Edgar Filing: HOST HOTELS & RESORTS L.P.

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) ¨

Smaller reporting company

FORM 10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

Form 10-K

x	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the year ended December 31, 2011

¨	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission File Number: 001-14625 (Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.)

0-25087 (Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.)

HOST HOTELS & RESORTS, INC.

HOST HOTELS & RESORTS, L.P.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)


Maryland (Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.) Delaware (Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.)		53-0085950 52-2095412
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

6903 Rockledge Drive, Suite 1500 Bethesda, Maryland		20817
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

(240) 744-1000

(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
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Common Stock, $.01 par value (707,561,384 shares outstanding as of February 16, 2012)	New York Stock Exchange
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	None	None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.		None
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.		Units of limited partnership interest (703,107,908 units outstanding as of February 16, 2012)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Yes x	No ¨
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	Yes ¨	No x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Yes ¨	No x
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	Yes ¨	No x

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.


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Yes x	No ¨
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	Yes x	No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Yes x	No ¨
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	Yes x	No ¨

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

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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.

Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).


Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	Yes ¨	No x
Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.	Yes ¨	No x

The aggregate market value of common shares held by non-affiliates of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. (based on the closing sale price on the New York Stock Exchange) on June 17, 2011 was $10,807,209,930.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and delivered to stockholders in connection with its annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 10, 2012 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

This report combines the annual reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P. Unless stated otherwise or the context otherwise requires, references to “Host Inc.” mean Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., a Maryland corporation and references to “Host L.P.” mean Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and its consolidated subsidiaries. We use the terms “we” or “our” or “the company” to refer to Host Inc. and Host L.P. together, unless the context indicates otherwise. We use the term Host Inc. to specifically refer to Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and the term Host L.P. to specifically refer to Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P. (and its consolidated subsidiaries) in cases where it is important to distinguish between Host Inc. and Host L.P.

Host Inc. operates as a self-managed and self-administered real estate investment trust, or REIT. Host Inc. owns properties and conducts operations through Host L.P., of which Host Inc. is the sole general partner and in which it holds approximately 98.5% of the partnership interests (“OP units”). The remaining approximate 1.5% partnership interests are owned by various unaffiliated limited partners. As the sole general partner of Host L.P., Host Inc. has the exclusive and complete responsibility for Host L.P.’s day-to-day management and control.

We believe combining the annual reports on Form 10-K of Host Inc. and Host L.P. into this single report results in the following benefits:

•

enhances investors’ understanding of Host Inc. and Host L.P. by enabling investors to view the business as a whole in the same manner as management views and operates the business;

•

eliminates duplicative disclosure and provides a more streamlined presentation, since a substantial portion of our disclosure applies to both Host Inc. and Host L.P.; and

•

creates time and cost efficiencies through the preparation of one combined report instead of two separate reports.

Management operates Host Inc. and Host L.P. as one enterprise. The management of Host Inc. consists of the same members who direct the management of Host L.P. The executive officers of Host Inc. are appointed by Host Inc.’s board of directors, but are employed by Host L.P. Host L.P. employs everyone who works for Host Inc. or Host L.P. As general partner with control of Host L.P., Host Inc. consolidates Host L.P. for financial reporting purposes, and Host Inc. does not have significant assets other than its investment in Host L.P. Therefore, the assets and liabilities of Host Inc. and Host L.P. are the same on their respective financial statements.

There are a few differences between Host Inc. and Host L.P., which are reflected in the disclosure in this report. We believe it is important to understand the differences between Host Inc. and Host L.P. in the context of how Host Inc. and Host L.P. operate as an interrelated consolidated company. Host Inc. is a REIT and its only material asset is its ownership of partnership interests of Host L.P. As a result, Host Inc. does not conduct business itself, other than acting as the sole general partner of Host L.P., and issuing public equity from time to time, the proceeds from which are contributed to Host L.P. in exchange for OP units. Host Inc. itself does not issue any indebtedness and does not guarantee the debt or obligations of Host L.P. Host L.P. holds substantially all of our assets and holds the ownership interests in our joint ventures. Host L.P. conducts the operations of the business and is structured as a partnership with no publicly traded equity. Except for net proceeds from public equity issuances by Host Inc., Host L.P. generates the capital required by our business through Host L.P.’s operations, by Host L.P.’s direct or indirect incurrence of indebtedness, or through the issuance of OP units.

The substantive difference between the filings of Host Inc. and Host L.P. is the fact that Host Inc. is a REIT with public stock, while Host L.P. is a partnership with no publicly traded equity. In the financial statements, this difference is primarily reflected in the equity (or partners’ capital for Host L.P.) section of the consolidated balance sheets and in the consolidated statements of equity (or partners’ capital) and in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) with respect to the manner in which income is allocated to non-controlling interests. Income allocable to the holders of 1.5% of the OP units is reflected as income allocable to non-

controlling interests at Host Inc. and within net income at Host LP. Also, earnings per share generally will be slightly less than the earnings per OP unit as, subsequent to the 2009 common stock election dividend, each Host Inc. common share is the equivalent of .97895 OP units (instead of 1 OP unit). This stock dividend caused an approximate 2% difference in earnings per share when compared to earnings per OP unit beginning in 2010. Apart from these differences, the financial statements of Host Inc. and Host L.P. are nearly identical.

To help investors understand the differences between Host Inc. and Host L.P., this report presents the following separate sections or portions of sections for each of Host Inc. and Host L.P.:

•

Part II Item 5 - Market for Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host Inc. / Market for Registrant’s Common Units, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host L.P.;

•

Part II Item 6 - Selected Financial Data;

•

Part II Item 7 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is combined, except for a separate discussion of material differences, if any, in the liquidity and capital resources between Host Inc. and Host L.P.;

•

Part II Item 7A - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk is combined, except for separate discussions of material differences, if any, between Host Inc. and Host L.P.; and

•

Part II Item 8 - Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. While the financial statements themselves are presented separately, the notes to the financial statements are generally combined, except for separate discussions of differences between equity of Host Inc. and capital of Host L.P.

This report also includes separate Item 9A. Controls and Procedures sections and separate Exhibit 31 and 32 certifications for each of Host Inc. and Host L.P. in order to establish that the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Host Inc. and the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Host Inc. as the general partner of Host L.P. have made the requisite certifications and that Host Inc. and Host L.P. are compliant with Rule 13a-15 or Rule 15d-15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. §1350.

HOST HOTELS & RESORTS, INC. AND HOST HOTELS & RESORTS, L.P.


		Page
	Part I
Item 1.	Business		1
Item 1A	Risk Factors		18
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments		35
Item 2.	Properties		35
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings		35
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures		35

	Part II

Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host Inc.		38
	Market for Registrant’s Common Units, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host L.P.		40
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data (Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.)		41
	Selected Financial Data (Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.)		42
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		43
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk		90
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data		93
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure		147
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures		147
Item 9B.	Other Information		148

	Part III

Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance		148
Item 11.	Executive Compensation		148
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder And Unitholder Matters		148
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence		148
Item 14.	Principal Accounting Fees and Services		148

	Part IV

Item 15.	Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules		149

iii

PART I

Forward Looking Statements

Our disclosure and analysis in this 2011 Form 10-K and in Host Inc.’s 2011 Annual Report to stockholders contain some forward-looking statements that set forth anticipated results based on management’s plans and assumptions. From time to time, we also provide forward-looking statements in other materials we release to the public. Such statements give 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” and similar expressions in connection with any discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these forward-looking statements include those relating to future actions, future acquisitions or dispositions, future capital expenditure plans, future performance or results of current and anticipated expenses, interest rates, foreign exchange rates or the outcome of contingencies, such as legal proceedings.

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 publicly update forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. You are advised, however, to consult any further disclosures we make or related subjects in our reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“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 discussion of risk factors to be a complete discussion of all of the potential risks or uncertainties that could affect our business.

Item 1.

Business

Consolidated Portfolio

As of February 22, 2012, we have 121 hotels in our portfolio, primarily consisting of luxury and upper upscale hotels containing 64,947 rooms as detailed below:


	Hotels		Rooms
United States (1)		105		60,658
Australia		1		364
Brazil		1		245
Canada		4		1,643
Chile		2		518
Mexico		1		312
New Zealand		7		1,207

Total		121		64,947

(1)	Includes properties in 25 states and Washington, D.C.

European Joint Venture

We own an interest in a joint venture in Europe (the “Euro JV”) that owns luxury and upper upscale hotels in two separate funds. We own a 32.1% interest in Fund I (11 hotels, 3,512 rooms) and a 33.4% interest in Fund II (two hotels, 676 rooms). The hotels are located in the following countries:


	Hotels		Rooms
Italy		3		1,053
Spain		2		950
United Kingdom		2		630
Belgium		3		539
France		1		396
Poland		1		350
The Netherlands		1		270

Total		13		4,188

We are the general partner of the Euro JV. We act as the asset manager for these hotels and for a hotel not owned by us or the Euro JV, a 440 room property in Paris, France, in exchange for a fee.

Asian Joint Venture

We own a 25% interest in an Asian joint venture (the “Asian JV”) that has made a non-controlling investment in a joint venture in India to develop seven hotels, totaling approximately 1,750 rooms, in three major cities in India, Bengaluru, Chennai and Delhi. The hotels will be managed by Accor under the Pullman, ibis and Novotel brands. The first two hotels are expected to fully open by March of 2012.

Other Real Estate Investments

Our other real estate investments represent less than 1% of our overall assets and approximately 5% of our overall revenues. We lease 53 Courtyard by Marriott select-service hotels from Hospitality Properties Trust (“HPT”) that are located in 24 states in the United States. We have given notice that we intend to terminate these leases on December 31, 2012. Additionally, we own €64 million ($87 million) face amount of the two most junior tranches of a mortgage note receivable secured by six hotels in Europe. The loan matures in October of 2012.

Where to Find Additional Information

The address of our principal executive office is 6903 Rockledge Drive, Suite 1500, Bethesda, Maryland, 20817. Our phone number is 240-744-1000. We maintain an internet website at: www.hosthotels.com. Through our website, we make available free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).

Our website also is a key source of important information about us. We routinely post to the Investor Relations section of our website important information about our business, our operating results and our financial condition and prospects, including, for example, information about material acquisitions and dispositions, our earnings releases and certain supplemental financial information related or complimentary thereto. The website also has a Governance page in the Investor Relations section that includes, among other things, copies of our By-laws, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and Conflicts of Interest Policy for our directors, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics Policy for employees, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and the charters for each standing committee of Host Inc.’s Board of Directors, which currently are the Audit Committee, the Compensation Policy Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Copies of these charters and policies, Host Inc.’s By-laws and Host L.P.’s partnership agreement are also available in print to stockholders and unitholders upon request to Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., 6903 Rockledge Drive, Suite 1500, Bethesda, Maryland 20817, Attn: Secretary. Please note that the information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference in, or considered to be a part of, any document, unless expressly incorporated by reference therein.

The discussion of our Business and Properties should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in Part II Item 8 of this report.

The Lodging Industry

The lodging industry in the United States consists of private and public entities that operate in an extremely diversified market under a variety of brand names. The lodging industry has several key participants:

•

Owners—own the hotel and typically enter into an agreement for an independent third party to manage the hotel. These properties may be branded and operated under the manager’s brand or branded under a franchise agreement and operated by the franchisee or by an independent hotel manager. The properties also may be operated as an independent hotel (unaffiliated with any brand) by an independent hotel manager.

•

Owner/Managers—own the hotel and operate the property with their own management team. These properties may be branded under a franchise agreement, operated as an independent hotel (unaffiliated with any brand) or operated under the owner’s brand. We are restricted from operating and managing hotels under applicable REIT rules.

•

Franchisors—own a brand or brands and strive to grow their revenues by expanding the number of hotels in their franchise system. Franchisors provide their branded hotels with brand recognition, marketing support and centralized reservation systems.

