10-K 1 a2016q410k.htm 2016 Q4 10-K Document


UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)
 
 
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
 
 
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016
 

OR
o
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
 
 
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 
For the transition period from           to
 
 
Commission file number: 001-14236
 
(FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated)
 
Commission file number: 333-39595-01
 
(FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership)
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

 
Maryland
(FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated)
 
75-2541756
 
Delaware
(FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership)
 
75-2544994
 
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
 Incorporation or Organization)
 
 
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 
 
 
 
125 E. John Carpenter Freeway, Suite 1600, Irving, Texas
 
75062
 
 (Address of Principal Executive Offices)
 
(Zip Code)
(972) 444-4900
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class
 
Name of each exchange
on which registered
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated:
 
 
Common Stock
 
New York Stock Exchange
$1.95 Series A Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
 
New York Stock Exchange
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership:
 
 
None
 
 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
(Title of class)



Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
 
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
 
þ
Yes
¨
No
 
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
 
¨
Yes
þ
No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
 
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
 
¨
Yes
þ
No
 
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
 
þ
Yes
¨
No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
 
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
 
þ
Yes
¨
No
 
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
 
¨
Yes
þ
No

Note: As a voluntary filer not subject to filing requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant has filed all reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) as if the registrant was subject to such filing requirements.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
 
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
 
þ
Yes
¨
No
 
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
 
þ
Yes
¨
No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.  See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated:
 
 
 Large accelerated filer  þ
 
 Accelerated filer ¨
 Non-accelerated filer     o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 
 Smaller reporting company o
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership:
 
 
 Large accelerated filer  o
 
 Accelerated filer ¨
 Non-accelerated filer     þ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 
 Smaller reporting company o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). 
 
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated
 
o
Yes
þ
No
 
FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership
 
o
Yes
þ
No

The aggregate market value of shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated as of June 30, 2016, computed by reference to the price at which its common stock was last sold at June 30, 2016, was approximately $837 million.
As of February 20, 2017, FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated had issued and outstanding 138,103,326 shares of common stock.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated’s definitive Proxy Statement pertaining to its 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Proxy Statement”), filed or to be filed not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year pursuant to Regulation 14A, is incorporated herein by reference into Part III.





EXPLANATORY NOTE
This annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, combines the filings for FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated, or FelCor, and FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership, or FelCor LP. Where it is important to distinguish between the two, we either refer specifically to FelCor or FelCor LP. Otherwise we use the terms “we” or “our” to refer to FelCor and FelCor LP, collectively (including their consolidated subsidiaries), unless the context indicates otherwise.
FelCor is a Maryland corporation operating as a real estate investment trust, or REIT, and is the sole general partner, and the owner of a greater than 99% partnership interest in, FelCor LP. Through FelCor LP, FelCor owns hotels and conducts business. As the sole general partner of FelCor LP, FelCor has exclusive and complete control of FelCor LP’s day-to-day management.
We believe combining periodic reports for FelCor and FelCor LP into a single combined report results in the following benefits:
presents our business as a whole (the same way management views and operates the business);
eliminates duplicative disclosure and provides a more streamlined presentation (a substantial portion of our disclosure applies to both FelCor and FelCor LP); and
saves time and cost by preparing combined reports instead of separate reports.
We operate the company as one enterprise. The employees of FelCor direct the management and operation of FelCor LP. With sole control of FelCor LP, FelCor consolidates FelCor LP for financial reporting purposes. FelCor has no assets other than its investment in FelCor LP and no liabilities separate from FelCor LP. Therefore, the reported assets and liabilities for FelCor and FelCor LP are substantially identical.
FelCor is a REIT with publicly-traded equity, while FelCor LP is a partnership with no publicly-traded equity. This difference is reflected in the financial statements in the equity (or partners’ capital) section of the consolidated balance sheets and in the consolidated statements of equity (or partners’ capital). Apart from the different equity treatment, the consolidated financial statements for FelCor and FelCor LP are nearly identical, except the net income (loss) attributable to redeemable noncontrolling interests in FelCor LP is deducted from FelCor’s net income (loss) in order to arrive at net income (loss) attributable to FelCor common stockholders. The noncontrolling interest is included in net income (loss) attributable to FelCor LP common unitholders. The holders of noncontrolling interests in FelCor LP are unaffiliated with FelCor and, in aggregate, hold less than 1% of the operating partnership units.
We present the sections in this report combined unless separate disclosure is required for clarity.






FELCOR LODGING TRUST INCORPORATED and
FELCOR LODGING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

INDEX

 
 
 
 
 
 
Item No.
 
Page
 
 
 
PART I
 
Item 1.
Business
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
Item 2.
Properties
Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
 
 
 
 PART II
 
Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and
    Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Item 9.
Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
 
 
 
 
 PART III
 
Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers of the Registrant and Corporate Governance
Item 11.
Executive Compensation
Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
   Related Stockholder Matters
Item 13.
Certain Relationships, Related Transactions and Director Independence
Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
 
 
 
PART IV 
 
Item 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
Item 16.
Form 10-K Summary
126
SIGNATURES
 

This Annual Report contains registered trademarks and service marks, including (but not limited to) Airbnb, DoubleTree Suites by Hilton, Embassy Suites Hotels, Fairmont, Hilton, Holiday Inn, The Knickerbocker, Marriott, Morgans, Renaissance, Royalton, Sheraton, VRBO, Walt Disney World, Wyndham and Wyndham Grand.


2


Disclosure Regarding Forward Looking Statements

Our disclosure and analysis in this Form 10-K and in FelCor’s 2016 Annual Report to Stockholders may contain forward-looking statements that set forth anticipated results based on management’s plans and assumptions. From time to time, we may also provide forward-looking statements in other materials we release to the public. Such statements reflect our current expectations or forecasts of future events; they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. We have tried, wherever possible, to identify each such statement by using words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “will,” “target,” “forecast,” “continue” or similar expressions. In particular, these forward-looking statements may include those relating to future actions (including future acquisitions or dispositions and future capital expenditure plans) and future performance or expenses.

We cannot guarantee that any future results discussed in any forward-looking statements will be realized, although we believe that we have been prudent in our plans and assumptions. Achievement of future results is subject to risks, uncertainties and potentially inaccurate assumptions, including those discussed in Item 1A, Risk Factors. Should known or unknown risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove inaccurate, actual results could differ materially from past results and those results anticipated, estimated or projected. You should bear this in mind as you consider forward-looking statements.

We undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements publicly, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. You should consult our subsequent disclosures or related discussions in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. Also note that, in our risk factors, we provide a cautionary discussion of risks, uncertainties and possibly inaccurate assumptions relevant to our business. These are factors that, individually or in the aggregate, we believe could cause our actual results to differ materially from past results and those results anticipated, estimated or projected. We note these factors for investors as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. It is not possible to predict or identify all such risk factors. Consequently, you should not consider the risk factor discussion to be a complete discussion of all of the potential risks or uncertainties that could affect our business.

3


PART I
Item 1.    Business
About FelCor and FelCor LP
FelCor Lodging Trust Incorporated (NYSE:FCH), or FelCor, is a Maryland corporation operating as a real estate investment trust, or REIT. FelCor is the sole general partner of, and the owner of a greater than 99.5% partnership interest in, FelCor Lodging Limited Partnership, or FelCor LP, through which we held ownership interests in 39 hotels with 11,500 rooms at December 31, 2016. At December 31, 2016, we had an aggregate of 138,600,280 shares and units outstanding, consisting of 137,990,097 shares of FelCor common stock and 610,183 units of FelCor LP limited partnership interest not owned by FelCor.

Business Strategy

Strategy and Objectives. Our goal is to deliver returns to stockholders through earnings growth, asset appreciation and sustainable dividends. We strive to achieve this goal by building a well-maintained and diversified portfolio of high quality hotels in strategic locations, leveraging our core competencies to enhance the quality and earnings potential of our hotels, and continuing to enhance our balance sheet flexibility and strength while reducing our cost of capital.

Our core portfolio consists primarily of upper-upscale and luxury hotels located in major markets and resort locations that have dynamic demand generators and high barriers-to-entry. We sell, acquire, rebrand and redevelop hotels to increase our return on invested capital, improve overall portfolio quality, enhance diversification and improve growth rates. Our long-term strategy has six critical components:
Acquire Hotels that Further Improve our Portfolio Quality, Diversification and Earnings Growth. We seek to acquire high-quality hotels in markets with high barriers-to-entry and sustainable demand growth. We target properties that are accretive to long-term stockholder value, will provide investment returns that exceed our weighted average cost of capital and provide attractive long-term yields. Additionally, we seek properties that will improve the overall quality and diversity of our portfolio and we consider hotels that offer redevelopment and/or revenue repositioning opportunities that will further enhance returns on our investment.
Sell Non-Strategic Hotels or Hotels Not Expected to Meet Our Long-Term Return Hurdles. We believe opportunistically selling hotels and reallocating capital to more attractive investments enhances our long-term growth, increases our return on capital and enables management to focus on long-term investments within our target markets. We consistently review our hotels in terms of projected performance, future capital expenditure requirements, market dynamics and concentration risk, and sell those properties in markets that are not expected to offer an attractive return on our investment or are inconsistent with our long-term portfolio strategy.
Utilize Focused and Engaged Asset Management Approach to Maximize Returns at our Hotels. FelCor’s asset management is aggressive and hands-on. All of our asset managers have extensive hotel operating experience and thorough knowledge of the markets and overall demand dynamics where our hotels operate. With our long-standing and extensive brand relationships, we can significantly influence how their policies and procedures (most notably, brand strategy for marketing and revenue enhancement programs) affect us as hotel owners. We utilize our expertise and relationships to maximize revenue, market share, hotel operating margins and cash flow at every hotel.

4


Pursue Redevelopment and Repositioning Opportunities that Leverage our Development and Operations Expertise. We consider redevelopment and repositioning opportunities at our properties that offer attractive risk-adjusted returns. Redevelopment opportunities may include adding guest rooms, meeting space and amenities (such as spas), and developing condominiums. Repositioning opportunities typically involve upgrading a hotel’s market position through converting to a superior brand, which can be done independently or in conjunction with a redevelopment. We are currently seeking the necessary approvals and entitlements to redevelop and/or reposition several of our hotels that are located in core markets and offer attractive risk-adjusted returns that are significantly above our cost of capital.
Enhance Our Assets’ Long-Term Performance by Investing in High-ROI Capital Projects. We strive to spend capital prudently. Our capital strategy involves efficiently maintaining our properties over the long term and limiting future expenditure fluctuations, while maximizing our return on investment. We generally renovate several hotels each year to maintain their competitive positions and value. We routinely evaluate value-adding opportunities at our hotels, such as better use of existing space, new restaurant concepts and improved food and beverage operations.
Manage Our Balance Sheet. We are committed to further strengthening our balance sheet by reducing leverage, extending debt maturities and taking advantage of opportunities to lower our cost of capital. Our improved balance sheet provides the necessary flexibility and capacity to thrive throughout lodging industry cycles. We will continue to reduce our leverage by, among other things, selling non-strategic or underperforming hotels and increasing operating cash flow. We also expect to reduce our cost of capital and enhance our debt maturity profile by refinancing or repaying higher cost debt and preferred stock in the future.
Recent Achievements. We have continued making progress toward achieving our strategic objectives.
We sold two hotels in 2016 for $108 million total gross proceeds.
We reduced our consolidated debt by $74 million and leverage ratio from 6.0x at December 31, 2015 to 5.6x at December 31, 2016. Moody’s upgraded our corporate credit rating in 2016 as a result of our stronger balance sheet and credit metrics.
In 2016, we renovated two hotels (Embassy Suites - Dallas Love Field and Embassy Suites - Orlando International Drive South/Convention Center) and began redeveloping two resort properties (The Vinoy Renaissance St. Petersburg Resort & Golf Club and Embassy Suites Myrtle Beach-Oceanfront Resort), which included the construction of significant enhancements and improvements to our resort amenities. In total, we spent $74.3 million on capital expenditure at our hotels, and believe our renovation and redevelopment projects will offer attractive returns.
We successfully completed negotiations with Hilton with respect to new management agreements for 18 of our properties, with four currently pending lender approval. The new management agreements shift a substantial portion of fees from fixed base fees to variable incentive fees, which are payable only after achieving a base return on our invested capital. This new fee structure better aligns Hilton’s interest with our economic interest. We also negotiated comprehensive, long-term renovation plans at the affected hotels that allow us to deploy our capital more efficiently. We are excited to extend our strong relationship with Hilton, and we are confident the new agreements will help us achieve meaningful returns on these assets.
We acquired the fee interest in the land at our Wyndham Houston-Medical Center Hotel & Suites that was previously leased.


