As discussed above, our Board has determined that each member of our Compensation Committee is “independent” under the rules of NASDAQ.

- 6 -

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Mr. Miller, Dr. Tow and Mr. Vogel served as members of the Compensation Committee during 2017. None of them is a current or former officer or employee of the Company.

Other Committees

In addition to standing committees, the Company has adopted a policy whereby a committee of our Board consisting entirely of independent directors (an “Independent Committee”) will review and approve or take such other action as it may deem appropriate with respect to transactions involving the Company and its subsidiaries in which any director, executive officer, greater than 5% stockholder of the Company or any other “related person” (as defined in Item 404 of Regulation S-K adopted by the SEC (“Item 404”) has or will have a direct or indirect material interest. This approval requirement covers any transaction that meets the related party disclosure requirements of the SEC as set forth in Item 404, which currently applies to transactions (or any series of similar transactions) in which the amount involved exceeds $120,000.

In addition, our Board has adopted a special approval policy for transactions with MSG and MSG Networks Inc. (“MSG Networks”), each of which is under common control with the Company, and their respective subsidiaries whether or not such transactions qualify as “related party” transactions described above. Under this policy, the Independent Committee oversees approval of all transactions and arrangements between the Company and its subsidiaries, on the one hand, and each of MSG and its subsidiaries and MSG Networks and its subsidiaries, on the other hand, in which the amount exceeds $120,000. To simplify the administration of the approval process under this policy, the Independent Committee may, where appropriate, establish guidelines for certain of these transactions.

Currently, and throughout our fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, our Audit Committee or Compensation Committee (each of which consisted solely of directors elected by the Class A stockholders) served as the Independent Committee under the above policy. For a further discussion of the scope of this policy, see “Related Party Transaction Policy.”

Our Amended By-Laws permit us to form an Executive Committee of the Board which would have the power to exercise all of the powers and authority of the Board in the management of the business and affairs of the Company, except as limited by the Delaware General Corporation Law. Our Board has not formed an Executive Committee, although it could do so in the future.

Director Compensation

The following table describes the components of the non-employee Director compensation program in effect during 2017:

^* Includes any non-standing committee of the Board that may be established from time to time. A director who is a Company employee receives no additional compensation for serving as a director.

^** Each director annual grant of RSUs determined by dividing the value of the annual equity retainer by the twenty trading day average closing price on the day prior to the annual stockholders’ meeting.

- 7 -

Director Compensation Table

The table below summarizes the total compensation paid to or earned by each of our non-employee directors from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017. Directors who are employees of the Company receive no additional compensation for service as directors.

- 8 -

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Board has nominated fourteen directors for re-election to the Board at this year’s annual meeting. Of the fourteen nominees for director, five are to be elected by the Class A stockholders and nine are to be elected by the Class B stockholders. All fourteen director candidates were elected by the respective Class A and Class B stockholders at the 2017 annual meeting of the Company’s stockholders.

All candidates are hereby nominated for a term to expire at the 2019 annual meeting of the Company’s stockholders.

The Company representatives appointed by the Board (the persons named in the proxy card, or, if applicable, their substitutes) will vote your shares as you instruct. If you sign your proxy card and return it without indicating how you would like to vote your shares, your shares will be voted to elect each of the director nominees below, as applicable based on whether you are a holder of Class A Common Stock or Class B Common Stock.

If a nominee for election as a director by the Class A stockholders becomes unavailable before the election, the Company representatives named in the Class A proxy card would be authorized to vote for a replacement nominee for election as a director by the Class A stockholders if the Board names one. If a Class B director nominee becomes unavailable before the election, the persons named in the Class B proxy card would be authorized to vote for a replacement Class B director nominee if the Board names one.

The Board unanimously recommends that you vote FOR each of the following candidates:

Directors Elected By Class A Common Stockholders

JONATHAN F. MILLER

Age: 61

Director since October 2013

Mr. Miller is the Chief Executive Officer of Integrated Media Company, a TPG sponsored investment company since February 2018. He is also an advisor to Advancit Capital, a private investment firm. He was a partner in Advancit Capital from July 2013 to February 2018. He was the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of News Corporation’s Digital Media Group and News Corporation’s Chief Digital Officer from April 2009 until September 2012. Mr. Miller had previously been a founding partner of Velocity Interactive Group, an investment firm focusing on digital media and the consumer Internet, from its inception in February 2007 until April 2009. Prior to founding Velocity Interactive Group, Mr. Miller served as Chief Executive Officer of AOL LLC (“AOL”) from August 2002 to November 2006. Prior to joining AOL, Mr. Miller served as Chief Executive Officer and President of USA Information and Services, of USA Interactive, a predecessor to IAC/ InterActiveCorp. During the prior five years, Mr. Miller was a director of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., RTL Group SA, Shutterstock, Inc. and TripAdvisor, Inc. Mr. Miller is currently a member of the board of directors of Akamai Technologies, Inc., Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc., and J2 Global, Inc. Mr. Miller also serves as a director of The Paley Center for the Media and American Film Institute.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Miller’s extensive knowledge of the media industry acquired through his high level executive roles at Integrated Media Company, News Corporation, AOL and USA Networks Information and Services as well as other management experience, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class A stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

- 9 -

LEONARD TOW

Age: 89

Director since June 2011

Dr. Tow is Chief Executive Officer of New Century Holdings LLC, an outdoor advertising company, since January 2005. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Citizens Communications Company from 1990 to September 2004. Dr. Tow previously served as a director of Cablevision Systems Corporation (“Cablevision”) until its sale in June 2016 and Citizens Communications Company. Dr. Tow also serves as Chairman of the Tow Foundation, a trustee of the Brooklyn College Foundation, a trustee of Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, a trustee of WNET.ORG and a member of the board of Lincoln Center Theater.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Dr. Tow’s experience as a founder and chief executive officer of a major cable television company, his experience as the chief executive officer of a private company, as well as the knowledge and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class A stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

DAVID E. VAN ZANDT

Age: 65

Director since June 2015

Mr. Van Zandt is the President of The New School. Mr. Van Zandt is also the special general counsel and an adviser for Artal Group S.A., a European-based family controlled and funded private equity firm, and The Invus Group, LLC, a U.S.-based worldwide family controlled and funded private equity firm. From 1995 through 2010, he served as the Dean of Northwestern University School of Law. Mr. Van Zandt joined the faculty of Northwestern University School of Law in 1985. After graduating from law school, Mr. Van Zandt clerked for Judge Pierre N. Leval, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (now on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit) and for Harry Blackmun, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States and then joined the law firm, Davis Polk and Wardwell. Mr. Van Zandt is a trustee for the Citizens Budget Commission. He is also a member of the steering committee of the Association for a Better New York and is on the education advisory board for The Vistria Group.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Van Zandt’s significant and valuable leadership and management experience as the President of The New School and as the Dean of Northwestern University School of Law and the extensive experience he has gained in strategic planning, risk management and governance by serving in those roles, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class A stockholders, has concluded that he should be elected to the Board.

CARL E. VOGEL

Age: 60

Director since June 2013

Mr. Vogel is a private investor. He serves as an industry advisor for Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. L.P. and a Senior Advisor of DISH Network Corporation. Mr. Vogel is also the President and sole stockholder of Bulldog Capital, Inc., a private investment firm. From November 2011 to October 2014, Mr. Vogel served as a Senior Adviser of The Gores Group, a private equity firm. From June 2005 until March 2009, Mr. Vogel served as Vice Chairman of DISH Network Corporation (formerly Echostar Communications Corporation, a satellite-delivered digital television services provider) and President from September 2006 until February 2008 of Echostar Communications Corporation. From October 2007 to March 2009, Mr. Vogel was Vice Chairman and Senior Advisor at Echostar Corp. Prior to that, Mr. Vogel was President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Charter Communications, a broadband service provider. He is director of DISH Network Corporation, Sirius/XM Holdings Inc., Shaw Communications, Inc. and Universal Electronics Inc. Mr. Vogel previously served on the board of directors of Ascent Capital Group, Inc., NextWave Wireless Inc., ICG Communications and Liberty Satellite.