•

Franchisor/Managers—own a brand or brands and also operate hotels on behalf of the hotel owner or franchisee.

•

Manager—operate hotels on behalf of the hotel owner, but do not, themselves, own a brand. The hotels may be operated under a franchise agreement or as an independent hotel unaffiliated with any brand.

The hotel manager is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the hotels, including the employment of hotel staff, the determination of room rates, the development of sales and marketing plans, the preparation of operating and capital expenditure budgets and the preparation of financial reports for the owner. They typically receive fees based on the revenues and profitability of the hotel.

Our industry is influenced by the cyclical relationship between the supply of and demand for hotel rooms. Lodging demand growth typically is related to the vitality of the overall economy, in addition to local market factors that stimulate travel to specific destinations. In particular, economic indicators such as GDP growth, business investment and employment growth are some of the primary drivers of lodging demand. Between 2003 and 2007, broad growth in the economy led to increases in demand. However, the global recession that began in the second half of 2008 and lasted throughout much of 2009 resulted in a considerable decline in both consumer and business spending and a severe decline in demand within the lodging industry. During 2010, economic indicators began to improve due to strengthening GDP and business investment, although these improvements have been tempered by continued high-unemployment. While lodging demand has not recovered fully from the steep declines experienced in 2008 and 2009, the recovery that began in 2010 has continued into 2011, led by transient demand from business and leisure travelers. We expect demand and RevPAR to grow in 2012, though the rate of growth may be affected by uncertainty in the direction of the global economy, particularly with regard to the ongoing sovereign debt crisis in Europe.

Lodging supply growth is generally driven by overall lodging demand, as extended periods of strong demand growth tend to encourage new development. However, the rate of supply growth also is influenced by a number of additional factors, including the availability of capital, interest rates, construction costs and unique market considerations. The relatively long lead-time required to complete the development of hotels makes supply growth

easier to forecast than demand growth, but increases the volatility of the cyclical behavior of the lodging industry. As illustrated in the charts below, at different points in the cycle, demand and supply may increase or decrease in a dissimilar manner such that demand may increase when there is no new supply or supply may grow when demand is declining. Beginning in the second half of 2008, the stress in the credit markets made financing for new hotel construction extremely difficult to obtain. This, coupled with the decline in lodging demand during 2008 and 2009 due to the global economic recession, caused a significant reduction in new hotel construction starts. As a result, supply growth was relatively low in 2010 and 2011, and we expect growth through 2013 to be well below the historical growth rate of 2.0% (based on data from Smith Travel Research over the past 25 years). In addition, we anticipate that demand growth will exceed supply growth during this period, resulting in occupancy gains, which is consistent with analysis prepared by PKF Hospitality Research.

Revenue per available room (“RevPAR”) is an operational measure commonly used in the hotel industry to evaluate hotel performance. RevPAR represents the product of the average daily room rate charged and the average daily occupancy achieved, but excludes other revenue generated by a hotel property, such as food and beverage, parking and other revenues. Average daily room rate (“ADR”) reflects the average rate charged by hotels. Average rates can be influenced by, among other things, demand, previously negotiated contracts, the overall mix of business and new supply in a given market.

The charts below detail the historical supply, demand and RevPAR growth for the U.S. lodging industry and for the upper upscale segment for 2007 to 2011 and forecast data for 2012. Historical industry trends have indicated that hotels in the upper upscale segment have generally outperformed the lodging industry in terms of RevPAR growth over time, although, in 2011, the upper-upscale segment slightly underperformed the lodging industry. Our portfolio primarily consists of upper upscale hotels and, accordingly, its performance is best understood in comparison to the upper upscale segment rather than the entire industry.

U.S. Lodging Industry Supply, Demand and RevPAR Growth

LOGO

U.S. Upper Upscale Supply, Demand and RevPAR Growth

LOGO

Business Strategy

Our primary long-term business objective is to provide superior total returns to our equity holders through a combination of appreciation in asset values, growth in earnings and dividend distributions. To achieve this objective, we seek to:

•

acquire properties in urban and resort/conference destinations that are operated by leading management companies. These investments primarily will be located in gateway cities with significant appeal to multiple customer segments. While we will continue to focus on luxury and upper upscale hotel properties in our target markets, we intend to expand our investments to include the acquisition or development of midscale and upscale properties, particularly in urban or foreign markets;

•

strategically invest in major redevelopment and return on investment (“ROI”) projects in order to maximize the inherent value in our portfolio;

•

drive operating results at our properties through aggressive asset management;

•

maintain a strong balance sheet with a low leverage level and balanced debt maturities in order to minimize the cost of capital and to maximize our financial flexibility in order to take advantage of opportunities throughout the lodging business cycle;

•

expand our global portfolio holdings and revenue sources through joint ventures or direct acquisitions that diversify our investments; and

•

recycle capital through the disposition of non-core assets, including hotels that are at competitive risk or that are located in suburban or slower-growth markets, or to opportunistically dispose of core properties to take advantage of market conditions.

Acquisitions. Our acquisition strategy focuses on acquiring hotels in both foreign and domestic markets at attractive yields that exceed our cost of capital. Domestically, our core acquisition strategy will continue to focus on upper upscale and luxury hotel properties located in the central business districts of key gateway cities and

prominent resort locations with high barriers to entry as, historically, these properties have demonstrated higher RevPAR growth. In addition, we are discussing select-service hotel development opportunities with strategic development partners in order to leverage our growth strategy. In the European markets, our acquisition targets will continue to be concentrated in the upper upscale and luxury segments. In the fast-growing emerging markets, primarily Asia-Pacific and South America (particularly Brazil), in addition to acquiring upper upscale properties, we also will pursue the acquisition or development of midscale and upscale hotels, as we believe the limited supply of quality lodging products in these markets creates an opportunity for solid returns on this type of investment.

Redevelopment and Return on Investment Projects. We pursue opportunities to enhance asset value by completing select capital improvements outside the scope of recurring renewal and replacement capital expenditures. In a typical year, these investments may represent 40% to 50% or more of our capital expenditures. These projects are designed to take advantage of changing market conditions and the favorable location of our properties to enhance customer satisfaction and increase profitability. We evaluate our capital expenditure projects based on their economic, environmental and social impact. In collaboration with our hotel managers, we continually evaluate new products and systems designed to yield predictable and targeted results, while improving overall energy efficiency. Examples of these technologies include: co-generation plants, laundry waste water recycling systems, elevator modernizations, building automation systems and controls, EPA ENERGY STAR^® qualified appliances and electronics, EPA WaterSense^® labeled plumbing fixtures, energy efficient lighting, sustainable construction practices and using materials made from recycled content.

Redevelopment projects. These projects are designed to optimally position our hotels within their respective markets and within their competitive set. Redevelopment projects include, for example, extensive renovations of guest rooms, including bathrooms, lobbies, food and beverage outlets, expanding ballroom and meeting rooms, and major mechanical system upgrades.

Targeted Return on Investment Projects. These projects often are smaller and focused on specific areas, such as converting unprofitable or underutilized space into meeting space or adding guestrooms. We also target projects that improve energy efficiency through the implementation and adoption of proven sustainable technologies and operational practices.

Value enhancement projects. We seek opportunities to enhance the value of our portfolio by identifying and executing strategies that maximize the highest and best use of all aspects of our hotels. These projects include the development of timeshare or condominium units on excess land, or the acquisition of air rights or development entitlements that add value to our portfolio or enhance its value in the event that we sell the hotel.

Acquisition Projects. Generally, in connection with an acquisition, we prepare a capital improvement plan that we believe will enhance profitability. These near-term projects may include required renewal and replacement projects or significant redevelopment and even re-branding of the property and represent a key component of our decision to invest in a hotel.

Asset Management. As Host Inc. is the nation’s largest lodging REIT with a diverse portfolio of luxury and upper upscale properties, we are in a unique position to work with the managers of our hotels in order to maximize revenues, while minimizing operating costs. The size and composition of our portfolio and our affiliation with most of the leading operators and brands in the industry allow us to benchmark similar hotels and identify best practices and identify efficiencies that can be implemented at our properties. Areas of focus include enhancing revenue management for rooms, food and beverage and other services, reducing operating costs and identifying operating efficiencies, all of which improve the long-term profitability of the hotel.

Another key component of our asset management strategy focuses on maintaining the high standards of product quality of our properties. We work closely with our managers to ensure that renewal and replacement expenditures are spent efficiently in order to maximize the profitability of the hotel. Typically, room refurbishments occur at intervals of approximately seven years, but the timing may vary based on the type of property and equipment being replaced. These refurbishments generally are divided into the following types: soft goods, case goods and infrastructure. Soft goods include items such as carpeting, bed spreads, curtains and wall vinyl and may require more frequent updates in order to maintain brand quality standards. Case goods include items such as dressers, desks, couches, restaurant and meeting room chairs and tables and generally are not replaced as frequently. Infrastructure includes the physical plant of the hotel, including the roof, elevators, façade and fire systems, which regularly are maintained and then replaced at the end of their useful lives.

Capital structure and liquidity profile. As a REIT, Host Inc. is required to distribute 90% of its taxable income (other than net capital gain) to its stockholders, and, as a result, generally must rely on external sources of capital to finance growth. We use a variety of debt and equity instruments in order to fund our external growth, including senior notes and mortgage debt, exchangeable debentures, common and preferred stock offerings, issuances of Host L.P. partnership units and joint ventures/limited partnerships to best take advantage of the prevailing market conditions. While we may issue debt at any time in order to take advantage of favorable market conditions, management believes it is prudent, over time, to continue to lower our leverage level. We believe lower overall leverage will reduce our cost of capital and earnings volatility, and provides us with the necessary flexibility to take advantage of opportunities throughout the lodging cycle, which we consider a key competitive advantage. Currently, we will look to fund the majority of our investments with proceeds from equity offerings and cash from dispositions.

We also seek to structure our debt profile to allow us to access different forms of financing, primarily senior notes and exchangeable debentures, as well as mortgage debt. Generally, this means we will look to minimize the number of assets that are encumbered by mortgage debt, minimize near-term maturities and maintain a balanced maturity schedule.

Joint Ventures. We expect to continue to utilize joint ventures to finance external growth. We believe joint ventures provide a significant means to access external capital and spread the inherent risk of hotel ownership. Our primary focus for joint ventures is in foreign markets, such as in Europe and Asia, which will help to diversify exposure to market risk. We also may explore joint venture opportunities in North America and Latin America.

Dispositions. Our disposition strategy focuses on properties where we believe the potential for growth is constrained or on properties with significant capital expenditure requirements where we do not believe we would generate a significant return on the investment. Primarily, these properties are located in secondary and tertiary markets, as opposed to our target markets of urban and resort locations. However, we also may dispose of assets in our primary markets through direct sales or through the creation of joint ventures, as described above, when we have the opportunity to capitalize on value enhancement strategies and apply the proceeds to other business objectives. Proceeds from dispositions are deployed to repay debt, fund acquisitions and/or ROI/redevelopment projects.

Corporate Responsibility

Host’s sustainability strategy integrates fiscal responsibility with environmental and social responsibility on both the corporate and portfolio levels. Our environmental goals are to reduce overall carbon emissions, energy consumption, water use and waste in our hotels. We pursue these goals through capital investments, sustainable design and renovations and by encouraging our hotel managers to implement and embrace sustainable operational practices.

Partnering closely with our hotel managers to attain each brand’s specific energy reduction targets, we seek to maximize the efficiency of existing systems and equipment through energy audits and retro-commissioning (RCx) studies. Through these processes, we identify proven energy conservation technologies and products that we seek to replicate, where applicable, across our portfolio through our capital projects. Our internal development, design and engineering teams strive to select sustainable construction materials that require less maintenance and last longer, recycle carpets and wall coverings, and frequently use products with recycled content. We may also specify and purchase EPA ENERGY STAR^® qualified appliances, electronics and reflective roofing systems and ship materials using EPA’s Smart Way trucking companies.