5



We remain committed to the highest standards of Board accountability, corporate ethics and stockholder engagement.  Accordingly, in 2016 we implemented various corporate governance enhancements, including, among others: (i) amending and restating FelCor’s 2014 Equity Compensation Plan to impose minimum vesting and post-vesting holding periods and to prohibit cash buyouts of underwater options; (ii) refreshing and enhancing the independence of the Board by appointing two independent directors to serve on the Board; (iii) adding a new section to FelCor’s Bylaws to provide proxy access to director candidates nominated by stockholders that meet certain ownership thresholds and satisfy other criteria; and (iv) amending FelCor’s Bylaws to delete a section that had reserved for the Board the exclusive power to amend FelCor’s Bylaws (stockholders will be able to propose binding amendments to FelCor’s Bylaws assuming they approve a corresponding charter amendment at this year’s annual meeting). The foregoing initiatives follow prior actions, as previously disclosed, that also strengthen our corporate governance and stockholder accountability.

Our Industry
The United States lodging industry is diverse and fragmented, comprising a myriad of hotel types across multiple quality and service segments. The industry caters to a wide range of guests, including transient customers (both leisure and corporate), groups (both leisure and corporate) and long-term, or contract, customers. Average rates charged by hotels are dependent on multiple factors, including the potential customer mix, level of customer demand and rooms supply in the market. Many hotels are marketed under a brand or “flag,” such as Hilton and Marriott, among others. Franchisors typically receive fees in exchange for brand recognition, marketing support and their reservation systems. Other hotels operate independently, often because they do not desire to fit within the standards of a particular brand or, in some cases, because operating as an independent “boutique” hotel enhances a hotel’s appeal to targeted guests. Hotels, and the underlying real estate, are owned by both public and private companies and partnerships. Franchisors or independent management companies often operate hotels on behalf of their owners. All of our hotels are operated on our behalf, mostly by managers affiliated with international franchisors.

Hotel Classification. Smith Travel Research (STR), a leading research provider for the lodging industry, classifies hotel chains into seven distinct segments: luxury, upper-upscale, upscale, upper-midscale, midscale, economy and independent. More than 90% of our Hotel EBITDA is generated from luxury (Fairmont) and upper-upscale (Embassy Suites, Hilton, Marriott, Renaissance, Sheraton, and Wyndham) hotels. We also own upscale (Doubletree), upper-midscale (Holiday Inn) and independent (Knickerbocker, Royalton and Morgans) hotels.
Industry Performance. The industry is cyclical, driven by changes in supply and demand. Overall economic conditions and local market factors influence demand, as do GDP growth, employment growth and corporate profits. While lodging industry fundamentals remain relatively healthy, acceleration of supply growth, coupled with a deceleration in demand growth, is expected to result in lower Revenue Per Available Room (RevPAR) growth in 2017.

6


For 2016, STR reported:
RevPAR increased 3.2%, to $81.19, achieving the highest RevPAR ever recorded by STR for any year;
ADR increased 3.1% to $123.97, achieving the highest ADR ever recorded by STR; and
Occupancy increased 0.1% to 65.5%, as demand growth outpaced supply growth.
a2016q410k_chart-57859.jpg

For 2017, CBRE Hotel Horizons (formerly, PKF Hospitality Research), or CBRE, another leading provider of hospitality industry research, projects occupancy to decrease 0.4%, ADR to increase by 3.3%, contributing to a projected 2.9% RevPAR increase in 2017. In its publication Hospitality Directions US, PwC’s outlook for 2017 RevPAR is a 2.3% increase, with an ADR increase of 2.6% and an occupancy decline of 0.3%.

Competition

The lodging industry is highly competitive. Customers can choose from a variety of brands and products. The interplay between the supply of and demand for hotel rooms is cyclical and affects our industry significantly. Certain markets have low barriers-to-entry (e.g., inexpensive land, favorable zoning, etc.), making it easier to build new hotels and increase the supply of modern, high-quality hotel rooms. Lodging demand growth typically moves in tandem with the overall economy, as well as local market factors that stimulate travel to specific destinations. Economic indicators, such as GDP, business investment and employment levels, are common indicators of lodging demand. Each of our hotels competes for guests, primarily with other full service and limited service hotels in the immediate vicinity and, secondarily, with other hotels in its geographic market. Location, brand recognition, hotel quality, service levels and prices are the principal competitive factors affecting our hotels.
Environmental Matters
Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in a property. These laws may impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. In addition, certain environmental laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real property for personal injury associated with exposure to related asbestos-containing materials. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require corrective modifications or other expenditures. In connection with our current or prior ownership or operation of hotels or other real estate, we may be liable for various environmental costs or liabilities.

7


We customarily obtain a Phase I environmental survey from an independent environmental consultant before acquiring a hotel. The principal purpose of a Phase I survey is to identify potential environmental contamination and, secondarily, to assess, to a limited extent, the potential for environmental regulatory compliance liabilities. The Phase I surveys of our hotels were designed to meet the requirements of the then current industry standards governing those surveys, and consistent with those requirements, none of the surveys involved testing of groundwater, soil or air. Accordingly, they do not represent evaluations of conditions at the studied sites that would be revealed only through such testing. In addition, Phase I assessments of environmental regulatory compliance issues are general in scope and not a detailed determination of a hotel’s environmental compliance. Similarly, Phase I reports do not involve comprehensive analysis of potential offsite liability. Our Phase I reports have not revealed any environmental liability that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our business, assets or results of operations, nor are we aware of any such liability. Nevertheless, it is possible that these reports do not reveal or accurately assess all material environmental conditions and that there are material environmental conditions of which we are unaware.
We believe that our hotels materially comply with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding hazardous substances and other environmental matters, to the extent violation of such laws and regulations have a material adverse effect on us. We have not been notified by any governmental authority or private party of any noncompliance, liability or claim relating to hazardous or toxic substances or other environmental matters in connection with any of our current or former properties that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our business, assets or results of operations. However, obligations for compliance with environmental laws that arise or are discovered in the future may adversely affect our financial condition.

Tax Status
FelCor LP is a partnership for federal income tax purposes, and is not subject to federal income tax. However, under its partnership agreement, it is required to reimburse FelCor for any tax payments it is required to make. Accordingly, the tax information herein represents disclosures regarding FelCor and its taxable subsidiaries.
FelCor elected to be treated as a REIT under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. As a REIT, FelCor generally is not subject to federal income taxation at the corporate level on taxable income that is distributed to its stockholders. FelCor may, however, be subject to certain state and local taxes on its income and property and to federal income and excise taxes on its undistributed taxable income. FelCor’s taxable REIT subsidiaries, or TRSs, formed to lease its hotels, are subject to federal, state and local income taxes. A REIT is subject to a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement that it currently distribute at least 90% of its annual taxable income to its stockholders. If FelCor fails to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year for which the statute of limitations remains open, it will be subject to federal income taxes at regular corporate rates (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) for such taxable year and may not qualify as a REIT for four subsequent years. In connection with FelCor’s election to be treated as a REIT, its charter imposes restrictions on the ownership and transfer of shares of its common stock. FelCor LP expects to make distributions on its units sufficient to enable FelCor to meet its distribution obligations as a REIT. At December 31, 2016, FelCor had a federal income tax net operating loss carryforward of $534.2 million, and its TRSs had federal income tax loss carryforwards of $254.8 million.
Employees
At December 31, 2016, we had 63 full-time employees. None of our employees are involved in the day-to-day operation of our hotels.

8


Ownership of our Hotels
Of our 39 hotels at December 31, 2016, we owned 100% interests in 36 hotels, a 95% interest in one hotel (The Knickerbocker) and 50% interests in entities that owned two hotels. We consolidate our real estate interests in the 37 hotels in which we hold majority interests, and we record the real estate interests of the two hotels in which we hold 50% interests using the equity method. We lease 38 of the 39 hotels to our TRSs, in which we own a controlling interest. We operate one 50% owned hotel without a lease. Because we own controlling interests in our operating lessees, we consolidate our interests in all 38 leased hotels (which we refer to as our Consolidated Hotels) and reflect their operating revenues and expenses in our statements of operations. We own 50% of the real estate interest in one Consolidated Hotel (we account for our real estate interest in this hotel by the equity method) and majority real estate interests in our remaining 37 Consolidated Hotels (we consolidate our real estate interests in these hotels). Our Consolidated Hotels are located in 14 states, with concentrations in major urban markets and resort areas.
Segment Reporting

Our business is conducted in one operating segment because of the similar economic characteristics of our hotels. Other information by geographic area may be found in the footnotes to our consolidated financial statements elsewhere in this report.

Additional Information

Additional information relating to our hotels and our business, including the charters of our Executive Committee, Governance Committee, Lead Director, Compensation Committee, Finance Committee and Audit Committee; our corporate governance guidelines; and our code of business conduct and ethics can be found on our website at www.felcor.com. Information relating to our hotels and our business can also be found in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements located elsewhere in this report. Our annual, quarterly and current reports, and amendments to these reports, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or Exchange Act, are made available on our website, free of charge, under the “Financials” tab on our “Investor Relations” page, as soon as practicable following their filing. The public may also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov.


9


Item 1A.  Risk Factors
The risk factors in this section describe the major risks to our business and should be considered carefully. In addition, these statements constitute our cautionary statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
Our revenues, expenses and the value of our hotels are subject to conditions affecting both the real estate and lodging industries.
Real estate investments are subject to numerous risks. Our investment in hotels is subject to numerous risks generally associated with owning real estate, including among others:
general economic conditions, including unemployment rates, major bank failures, unsettled capital markets and sovereign debt uncertainty;
changes in international, national, regional and local economic climate and real estate market conditions;
changes in zoning laws;
changes in traffic patterns and neighborhood characteristics;
increases in assessed property taxes from changes in valuation and real estate tax rates;
increases in the cost of property insurance;
potential for uninsured or underinsured property losses;
governmental regulations, including changes in immigration laws that may impact travel and labor and fiscal policies;
changes in interest rates and in the availability, cost and terms of debt financing;
the ongoing need for capital improvements;
changes in tax laws; and
other circumstances beyond our control.
Moreover, real estate investments are substantially illiquid, and we may not be able to adjust our portfolio in a timely manner to respond to changes in economic and other conditions.
Investing in hotel assets involves special risks. We have invested in hotels and related assets, and our hotels are subject to all the risks common to the hotel industry. These risks could adversely affect hotel occupancy, operating costs and rates that can be charged for hotel rooms, and generally include:

changes in business and leisure travel patterns;
decreases in demand for hotel rooms;
increases in lodging supply or competition, which may adversely affect demand at our hotels;
the effect of geopolitical disturbances, including terrorist attacks and terror alerts, that reduce business and leisure travel;
the appeal of our hotels to consumers relative to competing hotels;
seasonal fluctuations in our revenue caused by the seasonal nature of the hotel industry;
unforeseen events beyond our control, including organizing labor at our hotels;
the threat or outbreak of a pandemic or epidemic disease, including the Zika virus, and natural disasters affecting the travel industry;
increasing fuel costs and other travel expenses resulting in reductions of travel;
consolidation in the lodging industry; and
increased transportation security precautions affecting the travel industry.


10


We are subject to risks inherent to hotel operations. We have ownership interests in the operating lessees of our hotels; consequently, we are subject to the risk of fluctuating hotel operating expenses at our hotels, including but not limited to:
increases in operating expenses due to inflation;
wage and benefit costs, including hotels that employ unionized labor and minimum wage increases in states where our hotels are located;
repair and maintenance expenses;
gas and electricity costs;
insurance costs including health, general liability and workers compensation; and
other operating expenses.

Economic conditions may reduce demand for hotel properties and adversely affect our profitability. The performance of the lodging industry is highly cyclical and has traditionally been closely linked with the performance of the general economy. We cannot predict the pace or duration of the global economic cycle or the cycles of the lodging industry. In the event conditions in the industry deteriorate or do not continue to see sustained improvement, or there is an extended period of economic weakness, our occupancy rates, revenues and profitability could be adversely affected. Furthermore, other macroeconomic factors, such as consumer confidence and conditions which negatively shape public perception of travel, may have a negative effect on the lodging industry and may adversely affect our business.

We could face increased competition. Each of our hotels competes with other hotels in its geographic area. In addition to competing with traditional hotels and lodging facilities, we compete with alternative lodging, including third party providers of short-term rental properties, such as Airbnb and VRBO. A number of additional hotel rooms have been, or may be, built in a number of the geographic areas in which our hotels are located, which could adversely affect both occupancy and rates in those markets. A significant increase in the supply of upscale and upper-upscale hotel rooms, or if demand fails to increase at least proportionately, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The lodging business is seasonal in nature. Generally, hotel revenues for our hotel portfolio are greater in the second and third calendar quarters than in the first and fourth calendar quarters. Revenues for hotels in tourist areas are generally substantially greater during tourist season than other times of the year. We expect that seasonal variations in revenue at our hotels will cause quarterly fluctuations in our revenues.