- 10 -

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Vogel’s extensive knowledge of the media industry acquired through his high level executive roles at DISH Network Corporation and Charter Communications Inc. as well as his accounting experience acquired through his work as a certified public accountant and his role as a chief executive and senior finance executive of public companies, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class A stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

ROBERT C. WRIGHT

Age: 75

Director since June 2011

Mr. Wright is Senior Adviser of Lee Equity Partners LLC (formerly known as Thomas H. Lee Capital), an investment firm, since 2008. He served as Vice Chairman of General Electric Company and President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of NBC and NBC Universal from 1986 to 2007. Mr. Wright has served on the boards of General Electric Company, NBC Universal and EMI Group Global Inc. Mr. Wright is a director of Ralph Lauren Corporation. He is a trustee of the New York Presbyterian Hospital, co-founder of Autism Speaks and the founder of The Suzanne Wright Foundation.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Wright’s extensive business leadership and management experience at a major television network and leading media and entertainment company and his service as a director of other public companies, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class  A stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

Directors Elected By Class B Common Stockholders

WILLIAM J. BELL

Age: 78

Director since June 2011

Mr. Bell was a Consultant to Cablevision from 2005 to 2014 and held various positions at Cablevision and its predecessor from 1979 to 2004, including serving as its Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer until 2004. He serves as a director of MSG Networks. Mr. Bell also serves as a director of the Lustgarten Foundation.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Bell’s experience in various positions with Cablevision since 1979, including as its former Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

CHARLES F. DOLAN

Age: 91

Director since March 2011

Mr. Charles F. Dolan is Executive Chairman of the Company since June 2011. Mr. Dolan served as the Chairman of Cablevision from 1985 until its sale in June 2016. He was Chief Executive Officer of Cablevision from 1985 to October 1995. Mr. Dolan founded and acted as the General Partner of Cablevision’s predecessor from 1973 to 1985 and established Manhattan Cable Television in 1961 and Home Box Office in 1971. He serves as a director of MSG Networks and MSG, and previously served as a director of Cablevision. Mr. Dolan is the father of James L. Dolan, Patrick F. Dolan, Thomas C. Dolan and Marianne Dolan Weber and the father-in-law of Kristin A. Dolan and Brian G. Sweeney.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Dolan’s experience as founder of Cablevision, his previous service as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Cablevision and its predecessors, as well as the knowledge

- 11 -

and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

JAMES L. DOLAN

Age: 62

Director since March 2011

Mr. James L. Dolan is Executive Chairman of MSG Networks since July 2009. He is also Executive Chairman of MSG since October 2015 and is serving as the interim Chief Executive Officer of MSG since November 2017. Mr. Dolan was the President and Chief Executive Officer of MSG Networks from March 15, 2015 to July 15, 2015. Mr. Dolan was Chief Executive Officer of Cablevision from October 1995 until its sale in June 2016. He was President of Cablevision from June 1998 to April 2014, Chief Executive Officer of Rainbow Media Holdings, Inc. from September 1992 to October 1995, and Vice President of Cablevision from 1987 to September 1992. He serves as a director of MSG Networks and MSG. Mr. Dolan previously was a director of Cablevision and Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. Mr. Dolan is the son of Charles F. Dolan, the spouse of Kristin A. Dolan, the brother of Patrick F. Dolan, Thomas C. Dolan and Marianne Dolan Weber and the brother-in-law of Brian G. Sweeney.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Dolan’s experience in various positions with Cablevision since 1979, including as its Chief Executive Officer from 1995 until its sale in June 2016 and his experience as the Executive Chairman of MSG Networks, Inc. since 2009 and MSG since 2015, as well as the knowledge and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

KRISTIN A. DOLAN

Age: 52

Director since June 2011

Ms. Kristin A. Dolan is the founder and has been the Chief Executive Officer of 605, LLC, an audience measurement and data analytics company in the media and entertainment industries, since its inception in November 2016. She previously served as the Chief Operating Officer of Cablevision from April 2014 until its sale in June 2016. She was President of Optimum Services for Cablevision from April 2013 to April 2014, Senior Executive Vice President of Product Management and Marketing of Cablevision from November 2011 to April 2013 and Senior Vice President of Cablevision from 2003 to 2011. She serves as a director of MSG, MSG Networks, Revlon, Inc. and The Wendy’s Company and previously served as a director of Cablevision. Ms. Dolan is the daughter-in-law of Charles F. Dolan, the spouse of James L. Dolan and the sister-in-law of Patrick F. Dolan, Thomas C. Dolan, Brian G. Sweeney and Marianne Dolan Weber.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Ms. Dolan’s experience in various positions with Cablevision since 1990, as well as the knowledge and experience she has gained and contributions she has made during her tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that she should be reelected to the Board.

PATRICK F. DOLAN

Age: 66

Director since June 2011

Mr. Patrick F. Dolan is President of News 12 Networks since February 2002. News 12 Networks is a subsidiary of Altice N.V. He was Vice President of News 12 Networks from September 1995 to February 2002.

- 12 -

He is a majority owner of Newsday Media Group since July 2016. Mr. Dolan previously served as a director of Cablevision. Mr. Dolan is the son of Charles F. Dolan, the brother of James L. Dolan, Thomas C. Dolan and Marianne Dolan Weber and the brother-in-law of Kristin A. Dolan and Brian G. Sweeney.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Dolan’s experience as a member of Cablevision’s founding family and in various positions with News 12 Networks, a former subsidiary of Cablevision, since 1989, as well as the knowledge and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

THOMAS C. DOLAN

Age: 65

Director since June 2011

Mr. Thomas C. Dolan was Executive Vice President-Strategy and Development, Office of the Chairman of Cablevision from September 2008 until its sale in June 2016. He was Chief Executive Officer of Rainbow Media Corp. from April 2004 to April 2005. Executive Vice President and Chief Information Officer of Cablevision from October 2001 until April 2005. He serves as a director of MSG Networks and MSG and previously served as a director of Cablevision. Mr. Dolan is the son of Charles F. Dolan, the brother of James L. Dolan, Patrick F. Dolan and Marianne Dolan Weber and the brother-in-law of Kristin A. Dolan and Brian G. Sweeney.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Dolan’s experience as a member of Cablevision’s founding family and in various positions with Cablevision since 1987, as well as the knowledge and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

BRIAN G. SWEENEY

Age: 53

Director since June 2011

Mr. Brian G. Sweeney served as the President of Cablevision from April 2014 and Chief Financial Officer of Cablevision from March 2015 until its sale in June 2016. Previously, Mr. Sweeney served as the Senior Executive Vice President, Strategy and Chief of Staff of Cablevision from January 2013 to April 2014, Senior Vice President — Strategic Software Solutions of Cablevision from June 2012 to January 2013 and Senior Vice President — eMedia of Cablevision from January 2000 to December 2012. He serves as a director of MSG Networks and MSG and previously served as a director of Cablevision. Mr. Sweeney is the son-in-law of Charles F. Dolan and the brother-in-law of James L. Dolan, Kristin A. Dolan, Patrick F. Dolan, Thomas C. Dolan and Marianne Dolan Weber.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Mr. Sweeney’s experience in various positions with Cablevision since 1993, as well as the knowledge and experience he has gained and contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be reelected to the Board.