Operating Structure

Host Inc. operates through an umbrella partnership REIT structure in which substantially all of its properties and assets are held by Host L.P., of which Host Inc. is the sole general partner and holds approximately 98.5% of the OP units. As a result of the stock dividend in December 2009, which affected the conversion ratio of OP units to

Host Inc. common stock, each OP unit owned by holders other than Host Inc. is redeemable, at the option of the holder, for an amount of cash equal to the market value of one share of Host Inc. common stock multiplied by a factor of 1.021494 (as opposed to a conversion factor of 1 share/unit that existed prior to the stock dividend). Host Inc. has the right to acquire any OP unit offered for redemption directly from the holder in exchange for 1.021494 shares of Host Inc. common stock, instead of Host L.P. redeeming such OP unit for cash. Additionally, for every share of common stock issued by Host Inc., Host L.P. will issue .97895 OP units to Host Inc. As of December 31, 2011, non-controlling partners held 10.5 million OP units, which were convertible into 10.7 million Host Inc. common shares. Assuming that all non-controlling interests were converted into common shares, there would have been 715.8 million common shares of Host Inc. outstanding at December 31, 2011. When distinguishing between Host Inc. and Host L.P., the primary difference is the approximately 1.5% of OP units not held by Host Inc. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Financial Condition—Distribution/Dividend Policy”.

Our operating structure is as follows:

LOGO

Because Host Inc. is a REIT, certain tax laws limit the amount of “non-qualifying” income that Host Inc. can earn, including income derived directly from the operation of hotels. As a result, we lease substantially all of our consolidated properties to certain of our subsidiaries designated as taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”) for federal income tax purposes or to third party lessees. Our TRS are subject to income tax and are therefore not limited as to the amount of non-qualifying income they can generate. The lessees and our TRS enter into agreements with third parties to manage the operations of the hotels. Our TRS also may own assets engaging in other activities that produce non-qualifying income, such as the development of timeshare or condominium units, subject to certain restrictions. The difference between the hotels’ net operating cash flow and the aggregate rents paid to Host L.P. is retained by our TRS as taxable income. Accordingly, the net effect of the TRS leases is that, while, as a REIT, Host Inc. is generally exempt from federal income tax to the extent that it meets specific distribution requirements, among other REIT requirements, a portion of the net operating cash flow from our properties is subject to federal, state and, if applicable, foreign income tax.

Our Hotel Properties

Overview. We have 121 hotels in our portfolio, primarily consisting of luxury and upper upscale properties. These hotels generally are located in the central business districts of major cities, near airports and resort/conference destinations that, because of their locations, typically benefit from barriers to entry for new supply. These properties typically include meeting and banquet facilities, a variety of restaurants and lounges, swimming pools, exercise facilities and/or spas, gift shops and parking facilities, the combination of which enable them to serve business, leisure and group travelers. Forty-five of our hotels, representing approximately 63% of our revenues, have in excess of 500 rooms. The average age of our properties is 28 years, although substantially all of the properties have benefited from significant renovations or major additions, as well as regularly scheduled renewal and replacement and other capital improvements.

The following chart details our consolidated hotel portfolio by brand as of February 22, 2012:


Brand	Number of Hotels		Rooms		Percentage of Revenues⁽¹⁾
Marriott		66		38,013		54	%
Ritz-Carlton		8		3,018		8
Starwood:
Sheraton		7		5,441		8
Westin		13		6,899		10
W		3		1,382		3
St. Regis		1		232		1
The Luxury Collection		1		139		—
Hyatt		7		5,481		9
Fairmont		1		450		2
Four Seasons		2		608		1
Hilton/Embassy Suites		3		1,042		1
Swissôtel		1		661		1
Delta		1		374		1
Accor
ibis		3		455		—
Novotel		4		752		1

		121		64,947		100	%

(1)	Percentage of revenues is based on 2011 revenues. No individual property contributed more than 7% of total revenues in 2011.

Hotel Properties. The following table sets forth the location and number of rooms of our 121 hotels as of February 22, 2012:


Location	Rooms
Arizona
Scottsdale Marriott Suites Old Town		243
Scottsdale Marriott at McDowell Mountains		270
The Ritz-Carlton, Phoenix		281
The Westin Kierland Resort & Spa		732
California
Coronado Island Marriott Resort (1)		300
Costa Mesa Marriott		253
JW Marriott Desert Springs Resort & Spa		884
Hyatt Regency San Francisco, Burlingame		789
Manchester Grand Hyatt, San Diego (1)		1,625
Manhattan Beach Marriott (1)		385
Marina del Rey Marriott (1)		370
Newport Beach Marriott Hotel & Spa		532
Newport Beach Marriott Bayview		254
San Diego Marriott Marquis & Marina (1)		1,360
San Diego Marriott Mission Valley		350
San Francisco Airport Marriott		685
San Francisco Marriott Fisherman’s Wharf		285
San Francisco Marriott Marquis (1)		1,499
San Ramon Marriott (1)		368
Santa Clara Marriott (1)		759
Sheraton San Diego Hotel & Marina (1)		1,053
The Ritz-Carlton, Marina del Rey (1)		304
The Ritz-Carlton, San Francisco		336
The Westin Los Angeles Airport (1)		740
The Westin Mission Hills Resort & Spa		512
The Westin South Coast Plaza (2)		390
Colorado
Denver Marriott Tech Center Hotel		628
Denver Marriott West (1)		305
The Westin Denver Downtown		430
Connecticut
Hartford Marriott Rocky Hill (1)		251
Florida
Tampa Airport Marriott (1)		296
Harbor Beach Marriott Resort & Spa (1)(3)		650
Hilton Singer Island Oceanfront Resort		223
Miami Marriott Biscayne Bay (1)		600
Orlando World Center Marriott Resort & Convention Center		2,000
Tampa Marriott Waterside Hotel & Marina		719
The Ritz-Carlton, Amelia Island		444
The Ritz-Carlton, Naples		450
The Ritz-Carlton Golf Resort, Naples		295
Georgia
Atlanta Marriott Marquis		1,663


Location	Rooms
Georgia (cont.)
Atlanta Marriott Suites Midtown (1)		254
Atlanta Marriott Perimeter Center		400
Four Seasons Hotel Atlanta		244
Grand Hyatt Atlanta in Buckhead		439
JW Marriott Buckhead Atlanta		371
The Ritz-Carlton, Buckhead		510
The Westin Buckhead Atlanta		365
Hawaii
Hyatt Regency Maui Resort & Spa on Kaanapali Beach		806
The Fairmont Kea Lani Maui		450
Illinois
Chicago Marriott Suites Downers Grove		254
Chicago Downtown Courtyard River North		337
Chicago Marriott O’Hare		681
Chicago Marriott Suites O’Hare		256
Embassy Suites Chicago-Downtown/Lakefront		455
Swissôtel Chicago		661
The Westin Chicago River North		424
Indiana
Sheraton Indianapolis Hotel at Keystone Crossing (1)		395
The Westin Indianapolis		573
Louisiana
New Orleans Marriott		1,329
Maryland
Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center		284
Massachusetts
Boston Marriott Copley Place (1)		1,145
Hyatt Regency Cambridge		470
Sheraton Boston Hotel		1,220
Sheraton Needham Hotel		247
The Westin Waltham-Boston		346
Minnesota
Minneapolis Marriott City Center (1)		583
Missouri
Kansas City Airport Marriott (1)		384
New Hampshire
Courtyard Nashua		245
New Jersey
Newark Liberty International Airport Marriott (1)		591
Park Ridge Marriott (1)		289
Sheraton Parsippany Hotel		370
New York
New York Helmsley Hotel		773
New York Marriott Downtown		497


Location	Rooms
New York (cont.)
New York Marriott Marquis Times Square (4)		1,949
Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers		1,777
W New York		688
W New York – Union Square (3)		270
North Carolina
Greensboro-Highpoint Marriott Airport (1)		299
Ohio
Dayton Marriott		399
The Westin Cincinnati (1)		456
Oregon
Portland Marriott Downtown Waterfront		503
Pennsylvania
Four Seasons Hotel Philadelphia		364
Philadelphia Airport Marriott (1)		419
Philadelphia Marriott Downtown (3)		1,408
Tennessee
Memphis Marriott Downtown		600
Texas
Dallas/Addison Marriott Quorum by the Galleria		547
Houston Airport Marriott (1)		565
Houston Marriott at the Texas Medical Center (1)		386
JW Marriott Hotel Houston Galleria		515
San Antonio Marriott Rivercenter (1)		1,001
San Antonio Marriott Riverwalk (1)		512
St. Regis Hotel, Houston		232
Virginia
Hyatt Regency Reston		518
Key Bridge Marriott (1)		582
Arlington Pentagon City Residence Inn		299
The Ritz-Carlton, Tysons Corner (1)		398
Washington Dulles Airport Marriott (1)		368
Westfields Marriott Washington Dulles		336
Washington
Seattle Airport Marriott		459


Location	Rooms
Washington (cont.)
The Westin Seattle		891
W Seattle		424
Washington, D.C.
Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill		834
JW Marriott Washington DC		772
Marriott at Metro Center		459
The Westin Georgetown, Washington, D.C.		267
Australia
Hilton Melbourne South Wharf (1) (3)		364
Brazil
JW Marriott Rio de Janeiro		245
Canada
Calgary Marriott		384
Delta Meadowvale Resort & Conference Centre		374
Toronto Marriott Airport (3)		424
Toronto Marriott Downtown Eaton Centre (1)		461
Chile
San Cristobal Tower, Santiago		139
Sheraton Santiago Hotel & Convention Center		379
Mexico
JW Marriott Hotel Mexico City (3)		312
New Zealand
Novotel Auckland Ellerslie		147
ibis Ellerslie		100
Novotel Wellington		139
ibis Wellington		200
Novotel Queenstown Lakeside		273
Novotel Christchurch Cathedral Square (1)		193
ibis Christchurch (1)		155

Total		64,947

(1)	The land on which this hotel is built is leased from a third party under one or more long-term lease agreements.

(2)	The land, building and improvements are leased from a third party under a long-term lease agreement.

(3)	This property is not wholly owned.

(4)	This property is subject to a ground lease under which we have the option to purchase the land for an incremental payment of $19.9 million through 2017.

Competition

The lodging industry is highly competitive. Competition is often specific to individual markets and is based on a number of factors, including location, brand, guest facilities and amenities, level of service, room rates and the quality of accommodations. The lodging industry generally is viewed as consisting of six different segments, each of which caters to a discrete set of customer tastes and needs: luxury, upper upscale, upscale, midscale (with and without food and beverage service) and economy. The classification of a property is based on lodging industry standards, which take into consideration many factors such as guest facilities and amenities, level of service and quality of accommodations. Most of our hotels operate in urban and resort markets either as luxury properties under such brand names as Ritz-Carlton^®, Fairmont^®, Four Seasons^®, The Luxury Collection^®, St. Regis^® and W^®, or as upper upscale properties under such brand names as Marriott^®, Hyatt^®, Westin^®, Hilton^®, Sheraton^®, Swissôtel^®, Pullman^® and Delta^®. We also may selectively invest in midscale and upscale properties such as ibis^®, Novotel^®, Hyatt Place^®, Four Points by Sheraton^®, Hilton Garden Inn^®, Fairfield Inn by Marriott^® or Courtyard by Marriott^®, particularly in foreign markets. ⁽ ¹⁾ While our hotels primarily compete with other hotels in the luxury and upper upscale segments, they also may compete with hotels in other lower-tier segments.