Actions by organized labor may adversely affect our business. We believe that unions are increasingly aggressive about organizing workers at hotels in certain locations. If workers employed by our hotel management companies organize in the future, increased labor activity at our hotels could impact the labor, administrative, legal, and other expenses of our management companies, which would negatively effect our profitability.

Compliance with environmental laws may adversely affect our financial condition. Owners of real estate are subject to numerous federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. Under these laws and regulations, a current or former owner of real estate may be liable for the costs of remediating hazardous substances found on its property, whether or not they were responsible for its presence. In addition, if an owner of real property arranges for the disposal of hazardous substances at another site, it may also be liable for the costs of remediating the disposal site, even if it did not own or operate the disposal site. Such liability may be imposed without regard to fault or the legality of a party’s conduct and may, in certain circumstances, be joint and several. A property owner may also be liable to third parties for personal injuries or property damage sustained as a result of its release of hazardous or

11


toxic substances, including asbestos-containing materials, into the environment. Environmental laws and regulations may require us to incur substantial expenses and limit the use of our properties. We could have substantial liability for a failure to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations, which may be enforced by the government or, in certain instances, by private parties. The existence of hazardous substances at a property can also adversely affect the value of, and the owner’s ability to use, sell or borrow against the property.

We cannot provide assurances that future or amended laws or regulations, or more stringent interpretations or enforcement of existing environmental requirements, will not impose any material environmental liability, or that the environmental condition or liability relating to our hotels will not be affected by new information or changed circumstances, by the condition of properties in the vicinity of such hotels, such as the presence of leaking underground storage tanks, or by the actions of unrelated third parties.

Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act may adversely affect our financial condition. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, or the ADA, all public accommodations, including hotels, are required to meet certain federal requirements for access and use by disabled persons. Various state and local jurisdictions have also adopted requirements relating to the accessibility of buildings to disabled persons. We make every reasonable effort to ensure that our hotels substantially comply with the requirements of the ADA and other applicable laws. However, we could be liable for both governmental fines and payments to private parties if it were determined that our hotels are not in compliance with these laws. We also may be subject to future changes in these laws. If we were required to make unanticipated major modifications to our hotels to comply with the requirements of the ADA and similar laws, it could materially adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and to satisfy our other obligations.

System security risks, data protection breaches, cyber-attacks and systems integration issues could disrupt our internal operations or service provided to guests at our hotels, and any such disruption could reduce our expected revenue, increase our expenses, damage the reputation of our hotels and adversely affect our stock price. Experienced computer programmers and hackers may be able to penetrate our network security or the network security of our third-party managers and franchisors, and misappropriate or compromise our confidential information or that of our hotel guests, create system disruptions or cause the shutdown of our hotels. Computer programmers and hackers also may be able to develop and deploy viruses, worms and other malicious software programs that attack our computer systems or the computer systems operated by our third-party managers and franchisors, or otherwise exploit any security vulnerabilities of our respective networks. In addition, sophisticated hardware and operating system software and applications that we and our third-party managers or franchisors may procure from outside companies may contain defects in design or manufacture, including “bugs” and other problems that could unexpectedly interfere with our internal operations or the operations at our hotels. The costs to us to eliminate or alleviate cyber or other security problems, bugs, viruses, worms, malicious software programs and security vulnerabilities could be significant, and our efforts to address these problems may not be successful and could result in interruptions, delays, cessation of service and loss of existing or potential business at our hotels.
Portions of our information technology infrastructure or the information technology infrastructure of our independent managers and franchisors also may experience interruptions, delays or cessations of service or produce errors in connection with systems integration or migration work that takes place from time to time. We, or our third-party managers and franchisors, may not be successful in implementing new systems and transitioning data, which could cause business disruptions and be more expensive, time consuming, disruptive and resource-intensive. Such disruptions could adversely impact the ability of our third-party managers and franchisors to fulfill reservations for guestrooms and other services offered at

12


our hotels. Delayed sales or bookings, lower margins or lost guest reservations resulting from these disruptions could adversely affect our financial results, stock price and the reputation of our hotels.
We seek to minimize the impact of these attacks through various technologies, processes and practices designed to protect our networks, systems, computers and data from attack, damage or unauthorized access. However, there are no guaranties that our cyber-security practices will be sufficient to thwart all attacks. While we carry property, business interruption and cyber risk insurance, we may not be sufficiently compensated for all losses we may incur. These losses include not only a loss of revenues but also potential litigation, fines or regulatory action against us. Furthermore, we may also incur substantial remediation costs to repair system damage as well as satisfy liabilities for stolen assets or information that may further reduce our profits.
If we (or our independent managers or franchisors) fail to comply with applicable privacy laws and regulations, we could be subject to payment of fines, damages or face restrictions on our use of guest data. Our managers and franchisors collect information relating to our guests for various business purposes, including marketing and promotional purposes. Collecting and using personal data is governed by U.S. and other privacy laws and regulations. Privacy regulations continue to evolve and may be inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. Compliance with applicable privacy regulations may increase our operating costs and/or adversely impact our managers’ ability to market our products, properties and services to our guests. In addition, non-compliance (or in some circumstances non-compliance by third parties engaged by us (including our managers and franchisors)) or a breach of security in systems storing privacy data, may result in fines, payment of damages or restrictions on our (or our managers’ or franchisors’) use or transfer of data.
Future terrorist activities and political instability may adversely affect, and create uncertainty in, our business. Terrorism in the United States or elsewhere could have an adverse effect on our business, although the degree of impact will depend on a number of factors, including the United States and global economies and global financial markets. Previous terrorist attacks in the United States and subsequent terrorism alerts have adversely affected the travel and hospitality industries in the past. Such attacks, or the threat of such attacks, could have a material adverse effect on our business, our ability to finance our business, our ability to insure our properties, and/or our results of operations and financial condition, as a whole.

Furthermore, most of our hotels are classified as upper-upscale or upscale. In an economic downturn, these types of hotels may be more susceptible to a decrease in revenue, as compared to hotels in other categories that have lower room rates. This characteristic may result from the fact that upper-upscale and upscale hotels generally target business and high-end leisure travelers. In periods of economic difficulties, business and leisure travelers may seek to reduce travel costs by limiting travel or seeking to reduce costs on their trips. In addition, in periods of weak demand, as may occur during a general economic recession, profitability is negatively affected by the relatively high fixed costs of operating luxury, upper-upscale and upscale hotels. Consequently, any uncertainty in the general economic environment could adversely affect our business.
We face reduced insurance coverages and increasing premiums. Our property insurance has a $100,000 “all-risk” deductible, as well as a 5% deductible (insured value) for named windstorm and California earthquake coverage. Substantial uninsured or under-insured losses would have a material adverse impact on our operating results, cash flows and financial condition. Catastrophic losses could make the cost of insuring against these types of losses prohibitively expensive or difficult to find. In an effort to limit the cost of insurance, we purchase catastrophic insurance coverage based on probable maximum losses based on 250-year events. We have established a self-insured retention of $250,000 per

13


occurrence for general liability insurance with regard to 32 of our hotels. The remainder of our hotels participate in general liability programs sponsored by our managers, with no deductible.
We could have uninsured or under-insured property losses. Our property policies provide that all of the claims from each of our properties resulting from a particular insurable event must be combined together for purposes of evaluating whether the aggregate limits and sub-limits contained in our policies have been exceeded. Therefore, if an insurable event occurs that affects more than one of our hotels, the claims from each affected hotel will be added together to determine whether the aggregate limit or sub-limits, depending on the type of claim, have been reached, and each affected hotel may only receive a proportional share of the amount of insurance proceeds provided for under the policy if the total value of the loss exceeds the aggregate limits available. We may incur losses in excess of insured limits, and as a result, we may be even less likely to receive sufficient coverage for risks that affect multiple properties such as earthquakes or catastrophic terrorist acts. Risks such as war, catastrophic terrorist acts, nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attacks and some environmental hazards may be deemed to fall completely outside the general coverage limits of our policies or may be uninsurable or may be too expensive to justify insuring against.
We may also encounter disputes concerning whether an insurance provider will pay a particular claim that we believe is covered under our policy. Should a loss in excess of insured limits or an uninsured loss occur or should we be unsuccessful in perfecting a claim from an insurance carrier, we could lose all, or a portion of, the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the hotel. In that event, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property.
We obtain terrorism insurance as well as general liability and directors’ and officers’ policies. However, our all-risk policies have limitations, such as per-occurrence limits and sub-limits, that might have to be shared proportionally across participating hotels under certain loss scenarios. Also, all-risk insurers only have to provide terrorism coverage to the extent mandated by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, or TRIA, for “certified” acts of terrorism - namely those that are committed on behalf of non-United States persons or interests. Furthermore, we do not have full replacement coverage at all of our hotels for acts of terrorism committed on behalf of United States persons or interests (“non-certified” events) as our coverage for such incidents is subject to sub-limits and/or annual aggregate limits. In addition, property damage related to war and to nuclear, biological and chemical incidents is excluded under our policies. While TRIA will reimburse insurers for losses resulting from nuclear, biological and chemical perils, TRIA does not require insurers to offer coverage for these perils and, to date, insurers are not willing to provide this coverage, even with government reinsurance. Additionally, Congress may not renew TRIA in the future, which would eliminate the federal subsidy for terrorism losses. As a result of the above, the extent and adequacy of terrorism coverage that will be available in the future to protect our interests in the event of future terrorist attacks that impact our properties is uncertain.
We have geographic concentrations that may create risks from regional or local economic, seismic or weather conditions. At December 31, 2016, approximately 56% of our same-store hotel rooms were located in, and 62% of our 2016 Hotel EBITDA was generated from, three states: California (31% of our same-store hotel rooms and 37% of our Hotel EBITDA); Florida (16% of our same-store hotel rooms and 16% of our Hotel EBITDA); and Massachusetts (8% of our same-store hotel rooms and 10% of our Hotel EBITDA). Additionally, at December 31, 2016, we had concentrations in five major metropolitan areas which together represented approximately 50% of our Hotel EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the San Francisco Bay area (19%), Boston (10%), South Florida (8%), Los Angeles area (7%) and Myrtle Beach (6%)). Therefore, adverse economic, seismic or weather conditions in these states or metropolitan areas may have a greater adverse effect on us than on the industry as a whole.

14


Transfers and/or termination of franchise licenses and management agreements may occur. Hotel managers and franchise licensors may have the right to terminate their agreements or suspend their services in the event of default under such agreements or under other third-party agreements such as ground leases and mortgages, upon the loss of liquor licenses, or in the event of the sale or transfer of the hotel. When franchise licenses expire by their terms, we may not be able to obtain replacement franchise licenses.
If a management agreement or franchise license were terminated under certain circumstances (such as the sale of a hotel), we could be liable for liquidated damages (which may be guaranteed by us or certain of our subsidiaries). In addition, we may need to obtain a different franchise and/or engage a different manager, and the costs and disruption associated with those changes could be significant (and materially adverse to the value of the affected hotel) because of the loss of associated name recognition, marketing support and centralized reservation systems provided by the franchise licensor or operations management provided by the manager. Additionally, most of our management agreements restrict our ability to encumber our interests in the applicable hotels under certain circumstances without the managers’ consent, which can make it more difficult to obtain secured financing on acceptable terms.
We are subject to possible adverse effects of management, franchise and license agreement requirements. All of our hotels are operated under existing management, franchise or license agreements with nationally recognized hotel companies. Each agreement requires that the hotel be maintained and operated in accordance with specific standards and restrictions. Compliance with these standards, and changes in these standards, could require us to incur significant expenses or capital expenditures, which could adversely affect our results of operations and ability to pay dividends to our stockholders and service our debt.
Our ownership of hotels through ground leases exposes us to the risk of losing a hotel upon breach of the terms of a ground lease, selling a hotel for a discounted price and not renewing a ground lease. As of December 31, 2016, 10 of our hotels were subject to ground leases. If we default under one or more of our ground leases and are unable to cure the default in a timely manner, we may be liable for damages and could lose our leasehold interest in the applicable property and interest in the hotel on the applicable property. If any events of default occur and are not cured timely, our business could be materially and adversely affected. Our ground leases also generally require the lessor’s consent prior to transferring our interest in the ground lease. These provisions may impact our ability to sell or finance our hotels or our ability to sell the property at a higher price. Furthermore, there is no guaranty that we will be able to extend the terms of our ground leases or purchase the underlying fee interest at the end of the leasehold. Accordingly, we would lose the ability to use the hotel and derive income from it, which could materially and adversely affect us.
The operation and management of our hotels is concentrated. We are subject to the potential risks associated with the concentration of our hotels under a limited number of brands and management companies. A negative public image or other adverse event that becomes associated with a brand or management company could adversely affect hotels operated under that brand or by that management company. If any brands under which we operate hotels or any management company suffer a significant decline in appeal to the traveling public, the revenues and profitability of such hotels could be adversely affected. At December 31, 2016, 18 hotels (comprising 45% of our same-store hotel rooms) were flagged as Embassy Suites, and we derived approximately 44% of our 2016 Hotel EBITDA from those hotels. Furthermore, at December 31, 2016, subsidiaries of Hilton managed 20 of our hotels, and we derived approximately 50% of our 2016 Hotel EBITDA from those hotels.
The increasing use of Internet travel intermediaries by consumers may adversely affect our profitability. Some of our hotel rooms may be booked through Internet travel intermediaries. As these