VINCENT TESE

Age: 75

Director since June 2016

Mr. Tese served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Urban Development Corporation from 1985 to 1987 and as Director of Economic Development for New York State from 1987 to

- 13 -

December 1994. Mr. Tese is Chairman of Bond Street Holdings, LLC and ICE Clear Credit LLC. He is Executive Chairman of Florida Community Bank. Mr. Tese is a director of MSG and Mack-Cali Realty Corporation. He is a director of MSG, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and Mack-Cali Realty Corporation. He also serves as a trustee of New York Presbyterian Hospital and New York University School of Law. Mr. Tese previously was a director of Gabelli Asset Management, National Wireless Holdings, Inc., The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., Cablevision and MSG Networks.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of his experience as the chief executive officer of the New York State Urban Development Corporation, his other governmental service, his experience as the executive chairman of Florida Community Bank, and the contributions he has made during his tenure as a director of the Company and formerly of Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that he should be elected to the Board.

MARIANNE DOLAN WEBER

Age: 60

Director since June 2011

Ms. Marianne Dolan Weber is President of Heartfelt Wings Foundation Inc. and a Member of the Board of Green Mountain Foundation Inc. Ms. Dolan Weber served as Chairman of The Dolan Family Foundation and The Dolan Children’s Foundation from September 1999 through December 2011, President of The Dolan Family Foundation from 1986 to September 1999, President of The Dolan Children’s Foundation from 1997 to September 1999, and Vice Chairman and Director of Dolan Family Office, LLC from 1997 through December 2011. She serves as a director of MSG and previously served as a director of Cablevision and MSG Networks. Ms. Dolan Weber is the daughter of Charles F. Dolan, the sister of James L. Dolan, Patrick F. Dolan and Thomas C. Dolan and the sister-in-law of Kristin A. Dolan and Brian G. Sweeney.

Key Skills & Qualifications  In light of Ms. Dolan Weber’s experience as a member of Cablevision’s founding family and as Chairman of the Dolan Family Foundation and the Dolan Children’s Foundation, as well as the knowledge and experience she has gained and contributions she has made during her tenure as a director of the Company, MSG Networks, MSG and Cablevision, our Board of Directors, acting on the unanimous recommendation of the directors elected by the Class B stockholders, has concluded that she should be reelected to the Board.

- 14 -

PROPOSAL 2 — RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Audit Committee, comprised of independent members of the Board, has appointed KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) as our independent registered public accounting firm (the “independent auditors”) with respect to our operations for 2018. KPMG will audit our financial statements, including our internal control over financial reporting, for 2018. Representatives of KPMG will be present at the annual meeting to answer appropriate questions and to make a statement if they desire.

We are asking our stockholders to ratify the selection of KPMG as our independent registered public accounting firm. Although ratification is not required by our organizational documents, the Board is submitting the selection of KPMG to our stockholders for ratification because we believe it is a matter of good corporate practice. In the event that our stockholders fail to ratify the selection, it will be considered a recommendation to the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee to consider the selection of a different firm. Even if the selection is ratified, the Audit Committee may in its discretion select a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company and our stockholders. Approval of this proposal requires the favorable vote of the majority of the votes cast by the holders of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock, voting together as a single class. In accordance with our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, holders of Class A Common Stock will have one vote per share and holders of Class B Common Stock will have ten votes per share.

The Board unanimously recommends that you vote FOR this proposal.

Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The following table provides information about fees for services rendered by KPMG, our independent registered public accounting firm, in 2017 and 2016:

The Audit Committee’s pre-approval policy requires that the Audit Committee pre-approve audit and non-audit services performed by the independent registered public accounting firm. The Audit Committee may delegate its pre-approval authority to the Chairman provided that any such services are subsequently ratified by the entire Audit Committee. All of the services for which fees were disclosed under “Audit-related fees,” and “Tax fees” and “All other fees” in the table above were pre-approved under the Audit Committee’s pre-approval policy.

- 15 -

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

The Audit Committee assists the Board in its oversight of the Company’s financial reporting, internal controls, and audit functions. Three independent Class A Directors comprise the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board. The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee has no material relationship with the Company under the Board’s independence standards and each is independent and financially literate under the listing standards of NASDAQ and under the SEC’s standards relating to independence of audit committees. In addition, the Board of Directors has determined that all of our Audit Committee members: Messrs. Van Zandt and Vogel, and Dr. Tow, satisfy the financial expertise requirements of NASDAQ and have the requisite experience to be designated an audit committee financial expert as that term is defined by rules of the SEC. Management of the Company is responsible for the preparation, presentation and integrity of the Company’s financial statements, the Company’s accounting and financial reporting principles and internal controls and procedures designed to assure compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations.

The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, KPMG, is responsible for auditing the Company’s financial statements and internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) and expressing an opinion on the conformity of the consolidated financial statements to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

In the performance of its oversight function, the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management and KPMG. The Audit Committee also has discussed with KPMG the matters required to be discussed under the applicable requirements of the PCAOB. Finally, the Audit Committee has received the written disclosures from KPMG in accordance with the applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding KPMG’s independence, and has discussed with KPMG, its independence.

As part of its responsibilities for oversight of the risk management process, the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the Company’s risk assessment and risk management framework, including discussions of individual risk areas as well as a summary of the overall process.

The Audit Committee has discussed with the Company’s Internal Audit Service Provider and KPMG the overall scope of and plans for their respective audits. The Audit Committee meets with the Internal Audit Service Provider in regular and executive sessions (with and without management), to discuss the results of their examinations, the evaluations of the Company’s internal controls, and the overall quality of the Company’s financial reporting and compliance programs.

The Audit Committee is also responsible for the approval of audit fees, and the Committee reviewed and approved all fees paid to KPMG. These fees are described under “Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.” The Audit Committee also considered whether KPMG’s provision of non-audit services to the Company was compatible with the independence of the independent registered public accountants. The Audit Committee has adopted a formal policy for pre-approval of audit-related and non-audit services, which is briefly described under “Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.” The Audit Committee concluded that KPMG is independent from the Company and its management.

- 16 -

Based upon the reports, review and discussions described in this report, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 filed with the SEC. The Audit Committee has also retained KPMG as the Company’s independent registered public accountants for the fiscal year 2018. The Audit Committee and the Board believe that the continued retention of KPMG to serve as the Company’s independent registered public accountants is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders and have recommended that stockholders ratify the appointment of KPMG as the Company’s independent registered public accountants for the fiscal year 2018.

Members of the Audit Committee

Carl E. Vogel (Chair)

Leonard Tow

David E. Van Zandt

Dated: April 16, 2018

- 17 -

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

AMC Networks’ executive compensation program emphasizes alignment of pay and performance through annual and long-term incentive programs that provide performance-based incentives for our management team that are tied to key financial measures that we believe drive stockholder value and reward sustained achievement of our key financial goals.

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides a discussion of our compensation philosophy and 2017 program for the following named executive officers (“NEOs” or “Named Executive Officers”):

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Business Highlights

Our Business

AMC Networks owns and operates several of cable television’s most recognized brands, delivering high quality content to audiences and a valuable platform to distributors and advertisers. Since our founding in 1980, we have been a pioneer in the cable television programming industry, having created or developed some of the industry’s leading programming networks, with a focus on the programming of original productions.