We believe our properties enjoy competitive advantages associated with the hotel brands under which they operate. The international marketing programs and reservation systems of these brands, combined with the strong management systems and expertise they provide, should enable our properties to perform favorably in terms of both occupancy and room rates. In addition, repeat guest business is enhanced by guest reward or guest recognition programs offered by most of these brands. Nevertheless, many management contracts for our hotels do not prohibit our managers from converting, franchising or developing other hotel properties in our markets. As a result, our hotels in a given market often compete with other hotels that our managers may own, invest in, manage or franchise.

We also compete with other REITs and other public and private investors for the acquisition of new properties and investment opportunities, in both domestic and foreign markets, as we attempt to position our portfolio to take best advantage of changes in markets and travel patterns of our customers.

Seasonality

Our hotel sales traditionally have experienced moderate seasonality, which varies based on the individual property and the region. Additionally, hotel revenues for our domestic Marriott-managed hotels typically reflect approximately 16 weeks of results in the fourth quarter compared to approximately 12 weeks for each of the first three quarters of the year. For our non-Marriott managed hotels, the first quarter includes two months of operations, the second and third quarters include three months of operations and the fourth quarter includes four months of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Reporting Periods” for more information on our fiscal calendar. Hotel sales have historically averaged approximately 20%, 26%, 22% and 32% for the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively.

(1)

This annual report contains registered trademarks that are the exclusive property of their respective owners, which are companies other than us. None of the owners of these trademarks, their affiliates or any of their respective officers, directors, agents or employees, has or will have any responsibility or liability for any information contained in this annual report.

Other Real Estate Investments

European Joint Venture. We own a general and limited partnership interest in the Euro JV with APG Strategic Real Estate Pool NV, an affiliate of a Dutch Pension Fund, and Jasmine Hotels Pte Ltd, an affiliate of the real estate investment company of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation Pte Ltd (“GIC RE”). Effective June 27, 2011, the partners agreed to expand the Euro JV through the creation of a second fund, Fund II, in which each of the current partners holds a 33.3% limited partner interest and we hold the 0.1% general partner interest. We hold a 32.0% limited partner interest and a 0.1% general partner interest in Fund I. The Euro JV also acts as the asset manager for the hotels owned by the Euro JV, as well as one hotel in Paris, France, in exchange for a fee. As of February 22, 2012, the Euro JV owns the following hotels:


Hotel	City	Country	Rooms/Units
Fund I:
Hotel Arts Barcelona	Barcelona	Spain		483
The Westin Palace, Madrid	Madrid	Spain		467
The Westin Palace, Milan	Milan	Italy		228
The Westin Europa & Regina	Venice	Italy		185
Sheraton Roma Hotel & Conference Center	Rome	Italy		640
Sheraton Skyline Hotel & Conference Centre	Hayes	United Kingdom		350
Sheraton Warsaw Hotel & Towers	Warsaw	Poland		350
Renaissance Brussels Hotel	Brussels	Belgium		262
Brussels Marriott Hotel	Brussels	Belgium		221
Marriott Executive Apartments	Brussels	Belgium		56
Crowne Plaza Hotel Amsterdam City Centre	Amsterdam	The Netherlands		270

Fund I total rooms				3,512


Fund II:
Le Méridien Piccadilly	London	United Kingdom		280
Pullman Bercy Paris	Paris	France		396

Fund II total rooms				676

Total European joint venture rooms				4,188

Asian Joint Venture. We own a 25% interest in the Asian JV with RECO Hotels JV Private Limited, an affiliate of GIC RE. During 2011, our Asian JV invested approximately $53 million (of which our share was $13.3 million) of its $65 million commitment to acquire a 36% interest in a joint venture in India with Accor S.A. and InterGlobe Enterprises Limited. This joint venture is developing seven properties, totaling approximately 1,750 rooms in three major cities in India: Bengaluru, Chennai and Delhi, and will be managed by Accor under the Pullman, ibis and Novotel brands. The first two hotels are expected to be opened fully by March of 2012.

Other Investments. In addition to the joint ventures described above, we have the following real estate investments:

•

On April 13, 2010, we acquired, at a discount, the two most junior tranches of a €427 million ($581 million) mortgage loan that is secured by six hotels located in Europe, with a face value of €64 million ($87 million). The loan matures on October 20, 2012.

•

We own a leasehold interest in 53 Courtyard by Marriott properties which were sold to HPT and leased back to us in 1995. In conjunction with our conversion to a REIT, in 1999 we entered into a sublease with respect to these properties with a third party on similar terms. We terminated the subleases effective July 6, 2010 and subsequently act as the owner under the management agreements. We gave notice of our intent to cancel the leases effective December 31, 2012.

For additional detail of our other real estate investments, including a summary of the outstanding debt balances of our affiliates, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Off Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligation” and Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements entitled “Investments in Affiliates” and Note 7 “Leases” in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Foreign Operations

Excluding hotels owned by our European and Asian joint ventures, as of December 31, 2011, we own one property in Australia, one property in Brazil, four in Canada, one in Mexico, two in Chile, and seven in New Zealand, which collectively contain approximately 4,289 rooms. Approximately 6%, 4%, and 3% of our revenues were attributed to the operations of these properties in 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. See Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements entitled “Geographic and Business Segment Information” for information related to our operations and information regarding geographic areas.

Environmental and Regulatory 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. 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 properties for personal injury associated with exposure to released 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 or other expenditures. In connection with our current or prior ownership or operation of hotels, we may be potentially liable for various environmental costs or liabilities. Although we are currently not aware of any material environmental claims pending or threatened against us, we can offer no assurance that a material environmental claim will not be asserted against us in the future.

Operational Agreements

All of our hotels are managed by third parties pursuant to management or operating agreements, with some of those hotels also being subject to separate license agreements addressing matters pertaining to operation under the designated brand. Under these agreements, the managers generally have sole responsibility and exclusive authority for all activities necessary for the day-to-day operation of the hotels, including establishing room rates, securing and processing reservations, procuring inventories, supplies and services, providing periodic inspection and consultation visits to the hotels by the managers’ technical and operational experts and promoting and publicizing the hotels. The managers provide all managerial and other employees for the hotels, review the operation and maintenance of the hotels, prepare reports, budgets and projections, and provide other administrative and accounting support services to the hotels. These support services include planning and policy services, divisional financial services, product planning and development, employee staffing and training, corporate executive management and certain in-house legal services. For the majority of our properties, we have approval rights over budgets, capital expenditures, significant leases and contractual commitments, and various other matters.

General Terms and Provisions – Agreements governing the management and operation of our hotels typically include the terms described below:

•

Term and fees for operational services. The initial term of our management and operating agreements generally is 15 to 25 years, with one or more renewal terms at the option of the manager. The majority of our management agreements condition the manager’s right to exercise options for specified renewal terms upon the satisfaction of specified economic performance criteria. The manager typically receives compensation in the form of a base management fee, which is calculated as a percentage (generally 2-3%) of annual gross revenues, and an incentive management fee, which typically is calculated as a percentage (generally 10-20%) of operating profit after the owner has received a priority return on its investment in the hotel. In the case of our Starwood-managed hotels, the base management fee is only 1% of annual gross revenues, but that amount is supplemented by license fees payable to Starwood under a separate license agreement (as described below).

•

License services. In the case of our Starwood-managed hotels, the operation of the hotels is subject to separate license agreements addressing matters pertaining to the designated brand, including rights to use trademarks, service marks and logos, matters relating to compliance with certain brand standards and policies, and the provision of certain system programs and centralized services. Although the term of these license agreements with Starwood generally is coterminous with the corresponding operating agreements, the license agreements contemplate the potential for continued brand affiliation even in the event of a termination of the operating agreement. As noted above, the Starwood licensors receive compensation in the form of license fees (generally of 5% of gross revenues attributable to room sales and 2% of gross revenues attributable to food and beverage sales), which amounts supplement the lower base management fee of only 1% of gross revenues received by Starwood under the operating agreements.

•

Chain or system programs and services. Managers are required to provide chain or system programs and services generally that are furnished on a centralized basis. Such services include the development and operation of certain computer systems and reservation services, regional or other centralized management and administrative services, marketing and sales programs and services, training and other personnel services, and other centralized or regional services as may be determined to be more efficiently performed on a centralized, regional or group basis rather than on an individual hotel basis. Costs and expenses incurred in providing these chain or system programs and services generally are allocated on a cost reimbursement basis among all hotels managed by the manager or its affiliates or that otherwise benefit from these services.

•

Working capital and fixed asset supplies. We are required to maintain working capital for each hotel and to fund the cost of certain fixed asset supplies (for example, linen, china, glassware, silver and uniforms). We also are responsible for providing funds to meet the cash needs for hotel operations if at any time the funds available therefrom are insufficient to meet the financial requirements of the hotels. For certain hotels, the working capital accounts which would otherwise be maintained by the managers for each of such hotels are maintained on a pooled basis, with managers being authorized to make withdrawals from such pooled account as otherwise contemplated with respect to working capital in accordance with the provisions of the management or operating agreements.

•

Furniture, fixtures and equipment replacements. We are required to provide the managers with all furniture, fixtures and equipment (“FF&E”) necessary for the operation of the hotels (including funding any required FF&E replacements). On an annual basis, the managers prepare budgets for FF&E to be acquired and certain routine repairs and maintenance to be performed in the next year and an estimate of the necessary funds, which budgets are subject to our review and approval. For purposes of funding such expenditures, a specified percentage (typically 5%) of the gross revenues of each hotel is deposited by the manager into an escrow or reserve account in our name, to which the manager has access. In the case of our Starwood-managed hotels, our operating agreements contemplate that this reserve account also may be used to fund the cost of certain major repairs and improvements affecting the hotel building (as described below). For certain of our Marriott-managed hotels, we have entered into an agreement with Marriott to allow for such expenditures to be funded from one pooled reserve account, rather than funds being deposited into separate reserve accounts at each hotel, with the minimum required balance maintained on an ongoing basis in that pooled reserve account being significantly below the amount that would have otherwise been maintained in such separate hotel reserve accounts. For certain of our Starwood-managed hotels, the periodic reserve fund contributions, which otherwise would be deposited into reserve accounts maintained by managers for each hotel, are distributed to us and, as to this pool of hotels, we are responsible for providing funding of expenditures which otherwise would be funded from reserve accounts for each of the subject hotels.

•

Building alterations, improvements and renewals. The managers are required to prepare an annual estimate of the expenditures necessary for major repairs, alterations, improvements, renewals and replacements to the structural, mechanical, electrical, heating, ventilating, air conditioning, plumbing and elevators of each hotel, along with alterations and improvements to the hotel as are required, in the manager’s reasonable judgment, to keep the hotel in a competitive, efficient and economical operating condition that is consistent with brand standards. We generally have approval rights as to such budgets and expenditures, which we

review and approve based on our manager’s recommendations and on our judgment. Expenditures for these major repairs and improvements affecting the hotel building typically are funded directly by owners, although (as noted above) our agreements with Starwood contemplate that certain such expenditures may be funded from the reserve account.

•

Treatment of additional owner funding. As additional owner funding becomes necessary for either expenditures generally funded from the FF&E reserve accounts, or for any major repairs or improvements to the hotel building which may be required to be funded directly by owners, most of our agreements provide for an economic benefit to us through an impact on the calculation of incentive management fees payable to our managers. One approach frequently utilized at our Marriott-managed hotels is to provide such owner funding through loans which are repaid, with interest, from operational revenues, with the repayment amounts reducing operating profit available for payment of incentive management fees. Another approach that typically is used at our Starwood-managed hotels, as well as with certain expenditures projects at our Marriott-managed hotels, is to treat such owner funding as an increase to our investment in the hotel, resulting in an increase to owner’s priority return with a corresponding reduction to the amount of operating profit available for payment of incentive management fees. For our Starwood-managed hotels that are subject to the pooled arrangement described above, the amount of any additional reserve account funding is allocated to each of such hotels on a pro rata basis, determined with reference to the net operating income of each hotel and the total net operating income of all such pooled hotels for the most recent operating year.