15


Internet bookings increase, these intermediaries may be able to obtain higher commissions, reduced room rates or other significant contract concessions from us and our management companies. Moreover, some of these Internet travel intermediaries offer hotel rooms as a putative commodity, by increasing the importance of price and general indicators of quality (such as “three-star downtown hotel”) at the expense of brand identification. These agencies hope that consumers will eventually develop brand loyalties to their reservations system rather than to the brands under which our hotels are franchised. If the number or percentage of sales made through Internet travel intermediaries increases significantly, room revenues may flatten or decrease and our profitability may be adversely affected.
If revenue declines faster than operating expenses, our margins may shrink materially. We are subject to the risks of a decline in Hotel EBITDA margins, which occur when hotel operating expenses increase disproportionately to revenues or fail to shrink at least as fast as revenues decline. These operating expenses and Hotel EBITDA margins are controlled by independent third-party managers over whom we have limited influence.
Our business may be adversely affected by consolidation in the lodging industry. Consolidation among companies in the lodging industry may increase the resulting companies’ negotiating power relative to ours, and decrease competition among those companies for franchisees and management contracts. Consolidation could result in increased franchise or management fees. To the extent that consolidation among hotel brand companies adversely affects the loyalty reward program offered by one or more of our hotels, customer loyalty to those hotels may suffer and demand for guestrooms may decrease. Furthermore, because each hotel brand company relies on its own network of reservation systems, hotel management systems and customer databases, the integration of two or more networks may result in a disruption to operations of these systems, such as disruptions in processing guest reservations, delayed bookings or sales, or lost guest reservations, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We have substantial financial leverage.
At December 31, 2016, our consolidated debt ($1.3 billion) represented approximately 49% of our total enterprise value. Declining revenues and cash flow may adversely affect our public debt ratings and may limit our access to additional debt. Historically, we have incurred debt for acquisitions and to fund our renovation, redevelopment and rebranding programs. If our access to additional debt financing is limited, our ability to fund these programs or acquire hotels in the future could be adversely affected. Also, we can make no assurances that we will be able to refinance any of our debt on a timely basis or on satisfactory terms, if at all.

Financial leverage could have negative consequences. For example, it could:
limit our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, renovation, redevelopment and rebranding plans, acquisitions, debt service requirements and other purposes;
limit our ability to refinance existing debt;
limit our ability to pay dividends, invest in unconsolidated joint ventures, etc.;
require us to agree to additional restrictions and limitations on our business operations and capital structure to obtain financing;
enhance the impact of adverse economic and industry conditions and of interest rate fluctuations;
require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our debt, thereby reducing funds available for capital expenditures, future business opportunities, paying dividends or other purposes;
limit our flexibility to make, or react to, changes in our business and our industry; and
place us at a competitive disadvantage when compared to our competitors that have less leverage.

16


Compliance with, or failure to comply with, our financial covenants may adversely affect our financial position and results of operations.
The agreements governing our senior secured notes require that we satisfy total leverage, secured leverage and interest coverage tests in order, among other things, to: (i) incur certain additional indebtedness, except to refinance maturing debt with replacement debt, as defined under our indentures; (ii) pay dividends other than to maintain FelCor’s REIT status; (iii) repurchase FelCor’s capital stock; or (iv) merge. In addition, our 5.625% senior secured notes are secured by a combination of first lien mortgages and related security interests on nine hotels, as well as pledges of equity interests in certain subsidiaries of FelCor LP, and the 6.00% senior unsecured notes require us to maintain a minimum amount of unencumbered assets. These restrictions may adversely affect our ability to finance our operations or engage in other business activities that may be in our best interest.
Various political, economic, social or business risks, uncertainties and events beyond our control could affect our ability to comply with these covenants and financial thresholds. Failure to comply with any of the covenants in our existing or future financing agreements could result in a default under those agreements and under other agreements containing cross-default provisions. A default could permit lenders to accelerate the maturity of obligations under these agreements and to foreclose upon any collateral securing those obligations. Under these circumstances, we might not have sufficient funds or other resources to satisfy all of our obligations. In addition, the limitations imposed by financing agreements on our ability to incur additional debt and to take other actions could significantly impair our ability to obtain other financing. We cannot assure you that we will be granted waivers or amendments if for any reason we are unable to comply with these agreements, or that we will be able to refinance our debt on terms acceptable to us, or at all.
Certain of our subsidiaries have been formed as special purpose entities, or SPEs. These SPEs have incurred mortgage debt secured by the assets of those SPEs, which debt is non-recourse to us, except in connection with certain customary recourse “carve-outs,” including fraud, misapplication of funds, etc., in which case this debt could become fully recourse to us.
Our debt agreements will allow us to incur additional debt that, if incurred, could exacerbate the other risks described herein.
We may incur substantial debt in the future. Although the instruments governing our debt contain restrictions on the incurrence of additional debt, these restrictions are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions and, under certain circumstances, debt incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial. If we add incremental debt, the leverage-related risks described above would intensify.

Our ability to achieve our long-term objectives is subject to various risks and uncertainties, and we may be unable to execute some or all of those objectives as contemplated, or at all.
Our long-term strategy contemplates: (i) redeveloping hotels in our portfolio, including potentially rebranding and enhancing facilities, to enhance hotel performance and improve returns on our investment; (ii) acquiring additional hotels in our target markets that meet our investment criteria and/or present redevelopment opportunities similar to hotels already in our portfolio; and (iii) recycling capital invested in our portfolio by selling hotels that no longer meet our investment criteria, or are significantly more valuable as single assets than as part of a larger portfolio, and reinvesting the proceeds in hotels that meet or exceed our investment criteria. For example, while we intend to recycle capital invested in hotels that no longer meet our investment criteria, there is no assurance that we will be able to sell such hotels at acceptable prices, or at all, and we can provide no assurance that the capital recycled from selling hotels will, when reinvested, generate targeted returns. Similarly, we can provide no assurance that current and

17


future redevelopment opportunities will proceed as contemplated, or at all, or whether, if they do proceed, they will be successful and achieve or exceed targeted returns. In addition, while we contemplate acquiring hotels in our target markets, we can provide no assurances that we will successfully identify appropriate acquisition opportunities that meet our investment criteria or that we will be able to act on those opportunities and acquire hotels that will contribute to the long-term growth of our portfolio and deliver incremental stockholder value, or that our assumptions about the benefits of our target markets (growth rates and potential returns, among others) will prove correct. If we are unable to execute our plans, we may be unable to realize the growth underlying our strategy, and our future business operations or financial performance could be adversely affected.

We may be unable to execute our deleveraging strategy successfully if we are unable to sell hotels designated to be sold, or at all, or sell them for satisfactory pricing or if we are unable to grow our cash flow.
Our ability to sell hotels is at least partially dependent on potential buyers obtaining financing. If adequate financing is not available or is only available at undesirable terms, we may be unable to sell hotels or sell them for desired pricing. If we are unable to sell hotels or if we sell them below desired pricing, it could affect our ability to repay and refinance debt and slow the execution of our strategic plan. If we sell a mortgaged hotel for less than its outstanding debt balance, we would be required to use cash to make up the shortfall or substitute an unencumbered hotel as collateral, which would restrict future flexibility when refinancing debt or restrict us from using cash for other purposes. Similarly, if we are unsuccessful in growing the cash flow at our hotels, our deleveraging strategy could be frustrated.
We depend on external sources of capital for future growth, and we may be unable to access capital when necessary.
As a REIT, our ability to finance our growth must largely be funded by external sources of capital because we are required to distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our taxable income (other than net capital gains) including, in some cases, taxable income we recognize for federal income tax purposes but with regard to which we do not receive corresponding cash. Our ability to obtain the external capital we require could be limited by a number of factors, many of which are outside our control, including general market conditions, unfavorable market perception of our future prospects, lower current and/or estimated future earnings, excessive cash distributions or a lower market price for our common stock.

Our ability to access additional capital also may be limited by the terms of our existing debt, which, under certain circumstances, restrict our incurrence of debt and the payment of distributions. Any of these factors, individually or in combination, could prevent us from being able to obtain the external capital we require on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If our future cash flow from operations and external sources of capital are insufficient to pay our obligations as they mature or to fund our liquidity needs, we may be forced to reduce or delay our business activities and capital expenditures, sell assets, obtain additional equity capital or restructure or refinance all or a portion of our debt on or before maturity. Failing to obtain necessary external capital could have a material adverse effect on our ability to finance our future growth. We may have only a limited number of unencumbered hotels and limited resources to raise additional capital or we may have difficulties obtaining consent of an applicable lessor on any of our hotels subject to a ground lease.

Our ability to pay dividends may be limited or prohibited by the terms of our debt or preferred stock.
We are currently party to agreements and instruments that can restrict or prevent the payment of dividends on our common and preferred stock (except, to some degree, as necessary to retain REIT status). Under the agreements governing our senior notes, dividend payments are permitted only to the

18


extent that, at the time of the distribution, we can satisfy certain financial thresholds (concerning leverage and fixed charges) and meet other requirements. Under the terms of our outstanding preferred stock, we are not permitted to pay dividends on our common stock unless all accrued preferred dividends then payable have been paid. While our preferred dividends are current, if we fail to pay future dividends on our preferred stock for any reason, including to comply with the terms of our senior secured notes, our preferred dividends will accrue, and we will be prohibited from paying any common dividends until all such accrued but unpaid preferred dividends have been paid.

Our business could be negatively affected as a result of actions by activist stockholders.

Stockholder campaigns to effect changes in publicly-traded companies are sometimes led by activist investors through various corporate actions, including proxy contests. Responding to these actions can disrupt our operations by diverting the attention of management and our employees as well as our financial resources. Stockholder activism could create perceived uncertainties as to our future direction, which could result in the loss of potential business opportunities and make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified personnel and business partners. Furthermore, the election of individuals to our Board with a specific agenda could adversely affect our ability to effectively and timely implement our strategic plans.

Departure of key personnel would deprive us of the institutional knowledge, expertise and leadership they provide.
Members of our management team generally possess institutional knowledge about our organization and the hospitality or real estate industries, have significant expertise in their fields and possess leadership skills that are important to our operations. The loss of any of our executives or other long-tenured officers and our inability to find suitable replacements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business strategy.

As a REIT, we are subject to specific tax laws and regulations, the violation of which could subject us to significant tax liabilities.
The federal income tax laws governing REITs are complex. We have operated, and intend to continue to operate, in a manner that enables us to qualify as a REIT under the federal income tax laws. The REIT qualification requirements are extremely complicated, and interpretations of the federal income tax laws governing qualification as a REIT are limited. Accordingly, we cannot be certain that we have been, or will continue to be, successful in operating so as to qualify as a REIT.

The federal income tax laws governing REITs are subject to change. At any time, the federal income tax laws governing REITs or the administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended. These new laws, interpretations or court decisions may change the federal income tax laws relating to, or the federal income tax consequences of, qualification as a REIT. Any of these new laws or interpretations may take effect retroactively and could adversely affect us, or you as a stockholder.

Failure to make required distributions would subject us to tax. Each year, a REIT must pay out to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income, other than any net capital gain. To the extent that we satisfy the 90% distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% non-deductible tax if the actual amount we pay out to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than the minimum amount specified under federal tax laws. Our only source of funds to make such distributions comes from distributions from FelCor LP. Accordingly, we may be required to borrow

19


money or sell assets to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the distribution requirements and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% tax in a particular year.

Failure to qualify as a REIT would subject us to federal income tax. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year for which the statute of limitations remains open we would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) for such taxable year and may not qualify as a REIT for four subsequent years. We might need to borrow money or sell hotels in order to obtain the funds necessary to pay any such tax. If we cease to be a REIT, we no longer would be required to distribute most of our taxable income to our stockholders. Unless our failure to qualify as a REIT was excused under federal income tax laws, we could not re-elect REIT status until the fifth calendar year following the year in which we failed to qualify.

We lack control over the management and operations of our hotels. Because federal income tax laws restrict REITs and their subsidiaries from operating hotels, we do not manage our hotels. Instead, we depend on third-party managers to operate our hotels pursuant to management agreements. As a result, we are unable to directly implement strategic business decisions for the operation and marketing of our hotels, such as setting room rates, establishing salary and benefits provided to hotel employees, conducting food and beverage operations and similar matters. While our taxable REIT subsidiaries monitor the third-party manager’s performance, we have limited specific recourse under our management agreements if we believe the third-party managers are not performing adequately. Failure by our third-party managers to fully perform the duties agreed to in our management agreements could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, our third-party managers, or their affiliates, manage hotels that compete with our hotels, which may result in conflicts of interest. As a result, our third-party managers may have in the past made, and may in the future make, decisions regarding competing lodging facilities that are not or would not be in our best interests.

Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forgo attractive opportunities that could otherwise generate strong risk-adjusted returns and instead pursue less attractive opportunities, or none at all.
To continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of generating strong risk-adjusted returns on invested capital for our stockholders.

Complying with REIT requirements may force us to liquidate otherwise attractive investments, which could result in an overall loss on our investments.
To continue to qualify as a REIT, we must also ensure that at the end of each calendar quarter at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified REIT real estate assets. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than government securities and qualified real estate assets) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than government securities and qualified real estate assets) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 25% (20% effective in 2018) of the value of our total securities can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, the REIT statutes provide a means to cure the exception. If we are unable to cure the exception, we may be subject to an additional tax. As a result, we may be required to liquidate otherwise attractive investments.


20


We may become subject to a 100% excise tax if our TRSs pay us excessive rent.
The Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, could challenge the rents paid to us by our TRSs as excessive, and a court could reach a similar conclusion. In either event, we could be taxed at 100% of the amount of rents determined to be excessive. There can be no assurance that we will not be subjected to that excise tax. If we are, and if the amount is material, our liquidity and ability to service our debt and pay dividends could be materially and adversely affected.
If any hotel management companies that we engage do not qualify as “eligible independent contractors,” or if our hotels are not “qualified lodging facilities,” we would likely fail to qualify as a REIT.
Rent paid by a lessee that is a “related party tenant” of ours generally will not be qualifying income for purposes of the two gross income tests applicable to REITs. An exception is provided, however, for leases of “qualified lodging facilities” to a TRS so long as the hotels are managed by an “eligible independent contractor” and certain other requirements are satisfied. We lease and expect to lease all or substantially all of our hotels to TRS lessees, which are disregarded subsidiaries of the TRSs, and to engage hotel management companies that are intended to qualify as “eligible independent contractors.” Among other requirements, in order to qualify as an eligible independent contractor, the hotel management company must not own, directly or through its stockholders, more than 35% of our outstanding shares, and no person or group of persons can own more than 35% of our outstanding shares and the shares (or ownership interest) of the hotel management company (taking into account certain ownership attribution rules and, with respect to our shares and the outstanding shares of any publicly traded hotel management company, only the shares owned by persons who own, directly or indirectly, more than 5% of a publicly traded class of shares). The ownership attribution rules that apply for purposes of these 35% thresholds are complex, and monitoring actual and constructive ownership of our shares by the hotel management companies and their owners may not be practical. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that these ownership levels will not be exceeded.
In addition, for a hotel management company to qualify as an eligible independent contractor, such company or a related person must be actively engaged in the trade or business of operating “qualified lodging facilities” (as defined below) for one or more persons not related to the REIT or its TRSs at each time that such company enters into a hotel management contract with a TRS or its TRS lessee. As of the date hereof, we believe the hotel management companies operate qualified lodging facilities for certain persons who are not related to us or our TRS. However, no assurances can be provided that this will continue to be the case or that any other hotel management companies that we may engage in the future will in fact comply with this requirement in the future. Failure to comply with this requirement would require us to find other managers for future contracts, and, if we hired a management company without knowledge of the failure, could jeopardize our status as a REIT.
Finally, each hotel with respect to which our TRS lessees pay rent must be a “qualified lodging facility.” A “qualified lodging facility” is a hotel, motel or other establishment more than one-half of the dwelling units in which are used on a transient basis, including customary amenities and facilities, provided that no wagering activities are conducted at or in connection with such facility by any person who is engaged in the business of accepting wagers and who is legally authorized to engage in such business at or in connection with such facility. As of the date hereof, we believe that all of the hotels leased to our TRS lessees will be qualified lodging facilities. Although we intend to monitor future acquisitions and improvements of hotels, the REIT provisions of the IRS Code provide only limited guidance for making determinations under the requirements for qualified lodging facilities, and there can be no assurance that these requirements will be satisfied in all cases.

21


We own, and may acquire, interests in hotel joint ventures with third parties that expose us to some risk of additional liabilities or capital requirements.
Through our subsidiaries, we own interests in some real estate joint ventures. Our unconsolidated joint ventures owned two hotels, in which we had an $8.3 million aggregate investment at December 31, 2016. We include the lessee operations of one of these two hotels in our consolidated results of operations because we own a majority interest in the lessee. All of our joint venture partners are unaffiliated with us. The joint ventures owned hotels that secured $22.3 million of non-recourse loans at December 31, 2016.

Our subsidiaries’ personal liability for existing non-recourse loans secured by our joint venture hotels is generally limited to guarantying the lender’s losses caused by misconduct, fraud or misappropriation of funds by the borrowers and other customary “bad boy” exceptions from the non-recourse covenants in the loans (e.g., environmental liabilities). We may invest in other joint ventures in the future that own hotels and have recourse or non-recourse debt financing. If a joint venture defaults under a loan, the lender may accelerate the loan and demand payment in full before taking action to foreclose on the hotel. As a joint venturer, our subsidiary may be liable for claims asserted against the joint venture (including lenders’ claims for repayment), and the joint venture may have insufficient assets or insurance to cover the liability.

Our subsidiaries may be unable to control decisions unilaterally regarding these joint venture hotels. In addition, joint venture hotels may perform at levels below expectations, raising concerns about joint venture liquidity and solvency unless the joint venturers provide additional funds. In some cases, the joint venturers may elect to forgo additional capital contributions. We may be confronted with the choice of losing our investment or investing additional capital with no guaranty of any return on that investment.

Our charter limits ownership and transferring shares of our stock, which could adversely affect attempted transfers of our capital stock.
To maintain our status as a REIT, no more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock may be owned, actually or constructively, under the applicable tax rules, by five or fewer persons during the last half of any taxable year. Our charter prohibits, subject to some exceptions, any person from owning more than 9.9% of the number of outstanding shares of any class of our stock. Our charter also prohibits any transfer of our stock that would result in a violation of the 9.9% ownership limit, reduce the number of stockholders below 100 or otherwise result in our failure to qualify as a REIT. Any attempted transfer of shares in violation of the charter prohibitions is void, and the intended transferee acquires no right to those shares. We have the right to take any lawful action that we believe is necessary or advisable to ensure compliance with these ownership and transfer restrictions and to preserve our status as a REIT, including refusing to recognize any transfer of stock in violation of our charter.

Some provisions in our charter and bylaws and Maryland law make a takeover more difficult.
Ownership Limit. The ownership and transfer restrictions of our charter may have the effect of discouraging or preventing a third party from attempting to gain control of us without the approval of our Board. Accordingly, it is less likely that a change in control, even if beneficial to stockholders, could be effected without the approval of our Board.

Authority to Issue Additional Shares. Under our charter, our Board may issue up to an aggregate of 20 million shares of preferred stock without stockholder action. The preferred stock may be issued, in one or more series, with the preferences and other terms designated by our Board that may delay or

22


prevent a change in control of us, even if the change is in the best interests of stockholders. At December 31, 2016, we had 12,879,475 shares of Series A preferred stock outstanding.

Maryland Law. As a Maryland corporation, we are subject to various provisions under the Maryland General Corporation Law, including the Maryland Business Combination Act, that may have the effect of delaying or preventing a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for the stock or otherwise be in the best interests of stockholders. Under the Maryland business combination statute, some “business combinations,” including some issuances of equity securities, between a Maryland corporation and an “interested stockholder,” which is any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation’s shares, or an affiliate of that stockholder, are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Any of these business combinations must be approved by a stockholder vote meeting two separate super majority requirements, unless, among other conditions, the corporation’s common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined in the statute, for their shares and the consideration is received in cash or in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder for its common shares. Our charter currently provides that the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act will not apply to any of our existing or future stock. That statute may deny voting rights to shares involved in an acquisition of one-tenth or more of the voting stock of a Maryland corporation. To the extent these or other laws are applicable to us, they may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of us even though beneficial to our stockholders.
In addition, under the Maryland General Corporation Law, unless prohibited by charter or resolution (which we are with respect to certain provisions), our Board can elect by resolution without stockholder approval to be subject to certain corporate governance provisions that may be inconsistent with our charter and bylaws. Under certain sections of that statute, our Board may adopt corporate governance provisions that may, individually or in the aggregate, affect stockholders’ ability to alter corporate policies directly or delay or prevent a strategic transaction or a change in control.

Our directors may have interests that could conflict with our interests.
A director who has a conflict of interest with respect to an issue presented to our Board will have no inherent legal obligation to abstain from voting upon that issue. We do not have provisions in our bylaws or charter that require an interested director to abstain from voting upon an issue. Although each director has a duty of loyalty to us, there is a risk that, should an interested director vote upon an issue in which a director or one of his or her affiliates has an interest, his or her vote may reflect a bias that could be contrary to our best interests. In addition, even if an interested director abstains from voting, that director’s participation in the meeting and discussion of an issue in which they have, or companies with which he or she is associated have, an interest could influence the votes of other directors regarding the issue.

The trading volume and market price of our common shares may be volatile and could decline substantially in the future.

The market price of our common shares may be volatile in the future. In addition, the trading volume in our common shares may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot assure stockholders that the market price of our common shares will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future, including as a result of factors unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. In particular, the market price of our common shares could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors, including, among others, the following:
actual or anticipated differences in our operating results, liquidity or financial condition;

23


changes in our revenues, EBITDA, FFO or earnings estimates;
publication of research reports about us, our hotels or the lodging or overall real estate industry;
additions and departures of key personnel;
the performance and market valuations of other similar companies;
the realization of any of the other risk factors presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K;
changes in accounting principles;
terrorist acts; and
general market and economic conditions, including factors unrelated to our operating performance.
In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of their common shares. If the market price of our common shares is volatile and this type of litigation is brought against us, it could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on us.


Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments
None.

Item 2.    Properties
We own a diversified portfolio of hotels managed by Hilton Worldwide, or Hilton; Wyndham Worldwide, or Wyndham; Marriott International Inc., or Marriott; InterContinental Hotels Group, or IHG; Fairmont, a subsidiary of AccorHotels Group; Highgate Hotels, or Highgate; SBE (who acquired Morgans Hotel Group Corporation); and Aimbridge Hospitality. Our hotels are high-quality lodging properties with respect to desirability of location, size, facilities, physical condition, quality and variety of services offered in the markets in which they are located. Our hotels are designed to appeal to a broad range of hotel customers, including frequent business travelers, groups and conventions, as well as leisure travelers. They generally feature comfortable, modern guest rooms, meeting facilities and full-service restaurant and catering facilities. At December 31, 2016, all of our Consolidated Hotels were located in the United States (14 states), with concentrations in major markets and resort areas. Our hotels average 298 rooms.


24


The following table provides room counts for the hotels in which we held an ownership interest at December 31, 2016.
Consolidated Hotels
 
 
Rooms
Embassy Suites Atlanta-Buckhead
 
316

DoubleTree Suites by Hilton Austin
 
188

Embassy Suites Birmingham
 
242

The Fairmont Copley Plaza, Boston
 
383

Wyndham Boston Beacon Hill
 
304

Embassy Suites Boston-Marlborough
 
229

Sheraton Burlington Hotel & Conference Center
 
309

The Mills House Wyndham Grand Hotel, Charleston
 
216

Embassy Suites Dallas-Love Field
 
248

Embassy Suites Deerfield Beach-Resort & Spa
 
244

Embassy Suites Fort Lauderdale 17th Street
 
361

Wyndham Houston-Medical Center Hotel & Suites
 
287

Embassy Suites Los Angeles-International Airport/South
 
349

Embassy Suites Mandalay Beach-Hotel & Resort
 
250

Embassy Suites Miami-International Airport
 
318

Embassy Suites Milpitas-Silicon Valley
 
266

Embassy Suites Minneapolis-Airport
 
310

Embassy Suites Myrtle Beach-Oceanfront Resort
 
255

Hilton Myrtle Beach Resort
 
385

Embassy Suites Napa Valley
 
205

Wyndham New Orleans-French Quarter
 
374

The Knickerbocker New York
 
330

Morgans New York
 
117

Royalton New York
 
168

Embassy Suites Orlando-International Drive South/Convention Center
 
244

DoubleTree Suites by Hilton Orlando-Lake Buena Vista
 
229

Wyndham Philadelphia Historic District
 
364

Sheraton Philadelphia Society Hill Hotel
 
364

Embassy Suites Phoenix-Biltmore
 
232

Wyndham Pittsburgh University Center
 
251

Wyndham San Diego Bayside
 
600

Embassy Suites San Francisco Airport-South San Francisco
 
312

Embassy Suites San Francisco Airport-Waterfront
 
340

Holiday Inn San Francisco-Fisherman’s Wharf
 
585

San Francisco Marriott Union Square
 
400

Wyndham Santa Monica at the Pier
 
132

Embassy Suites Secaucus-Meadowlands(a)
 
261

The Vinoy Renaissance St. Petersburg Resort & Golf Club
 
361

 
 
 
11,329

Unconsolidated Hotel
 
 
Chateau LeMoyne - French Quarter, New Orleans(a)
 
171

(a)    We own a 50% interest in this property.