Strong 2017 Performance Continues to Drive Long-Term Financial Results

The Company delivered strong financial results in 2017 and remains well positioned to capitalize on future opportunities. Here are some key highlights:

We continued the long-term trend of growing net revenues and adjusted operating income while generating significant free cash flow and delivering strong operational performance for our stockholders. Our incentive compensation is determined by successful performance against these financial measures and is designed to promote the creation of long-term stockholder value. Our Annual Incentive program awards includes not only these financial measures but also an assessment of each business unit’s achievement of certain strategic objectives and its performance relative to its peers.

- 18 -

The Compensation Committee has identified Net Revenues, Adjusted Operating Income (AOI) and Free Cash Flow to be the three key financial measures that promote the creation of long-term stockholder value and investors and analysts use the measures to compare performance in the industry. In order to create a meaningful link between our performance and our NEOs’ compensation, these three financial measures are utilized in calculating the Company’s incentive compensation. The chart below provides the Company’s performance for these measures in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

The Company continued to focus on its commitment to return value to its stockholders through Board approval of a stock repurchase program to repurchase up to $1 billion of the Company’s outstanding shares of Class A Common stock. As of February 23, 2018, the Company has repurchased 12.3 million shares of Class A Common Stock leaving approximately up to $322 million available for future repurchases. Our share repurchases are part of an overall capital allocation strategy overseen by our Board of Directors and designed to efficiently balance return of capital to stockholders with investment in our business.

- 19 -

Total Stockholder Return (June 16, 2011 through December 31, 2017)⁽¹⁾

                                                                         Source: S&P Capital IQ

In 2017, the Company continued to increase its investment in world-class original programming and to build brands that have passionate, engaged and connected audiences. This investment has enabled us to expand the distribution of our content through new and existing platforms, leading to growth in our distribution revenues. The Company is available on more virtual multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) than any other independent programmer, proving the value of our discrete brands and our desirable high quality content. Through the Company’s AMC Studios operation, we now own more of our content, which has enabled us to invest in and grow our international channels business, providing us with increasing revenue diversification and a vibrant, global platform.

In 2017, the Company’s businesses achieved notable successes, which the Committee uses in assessing each business unit’s achievement of its strategic objectives as well as its performance relative to its peers.

- 20 -

- 21 -

The Compensation Committee believes that the efforts and leadership of our senior management team, including our NEOs, are, and will continue to be critical to the Company’s accomplishments.

2017 Key Compensation Decisions

Taking into consideration the Company’s 2017 performance and relatively strong performance compared to peers, the Compensation Committee made the following determinations for this year:

Impact of Transition from Long-Term Cash Awards to Long-Term Equity

In 2016, the Compensation Committee replaced its long-term cash performance awards (“CPAs”) with performance-based stock unit (PSU) awards. The PSU awards vest based on performance over a three year performance period and retain the same financial performance metrics as the previous cash performance awards but also take into account the Company’s stock performance. This transition from CPAs to PSUs impacts the compensation amounts disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table. SEC rules require that cash-based

- 22 -

compensation be included in the Summary Compensation Table for the year in which the compensation was earned (which for the long-term cash performance awards is for the year when the performance period ended). On the other hand, the SEC requires equity-based grants to be disclosed for the year in which the grant was made. Therefore, relatively higher compensation is attributed to each NEO for 2017 as the 2017 Summary Compensation Table includes both the long-term cash performance awards granted in 2015 and earned for the period of 2015-2017, and the PSU awards granted for 2017 (with payment to be made in 2020 based upon the performance period 2017-2019).

2017 NEO Annual Compensation Determinations

The table below sets forth the 2017 Compensation Committee compensation determinations with respect to our NEOs. This table is different from the SEC-required 2017 Summary Compensation Table on page 39. The long-term cash-based performance awards granted in 2015 are not included in this table as they were not part of the Compensation Committee’s 2017 determinations. The PSUs awarded in 2017 are included in this table and in the Summary Compensation Table.

Stockholder Engagement and Our Compensation-Related Stockholder Votes

The Company values feedback from its stockholders and regularly engages with stockholders to keep informed on the evolving perspectives of the investor community. We engage with our stockholders on various matters, including Company performance and strategy, our Board and corporate governance practices, and our executive compensation program as well as environmental and social matters with a focus on diversity. These stockholder dialogues, focused on governance and compensation matters, are an important component of the Compensation Committee’s review of our executive compensation program.

The Compensation Committee believes that our executive compensation program closely links to our business strategies, aligns pay with performance and reflects competitive practices regarding executive compensation. Management and directors also engaged with our institutional shareholders in meetings and calls regarding our executive compensation program throughout 2017.

Consistent with the results of the advisory vote on the frequency of the stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation held at the 2012 annual meeting of stockholders, the Company has determined to conduct an advisory vote on executive compensation, or “say-on-pay,” every three years, as permitted under SEC rules, including at this year’s 2018 annual meeting (see ”Proposal 3- Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officer Compensation). Stockholders last voted on executive compensation in 2015, when more than 84% of votes of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting together as a single class, approved the proposal.

- 23 -

In accordance with SEC rules, stockholders also will be asked to vote on the frequency of the stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation (See Proposal 4-Non-Binding Advisory Vote on Frequency of the Stockholder Vote on Compensation of Our NEOs”). After careful consideration, our Board has determined that an advisory vote on compensation of our NEOs that occurs every three years is the most appropriate frequency for the Company and therefore is recommending again a vote for a triennial advisory vote. In reaching its recommendation, our Board considered that a triennial advisory vote would permit the pay for performance elements of our executive compensation program to be judged over an appropriately indicative period of time. Our Board believes that a well-structured compensation program should include policies and practices that emphasize the creation of stockholder value over the long-term and that the effectiveness of such plans cannot be best evaluated on an annual or biennial basis.

Compensation Governance Practices

Our executive compensation program is governed by sound pay practices highlighted below that are maintained and reviewed by our Compensation Committee.

Philosophy and Objectives of Our Executive Compensation Program

The Company is a media business comprised of dynamic and powerful brands. In support of its business objectives, the Company places great importance on its ability to attract, retain, motivate and reward experienced executive officers. The Company strives to do so by developing executive compensation policies and programs that are consistent with, explicitly linked to, and supportive of the strategic objectives of growing the Company’s businesses and maximizing stockholder value. The Compensation Committee sets executive compensation, and seeks to offer both short and long-term incentive compensation programs that will provide competitive compensation, drive performance and encourage executive retention, guided by the following principles:

- 24 -

The primary elements of 2017 executive compensation are base salary, an annual cash incentive award and long-term incentive awards in the form of RSUs, which vest ratably over three years, and PSUs that typically cliff vest at the end of three years. We target the elements of our compensation so that at least 70% of total target compensation for our NEOs is performance-based. In this way, a significant portion of the value ultimately realized by the executive depends upon the Company’s performance and can be considered at-risk compensation.

Elements of the Company’s Compensation Program

Our executive compensation program is designed to provide a mix of fixed and variable incentive awards, including short-and long-term incentives:

2017 NEO Total Direct Compensation Program Structure

2017 CEO Annual Compensation Decision Mix

- 25 -

2017 Performance Metrics

A significant percentage of total compensation is allocated to incentive compensation in accordance with the Compensation Committee’s philosophy as described above. The Compensation Committee reviews historical Company compensation, other information provided by the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant and other factors, such as each executive officer’s experience, performance and length of service, to determine the level and mix of compensation for executive officers, by position and grade level, that the Compensation Committee has deemed appropriate. The allocation between cash and equity compensation and short and long-term compensation is designed to provide a combination of fixed and at-risk compensation that is related to the achievement of the Company’s short-term and long-term objectives.