•

Territorial protections. Certain management and operating agreements impose restrictions for a specified period which limit the manager and its affiliates from owning, operating or licensing a hotel of the same brand within a specified area. The area restrictions vary with each hotel, from city blocks in urban areas to up to a multi-mile radius from the hotel in other areas.

•

Sale of the hotel. Subject to specific agreements as to certain hotels (see below under ‘Special Termination Rights’), we generally are limited in our ability to sell, lease or otherwise transfer the hotels by the requirement that the transferee assume the related management agreements and meet specified other conditions, including the condition that the transferee not be a competitor of the manager.

•

Performance Termination Rights. In addition to any right to terminate that may arise as a result of a default by manager, most of our management and operating agreements include reserved rights by us to terminate management or operating agreements on the basis of the manager’s failure to meet certain performance-based metrics, typically including a specified threshold return on owner’s investment in the hotel, along with a failure of the hotel to achieve a specified RevPAR performance threshold established with reference to other competitive hotels in the market. Typically, such performance-based termination rights arise in the event the operator fails to achieve specified performance thresholds over a consecutive two-year period, and are subject to the manager’s ability to ‘cure’ and avoid termination by payment to us of specified deficiency amounts (or, in some instances, waiver of the right to receive specified future management fees). We have agreed in the past, and may agree in the future, to waive certain of these termination rights in exchange for consideration from a manager or its affiliates, which consideration may include cash compensation or amendments to management agreements.

•

Special Termination Rights. In addition to any performance-based or other termination rights set forth in our management and operating agreements, we have negotiated with Marriott and Starwood specific termination rights as to certain management and operating agreements. While the brand affiliation of a property may increase the value of a hotel, the ability to dispose of a property unencumbered by a management agreement or even brand affiliation also can increase the value for prospective purchasers. These termination rights can take a number of different forms, including termination of agreements upon sale that leave the property unencumbered by any agreement; termination upon sale provided that the property continues to be operated under a license or franchise agreement with continued brand affiliation; as well as termination without sale or other condition, which may require payment of a fee. These termination rights also may restrict the number of agreements that may be terminated over any annual or other period; impose limitations on the number of agreements terminated as measured by EBITDA; require that a certain number of properties continue to maintain the brand affiliation; or be restricted to a specific pool of assets.

Employees

As of December 31, 2011, we had 219 employees, consisting of 196 at our corporate headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland and a total of 23 employees in our offices in Arizona, London, England, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and the Republic of Singapore. While employees at our consolidated hotels generally are employed by the operators that manage our hotels, we have seven hotels in New Zealand and one in Australia where we collectively have 538 employees.

None of our direct employees as of December 31, 2011 are covered by collective bargaining agreements. However, employees at certain of our third-party managed hotels are covered by collective bargaining agreements that are subject to review and renewal on a regular basis. For a discussion of these relationships see “Risk Factors—We are subject to risks associated with the employment of hotel personnel, particularly with hotels that employ unionized labor.”

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

The statements 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.

Financial Risks and Risks of Operation

Our revenues and the value of our properties are subject to conditions affecting the lodging industry.

The lodging industry is subject to changes in the travel patterns of business and leisure travelers, both of which are affected by the strength of the economy, as well as other factors. Changes in travel patterns of both business and leisure travelers may create difficulties for the industry over the long-term and adversely affect our results. During the recession in 2008 and 2009, overall travel was reduced, which had a significant effect on our results of operations. While operating results improved during 2010 and 2011, uncertainty in the strength and direction of the recovery and continued high unemployment have slowed the pace of the overall economic recovery. Therefore, there can be no assurance that any increases in hotel revenues or earnings at our properties will continue for any number of reasons, including, but not limited to, slower than anticipated growth in the economy. Our results of operations and any forecast we make, may be affected by, and can change based on, a variety of circumstances that affect the lodging industry, including:

•

changes in the international, national, regional and local economic climate;

•

changes in business and leisure travel patterns;

•

the effect of terrorist attacks and terror alerts in the United States and internationally, as well as other geopolitical disturbances;

•

supply growth in markets where we own hotels, which may adversely affect demand at our properties;

•

the attractiveness of our hotels to consumers relative to competing hotels;

•

the performance of the managers of our hotels;

•

outbreaks of disease and the impact on travel of natural disasters and weather;

•

changes in room rates and increases in operating costs due to inflation and other factors; and

•

unionization of the labor force at our hotels.

A reduction in our revenue or earnings as a result of the above risks may reduce our working capital, impact our long-term business strategy, and impact the value of our assets and our ability to meet certain covenants in our existing debt agreements.

Disruptions in the financial markets may adversely affect our business and results of operations, our ability to obtain financing on reasonable and acceptable terms, and our ability to hedge our foreign currency exchange risk.

The United States and global equity and credit markets have at times experienced significant price volatility, dislocations and liquidity disruptions since 2008, all of which caused market prices of the stocks of many companies to fluctuate substantially and the spreads on prospective and outstanding debt financings to widen considerably. These circumstances impacted liquidity in the financial markets, which made terms for financings less attractive, and, in some cases, resulted in the lack of availability of certain types of financing. Conditions in the credit markets improved in 2010 but have become more volatile again starting in the third quarter of 2011. Continued uncertainty in the equity and credit markets may negatively impact our ability to access additional short-term and long-term financing on reasonable terms or at all, which would negatively impact our liquidity and financial condition. A prolonged downturn in the stock or credit markets may cause us to seek alternative sources of potentially less attractive financing and may negatively impact our ability to enter into derivative contracts in order to hedge risks associated with changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. Disruptions in the financial markets also may adversely affect our credit rating. While we believe we have adequate sources of liquidity with which to meet our anticipated requirements for working capital, debt service and capital expenditures for the foreseeable future, if our operating results weaken significantly and our cash flow or capital resources prove inadequate, or if interest rates increase significantly, we could face liquidity problems that could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Concerns regarding the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating and the sovereign debt crisis in Europe could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and liquidity.

On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor’s lowered its long term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America from AAA to AA+. While U.S. lawmakers reached agreement to raise the federal debt ceiling on August 2, 2011, the downgrade reflected Standard & Poor’s view that the fiscal consolidation plan within that agreement fell short of what would be necessary to stabilize the U.S. government’s medium term debt dynamics. This downgrade could have material adverse impacts on financial markets and economic conditions in the United States and throughout the world and, in turn, the market’s anticipation of these impacts could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and liquidity. In particular, it could disrupt payment systems, money markets, long-term or short-term fixed income markets, foreign exchange markets, commodities markets and equity markets and adversely affect the cost and availability of funding and certain impacts, such as increased spreads in money market and other short term rates, some of which have been experienced already. Because of the unprecedented nature of negative credit rating actions with respect to U.S. government obligations, the ultimate impacts on global markets and our business, financial condition and liquidity are unpredictable and may not be immediately apparent.

On January 13, 2012, Standard & Poor’s lowered its long term sovereign credit rating on France, Italy and seven other European countries, which has negatively impacted global markets and economic conditions. The continued uncertainty over the outcome of these governments and other European Union (“EU”) member states financial support programs and the possibility that other EU member states may experience similar financial troubles could further disrupt global markets. In particular, it has and could in the future disrupt equity markets and result in volatile bond yields on the sovereign debt of EU members. These factors could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and liquidity. We have properties in some EU member states, held through our European joint venture, that have experienced difficulties servicing their sovereign debt, including Italy and Spain, and the results of operations at those hotels also could be adversely affected.

Economic conditions may adversely affect the value of our hotels which may result in impairment charges on our properties.

We analyze our assets for impairment in several situations, including when a property has current or projected losses from operations, when it becomes more likely than not that a hotel will be sold before the end of its previously estimated useful life, or when other material trends, contingencies or changes in circumstances indicate that a triggering event has occurred, such that an asset’s carrying value may not be recoverable. For impaired assets, we record an impairment charge equal to the excess of the property’s carrying value over its fair value. Our operating results for 2009 and 2011 included $131 million and $8 million, respectively, of impairment charges related to our consolidated hotels and the investment in our European joint venture. We may incur additional impairment charges in the future, which charges will negatively affect our results of operations. We can provide no assurance that any impairment loss recognized would not be material to our results of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Policies.”

We depend on external sources of capital for future growth and we may be unable to access capital when necessary.

Unlike regular C corporations, Host Inc. must finance its growth and fund debt repayments largely with external sources of capital because it is required to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income (other than net capital gain) in order to qualify as a REIT, including taxable income recognized for federal income tax purposes but with regard to which it does not receive cash. Funds used by Host Inc. to make required distributions are provided through distributions from Host L.P. Our ability to access external capital could be hampered by a number of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including credit market conditions as discussed above, unfavorable market perception of our growth potential, decreases in our current and estimated future earnings, or decreases in the market price of the common stock of Host Inc. Our ability to access additional

capital also may be limited by the terms of our existing indebtedness which, under certain circumstances, restrict our incurrence of debt and the payment of dividends and Host L.P. distributions. The occurrence of 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, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to finance our future growth.

We have substantial debt and may incur additional debt.

As of December 31, 2011, we and our subsidiaries had total indebtedness of approximately $5.75 billion. Our substantial indebtedness requires us to dedicate a significant portion of our cash flow from operations to debt service payments, which reduces the availability of our cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, expansion efforts, dividends and distributions and other general corporate needs. Additionally, our substantial indebtedness could:

•

make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our indebtedness;

•

limit our ability in the future to undertake refinancings of our debt or to obtain financing for expenditures, acquisitions, development or other general corporate needs on terms and conditions acceptable to us, if at all; or

•

affect adversely our ability to compete effectively or operate successfully under adverse economic conditions.

If our cash flow and working capital are not sufficient to fund our expenditures or service our indebtedness, we will have to raise additional funds through:

•

sales of our OP units or common stock;

•

the incurrence of additional permitted indebtedness by Host L.P.; or

•

the sale of our assets.

We cannot make any assurances that any of these sources of funds will be available to us or, if available, will be on terms that we would find acceptable or in amounts sufficient to meet our obligations or fulfill our business plan. Under certain circumstances we would be required to use the cash from some of the events described above to repay other indebtedness.

The terms of our debt place restrictions on us and our subsidiaries and these restrictions reduce our operational flexibility and create default risks.

The documents governing the terms of our existing senior notes and our credit facility contain covenants that place restrictions on us and our subsidiaries. These covenants restrict, among other things, our ability to:

•

conduct acquisitions, mergers or consolidations, unless the successor entity in such transaction assumes our indebtedness;

•

incur additional debt in excess of certain thresholds and without satisfying certain financial metrics;

•

create liens securing indebtedness, unless an effective provision is made to secure our other indebtedness by such liens;

•

sell assets without using the proceeds from such sales for certain permitted uses or to make an offer to repay or repurchase outstanding indebtedness;

•

make distributions without satisfying certain financial metrics; and

•

conduct transactions with affiliates other than on an arm’s length basis and, in certain instances, without obtaining opinions as to the fairness of such transactions.

In addition, certain covenants in our credit facility also require us and our subsidiaries to meet financial performance tests. The restrictive covenants in the applicable indenture(s), the credit facility and the documents governing our other debt (including our mortgage debt) will reduce our flexibility in conducting our operations and will limit our ability to engage in activities that may be in our long-term best interest. Failure to comply with these restrictive covenants could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration

of all or a substantial portion of our debt. For a detailed description of the covenants and restrictions imposed by the documents governing our indebtedness, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition.”

Our ability to pay dividends and to make distributions may be limited or prohibited by the terms of our indebtedness or preferred units.

