CORRECTING AND RELACING Milberg Weiss Announces The Filing Of A Class Action Suit Against MasTec, Inc. on Behalf of Investors

Business Wire, April 23, 2004

Business Editors/Legal Writers

CORRECTION...by Milberg Weiss

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 23, 2004

In BW5677 issued April 23, 2004: In the contact information listed at the end of the text and in the contact section, the e-mail address listed for Steven G. Schulman should read masteccase@milberg.com sted spxcorp@milberg.com.

The corrected release reads:

MILBERG WEISS ANNOUNCES THE FILING OF A CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST MASTEC, INC. ON BEHALF OF INVESTORS

The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP announces that a class action lawsuit was filed on April 16, 2004, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of MasTec, Inc. ("MasTec" or the "Company") (NYSE:MTZ) between May 13, 2003 and April 12, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on Milberg Weiss' Web site at http://www.milberg.com/cases/mastec/

The complaint charges MasTec, Austin Shanfelter, and Donald Weinstein with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The complaint alleges that defendants made material misstatements with respect to the Company's financial results. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose and indicate the following: (1) that the Company was materially inflating its financial results; (2) that the Company was prematurely recognizing revenue on various contracts; (3) that the Company's practice of improperly recognizing revenue was in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; (4) that the Company overstated its inventory; (5) that the Company failed to have adequate reserves for bad debts, inventory, cost overruns, and projected losses on certain projects; and (6) as a result, the Company's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times.

According to the complaint, the truth about the Company's inflated financial results began to emerge on March 10, 2004, when MasTec announced that the filing of its 10-K would be delayed past the March 15th deadline. Upon this news, MasTec shares fell $2.00 per share (16.75%) on March 10, 2004 to close at $9.94 per share. On March 18, 2004, MasTec further declined $2.31 per share (23%) to close at $7.75 per share when Standard & Poor's Rating Services put the Company's BB credit rating on watch for a downgrade.

On April 13, 2004, MasTec announced its 2003 operating results and disclosed material problems that could result in a restatement of its previously announced financial results. More specifically, the Company announced a net loss of $39.7 million ($0.83 per share) on revenue of $873.9 million for the year. Additionally, the Company disclosed that during its review and analysis of the Company's annual results, MasTec's management identified a number of matters that impacted current and prior-period operating results. These included additional reserves for bad debts and inventory, cost overruns and projected losses on certain projects, valuation reserves for state deferred tax assets, revenues recognized on various contracts, work in progress and inventory overstatements at a Canadian subsidiary, the closing of Brazilian operations, the accrual for certain insurance reserves, which was complicated by the receivership of a prior insurance carrier, and other items. Defendants concluded that these matters required a detailed analysis and evaluation to determine the appropriate accounting treatment. Some of these issues may require restatements of amounts previously reported. Immediately following the Company's announcement, MasTec's stock plummeted, on usually high trading volume of 1.9 million shares, from its closing price of $9.68 on April 12, 2004 to a closing price of $8.39 on April 13, 2004. Also on that day, Standard & Poor's Rating Services lowered MasTec's corporate credit rating to BB-, the third-highest junk-bond rating, from BB. MasTec's senior secured bank-loan rating fell to BB from BB , and its subordinated-debt rating dropped to B from B . In addition, all ratings for the Company remain on credit watch with negative implications.

If you bought the securities of MTZ between May 13, 2003 and April 12, 2004, and sustained damages, you may, no later than June 14, 2004, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the proposed lead plaintiff's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.