Generally, the performance metrics for the Company’s incentive compensation have been based on the Company’s AOI, net revenues and free cash flow. The Compensation Committee believes that these are the key measures for evaluating our NEOs’ effectiveness in executing the Company’s strategy as these are the common performance measures used by the Company’s investors and analysts to evaluate the Company’s operating performance. The Compensation Committee believes that successful performance against these measures promotes the creation of long-term stockholder value.

In connection with the Annual Incentive Award payout, the Committee considers these financial measures for each of its business units as well as an assessment of each business unit’s achievement of certain strategic objectives and its performance relative to its peers.

2017 COMPENSATION DECISIONS

Employment Agreements

We have written employment agreements with each of our NEOs. We enter into employment agreements with our senior executives when the Compensation Committee determines that it is appropriate to attract or retain an executive. As discussed in greater detail below under Executive Compensation Tables, “Employment Agreements,” much of the NEOs’ compensation is determined in accordance with their employment agreements. Mr. Dolan’s employment agreement was entered into in connection with the Company’s 2011 spin off from Cablevision and approved by Cablevision’s compensation committee at a time when the Company was a subsidiary of Cablevision. The Company entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Sapan in 2014 and employment agreements with Messrs. Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher in 2016. The Compensation Committee believes that entering into employment contracts with our senior executives provides management stability and helps ensure that the Company has the continuity to achieve its strategic objectives. The Compensation Committee further believes that the entertainment industry standard practice is for executives to have employment agreements. Each of the NEOs has demonstrated strong performance and willingness to take on greater responsibilities as the Company grows and their multi-year agreements are designed to ensure their continued contributions to the Company.

Base Salaries

Base salaries for our executives have been set at levels that are intended to reflect the competitive marketplace in attracting and retaining quality executives. The Compensation Committee currently reviews the

- 26 -

salaries of the executive officers at least annually. The Compensation Committee evaluates each executive’s performance and experience and based on this evaluation and in accordance with the terms of the employment agreements, the Compensation Committee, in its discretion, may increase base salaries for the executive officers over time. Each of the employment agreements of our NEOs contains a minimum base salary level. For information regarding these minimum base salary levels, please see Executive Compensation Tables, “Employment Agreements” below.

For 2017, the Compensation Committee increased the base salaries of Messrs. Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher by the standard 2% merit increase provided to all of the Company’s senior officers. For 2017, Messrs. Dolan and Sapan did not receive any base salary increase. The annual base salaries paid to the NEOs in 2017 were as follows: Mr. Dolan — $400,000; Mr. Sapan — $2,000,000; Mr. Carroll — $1,734,000; Mr. Sullivan —$918,000; and Mr. Gallagher — $740,000. See footnote 1 to Executive Compensation Tables, “Summary Compensation Table” for additional information regarding the 2017 base salaries.

Annual Cash Incentives

Annual cash incentive awards are designed to link executive compensation directly to the Company’s performance and provide incentives and rewards for excellent business performance during the year.

We have two performance-based annual incentive programs by which annual cash incentive awards are determined:

Although our NEOs were awarded annual incentive compensation under the CIP, the actual calculation and determination of earned incentive awards is based on the Annual Incentive Program. The Compensation Committee exercises discretion to bring CIP payouts in line with the payouts calculated under the Company’s Annual Incentive Program.

NEO Annual Incentive Award Target Setting

Each employee who is eligible for an annual cash incentive award is assigned a target annual incentive award equal to a percentage of that employee’s annual base salary. For 2017, target bonuses were set as a percentage of the base salary earned during 2017 (“Eligible Earnings”).

The target annual cash incentive awards are determined based upon the applicable employee’s position, grade level, responsibilities, and historical and expected future contributions to the Company. In addition, each of the employment agreements of Messrs. Dolan, Sapan, Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher contains a target annual incentive award level. The Compensation Committee currently reviews the target bonus levels of the executive officers, and going forward intends to do so at least annually. The Compensation Committee evaluates each such executive’s performance and experience, and, based on this evaluation and in accordance with the terms of the employment agreements, the Compensation Committee, in its sole discretion, may set target annual incentive award levels for the executive officers. Target bonuses for 2017 (expressed as a percentage of Eligible Earnings) were as follows: Mr. Dolan — 200%; Mr. Sapan — 200%; Mr. Carroll — 175%; Mr. Sullivan — 100%; and Mr. Gallagher — 75%. For information regarding these target annual incentive award levels, see Executive Compensation Tables, “Employment Agreements,” below.

- 27 -

2017 CIP Performance Metrics

The payment of the 2017 annual cash incentive awards under the CIP is conditioned upon the satisfaction of one or more performance objectives established by the Compensation Committee. The performance metrics were designed to achieve tax deductibility under Code Section 162(m). Upon achievement of the performance objective(s), each NEO would be eligible to receive payment of an incentive bonus equal to the lesser of $10 million or two times the executive’s target annual incentive award, subject to the Compensation Committee’s discretion to reduce the award. In general, under the CIP, regardless of whether the Company achieves, exceeds or fails to achieve its target performance objective(s), the Compensation Committee has the discretion only to decrease annual incentive awards if the Company wishes to preserve the Code Section 162(m) deduction. Performance objectives are subject to various adjustments including for acquisitions and dispositions and investments in new business ventures not contemplated when the performance objections are formulated.

In order for the NEOs to be eligible to receive an annual cash incentive award for the year ended December 31, 2017, the AOI of the business units for the year ended December 31, 2017 needed to exceed approximately $791 million.

2017 CIP Award Achievements

In March 2018, Compensation Committee certified the awards as achieved by virtue of the AOI of the business units for the year ended December 31, 2017 equaling approximately $905 million³, and the CIP bonus pool was funded.

The Compensation Committee applied negative discretion under the CIP to bring payouts in line with the payouts under the Annual Incentive Program. Each of our NEOs holds a corporate-wide position and, as such, the amount by which his annual incentive award under the CIP was reduced was determined based on the level of achievement of Company-wide performance metrics under the Annual Incentive Program, as described in more detail below.

2017 Annual Incentive Program Awards

The payment of annual incentive awards under the Annual Incentive Program is conditioned upon the satisfaction of one or more performance objectives established by the Compensation Committee depending upon the applicable eligible employee’s specific business unit. For individuals who hold corporate-wide positions at the Company, the Annual Incentive Program performance objectives are predominantly based on the weighted average performance of the different business units.

For 2017, under the Annual Incentive Program, these performance objectives related to an assessment of business unit performance against goals, strategies, operating performance and growth initiatives. These performance objectives include specific annual growth targets for revenues, AOI and Free Cash Flow for each of the following business units: AMC, BBC AMERICA (the Company’s joint venture with BBC Worldwide), WE tv, IFC, SundanceTV, IFC Films, AMC Networks International, Affiliate Sales and Digital & OTT. In addition, each of the networks is expected to achieve growth in advertising impressions, and targets for viewership of new series and has also additional weighted metrics tailored for its business unit. Each business unit also is assessed on its achievement of certain strategic objectives and its performance relative to its peers.

- 28 -

Bonuses awarded under the Annual Incentive Program may also be adjusted based on the recipient’s individual performance. To the extent the Company exceeds or falls short of the Annual Incentive Program performance objectives, eligible employees may receive payments greater than or less than their target annual incentive award.

2017 Annual Incentive Award Payouts

Based on the performance under each of the CIP and Annual Incentive Program, the 2017 annual incentive awards were paid by the Company to the NEOs as shown in the table below:

Long-term Incentives

Long-term incentives represent a substantial portion of our NEO’s total compensation. For 2017, our long-term incentive program for all executives consisted of two elements: PSUs and RSUs. These long-term incentives are awarded to members of management based upon each individual’s grade level. Except for Messrs. Dolan and Sapan, who receive long-term incentive awards comprised of 60% of the value in PSUs and 40% of the value in RSUs, these long-term incentive awards granted to the other NEOs are comprised of 50% of the value in PSUs and 50% of the value in RSUs.