We are, and may in the future become, party to agreements and instruments that restrict or prevent the payment of dividends on classes and series of Host Inc. capital stock and Host L.P.’s payment of distributions on its classes of units. Under the terms of Host L.P.’s credit facility and senior notes indenture, distributions to Host L.P. unitholders, including Host Inc., upon which Host Inc. depends in order to obtain the cash necessary to pay dividends, are permitted only to the extent that Host L.P. can satisfy certain financial covenant tests (concerning leverage, fixed charge coverage and unsecured interest coverage) and meet other requirements. We are permitted under our credit facility and senior notes indenture to make distributions of estimated taxable income that are necessary to maintain Host Inc.’s REIT status.

Under the terms of Host L.P.’s outstanding preferred OP units, we are not permitted to make distributions on our common OP units unless all cumulative distributions have been paid (or funds for payment have been set aside for payment) on our preferred OP units. In the event that we fail to pay the accrued distributions on our preferred OP units for any reason, including any restriction on making such distributions under the terms of our debt instruments (as discussed above), distributions will continue to accrue on such preferred OP units and we will be prohibited from making any distributions on our common OP units until all such accrued but unpaid distributions on our preferred OP units have been paid (or funds for such payment have been set aside).

An increase in interest rates would increase the interest costs on our credit facility and on our floating rate debt and could adversely impact our ability to refinance existing debt or sell assets.

Interest payments for borrowings on our credit facility, the mortgages on nine properties and the fixed-to- floating interest rate swaps linked to two other properties are based on floating rates. As a result, an increase in interest rates will reduce our cash flow available for other corporate purposes, including investments in our portfolio. Further, rising interest rates could limit our ability to refinance existing debt when it matures and increase interest costs on any debt that is refinanced. We may from time to time enter into agreements such as interest rate swaps, caps, floors and other interest rate hedging contracts. Currently, all of the mortgages with floating rates, which are secured by nine of our hotel properties, are fully or partially hedged through the use of floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps or interest rate caps and floors. While these agreements may lessen the impact of rising interest rates, they also expose us to the risk that other parties to the agreements will not perform or that the agreements will be unenforceable. In addition, an increase in interest rates could decrease the amount third parties are willing to pay for our assets, thereby limiting our ability to dispose of assets as part of our business strategy.

Rating agency downgrades may increase our cost of capital.

Our senior notes are rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services and Fitch Ratings. These independent rating agencies may elect to downgrade their ratings on our senior notes at any time. Such downgrades may affect negatively our access to the capital markets and increase our cost of capital.

Our expenses may not decrease if our revenue decreases.

Many of the expenses associated with owning and operating hotels, such as debt-service payments, property taxes, insurance, utilities, and employee wages and benefits, are relatively inflexible and do not necessarily decrease in tandem with a reduction in revenue at the hotels. Our expenses also will be affected by inflationary increases, and certain costs, such as wages, benefits and insurance, may exceed the rate of inflation in any given period. In the event of a significant decrease in demand, we may not be able to reduce the size of hotel work forces in order to decrease wages and benefits. Our managers also may be unable to offset any such increased expenses with higher room rates. Any of our efforts to reduce operating costs or failure to make scheduled capital expenditures also could adversely affect the future growth of our business and the value of our hotel properties.

Our acquisition of additional properties may have a significant effect on our business, liquidity, financial position and/or results of operations.

As part of our business strategy, we seek to acquire luxury and upper upscale hotel properties. We may acquire properties through various structures, including transactions involving portfolios, single assets, joint ventures and acquisitions of all or substantially all of the securities or assets of other REITs or similar real estate entities. We anticipate that our acquisitions will be financed through a combination of methods, including proceeds from Host Inc. equity offerings, issuance of limited partnership interests of Host L.P., advances under our credit facility, the incurrence or assumption of indebtedness and proceeds from the sales of assets. Continued disruptions in credit markets may limit our ability to finance acquisitions and may limit the ability of purchasers to finance hotels and adversely affect our disposition strategy and our ability to use disposition proceeds to finance acquisitions.

We may, from time to time, be in the process of identifying, analyzing and negotiating possible acquisition transactions. We cannot provide any assurances that we will be successful in consummating future acquisitions on favorable terms or that we will realize the benefits that we anticipate from such acquisitions. Our inability to consummate one or more acquisitions on such terms, or our failure to realize the intended benefits from one or more acquisitions, could have a significant adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial position and/or results of operations, including as a result of our forfeiture of deposits in connection with our failure to consummate an acquisition or our incurrence of additional indebtedness and related interest expense and our assumption of unforeseen contingent liabilities in connection with completed acquisitions.

We do not control our hotel operations and we are dependent on the managers of our hotels.

We have entered into management agreements with third-party managers to operate our hotel properties. Our cash flow from our hotels may be adversely affected if our managers fail to provide quality services and amenities or if they or their affiliates fail to maintain a quality brand name. While we monitor the hotel managers’ performance, we have limited recourse under our management agreements if we believe that the hotel managers are not performing adequately. In addition, from time to time, we have had, and continue to have, differences with the managers of our hotels over their performance and compliance with the terms of our management agreements. We generally resolve issues with our managers through discussions and negotiations. However, if we are unable to reach satisfactory results through discussions and negotiations, we may choose to litigate the dispute or submit the matter to third-party dispute resolution. Failure by our hotel managers to fully perform the duties agreed to in our management agreements could adversely affect our results of operations. Our hotel managers or their affiliates manage, and in some cases own, have invested in, or provided credit support or operating guarantees to hotels that compete with our hotels, all of which may result in conflicts of interest. As a result, our hotel managers 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 interest.

We are subject to risks associated with the employment of hotel personnel, particularly with hotels that employ unionized labor.

Our third-party managers are responsible for hiring and maintaining the labor force at each of our hotels. Although we do not directly employ or manage employees at our consolidated hotels (other than at our New Zealand and Australian properties), we still are subject to many of the costs and risks generally associated with the hotel labor force, particularly those hotels with unionized labor. From time to time, hotel operations may be disrupted as a result of strikes, lockouts, public demonstrations or other negative actions and publicity. We also may incur increased legal costs and indirect labor costs as a result of contract disputes or other events. The resolution of labor disputes or re-negotiated labor contracts could lead to increased labor costs, either by increases in wages or benefits or by changes in work rules that raise hotel operating costs. We do not have the ability to affect the outcome of these negotiations.

Our hotels have an ongoing need for renovations and potentially significant capital expenditures in order to remain competitive in the marketplace, maintain brand standards or to comply with applicable laws or regulations. The timing and costs of such renovations or improvements may result in reduced operating performance during construction and may not improve the return on these investments.

We are required by our loan agreements or agreements with our hotel managers to make agreed upon capital expenditures. In addition, we will need to make further capital expenditures in order to remain competitive with other hotels, to maintain the economic value of our hotels and to comply with applicable laws and regulations. The timing of these improvements can affect hotel performance, particularly if the improvements require closures of a significant number of rooms or other features of the hotels, such as ballrooms, meeting space and restaurants. These capital improvements reduce the availability of cash for other purposes and are subject to cost overruns and delays. In addition, because we depend on external sources of capital, we may not have the necessary funds to invest and, if we fail to maintain our properties in accordance with brand standards set by our managers, the manager may terminate the management agreement. Moreover, we may not necessarily realize a significant, or any, improvement in the performance of the hotels in which we make these investments.

The ownership of hotels outside the United States and the expansion of our business into new markets outside of the United States will expose us to risks relating to owning hotels in those foreign markets.

Part of our business strategy is to expand our presence outside of the United States. As of December 31, 2011, we own directly 16 hotels located outside the United States. We also are party to a joint venture that owns 13 hotels in Europe and to a joint venture that owns a non-controlling interest in seven hotels in development in India. We may have difficulty managing our expansion into new geographic markets where we have limited knowledge and understanding of the local economy, an absence of business relationships in the area, or unfamiliarity with local governmental and permitting procedures and regulations. There are risks inherent in conducting business outside of the United States, which include:

•

employment laws and practices;

•

tax laws, which may provide for income or other taxes or tax rates that exceed those of the U.S. and which may provide that foreign earnings that are repatriated, directly or indirectly, are subject to dividend withholding tax requirements or other restrictions;

•

compliance with and unexpected changes in regulatory requirements or monetary policy;

•

the willingness of domestic or foreign lenders to provide financing and changes in the availability, cost and terms of such financing;

•

adverse changes in local, political, economic and market conditions;

•

insurance coverage related to terrorist events;

•

changes in interest rates and/or currency exchange rates;

•

regulations regarding the incurrence of debt; and

•

difficulties in complying with U.S. rules governing REITs while operating outside of the United States.

Any of these factors could affect adversely our ability to obtain all of the intended benefits of our foreign country expansion. If we do not effectively manage this expansion and successfully integrate the foreign hotels into our organization, our operating results and financial condition may be adversely affected.

We may acquire hotel properties through joint ventures with third parties that could result in conflicts.

We have made investments in joint ventures in Europe and Asia and are exploring further investment opportunities in Asia, Europe and Latin America. We may, from time to time, invest as a co-venturer in other entities holding hotel properties instead of purchasing hotel properties directly. Investments in joint ventures may involve risks not present were a third party not involved, including the possibility that partners or co-venturers might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Co-venturers often share control over the operation of a joint venture. Actions by a co-venturer also could subject the assets to additional risks as a result of any of the following circumstances:

•

our co-venturer might have economic or business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our, or the joint venture’s, interests or goals; or

•

our co-venturer may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions or requests, or contrary to our policies or objectives.

Although generally we will seek to maintain sufficient control of any joint venture in order to permit our objectives to be achieved, we might not be able to take action without the approval of our joint venture partners. Disputes between us and partners or co-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses and prevent our officers from focusing their time and effort on our business.

Our management agreements could affect the sale or financing of our hotels.

Under the terms of our management agreements, we generally may not sell, lease or otherwise transfer our hotels unless the transferee is not a competitor of the manager and the transferee assumes the related management agreements and meets specified other conditions. Our ability to finance or sell our properties, depending upon the structure of such transactions, may require the manager’s consent. If the manager does not consent to such sale or financing, we may be precluded from taking actions in our best interest.

Our mortgage debt contains provisions that may reduce our liquidity.

Certain of our mortgage debt requires that, to the extent cash flow from the hotels which secure such debt drops below stated levels, we escrow cash flow after the payment of debt service until operations improve above the stated levels. In some cases, the lender has the right under certain circumstances to apply the escrowed amount to the outstanding balance of the mortgage debt. If such provisions are triggered, there can be no assurance that the affected properties will achieve the minimum cash flow levels required to trigger a release of any escrowed funds. The amounts required to be escrowed may affect negatively our liquidity by limiting our access to cash flow after debt service from these mortgaged properties.

We may not be able to recover fully under our existing terrorism insurance for losses caused by some types of terrorist acts, and federal terrorism legislation does not ensure that we will be able to obtain terrorism insurance in adequate amounts or at acceptable premium levels in the future.

We obtain terrorism insurance as part of our all-risk property insurance program, as well as our general liability and directors’ and officers’ coverage. However, our all-risk policies have limitations, such as per occurrence limits, annual aggregate coverage limits and sublimits, all of which 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 Program Reauthorization Act (“TRIPRA”). Property damage related to war and to nuclear, radiological, biological and chemical incidents is excluded under our policies. While TRIPRA will reimburse insurers for losses resulting from nuclear, radiological, biological and chemical perils, TRIPRA 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. We have a wholly-owned captive insurance company through which we obtain a policy for nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological (“NBCR”) coverage. This captive insurer has the same ability as other insurance companies to apply to the U.S. Treasury for reimbursement, as provided for in TRIPRA, and is subject to the same deductibles and co-insurance obligations. This potential reimbursement applies to property insurance only, and not to general liability or directors’ and officers’ insurance, and there are no assurances that we will be able to recover any or all of our NBCR losses under this program.

We may be unable to satisfy the insurance requirements of our lenders.