25


Hotel Operating Statistics
 
 
 
Occupancy (%)
 
ADR ($)
 
RevPar ($)
 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
Year Ended December 31,
Same-store Hotels(1)
 
2016
 
2015
 
%Change
 
2016
 
2015
 
%Change
 
2016
 
2015
 
%Change
Embassy Suites Atlanta-Buckhead
77.3
 
79.5
 
(2.7
)
 
156.50

 
147.51

 
6.1

 
121.04

 
117.30

 
3.2

DoubleTree Suites by Hilton Austin
81.3
 
81.8
 
(0.6
)
 
221.70

 
221.63

 

 
180.33

 
181.35

 
(0.6
)
Embassy Suites Birmingham
77.9
 
79.0
 
(1.3
)
 
137.76

 
134.07

 
2.7

 
107.35

 
105.86

 
1.4

The Fairmont Copley Plaza, Boston
76.0
 
75.5
 
0.5

 
325.88

 
326.70

 
(0.3
)
 
247.52

 
246.81

 
0.3

Wyndham Boston Beacon Hill
79.0
 
79.2
 
(0.2
)
 
228.49

 
234.42

 
(2.5
)
 
180.61

 
185.60

 
(2.7
)
Embassy Suites Boston-Marlborough
68.6
 
74.9
 
(8.5
)
 
171.81

 
171.10

 
0.4

 
117.81

 
128.20

 
(8.1
)
Sheraton Burlington Hotel & Conference Center
74.4
 
75.2
 
(1.1
)
 
119.86

 
116.52

 
2.9

 
89.14

 
87.64

 
1.7

The Mills House Wyndham Grand Hotel, Charleston
81.6
 
81.1
 
0.6

 
228.13

 
222.42

 
2.6

 
186.26

 
180.45

 
3.2

Embassy Suites Dallas-Love Field (2)
73.6
 
87.9
 
(16.2
)
 
142.57

 
132.52

 
7.6

 
104.91

 
116.42

 
(9.9
)
Embassy Suites Deerfield Beach-Resort & Spa
76.9
 
80.2
 
(4.2
)
 
199.23

 
200.97

 
(0.9
)
 
153.13

 
161.22

 
(5.0
)
Embassy Suites Fort Lauderdale 17th Street
83.6
 
84.8
 
(1.4
)
 
174.15

 
165.76

 
5.1

 
145.59

 
140.55

 
3.6

Wyndham Houston-Medical Center Hotel & Suites
76.4
 
81.5
 
(6.2
)
 
145.35

 
150.80

 
(3.6
)
 
111.07

 
122.87

 
(9.6
)
Embassy Suites Los Angeles-International Airport/South
86.2
 
81.3
 
6.0

 
169.72

 
159.93

 
6.1

 
146.27

 
129.98

 
12.5

Embassy Suites Mandalay Beach-Hotel & Resort
80.5
 
78.0
 
3.2

 
227.22

 
212.81

 
6.8

 
182.82

 
165.97

 
10.1

Embassy Suites Miami-International Airport
85.0
 
88.3
 
(3.8
)
 
146.80

 
151.72

 
(3.2
)
 
124.76

 
133.98

 
(6.9
)
Embassy Suites Milpitas-Silicon Valley
81.5
 
82.4
 
(1.1
)
 
201.81

 
195.17

 
3.4

 
164.57

 
160.88

 
2.3

Embassy Suites Minneapolis-Airport
75.4
 
77.1
 
(2.3
)
 
156.54

 
150.93

 
3.7

 
117.95

 
116.38

 
1.4

Embassy Suites Myrtle Beach-Oceanfront Resort
74.2
 
74.4
 
(0.2
)
 
176.68

 
172.30

 
2.5

 
131.18

 
128.12

 
2.4

Hilton Myrtle Beach Resort
61.6
 
64.1
 
(4.0
)
 
146.09

 
140.45

 
4.0

 
89.95

 
90.09

 
(0.2
)
Embassy Suites Napa Valley
80.9
 
83.8
 
(3.4
)
 
242.71

 
232.95

 
4.2

 
196.36

 
195.12

 
0.6

Wyndham New Orleans-French Quarter
72.2
 
68.9
 
4.9

 
146.18

 
150.70

 
(3.0
)
 
105.60

 
103.77

 
1.8

Morgans New York
84.9
 
82.4
 
3.1

 
265.31

 
282.65

 
(6.1
)
 
225.28

 
232.79

 
(3.2
)
Royalton New York
83.9
 
86.7
 
(3.2
)
 
291.17

 
303.39

 
(4.0
)
 
244.42

 
263.02

 
(7.1
)
Embassy Suites Orlando-International Drive South/Convention Center(2)
70.0
 
83.9
 
(16.5
)
 
148.73

 
146.67

 
1.4

 
104.15

 
122.99

 
(15.3
)
DoubleTree Suites by Hilton Orlando-Lake Buena Vista
88.2
 
89.4
 
(1.3
)
 
141.13

 
139.63

 
1.1

 
124.54

 
124.89

 
(0.3
)
Wyndham Philadelphia Historic District
74.4
 
64.3
 
15.7

 
153.83

 
160.43

 
(4.1
)
 
114.49

 
103.22

 
10.9

Sheraton Philadelphia Society Hill Hotel
71.0
 
69.0
 
2.8

 
181.94

 
174.72

 
4.1

 
129.09

 
120.54

 
7.1

Embassy Suites Phoenix-Biltmore
68.0
 
71.4
 
(4.8
)
 
180.19

 
175.83

 
2.5

 
122.60

 
125.60

 
(2.4
)
Wyndham Pittsburgh University Center
69.1
 
71.1
 
(2.8
)
 
145.80

 
145.55

 
0.2

 
100.76

 
103.53

 
(2.7
)
Wyndham San Diego Bayside
78.1
 
78.1
 

 
151.72

 
147.63

 
2.8

 
118.47

 
115.33

 
2.7

Embassy Suites San Francisco Airport-South San Francisco
88.3
 
88.4
 
(0.1
)
 
203.47

 
200.69

 
1.4

 
179.70

 
177.46

 
1.3

Embassy Suites San Francisco Airport-Waterfront
89.7
 
86.4
 
3.8

 
208.23

 
207.60

 
0.3

 
186.75

 
179.35

 
4.1

Holiday Inn San Francisco-Fisherman’s Wharf
86.5
 
86.2
 
0.3

 
210.92

 
208.90

 
1.0

 
182.47

 
180.10

 
1.3

San Francisco Marriott Union Square
89.3
 
86.8
 
2.9

 
294.41

 
288.45

 
2.1

 
263.03

 
250.49

 
5.0

Wyndham Santa Monica at the Pier
86.1
 
83.9
 
2.7

 
278.40

 
255.40

 
9.0

 
239.83

 
214.26

 
11.9

Embassy Suites Secaucus-Meadowlands
72.7
 
76.0
 
(4.3
)
 
179.80

 
184.97

 
(2.8
)
 
130.75

 
140.57

 
(7.0
)
The Vinoy Renaissance St. Petersburg Resort & Golf Club
80.7
 
81.9
 
(1.4
)
 
219.22

 
210.49

 
4.1

 
177.00

 
172.39

 
2.7

Same-store Hotels
78.5
 
79.3
 
(0.9
)
 
191.14

 
187.74

 
1.8

 
150.11

 
148.81

 
0.9


(1)
Consolidated Hotels excluding The Knickerbocker.
(2)    Hotel under renovation in 2016.

26


Management Agreements
At December 31, 2016, of our 38 Consolidated Hotels: (i) subsidiaries of Hilton managed 20 hotels; (ii) subsidiaries of Wyndham managed eight hotels; (iii) subsidiaries of Marriott managed four hotels; (iv) subsidiaries of IHG managed one hotel; (v) Fairmont, a subsidiary of AccorHotels Group, managed one hotel; (vi) a subsidiary of Highgate managed one hotel; (vii) a subsidiary of SBE (who recently acquired Morgans Hotel Group) managed two hotels; and (viii) Aimbridge Hospitality managed one hotel.

During 2016, we renegotiated certain management agreements with Hilton. The management agreements relating to 32 Consolidated Hotels contain the right and license to operate the hotels under specified brands. No separate franchise agreements exist, and no separate franchise fee is required, for these hotels. These hotels are managed by (i) Wyndham, under the Wyndham brand, (ii) Hilton, under the DoubleTree, Hilton and Embassy Suites brands, (iii) Marriott, under the Renaissance, Marriott and Sheraton brands, (iv) IHG, under the Holiday Inn brand, and (v) Fairmont, under the Fairmont brand. The Knickerbocker (managed by Highgate) as well as Morgans and Royalton (managed by SBE) are operated without a brand.
Management Fees. Minimum base management fees generally range from 2 to 3% of total revenue, with the exception of our IHG-managed hotel, where base management fees are 2% of total revenue plus 5% of room revenue. The performance of our Wyndham-managed hotels is subject to a $100 million guaranty from Wyndham Worldwide Corporation over the initial 10-year term (which can be extended for an additional five years), with an annual performance guaranty of up to $21.5 million, which ensures minimum annual NOI for those hotels.
Most of our management agreements also provide for incentive management fees that are subordinated to our return on investment.
We incurred the following management fees (in thousands) included in continuing operations during each of the past three years:
 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Base fees
 
$
18,190

 
$
19,948

 
$
19,583

Incentive fees
 
4,995

 
4,091

 
3,316

Total management fees
 
$
23,185

 
$
24,039

 
$
22,899


The Wyndham management agreements became effective on March 1, 2013. Because Wyndham guarantees a minimum level of net operating income, we reduced Wyndham’s contractual management fees during 2016, 2015 and 2014 by $2.9 million, $1.4 million and $1.3 million, respectively. In addition, in 2016, we reduced additional Wyndham contractual fees (other than management fees) by $2.4 million to reflect Wyndham’s guaranty.

Term and Termination. The initial term of Wyndham’s management agreements ends in 2022 and the term may be extended by Wyndham subject to certain conditions. IHG’s management agreement terminates in 2018. Marriott’s management agreements terminate in 2025 for our Renaissance hotel and 2029 for our Marriott hotel, and these agreements may be extended to 2055 and 2039, respectively, at Marriott’s option. Marriott’s management agreements for our Sheraton hotels terminate in 2017. Fairmont’s management agreement terminates in 2030 and may be extended to 2040 and 2050 at Fairmont’s option. The SBE management agreements terminate in 2026 and may be extended to 2036 at SBE’s option. However, we have agreed to terms that allow us to terminate the SBE management

27


agreements prior to 2026. Highgate’s management agreement terminates in 2025 and may be extended to 2035 at Highgate’s option. Hilton’s management agreements generally have initial terms of 15 years and are renewable beyond the initial term upon the mutual written agreement of the parties.
The following management agreements covering 37 of our 38 Consolidated Hotels expire after 2016 (one hotel agreement expired in 2015 and is renewed monthly), subject to any renewal rights:
 
 
Number of Management Agreements Expiring
Manager
 
2017
 
2018
 
Thereafter
Hilton
 
4

 
 

 
 
16

 
Wyndham
 

 
 

 
 
8

 
Marriott(a)
 
2

 
 

 
 
2

 
IHG
 

 
 
1

 
 

 
SBE
 

 
 

 
 
2

 
Fairmont
 

 
 

 
 
1

 
Highgate
 

 
 

 
 
1

 
Total
 
6

 
 
1

 
 
30

 

(a)Includes Sheraton hotels.

Management agreements are generally terminable upon the occurrence of customary events of default or if the subject hotel fails to meet certain performance hurdles. Upon termination for any reason, we are generally required to pay all amounts due and owing under the management agreement through the effective date of termination. If an agreement is terminated as a result of our default, or by us other than for cause, we may also be liable for damages suffered by the manager. We expect to enter into new management agreements for all agreements set to expire in 2017.

Assignment. Generally, neither party to a management agreement may sell, assign or transfer the agreement to an unaffiliated third party without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. A change in control of FelCor would require manager or franchisor consent under most of our management and franchise agreements.

Franchise Agreements
After renegotiating certain management agreements with Hilton during 2016, six of our Consolidated Hotels operate under franchise or license agreements with Embassy Suites that are separate from our management agreements.