Transition from Long-Term Cash to Performance Stock Unit Awards

As part of the Compensation Committee’s annual evaluation of the Company’s compensation program and in consideration of investor feedback, beginning in 2016, the Compensation Committee modified the Company’s long-term incentive program and decided to replace the Company’s long-term cash performance awards with long-term PSUs. The performance metrics for the PSUs have remained consistent with those used for the cash performance awards. The Compensation Committee believes that using an equity-based award that is subject to market risk over a multi-year performance period better aligns the interests of its NEOs with those of stockholders. We believe that our PSU awards provide strong incentives for the NEOs to help the Company achieve specific long-term financial objectives. We further believe that both our PSU and RSU awards provide the NEOs with further incentives to improve the Company’s stock price performance and align our NEOs with stockholders’ interests, as well as the potential for a continuing stake in the long-term success of the Company.

Performance Stock Unit Awards

In 2017, our executive compensation program provided annual grants of three-year PSU awards to executive officers and other members of management to be earned on the basis of long-term performance of the Company relative to pre-established financial goals. The 2017 PSUs were made to such executive officers and certain other members of senior management pursuant to the Company’s 2016 Employee Stock Plan. The

- 29 -

Compensation Committee sets the performance objectives for each award in the first quarter of the year of grant. Each recipient is eligible to receive a target PSU award, the amount of which depends on the employee’s grade level and employment agreement, if any. To the extent that the Company’s target performance objectives are achieved and the recipient is continuously employed through the payment date, eligible employees may receive payments greater than or less than (or none of) their target PSU.

2017 PSU Award Grants. In March 2017, the Compensation Committee granted PSU awards to the NEOs in the following target amounts:

All 2017 PSU awards are subject to achievement of specified targets of AOI, net revenues and free cash flow (determined by calculating the average of AOI, net revenues and free cash flow of the Company earned in 2017, 2018 and 2019) as well as vesting based on continuous employment through March 9, 2020. These performance targets are intended to measure the Company’s ongoing operating performance and are subject to various adjustments including for acquisitions and dispositions and investments in new business initiatives not contemplated at the time the performance objectives are formulated and exclude all charges for long-term performance-based compensation.

The 2017 performance awards will be determined based on the weights and performance achievements as shown in the table below:

Because the targets for the 2017 awards have been derived from the Company’s confidential strategic plan, which is not disclosed publicly for competitive reasons, we do not believe it is appropriate to disclose specific numerical targets. Disclosure of these targets could provide information that could lead to competitive harm and for this reason the three-year PSU financial targets are not disclosed. We believe that our strategic plan, and consequently the targets set by the Compensation Committee are ambitious and reflect desired above-market performance. In determining the threshold levels of performance, the Company’s strategic plans and the degree of difficulty in achieving the targets, including a comparison of the strategic plans with analysts’ published projections of our growth as well as the projected growth of some of our competitors, were considered. The 2017 PSUs include a sliding scale of payouts based upon the achievement over the next three years of average AOI,

- 30 -

average net revenues and average free cash flow. The Compensation Committee believes that the lowest levels on the sliding scale of the 2017 awards should be achieved, although there can be no assurance this will occur. The Compensation Committee has the authority to amend or waive the performance targets under the 2017 awards and to make interpretations thereof and adjustments thereto subject to the requirements of Code Section 162(m) if applicable to the award.

Restricted Stock Units

Under our executive compensation program, long-term incentive grants of RSUs are made to executive officers and certain other members of management pursuant to the Company’s 2016 Employee Stock Plan. The RSUs granted to the NEOs also include a performance vesting condition. The 2017 RSU grants vest ratably over a three-year vesting period, subject to the attainment of the performance vesting condition during the first year. The Committee believes that this vesting schedule provides the Company with a more effective recruitment tool, conforms to industry practice and is appropriately balanced by the three-year cliff vesting of the PSUs.

In March 2017, the Compensation Committee granted RSUs to the NEOs in the following amounts:

All of the 2017 RSU awards will vest ratably over a three-year vesting period subject to continued employment and include a performance threshold designed to achieve tax deductibility under Code Section 162(m) The performance objectives required the Company to achieve 90% of Business Unit AOI (relative to 2016) in any of the three fiscal years: 2017, 2018 and 2019. “Business Unit” means the combined AOI of the Company’s operating businesses. This performance requirement was met in 2017.⁴ This performance metric was designed to achieve tax deductibility under Code Section 162(m). Please see below “Tax Deductibility of Compensation” for a discussion of the new Tax Reform Act and its impact on the deductibility of future performance based compensation to certain executive officers. Additional information regarding RSUs for the NEOs during 2017 is set forth in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table under “Executive Compensation Tables” below. More information regarding other equity grants for the NEOs appears in the Outstanding Equity Awards at December 31, 2017 table under “Executive Compensation Tables” below.

- 31 -

Cash Performance Awards

Achievement of 2015 Cash Performance Award Objectives. In February 2018, the Compensation Committee certified the Company’s achievement of performance objectives of average “AOI”, average net revenue and average free cash flow for the cash performance awards granted in March 2015. In determining the achievement of the performance objectives for the 2015 cash performance awards, AOI, net revenue and free cash flow were weighted at 50%, 30%, and 20%, respectively. The following table shows actual performance with respect to each of the performance objectives relative to the ranges established by the Compensation Committee in March 2015 and the resulting performance factor used in calculating the aggregate weighted performance payout at 114.9% of target in March 2018.

For the 2015 cash performance awards to pay out at 100%, the Company was required to achieve specified targets of average AOI of $906 million, average net revenues of $2,773 million, and average free cash flow of $747 million for years 2015 through 2017, subject to various adjustments including for certain impacts of the Distribution as well as unanticipated acquisitions and dispositions and investments in new business initiatives and exclude all charges for long-term performance-based compensation.⁵ Based upon the Company’s performance, as shown in the table above, the 2015 cash performance awards paid out at 114.9% of target in March 2018.

- 32 -

COMPENSATION DECISION PROCESS AND COMPENSATION POLICIES

Role of Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee oversees the design and administration of AMC Networks’ compensation and benefits policies and programs. Among its duties, the Compensation Committee is responsible for (1) establishing our general compensation philosophy and, in consultation with management, overseeing the development and implementation of compensation programs; (2) reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer and the other executive officers of the Company; (3) evaluating the CEO’s and other executive officers’ performance in light of those goals and objectives and determining and approving their compensation levels based upon those evaluations; (4) evaluating the competitiveness of each executive officer’s total compensation package; (5) administering our stockholder approved compensation plans; and (6) overseeing the activities of the committee or committees administering our benefit and retirement plans.

The Compensation Committee is supported in its work by the head of the Human Resources Department, his staff and the Committee’s independent executive compensation consultant as described below. Based upon a review of performance and historical compensation, recommendations and information from members of management, and discussions with the compensation consultant, the Compensation Committee determines and approves compensation for the executive officers, which includes making recommendations to the full Board for its approval of compensation for the Company’s executive officers (other than the Executive Chairman and CEO).

The Compensation Committee’s charter, which sets out its duties and responsibilities and addresses other matters, can be found on our website at www.amcnetworks.com.

Role of Independent Compensation Consultant

In accordance with its charter, the Compensation Committee has the authority to engage outside consultants to assist in the performance of its duties and responsibilities. Our Compensation Committee utilizes the services of an independent compensation consultant to assist in determining whether the elements of our executive compensation program are reasonable and consistent with our objectives.