Certain of the mortgage debt agreements for our properties and properties held by our European joint venture require us to maintain property insurance provided by carriers maintaining minimum ratings from Standard & Poor’s, A.M. Best or other rating agencies. Several of our mortgages contain requirements for the financial strength of insurers to be rated as high as AA by Standard & Poor’s. Due to upheavals in the financial markets, the number of insurers that carry that rating has been decreasing for a number of years. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, in cases where our insurance carriers did not meet the minimum financial strength requirements (there were two such cases in 2011),

we were able to obtain waivers from the lenders or they have provided written assurances that they are satisfied with the makeup of our pool of insurance providers. We cannot provide assurances that each of our lenders will continue to be satisfied with our insurance coverage, or with the rating levels of our carriers, or that our carriers will not be downgraded further. If any of these lenders becomes dissatisfied with our insurance coverage or the ratings of our insurance carriers, they may, on our behalf and in addition to other remedies, elect to procure additional property insurance coverage that meets their ratings requirements. The cost of such additional property insurance would be borne by the property or properties securing the loans. Also, the premiums associated with such coverage may be considerably higher than those associated with our current insurance coverage.

Some potential losses are not covered by insurance.

We, or our hotel managers, carry comprehensive insurance coverage for general liability, property, business interruption and other risks with respect to all of our hotels and other properties. These policies offer coverage features and insured limits that we believe are customary for similar types of properties. Generally, our “all-risk” property policies provide coverage that is available on a per-occurrence basis and that, for each occurrence, has an overall limit, as well as various sub-limits, on the amount of insurance proceeds we can receive. Sub-limits exist for certain types of claims, such as service interruption, debris removal, expediting costs, landscaping replacement and natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods and hurricanes, and may be subject to annual aggregate coverage limits. The dollar amounts of these sub-limits are significantly lower than the dollar amounts of the overall coverage limit. In this regard, hotels in certain of our markets, including California, Florida and New Zealand, have in the past been and continue to be particularly susceptible to damage from natural disasters. Recovery under the applicable policies also is subject to substantial deductibles and complex calculations of lost business income. There is no assurance that this insurance, where maintained, will fully fund the re-building or restoration of a hotel that is impacted by an earthquake, hurricane, or other natural disaster, or the income lost as a result of the damage. Our property policies also 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 and, in the case where the manager of one of our hotels provides this coverage, any such claims will be combined with the claims of other owners participating in the manager’s program for the same purpose. Therefore, if an insurable event occurs that affects more than one of our hotels, or, in the case of hotels where coverage is provided by the manager, affects hotels owned by others, 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. Each affected hotel only may 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 complete coverage for risks that affect multiple properties, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, or certain types of terrorism.

In addition, there are other risks, such as certain environmental hazards, that may be deemed to fall completely outside the general coverage limits of our policies or may be uninsurable or too expensive to justify coverage. We also may encounter challenges with an insurance provider regarding whether it will pay a particular claim that we believe to be covered under our policy. Should a loss in excess of insured limits or an uninsured loss occur, or should we be unsuccessful in obtaining coverage from an insurance carrier, we could lose all or a part 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.

Litigation judgments or settlements could have a significant adverse effect on our financial condition.

We have accrued a potential litigation loss of approximately $56 million in connection with a lawsuit in the 166^th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas involving the sale of land encumbered by a ground lease for the San Antonio Marriott Rivercenter. See “Legal Proceedings” for more information on the verdict and the status of the appeal.

We also are involved in various other legal proceedings in the normal course of business and are vigorously defending these claims; however, no assurances can be given as to the outcome of any pending legal proceedings. We believe, based on currently available information, that the results of such proceedings, in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, but might be material to our operating results for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period.

We also could become the subject of future claims by the operators of our hotels, individuals or companies who use our hotels, our investors, our joint venture partners or regulating entities and these claims could have a significant adverse effect on our financial condition and performance.

We may be subject to unknown or contingent liabilities related to hotels or businesses we acquire.

Assets and entities that we have acquired, or may in the future acquire, may be subject to unknown or contingent liabilities for which we may have no recourse, or only limited recourse, against the sellers. In general, the representations and warranties provided under the transaction agreements may not survive long enough for us to become aware of such liabilities and seek recourse against our sellers. While usually we require the sellers to indemnify us with respect to breaches of representations and warranties that survive, such indemnification often is limited and subject to various materiality thresholds, a significant deductible or an aggregate cap on losses. As a result, there is no guarantee that we will recover any amounts with respect to losses due to breaches by the sellers of their representations and warranties. The total amount of costs and expenses that may be incurred with respect to liabilities associated with acquired hotels and entities may exceed our expectations, plus we may experience other unanticipated adverse effects, all of which may adversely affect our revenues, expenses, operating results and financial condition. Finally, indemnification agreements between us and the sellers typically provide that the sellers will retain certain specified liabilities relating to the assets and entities acquired by us. While the sellers generally are contractually obligated to pay all losses and other expenses relating to such retained liabilities without regard to survival limitations, materiality thresholds, deductibles or caps on losses, there can be no guarantee that such arrangements will not require us to incur losses or other expenses in addition to those incurred by the sellers.

We depend on our key personnel.

Our success depends on the efforts of our executive officers and other key personnel. None of our key personnel have employment agreements and we do not maintain key person life insurance for any of our executive officers. We cannot assure you that these key personnel will remain employed by us. While we believe that we could find replacements for these key personnel, the loss of their services could have a significant adverse effect on our financial performance.

Exchange rate fluctuations could affect adversely our financial results.

As a result of the expansion of our foreign operations, currency exchange rate fluctuations could affect our results of operations and financial position. We expect to generate an increasing portion of our revenue and expenses in such foreign currencies as the Euro, the Canadian Dollar, the Mexican Peso, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, the British Pound, the Polish Zloty, the Brazilian Real and the Chilean Peso. In 2011, these currencies represented approximately 6% of our revenues. Although we may enter into foreign exchange agreements with financial institutions and/or obtain local currency mortgage debt in order to reduce our exposure to fluctuations in the value of these and other foreign currencies, these transactions, if entered into, will not eliminate that risk entirely. To the extent that we are unable to match revenue received in foreign currencies with expenses paid in the same currency, exchange rate fluctuations could have a negative impact on our results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, because our consolidated financial results are reported in U.S. Dollars, if we generate revenues or earnings in other currencies, the conversion of such amounts into U.S. Dollars can result in an increase or decrease in the amount of our revenues or earnings.

Applicable REIT laws may restrict certain business activities.

As a REIT, Host Inc. is subject to various restrictions on the types of income it can earn, assets it can own and activities in which it can engage. Business activities that could be impacted by applicable REIT laws include, but are not limited to, activities such as developing alternative uses of real estate, including the development and/or sale of timeshare or condominium units. Due to these restrictions, we anticipate that we will conduct certain business activities, including those mentioned above, in one or more of our taxable REIT subsidiaries. Our taxable REIT subsidiaries are taxable as regular C corporations and are subject to federal, state, local, and, if applicable, foreign taxation on their taxable income.

We may be unable to sell properties because real estate investments are inherently illiquid.

Real estate properties generally cannot be sold quickly and, accordingly, we may not be able to vary our portfolio promptly in response to economic or other conditions. The inability to respond promptly to changes in the performance of our investments could affect adversely our financial condition and the ability to service our debt. In addition, under the federal income tax laws applicable to REITs, we may be limited in our ability to recognize the full economic benefit from a sale of our assets.

Our ground lease payments may increase faster than the revenues we receive on the hotels located on the leased properties.

As of December 31, 2011, 38 of our hotels are subject to third-party ground leases (encumbering all or a portion of the hotel). These ground leases generally require periodic increases in ground rent payments, which are often based on economic indicators such as the Consumer Price Index. Our ability to pay ground rent could be adversely affected to the extent that our hotel revenues do not increase at the same or a greater rate than the increases in rental payments under the ground leases. In addition, if we were to sell a hotel encumbered by a ground lease, the buyer would be required to assume the ground lease, which may result in a lower sales price.

Environmental problems are possible and can be costly.

We believe that our properties comply in all material respects with applicable environmental laws. Unidentified environmental liabilities could arise, however, and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and performance. Federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment may require a current or previous owner or operator of real estate to investigate and remediate hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum product releases at the property. The owner or operator may be required to pay a governmental entity or third parties for property damage, and for investigation and remediation costs incurred by the parties in connection with the contamination. These laws typically impose clean-up responsibility and liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of or caused the presence of the contaminants. Even if more than one person may have been responsible for the contamination, each person covered by the environmental laws may be held responsible for all of the clean-up costs incurred. In addition, third parties may sue the owner or operator of a site for damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from that site. Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance and removal of asbestos. These laws require that owners or operators of buildings containing asbestos properly manage and maintain the asbestos, that they notify and train those who may come into contact with asbestos and that they undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement, if asbestos would be disturbed during renovation or demolition of a building. These laws may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators who fail to comply with these requirements and may allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos fibers.

Compliance with other government regulations can be costly.

Our hotels are subject to various other forms of regulation, including Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), building codes and regulations pertaining to fire and life safety. Under the ADA, all public accommodations are required to meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. These laws and regulations may be changed from time-to-time, or new regulations adopted, resulting in additional costs of compliance, including potential litigation. For example, the ADA was substantially revised in September 2010 and our facilities must comply with the new regulations by March 15, 2012. A determination that we are not in compliance with the ADA could result in a court order to bring the hotel into compliance, imposition of fines or an award of attorneys’ fees to private litigants. Compliance with the ADA and other laws and regulations could require substantial capital expenditures. Any increased costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks of Ownership of Host Inc.’s Common Stock

There are limitations on the acquisition of Host Inc. common stock and changes in control.

Host Inc.’s charter and bylaws, the partnership agreement of Host L.P., and the Maryland General Corporation Law contain a number of provisions, the exercise or existence of which could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for Host Inc.’s stockholders or Host L.P.’s unitholders or otherwise be in their best interests, including the following:

•

Restrictions on transfer and ownership of Host Inc.’s stock. To maintain Host Inc.’s qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, not more than 50% in value of Host Inc.’s outstanding shares of capital stock may be owned in the last half of the taxable year, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals, which, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”), may include certain entities. Because such ownership could jeopardize Host Inc.’s qualification as a REIT, a person cannot own, directly or by attribution, 10% or more of an interest in a Host Inc. lessee, nor can a Host Inc. lessee of any partnership in which Host Inc. is a partner own, directly or by attribution, 10% or more of Host Inc.’s shares, in each case unless exempted by Host Inc.’s Board of Directors.

Host Inc.’s charter prohibits ownership, directly or by attribution, by any person or persons acting as a group, of more than 9.8% in value or number, whichever is more restrictive, of shares of Host Inc.’s outstanding common stock, preferred stock or any other class or series of stock, each considered as a separate class or series for this purpose. Together, these limitations are referred to as the “ownership limit.”

Stock acquired or held in violation of the ownership limit will be transferred automatically to a trust for the benefit of a designated charitable beneficiary, and the intended acquirer of the stock in violation of the ownership limit will not be entitled to any distributions thereon, to vote those shares of stock or to receive any proceeds from the subsequent sale of the stock in excess of the lesser of the price paid for the stock or the amount realized from the sale. A transfer of shares of Host Inc.’s stock to a person who, as a result of the transfer, violates the ownership limit may be void under certain circumstances, and, in any event, would deny that person any of the economic benefits of owning shares of Host Inc.’s stock in excess of the ownership limit. These restrictions on transfer and ownership will not apply if Host Inc.’s Board of Directors determines that it is no longer in Host Inc.’s best interests to continue to qualify as a REIT or that compliance with the restrictions on transfer and ownership is no longer required for Host Inc. to qualify as a REIT.