These six Embassy Suites franchise agreements grant us the right to the use of the Embassy Suites Hotels name, system and marks with respect to specified hotels and establish various management, operational, record-keeping, accounting, reporting and marketing standards and procedures with which the licensed hotel must comply. In addition, the franchisor establishes requirements for the quality and condition of the hotel and its furniture, fixtures and equipment, and we are obligated to expend such funds as may be required to maintain the hotel in compliance with those requirements. Typically, our Embassy Suites franchise agreements provide for a license fee, or royalty, of 4 to 5.5% of room revenues. In addition, we pay approximately 3.5 to 4% of room revenues as marketing and reservation system contributions for the systemwide benefit of Embassy Suites Hotels. We incurred marketing and reservation systems fees of $9.3 million, $10.2 million and $12.3 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. We incurred license fees included in continuing operations with respect to our hotels

28


operated as Embassy Suites of $9.8 million, $11.5 million and $13.2 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

The terms of our typical Embassy Suites franchise agreements extend 10 to 20 years. The agreements provide no renewal or extension rights and are not assignable. If we breach a franchise agreement, we may lose the right to use the Embassy Suites name for the applicable hotel and be liable, under certain circumstances, for liquidated damages (generally equal to the fees paid to the franchisor with respect to that hotel during the three immediately preceding years). Of our Embassy Suites franchise agreements, four expire in 2017 and the remainder expire later. We expect to enter into new agreements in 2017 for these properties, allowing us the continued use of the Embassy Suites brand.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

There is no litigation pending or known to be threatened against us or affecting any of our hotels, other than claims arising in the ordinary course of business or which are not considered to be material. Furthermore, most of these claims are substantially covered by insurance. We do not believe that any claims known to us, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on us.

Item 4.     Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

29


PART II

Item 5.    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “FCH.” The following table sets forth the high and low sale prices for our common stock for the indicated periods, as traded on that exchange, and dividends declared per share.
 
High
 
Low
 
Dividends
Declared
Per Share
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
First quarter
$
8.17

 
 
$
5.47

 
 
$
0.06

 
Second quarter
8.08

 
 
5.68

 
 
0.06

 
Third quarter
7.19

 
 
6.00

 
 
0.06

 
Fourth quarter
8.44

 
 
6.07

 
 
0.06

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
First quarter
$
12.43

 
 
$
9.70

 
 
$
0.04

 
Second quarter
12.29

 
 
9.64

 
 
0.04

 
Third quarter
10.87

 
 
6.88

 
 
0.04

 
Fourth quarter
8.63

 
 
6.83

 
 
0.06

 
Stockholder Information
At February 20, 2017, we had approximately 138 record holders of our common stock and 15 record holders of our Series A preferred stock (which is convertible into common stock). However, because many of the shares of our common stock and Series A preferred stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of stockholders, we believe there are substantially more beneficial holders of our common stock and Series A preferred stock than record holders. At February 20, 2017, there were 18 holders (other than FelCor) of FelCor LP units. FelCor LP units are redeemable for cash or, at our election, for shares of FelCor common stock.
IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO OUR QUALIFICATION AS A REIT, OUR CHARTER LIMITS, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS, THE NUMBER OF SHARES OF ANY CLASS OR SERIES OF OUR CAPITAL STOCK THAT MAY BE OWNED BY ANY SINGLE PERSON OR AFFILIATED GROUP TO 9.9% OF THE OUTSTANDING SHARES OF THAT CLASS OR SERIES.
Distribution Information
In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our annual taxable income (other than net capital gains) to our stockholders each year. We distributed in excess of 100% of our taxable income in 2016 and 2015. We had no taxable income for 2014. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to make distributions that exceed cash available for distribution in order to meet REIT distribution requirements. In that event, we expect to borrow funds or sell assets to obtain cash sufficient to make the required distribution.
Our senior notes indentures limit our ability to pay dividends and make other payments based on our ability to satisfy certain financial requirements (except as necessary to retain REIT status). The terms of our outstanding preferred stock prohibit us from paying dividends on our common stock unless all accrued preferred dividends then payable have been paid. None of these restrictions prevent us from paying dividends under current circumstances. We discuss these limitations further in “Liquidity and Capital Resources” in Item 7 and in Item 1A, Risk Factors.

30


Item 6.    Selected Financial Data
The following tables set forth selected financial data derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes. This data should be read in conjunction with Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(in millions, except per share/unit data)
 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
2012
Statement of Operations Data:(a)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
 
$
867

 
$
886

 
$
922

 
$
893

 
$
862

Income (loss) from continuing operations
 
1

 
(24
)
 
28

 
(84
)
 
(187
)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Diluted earnings per share/unit:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
FelCor - income (loss) from continuing operations
 
$
(0.13
)
 
$
(0.33
)
 
$
0.43

 
$
(0.95
)
 
$
(1.81
)
FelCor LP - income (loss) from continuing operations
 
(0.13
)
 
(0.33
)
 
0.43

 
(0.95
)
 
(1.81
)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Other Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cash flows provided by operating activities
 
$
135

 
$
147

 
$
108

 
$
69

 
$
48

Cash distributions declared per common share/unit
 
0.24

 
0.18

 
0.10

 
0.02

 

Adjusted FFO per share/unit(b)
 
0.92

 
0.83

 
0.65

 
0.39

 
0.23

Adjusted EBITDA(b)
 
240

 
235

 
221

 
200

 
203

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance Sheet Data (at end of period):
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total assets (c)
 
$
1,707

 
$
1,866

 
$
2,082

 
$
2,119

 
$
2,174

Total debt, net of unamortized debt issuance costs and discount (c)
 
1,338

 
1,410

 
1,563

 
1,638

 
1,602

FelCor’s redeemable noncontrolling interests in FelCor LP, at redemption value
 
5

 
4

 
7

 
5

 
3


(a)
Hotels that were designated as held for sale at December 31, 2013 or disposed of prior to that date are included in discontinued operations.
(b)
We include a more detailed description and computation of Adjusted FFO per share and Adjusted EBITDA in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” which is found in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7.

(c)
Since the adoption of ASU 2015-03, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs, in 2016, we classify deferred financing costs within the debt on our consolidated balance sheets. We previously classified deferred financing costs as an asset on our consolidated balance sheets. All periods presented have been adjusted to conform with the presentation required under ASU 2015-03. Deferred financing costs associated with our line of credit continue to be classified as an asset.

31


Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
RevPAR for our 37 same-store hotels (which excludes The Knickerbocker) increased 0.9% during 2016 compared to last year, reflecting a 1.8% increase in ADR offset by a 0.9% decrease in occupancy.
In our continuing effort to increase long-term stockholder value, we look for opportunities to redeploy capital to achieve higher returns and strengthen our balance sheet. As part of our 2015 strategic plan, our Board approved selling five hotels. In 2016, we sold two of those hotels, the Renaissance Esmeralda Indian Wells Resort and the Holiday Inn Nashville Airport, for aggregate gross proceeds of $108.0 million. We used proceeds from these sales to repay our line of credit. We continue to market our three New York hotels for sale.
In 2015, our Board approved a common stock repurchase program, under which we may repurchase up to $100 million of our common stock through October 2017. We may repurchase shares in transactions on the open market, in privately-negotiated transactions or by other means, including Rule 10b5-1 trading plans, in accordance with applicable securities laws and other restrictions. In 2015, FelCor paid $14.4 million (including commissions) to repurchase approximately 2.0 million shares of its common stock at an average price of $7.26 per share. In 2016, FelCor repurchased 4.6 million shares for $30.5 million (including commissions) at an average price of $6.58 per share. Since the inception of the share repurchase program, FelCor has repurchased 6.6 million shares for a total of $44.8 million (including commissions) at an average share price of $6.78 per share.
Financial Comparison (Hotel EBITDA and Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations, $ in millions)

 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
% Change
2015-16
 
2014
 
 
% Change
2014-15
RevPAR(a)
 
$
150.11

 
 
$
148.81

 
 
0.9
 %
 
 
$
137.24

 
 
8.4
 %
 
Income (loss) from continuing operations
 
1

 
 
(24
)
 
 
(104.3
)%
 
 
28

 
 
(184.9
)%
 
Hotel EBITDA(a)(b)
 
239

 
 
237

 
 
0.6
 %
 
 
206

 
 
15.4
 %
 
Hotel EBITDA margin(a)(b)
 
30.6
%
 
 
30.8
%
 
 
(0.5
)%
 
 
29.0
%
 
 
6.2
 %
 

(a)
Data shown is for our 37 same-store Consolidated Hotels for all years presented.
(b)
Hotel EBITDA and Hotel EBITDA margin are non-GAAP financial measures. A discussion of the use, limitations and importance of these non-GAAP financial measures and detailed reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP measures are found in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”


32


Results of Operations

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2016 and 2015

For the year ended December 31, 2016, we recorded $4.2 million of net income compared to a $3.5 million net loss in 2015. Our 2016 net income includes $26.5 million in impairment charges relating to two hotels (one of which was sold in 2016) and a $6.9 million severance charge, primarily related to the retirement of our former chief executive officer, partially offset by a $3.2 million net gain on hotel sales (including a $3.1 million loss in discontinued operations). Our 2015 net loss included debt extinguishment charges of $30.9 million and a $20.9 million impairment charge for a hotel subsequently sold in 2016, partially offset by a $20.1 million net gain on hotel sales (including $658,000 in discontinued operations) and $3.7 million in net revenue attributable to a favorable settlement of a commercial dispute. Additionally, in 2015, one of our unconsolidated joint ventures sold a hotel, the gain from which increased our equity in income from unconsolidated entities by $7.1 million.

In 2016:

Hotel operating revenue decreased $15.6 million, including a $24.0 million net reduction in revenue for hotels that have been disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, hotel operating revenue increased 1.1% from last year. We attribute the increase primarily to the 0.9% increase in same-store RevPAR, reflecting a 1.8% increase in ADR offset by a 0.9% decrease in occupancy. In 2016, certain hotels also experienced improved food and beverage operations, primarily in the banquet and catering departments, and an increase in revenue (such as resort fees) for other hotel departments.
Other revenue decreased $3.7 million, resulting primarily from a favorable $3.7 million net settlement of a commercial dispute in 2015.
Hotel departmental expenses decreased $7.1 million, including a $10.2 million net reduction in expense for hotels that have been disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, hotel departmental expenses increased slightly to 34.5% of hotel operating revenue from 34.4% last year.
Other property-related costs decreased $11.4 million, including a $12.1 million net reduction in expense for hotels that have been disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, other property-related costs decreased slightly to 24.4% of hotel operating revenue from 24.6% last year.
Management and franchise fees decreased $2.6 million, including a $1.8 million net reduction in expense for hotels that have been disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, these costs decreased slightly to 3.9% of hotel operating revenue from 4.0% last year.
Taxes, insurance and lease expense decreased $1.9 million, including a $3.8 million net reduction in expense for hotels that have been disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, these expenses increased to 7.0% of hotel operating revenue from 6.8% last year. We attribute this increase to successfully resolving property tax appeals last year and a more favorable insured claims experience in 2015, partially offset by higher land lease expense last year. Land lease expense last year included a $1.6 million straight-line lease expense adjustment related to prior years for a ground lease associated with one of our Consolidated Hotels. Improved operations at certain hotels in the current year offset lower land lease expense resulting from the 2015 adjustment. To the extent our ground lease rent is tied to revenue, land lease expense increases as revenue increases.
Impairment was $26.5 million compared to $20.9 million last year. The 2016 charges reflect a reduction in the fair value of one hotel resulting from third-party offers to purchase the hotel, as well as observable market data for hotels in similar locations, and a charge reflecting an accepted third-party offer to

33


purchase a hotel sold in the current year. The 2015 charge resulted from reducing the estimated hold period for a hotel subsequently sold in 2016.
Other expenses increased $261,000 from last year. We attribute this change primarily to a $3.2 million increase in severance expense from last year, an $856,000 increase in expense for a litigation settlement, $740,000 incurred for hurricane costs in the current year and a $300,000 increase in abandoned costs. These increases are partially offset by a $5.0 million reduction in pre-opening costs, primarily attributable to The Knickerbocker.
Net interest expense decreased $936,000. In 2015, we completed certain renovation and redevelopment projects, including The Knickerbocker, resulting in lower capitalized interest in the current year as compared to last year. Excluding the increase in interest expense resulting from less capitalization of interest on redevelopment projects, interest expense declined $5.9 million, reflecting lower average outstanding debt and a lower blended interest rate in the current year.
Debt extinguishment charges in the current year were zero, compared to $30.9 million last year (which included a $10.5 million write-off of deferred loan costs), primarily related to redeeming our 6.75% senior secured notes.
Equity in income from unconsolidated entities decreased $6.3 million, primarily reflecting the 2015 $7.1 million gain on sale of a hotel owned by one of our unconsolidated joint ventures, partially offset by improved operations at one of our unconsolidated joint ventures resulting from completing renovations which contributed to displacement-related reductions in 2015.
Discontinued operations in 2016 and 2015 include adjustments to gains and losses for hotels sold prior to December 31, 2013.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2015 and 2014
For the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded a $3.5 million net loss compared to $94.2 million of net income in 2014. Our 2015 net loss included debt extinguishment charges of $30.9 million and a $20.9 million impairment charge related to one hotel, which was subsequently sold in 2016, partially offset by a $20.1 million net gain on hotel sales (including $658,000 in discontinued operations) and $3.7 million in net revenue attributable to a favorable settlement of a commercial dispute. Additionally, in 2015, one of our unconsolidated joint ventures sold a hotel, the gain from which increased our equity in income from unconsolidated entities by $7.1 million. Our 2014 net income included a $66.7 million net gain on hotel sales (of which $24.4 million resulted from foreign currency translation previously recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income and $102,000 included in discontinued operations), a $30.2 million gain on the disposition of our interests in unconsolidated hotels, and a $20.7 million gain on the fair value remeasurement of previously unconsolidated hotels. The 2014 gains were partially offset by a $5.9 million charge for a commercial dispute contingency (of which $3.7 million was subsequently recovered in 2015) and $5.0 million of debt extinguishment charges (including $245,000 in discontinued operations).