In August 2011, after a full review and selection process, the Compensation Committee engaged Pay Governance LLC (“Pay Governance”) to serve as its independent compensation consultant. Pay Governance reports directly to our Compensation Committee, and, at the request of the Compensation Committee, Pay Governance meets with members of our management from time to time for purposes of gathering information on management proposals and recommendations to be presented to our Compensation Committee.

The following is a description of the services provided by Pay Governance as the Compensation Committee’s consultant:

- 33 -

During 2017, Pay Governance provided no other services to the Company.

The Compensation Committee believes that Pay Governance’s work did not raise any conflict of interest during 2017. In reaching this conclusion, the Compensation Committee considered the factors set forth in the SEC rules regarding compensation advisor independence. Although such independence rules are not applicable to the Company because it is a controlled company, the Compensation Committee believes that Pay Governance nonetheless satisfies the independence factors provided in such rules.

Role of Management

The Compensation Committee reviews the performance and compensation of the Executive Chairman and the President and CEO and, following discussions with Pay Governance and a review of market competitive data, establishes each of their compensation. The management of the Company assists the Compensation Committee and Pay Governance as described above. Within the framework of the compensation programs approved by the Compensation Committee and based on management’s review of market competitive positions, management provides to the Compensation Committee, either directly or through the compensation consultant, management’s recommendations on the compensation for executive officers other than the Executive Chairman and the President and CEO. These recommendations are influenced by the CEO’s assessment of each executive officer’s performance, the performance of the individual’s respective business or function and employee retention considerations. The Compensation Committee reviews management’s recommendations and approves any compensation changes affecting our executive officers as it determines in its sole discretion.

Tally Sheets

The Compensation Committee has reviewed tally sheets setting forth all components of compensation payable, and the benefits accruing, to the NEOs for 2017, including all cash compensation and the current value of outstanding equity-based awards. The Compensation Committee considers the information presented in the tally sheets in determining future compensation.

Risk Considerations

The Compensation Committee reviews the risks and rewards associated with the Company’s compensation programs. The programs are designed with features that the Compensation Committee believes mitigate risk without diminishing the incentive nature of the compensation. We believe or compensation programs encourage and reward prudent business judgment and appropriate risk taking over the short term and the long term.

Management and the Compensation Committee do not believe any of the Company’s compensation programs create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse impact on the Company.

Benchmarking

To ensure we provide compensation comparable to that offered by other leading companies in our industry, we compare the Company’s executive compensation levels against an appropriate peer group of companies tailored for specific NEOs. As part of the Compensation Committee’s review of 2017 compensation,

- 34 -

Pay Governance assisted the Compensation Committee in: (1) determining the appropriate peer group to be used for competitive comparisons; (2) assessing executive compensation in comparison with the appropriate peer group and in light of the Company’s performance; and (3) reviewing the Company’s equity and cash-based executive incentive programs, taking into account evolving market trends.

On December 14, 2016, the Compensation Committee reviewed the Corporate Peer Group used in 2016 and determined that no changes should be made. As such, the Committee reapproved the prior year’s Corporate Peer Group for the 2017 performance year.

While the Corporate Peer Group includes several significantly larger market capitalization companies, there are not a sufficient number of peers with similar market capitalizations in our industry to develop a broadly representative peer group. Therefore, the Committee determined that market capitalization should only be one of many factors considered when selecting a peer group. Revenues, lines of business and sources and competition for talent are also important and, thus, Viacom, Inc. CBS Corporation and Netflix, Inc. are included in the Company’s peer group. The Compensation Committee also took into account that Netflix uses the Company as one of its peers. This Corporate Peer Group differs from that used in the stock performance graph contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K. Since only a few of the companies in our peer group had an executive serving as a chief operating officer, the Compensation Committee also considered a supplemental reference group for the Company’s Chief Operating Officer role, which includes business unit executives at CBS Corporation, Disney, Fox, Netflix, Viacom and Paramount.

In connection with the review of 2017 compensation, Pay Governance presented to the Compensation Committee a comparison of total compensation and each of its components with the median in each position’s peer group. In its review, the compensation consultant noted that there was limited market information regarding the role and compensation of the Executive Chairman in its peer group. The Compensation Committee further considered that the Company’s founder and Executive Chairman, Mr. Charles F. Dolan, plays a unique and important role in setting the strategic direction of the Company in addition to his role on the Board. Pay Governance compared Mr. Dolan’s total target compensation to that received by other executive chairmen of other similar sized companies who were significant stockholders of their companies and found that Mr. Dolan’s total target compensation was below the 50th percentile of this group.

In connection with its review of 2017 compensation, the Compensation Committee set a general guideline for total target compensation, over time, at a range from the median to the 75th percentile of the applicable peer group, reserving for the Compensation Committee the flexibility to recognize differences by individual. The Company competes for talented executives in a highly-compensated industry. The Compensation Committee believes that this range is appropriate in light of the competitive nature of the Company’s businesses as well as the Company’s and its management’s performance. The Compensation Committee believes that these guidelines for total target compensation provide a useful point of reference, along with the other factors described above, in administering the Company’s executive compensation program. For 2017, after considering individual performance and scope of responsibilities, the Compensation Committee believes that all NEOs are assigned total target compensation levels consistent with the compensation philosophy.

- 35 -

Benefits

Our executive officers are generally eligible to participate in the same retirement plans, health and welfare benefit plans and other voluntary benefit plans made available to other benefits-eligible employees of the Company, including, for example, medical, dental, vision, life insurance and disability coverage.

Defined Contribution Plans

The Company maintains the AMC Networks 401(k) Savings Plan, a tax qualified retirement savings plan (the “AMC 401(k) Plan”). Participating employees, including executive officers, may contribute into their plan accounts a percentage of their eligible pay on a before-tax basis as well as a percentage of their eligible pay on an after-tax basis. The Company matches 100% of the first 3% of pretax eligible earnings and 50% of the next 2% of pretax eligible earnings contributed by participating employees.

The Company also maintains the AMC Networks Excess Savings Plan (the “AMC Excess Savings Plan”) for certain of the Company’s employees, including executive officers. The AMC Excess Savings Plan is a non-qualified deferred compensation plan offered to certain employees, including executive officers, who are restricted by the applicable IRS annual compensation limitation and/or the pre-tax income deferral limitation. More information regarding the AMC Excess Savings Plan is provided in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table. In addition, the Company may provide a profit sharing contribution based on the employee’s eligible earnings. For December 31, 2017, the Company provided a 1.5% profit sharing contribution based on the employee’s eligible earnings to each eligible employee, including each NEO. The Company’s profit sharing contributions are subject to vesting limitations for the first three years of employment.

Matching contributions made by the Company under the AMC 401(k) Plan and the AMC Excess Savings Plan on behalf of the NEOs are set forth in the Summary Compensation Table under “Executive Compensation Tables” below.

Other

In addition to the standard life insurance available to all Company employees (based on a multiple of base salary, up to a $4,000,000 cap on the total amount of life insurance), Cablevision had purchased whole life insurance policies for certain current and former senior executives of Cablevision, including Mr. Sapan. The policies originally provided coverage (before the application of any dividends to purchase increased insurance) in the amount of the greater of three times the individual’s annual base salary as in effect in 1996 or the estimated death benefit provided under previous policies. As of the most recent anniversary date, the policies for Mr. Sapan provided for an estimated aggregate death benefit of $1,317,668. Information regarding premiums paid with respect to Mr. Sapan is set forth in the Summary Compensation Table below. On June 30, 2011, the date Cablevision spun off the Company (the “Distribution”), the Company assumed responsibility for the payment of required premiums, if any, with respect to Mr. Sapan.

Perquisites

The Company has adopted a policy that it generally will not provide perquisites to its executive officers. During 2017, the aggregate value of perquisites received by each of Messrs. Dolan, Sapan, Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher by the Company was less than $10,000.

Post-Termination Compensation

We believe that post-termination benefits are integral to the Company’s ability to attract and retain qualified executives. Under certain circumstances, payments or other benefits may be provided to employees

- 36 -

upon the termination of their employment with the Company. These may include payments or other benefits upon a termination by the Company without cause, termination by the employee for good reason, other voluntary termination by the employee, retirement, death, disability, or termination following a change in control of the Company or a going-private transaction. With respect to the NEOs, the amounts and terms of such payments and other benefits (including the definition of “cause” and “good reason”) are governed by each NEO’s employment agreement and any applicable award agreements. The Company award agreements regarding various long-term incentives address employment termination events, including the circumstances upon which vesting, payment and/or forfeiture of all or a portion of the long-term incentives may be accelerated. If an executive’s employment agreement with the Company refers to the treatment of any award upon a triggering event, the employment agreements generally provide that, if the terms of the award agreement are more favorable to the executive than the terms of the employment agreement, then the terms of the award agreement will apply. Post-termination compensation is discussed in greater detail in Executive Compensation Tables, “Employment Agreements” and Executive Compensation Tables, “Termination and Severance” below.

Tax Deductibility of Compensation

Code Section 162(m) establishes a $1 million limit on the amount that a publicly held corporation may deduct for compensation paid to the chief executive officer and the next three most highly paid NEOs (other than the chief financial officer) in a taxable year. Prior to the federal tax reform legislation enacted in December 2017, this limitation did not apply to the CFO or to “qualified performance-based compensation” as defined under Code Section 162(m). The Company has generally designed its short-term and long-term incentive compensation plans to qualify for this exemption from the deduction limitations of Code Section 162(m) and to be consistent with providing appropriate compensation to executives. Although it has been the Company’s intent generally to qualify compensation for the exemption from the deduction limitations, we believe that it is in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders to allow the Compensation Committee the flexibility and discretion to design an appropriate executive compensation program so that the Company can attract, retain and motivate our executives, notwithstanding Code Section 162(m). To the extent it deems appropriate, the Compensation Committee has retained discretion to pay compensation or make awards (or modifications to awards) that would not qualify for an exemption from Code Section 162(m). For example, we expect that the amount of annual base salary plus any other annual compensation paid or imputed to the President and CEO and the next three most highly paid NEOs covered by Code Section 162(m) that causes their non-performance-based compensation to exceed the $1 million limit will not be deductible by the Company for federal income tax purposes.

Effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, the new tax legislation removed the “qualified performance-based compensation” exemption from the deduction limitations of Code Section 162(m) and expanded the scope of Code Section 162(m) deduction limitations to include the chief financial officer. As such, the Company expects that future performance based compensation paid to our covered executive officers in excess of $1 million will not be deductible except to the extent that such compensation awarded pursuant to contracts entered into prior to November 2017 remains eligible for the exemption.

- 37 -

REPORT OF THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis set forth above. Based on such review and discussions, we have recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement for filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Members of the Compensation Committee

Leonard Tow (Chair)

Jonathan F. Miller

Carl E. Vogel

Dated: April 16, 2018

- 38 -

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The tables below reflect the compensation of the Company’s Executive Chairman, President and CEO, Chief Financial Officer and the two other most highly paid executive officers. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” for an explanation of our compensation philosophy and program.

Total Compensation 2016 and 2017 —“Bunching” Effect. In 2016, the Company changed its long-term incentive compensation from a long term cash performance award (“CPA”), which the Company awarded prior to 2016, to a long-term equity-based award in the form of PSUs. SEC reporting rules require that the Company report CPAs when paid at the end of their three-year performance cycle. At the same time, SEC rules require that PSU awards, which also vest after a three-year performance cycle, be reported in the year granted. This results in a “bunching” effect for the calendar years ended December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2017 because 2016 includes both the value of the CPAs that were granted in 2014 and the value of the PSUs granted in 2016, and 2017 includes both the value of the CPAs that were granted in 2015 and the value of the PSUs granted in 2017. As a result, all of our NEOs have a “bunching” effect for their 2016 and 2017 compensation. Footnote 2 of the Summary Compensation Table provides additional explanation. See a detailed discussion on the impact of the change in the make-up of the long-term awards on page 22 of this Proxy Statement.

Summary Compensation Table

The table below summarizes the total compensation paid or earned by each of our NEOs and paid by us for the years ended December 31, 2015, December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2017.

The increase in stock awards in 2016 and 2017 as compared with 2015 was primarily a result of the Company moving its long-term incentive to 100% equity, by replacing CPAs (reported under the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan” column when paid) with PSUs (reported in this column when granted). The 2016 and 2017 figures in this column reflect the aggregate

- 39 -

grant date fair value of the Company’s RSUs and PSUs at target that were awarded in 2016 and 2017, respectively and solely without any reduction for risk of forfeiture, as calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The figures in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column for 2016 also include the long-term CPAs granted in 2014 for the performance period of 2014-2016. The figures in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column for 2017 also include the long-term CPAs granted in 2015 for performance period of 2015-2017. In 2016, concurrently with the execution of his employment agreement, Mr. Carroll also received a one-time special equity retention award of RSUs with an aggregate target value of $12,500,000, which vests on December 31, 2021. See “Employment Agreements —Edward A. Carroll” for details about the special equity retention award.

For 2015, this column reflects the aggregate grant date fair value of the Company’s RSUs that were awarded in 2015, without any reduction for risk of forfeiture, as calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.

The 2016 figures in this column for Messrs. Dolan, Sapan, Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher include amounts from two distinct awards: (i) the annual incentive awards for performance in 2016 and (ii) the value of long-term CPAs granted in 2014, earned at the end of 2016 as follows: Mr. Dolan: $801,500 and $770,640, respectively; Mr. Sapan: $4,580,000 and $10,545,600, respectively; Mr. Carroll: $3,226,038 and $2,028,000, respectively; Mr. Sullivan: $1,008,041 and $1,081,600, respectively; and Mr. Gallagher: $605,749 and $608,400, respectively. Beginning in 2016, the Compensation Committee replaced its long-term CPAs with PSU awards. Therefore, the 2016 row contains both the long-term CPAs granted in 2014 and earned for the period of 2014-2016 (disclosed in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column), and the PSUs granted in 2016 for the performance period of 2016 to 2018 (disclosed in the Stock Awards column).

The 2015 figures in this column for Messrs. Dolan, Sapan, Carroll, Sullivan and Gallagher include amounts from two distinct awards: (i) the annual incentive awards for performance in 2015 and (ii) the value of long-term CPAs granted in 2013, earned at the end of 2015 as follows: Mr. Dolan: $994,000 and $769,500, respectively; Mr. Sapan: $5,680,000 and $4,455,000, respectively; Mr. Carroll: $2,994,288 and $1,518,750, respectively; Mr. Sullivan: $1,097,769 and $810,000 , respectively; and Mr. Gallagher: $644,121 and $472,500, respectively.

- 40 -

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The table below presents information regarding awards granted in 2017 to each NEO under the Company’s plans, including estimated possible and future payouts under non-equity incentive plan awards and other restricted stock-based awards.

- 41 -

Outstanding Equity Awards at 2017 Year End

The table below shows the aggregate number of unvested RSUs and PSUs outstanding for each NEO, in each case as of December 31, 2017.