In 2015:
Hotel operating revenue decreased $39.6 million, including a $104.5 million net reduction in revenue for hotels that were disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, hotel operating revenue increased 8.5% from 2014. The increase was driven by an 8.1% increase in same-store RevPAR, reflecting a 5.3% increase in ADR and a 2.7% increase in occupancy from 2014. RevPAR for our Wyndham portfolio increased 15.1% from 2014, driven by a 9.9% increase in ADR and a 4.7% increase in occupancy, which primarily reflected the repositioning of these hotels as upper-upscale.


34


Other revenue increased $4.3 million, primarily reflecting a $3.7 million net settlement of a commercial dispute in 2015.
Hotel departmental expenses decreased $18.7 million, including a $31.6 million net reduction in expense for hotels that were disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, hotel departmental expenses decreased to 35.2% of hotel operating revenue in 2015 from 36.5% in 2014. This reduction primarily reflected improved margins for the rooms department, driven by increased ADR. Additionally, banquet and catering operations, which typically have higher margins than other food and beverage operations, increased in 2015 compared to 2014.
Other property-related costs decreased $14.6 million, including a $29.4 million net reduction in expense for hotels that were disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, other property-related costs decreased slightly to 24.9% of hotel operating revenue in 2015 from 25.1% in 2014, primarily driven by ADR growth.

Management and franchise fees decreased $495,000, including a $5.1 million net reduction in expense for hotels that were disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, these costs increased slightly to 4.0% of hotel operating revenue in 2015 from 3.8% in 2014.

Taxes, insurance and lease expense decreased $25.1 million to 6.7% of hotel operating revenue in 2015 compared to 9.2% for 2014. The decrease primarily reflected a $24.2 million reduction in hotel lease expense resulting from unwinding our 10-hotel unconsolidated joint ventures in 2014 and selling one hotel owned by an unconsolidated joint venture in 2015.

The decrease also included a $1.3 million net reduction, primarily due to property tax expense, and included property insurance and land lease expense for hotels that were disposed of or recently opened. Excluding these hotels, the net reduction in property tax expense reflected the successful resolution of property tax appeals, partially offset by increased assessed property values. Our insurance expense declined due to more favorable property insurance rates and a successful insured claims experience in 2015. Land lease expense in 2015 included a $1.6 million straight-line lease expense adjustment related to prior years for a ground lease associated with one of our Consolidated Hotels. The 2015 lease adjustment, as well as improved hotel operations at hotels subject to a ground lease, partially offset reductions attributable to property taxes and insurance. To the extent our ground lease rent is tied to revenue, land lease expense increases as revenue increases.

Corporate expenses decreased $2.3 million and primarily reflected the change in stock compensation expense associated with variable stock awards (our stock price increased during 2014 but decreased in 2015) and lower corporate bonus expense in 2015.

Depreciation and amortization expense decreased $1.4 million primarily attributable to selling hotels, partially offset by depreciation recognized on The Knickerbocker after the hotel was placed in service during 2015.

Impairment for 2015 was $20.9 million resulting from a reduced estimated hold period for one hotel subsequently sold in 2016. We recorded no impairment for 2014.

Other expenses decreased $5.5 million from 2014. This change was primarily attributable to a $5.9 million charge recognized in 2014 for a commercial dispute contingency and a $2.4 million reduction in pre-opening costs incurred for The Knickerbocker in 2015. These reductions were partially offset by $3.7 million in severance charges in 2015 compared to $928,000 in 2014.


35


Net interest expense decreased $11.6 million, primarily reflecting lower outstanding debt and a lower blended interest rate, offset partially by lower capitalized interest as we completed certain renovation and redevelopment projects, including The Knickerbocker in 2015.

Debt extinguishment was $30.9 million in 2015 (which included a $10.5 million write-off of deferred loan costs), primarily related to the redemption of our 6.75% senior secured notes. In 2014, we recorded $4.8 million in debt extinguishment charges primarily related to repaying the remaining $234.0 million of our 10% senior secured notes, which were due in 2014, and repaying a $9.6 million loan in connection with the sale of a hotel.

Equity in income from unconsolidated entities increased $2.8 million. In 2015, one of our unconsolidated joint ventures sold a hotel, which increased our equity in income from unconsolidated entities by $7.1 million from the gain on sale. That increase was partially offset by lower income after we unwound our 10-hotel unconsolidated joint ventures in July 2014 and a decline in operations at one of our remaining unconsolidated joint ventures, which resulted from renovation-related displacement.

Income tax expense increased $585,000, primarily due to changes in state apportionment factors, resulting from hotel asset sales, and full utilization of state net operating loss carryforwards.


36



Non-GAAP Financial Measures

We refer in this Annual Report to certain “non-GAAP financial measures.” These measures, including FFO (Funds From Operations), Adjusted FFO, EBITDA (Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization), Adjusted EBITDA, Same-store Adjusted EBITDA, Hotel EBITDA and Hotel EBITDA margin, are measures of our financial performance that are not calculated and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. The following tables reconcile these non-GAAP measures to FelCor’s most comparable GAAP financial measures. Immediately following the reconciliations, we include a discussion of why we believe these measures are useful supplemental measures of our performance and of the limitations of such measures.





































37


Reconciliation of Net Income (Loss) to FFO and Adjusted FFO
(in thousands, except per share data)
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 


Dollars
 


Shares
 
Per
Share
Amount
 


Dollars
 


Shares
 
Per
Share
Amount
Net income (loss)
$
4,193

 
 
 
 
 
$
(3,465
)
 
 
 
 
Noncontrolling interests
766

 
 
 
 
 
(3,963
)
 
 
 
 
Preferred dividends
(25,115
)
 
 
 
 
 
(30,138
)
 
 
 
 
Preferred distributions - consolidated joint venture
(1,461
)
 
 
 
 
 
(1,437
)
 
 
 
 
Redemption of preferred stock

 
 
 
 
 
(6,096
)
 
 
 
 
Net loss attributable to FelCor common stockholders
(21,617
)
 
 
 
 
 
(45,099
)
 
 
 
 
Less: Dividends declared on unvested restricted stock
(129
)
 
 
 
 
 
(56
)
 
 
 
 
Basic and diluted earnings per share data
(21,746
)
 
138,128

 
$
(0.16
)
 
(45,155
)
 
137,730

 
$
(0.33
)
Depreciation and amortization
114,054

 

 
0.83

 
114,452

 

 
0.83

Depreciation, unconsolidated entities and other partnerships
1,844

 

 
0.01

 
2,211

 

 
0.02

Other gains, net
(342
)
 

 

 
(100
)
 

 

Impairment
26,459

 

 
0.19

 
20,861

 

 
0.15

Gain on sale of hotel in unconsolidated entity

 

 

 
(7,126
)
 

 
(0.05
)
Gain on sale of hotels, net of noncontrolling interests in other partnerships
(3,191
)
 

 
(0.03
)
 
(15,096
)
 

 
(0.12
)
Noncontrolling interests in FelCor LP
(93
)
 
611

 

 
(194
)
 
611

 

Dividends declared on unvested restricted stock
129

 

 

 
56

 
4

 

Conversion of unvested restricted stock units

 
155

 

 

 
488

 

FFO*
117,114

 
138,894

 
0.84

 
69,909

 
138,833

 
0.50

Debt extinguishment

 

 

 
30,909

 

 
0.22

Debt extinguishment, unconsolidated entities

 

 

 
330

 

 

Variable stock compensation
450

 

 

 
798

 

 
0.01

Redemption of preferred stock

 

 

 
6,096

 

 
0.05

Severance costs
6,874

 

 
0.06

 
3,667

 

 
0.03

Contract dispute recovery

 

 

 
(3,717
)
 

 
(0.03
)
Pre-opening costs, net of noncontrolling interests
527

 

 

 
5,235

 

 
0.04

Litigation settlement
856

 

 
0.01

 

 

 

Lease adjustment

 

 

 
1,628

 

 
0.01

Hurricane and earthquake loss
740

 

 
0.01

 

 

 

Hurricane and earthquake loss, unconsolidated entities
45

 

 

 

 

 

Abandoned projects
620

 

 

 
320

 

 

Adjusted FFO*
$
127,226

 
138,894

 
$
0.92

 
$
115,175

 
138,833

 
$
0.83


* FFO and Adjusted FFO are attributable to FelCor common stockholders and FelCor LP common unitholders other than FelCor.

38


Reconciliation of Net Income (Loss) to FFO and Adjusted FFO
(in thousands, except per share data)
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2014
2013
2012
 
Dollars
 
Shares
 
Per Share Amount
 


Dollars
 


Shares
 
Per
Share
Amount
 


Dollars
 


Shares
 
Per
Share
Amount
Net income (loss)
$
94,152

 
 
 
 
 
$
(65,783
)
 
 
 
 
 
$
(129,414
)
 
 
 
 
Noncontrolling interests
(834
)
 
 
 
 
 
4,279

 
 
 
 
 
1,407

 
 
 
 
Preferred dividends
(38,712
)
 
 
 
 
 
(38,713
)
 
 
 
 
 
(38,713
)
 
 
 
 
Preferred distributions - consolidated joint venture
(1,219
)
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Net income (loss) attributable to FelCor common stockholders
53,387

 
 
 
 
 
(100,217
)
 
 
 
 
 
(166,720
)
 
 
 
 
Less: Dividends declared on unvested restricted stock
(8
)
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Less: Undistributed earnings allocated to unvested restricted stock
(20
)
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Basic earnings per share data
53,359

 
124,158

 
0.43

 
(100,217
)
 
123,818

 
$
(0.81
)
 
(166,720
)
 
123,634

 
$
(1.35
)
Restricted stock units

 
734

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diluted earnings per share data
53,359

 
124,892

 
0.43

 
(100,217
)
 
123,818

 
(0.81
)
 
(166,720
)
 
123,634

 
(1.35
)
Depreciation and amortization
115,819

 

 
0.93

 
119,624

 

 
0.97

 
116,384

 

 
0.94

Depreciation, discontinued operations, unconsolidated entities and other partnerships
6,891

 

 
0.06

 
15,996

 

 
0.13

 
24,216

 

 
0.20

Other gains, net
(100
)
 

 

 
(37
)
 

 

 

 

 

Other gains, discontinued operations

 

 

 
(59
)
 

 

 

 

 

Impairment, net of noncontrolling interests in other partnerships

 

 

 
20,382

 

 
0.16

 

 

 

Impairment, discontinued operations

 

 

 
4,354

 

 
0.04

 
1,335

 

 
0.01

Gain on sale of hotels
(65,453
)
 

 
(0.52
)
 
(18,590
)
 

 
(0.15
)
 
(54,459
)
 

 
(0.44
)
Gain from remeasurement of unconsolidated entities
(20,737
)
 

 
(0.17
)
 

 

 

 

 

 

Gain on sale of investment in unconsolidated entities, net
(30,176
)
 

 
(0.24
)
 

 

 

 

 

 

Noncontrolling interests in FelCor LP
137

 
614

 
(0.01
)
 
(497
)
 
619

 
(0.01
)
 
(842
)
 
628

 

Dividends declared on unvested restricted stock
8

 
5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conversion of unvested restricted stock units
20

 

 

 

 
547

 

 

 

 

FFO*
59,768

 
125,511

 
0.48

 
40,956

 
124,984

 
0.33

 
(80,086
)
 
124,262

 
(0.64
)
Acquisition costs

 

 

 
23

 

 

 
132

 

 

Debt extinguishment, including discontinued operations
4,850

 

 
0.03

 

 

 

 
75,117

 

 
0.60

Debt extinguishment, unconsolidated entities
168

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variable stock compensation
2,723

 

 
0.02

 
963

 

 
0.01

 

 

 

Severance costs
928

 

 
0.01

 
3,268