•

Removal of Board of Directors. Host Inc.’s charter provides that, except for any directors who may be elected by holders of a class or series of shares of capital stock other than common stock, directors may be removed only for cause and only by the affirmative vote of stockholders holding at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast in the election of directors. Vacancies on Host Inc.’s Board of Directors may be filled, at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose, by the affirmative vote of the remaining directors, except that a vacancy resulting from an increase in the number of directors may be filled by a majority vote of the entire Board of Directors. Any vacancy resulting from the removal of a director by the stockholders may be filled by the affirmative vote of holders of at least two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast in the election of directors.

•

Preferred shares; classification or reclassification of unissued shares of capital stock without stockholder approval. Host Inc.’s charter provides that the total number of shares of stock of all classes that Host Inc. has authority to issue is 1,100,000,000, consisting of 1,050,000,000 shares of common stock and 50,000,000 shares of preferred stock. Host Inc.’s Board of Directors has the authority, without a vote of stockholders, to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of common stock and preferred stock into other classes or series of stock, including common stock into preferred stock or vice versa, and to establish the terms, preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications and terms or conditions of redemption for each class or series. Because Host Inc.’s Board of Directors has this power, it may give the holders of any class or series of stock terms, preferences, powers and rights, including voting rights, senior to the rights of holders of existing stock.

•

Maryland business combination law. Under the Maryland General Corporation Law, specified “business combinations” include mergers, consolidations, share exchanges, or, in circumstances specified in the statute, asset transfers or issuances or reclassifications of equity securities, between a Maryland corporation and any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation’s then outstanding shares, or an affiliate or associate of the corporation who, at any time during the two year period prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of the then outstanding stock of the corporation (each, an “interested stockholder”), or an affiliate of the interested stockholder, are prohibited for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Thereafter, any of these specified business combinations must be approved by 80% of the votes entitled to be cast by the holders of outstanding shares of voting stock of the corporation and by two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by the holders of voting stock of the corporation other than shares held by the interested stockholder unless, among other conditions, the corporation’s common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined in the Maryland General Corporation Law, for their shares and the consideration is received in cash or in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder. As a Maryland corporation which has not opted out of these provisions, Host Inc. is subject to the Maryland business combination statute. The statute provides various exemptions from its provisions, including for business combinations that are exempted by the board of directors before the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. The Board of Directors has not granted any such exceptions at this time.

•

Maryland control share acquisition law. Under the Maryland General Corporation Law, “control shares” acquired in a “control share acquisition” have no voting rights, except to the extent approved by the affirmative vote of holders of two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding shares owned by the acquiror by officers or by directors who are employees of the corporation. “Control shares” are voting shares which, if aggregated with all other voting shares owned by the acquiror or over which the acquiror is able to exercise or direct the exercise of voting power (except solely by virtue of a revocable proxy), would entitle the acquiror to exercise voting power in electing directors within one of the following ranges of voting power: (1) one-tenth or more but less than one-third, (2) one-third or more but less than a majority, or (3) a majority or more of all voting power. Control shares do not include shares the acquiring person is then entitled to vote as a result of having previously obtained stockholder approval. A “control share acquisition” means the acquisition of control shares, subject to specified exceptions. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting us from the control share provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law. There can be no assurance that this bylaw provision exempting us from the control share provisions will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future.

•

Merger, consolidation, share exchange and transfer of Host Inc.’s assets. Under Maryland law and Host Inc.’s charter, subject to the terms of any outstanding class or series of capital stock, we can merge with or into another entity, consolidate with one or more other entities, participate in a share exchange or transfer Host Inc.’s assets within the meaning of the Maryland General Corporation Law if approved (1) by Host Inc.’s Board of Directors in the manner provided in the Maryland General Corporation Law, and (2) by Host Inc.’s stockholders holding two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, except that any merger of Host Inc. with or into a trust organized for the purpose of changing Host Inc.’s form of organization from a corporation to a trust requires only the approval of Host Inc.’s stockholders holding a majority of all votes entitled to be cast on the merger. Under the Maryland General Corporation Law, specified mergers may be approved without a vote of stockholders and a share exchange is only required to be approved by the board of directors of a Maryland corporation if the corporation is the successor entity. Host Inc.’s voluntary dissolution also would require approval of stockholders holding two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter.

•

Certain charter and bylaw amendments. Host Inc.’s charter contains provisions relating to restrictions on transfer and ownership of Host Inc.’s stock, fixing the size of the Board of Directors within the range set forth in the charter, removal of directors, the filling of vacancies, exculpation and indemnification of directors, calling special stockholder meetings and others, all of which may be amended only by a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors and approved by Host Inc.’s stockholders holding two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. Other charter amendments generally require approval of the

Board and the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. As permitted under the Maryland General Corporation Law, Host Inc.’s charter and bylaws provide that the Board of Directors has the exclusive right to amend Host Inc.’s bylaws. These provisions may make it more difficult to amend Host Inc.’s charter and bylaws to alter the provisions described herein that could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control or the acquisition of Host Inc. common stock, without the approval of the Board of Directors.

Shares of Host Inc.’s common stock that are or become available for sale could affect the share price of Host Inc.’s common stock.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of Host Inc.’s common stock, or the perception that sales could occur, could adversely affect prevailing market prices for Host Inc.’s common stock. In addition, holders of OP units who redeem their units and receive, at Host Inc.’s election, shares of Host Inc. common stock will be able to sell those shares freely. As of December 31, 2011, there are approximately 10.5 million OP units outstanding that are redeemable, which represents approximately 1.5% of all outstanding shares. Further, a substantial number of shares of Host Inc.’s common stock have been and will be issued or reserved for issuance from time to time under our employee benefit plans. We maintain two stock-based compensation plans: (i) the comprehensive stock plan, whereby we may award to participating employees and directors restricted shares of common stock, options to purchase common stock and deferred shares of common stock, and (ii) an employee stock purchase plan. At December 31, 2011, there were approximately 19 million shares of Host Inc.’s common stock reserved and available for issuance under the comprehensive stock plan and employee stock purchase plan and 1.3 million outstanding options exercisable with a weighted average exercise price of $7.68 per share.

Also as of December 31, 2011, Host L.P. had outstanding $963 million principal amount of exchangeable senior debentures that could become exchangeable, under certain conditions, for shares of Host Inc.’s common stock. The principal portion for $388 million face amount of such exchangeable debentures is cash settled, and therefore no shares would be issued, unless Host Inc.’s share price exceeded the exchange rate for this series of debentures of $31.23 as of December 31, 2011. For another $400 million of such exchangeable debentures, Host Inc. has the option to issue cash, shares of Host Inc.’s common stock or any combination thereof in settlement of the debentures, should they be presented for exchange.

On April 21, 2011, we entered into a Sales Financing Agreement with BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC, through which Host Inc. may issue and sell, from time to time, shares having an aggregate offering price of up to $400 million. The sales will be made in “at the market” offerings under SEC rules, including sales made directly on the NYSE. BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC is acting as sales agent. Host Inc. may sell shares of common stock under its program, from time to time, based on market conditions, although it is not under an obligation to sell any shares. As of December 31, 2011, $226 million of Host Inc.’s common stock have been issued and sold pursuant to the program. Shares of Host Inc.’s common stock, having an aggregate offering price of approximately $174 million, remain issuable from time to time under the agreement. Any additional shares of common stock issued by Host Inc., whether issued under this program or otherwise, would be available in the future for sale in the public markets.

Our earnings and cash distributions will affect the market price of shares of Host Inc.’s common stock.

We believe that the market value of a REIT’s equity securities is based primarily upon the market’s perception of the REIT’s growth potential and its current and potential future cash distributions, whether from operations, sales, acquisitions, development or refinancings, and is secondarily based upon the value of the underlying assets. For that reason, shares of Host Inc.’s common stock may trade at prices that are higher or lower than the net asset value per share. To the extent that we retain operating cash flow for investment purposes, working capital reserves or other purposes, rather than distributing the cash flow to stockholders, these retained funds, while increasing the value of our underlying assets, may impact negatively the market price of Host Inc.’s common stock. Our failure to meet the market’s expectation with regard to future earnings and cash distributions likely would affect adversely the market price of Host Inc.’s common stock.

Market interest rates may affect the price of shares of Host Inc.’s common stock.

We believe that one of the factors that investors consider important in deciding whether to buy or sell shares of a REIT is the dividend rate on the shares, considered as a percentage of the price of the shares, relative to market interest rates. If market interest rates increase, prospective purchasers of REIT shares may expect a higher dividend rate. Thus, higher market interest rates could cause the market price of Host Inc.’s common stock to decrease.

Federal Income Tax Risks

To qualify as a REIT, each of Host Inc. and its subsidiary REITs are required to distribute at least 90% of its taxable income, excluding net capital gain, regardless of available cash or outstanding obligations.

To continue to qualify as a REIT, Host Inc. is required to distribute to its stockholders with respect to each year at least 90% of its taxable income, excluding net capital gain. To the extent that Host Inc. satisfies this distribution requirement, but distributes less than 100% of its taxable income and net capital gain for the taxable year, it will be subject to federal and state corporate income tax on its undistributed taxable income and net capital gain. In addition, Host Inc. will be subject to a nondeductible 4% excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions made by Host Inc. with respect to the calendar year are less than the sum of (1) 85% of its ordinary income, (2) 95% of its net capital gain, and (3) any undistributed taxable income from prior years, less excess distributions from prior years. Host Inc. intends to make distributions, subject to the availability of cash and in compliance with any debt covenants, to its stockholders in order to comply with the distribution requirement and to avoid the imposition of a significant nondeductible 4% excise tax and will rely for this purpose on distributions from Host L.P. and its subsidiaries. There are differences in timing between Host Inc.’s recognition of taxable income and its receipt of cash available for distribution due to, among other things, the seasonality of the lodging industry and the fact that some taxable income will be “phantom” taxable income, which is taxable income that is not matched by cash flow. Due to transactions entered into in years prior to Host Inc.’s conversion to a REIT, Host Inc. could recognize substantial amounts of “phantom” taxable income in the future. It is possible that any differences between the recognition of taxable income and the receipt of the related cash could require us to borrow funds or for Host Inc. to issue additional equity in order to enable Host Inc. to meet its distribution requirements and, therefore, to maintain its REIT status and to avoid the nondeductible 4% excise tax. In addition, because the REIT distribution requirements prevent Host Inc. from retaining earnings, generally we will be required to refinance debt at its maturity with additional debt or equity. It is possible that any of these sources of funds, if available at all, would not be sufficient to meet Host Inc.’s distribution and tax obligations.

Host L.P. owns 100% of the outstanding common stock and a portion of the outstanding preferred stock of two entities that have elected to be treated as REITs. Each of these subsidiary REITs are subject to the same requirements that Host Inc. must satisfy in order to qualify as a REIT, including the distribution requirements described above.

Adverse tax consequences would occur if Host Inc. or any of its subsidiary REITs fail to qualify as a REIT.

We believe that Host Inc. has been organized and has operated in such a manner so as to qualify as a REIT under the Code, commencing with its taxable year beginning January 1, 1999, and Host Inc. currently intends to continue to operate as a REIT during future years. In addition, Host Inc. owns, through Host L.P., two entities that have elected to be treated as REITs. As the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT are extremely complex and interpretations of the federal income tax laws governing qualification and taxation as a REIT are limited, no assurance can be provided that Host Inc. currently qualifies as a REIT or will continue to qualify as a REIT or that each of Host Inc.’s subsidiary REITs qualify as a REIT. If any of the subsidiary REITs were to fail to qualify as a REIT, it is possible that Host Inc. would fail to qualify as a REIT unless it (or the subsidiary REIT) could avail itself of certain relief provisions. New legislation, treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could change significantly the tax laws with respect to an entity’s qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of its REIT qualification. If Host Inc. or any of the subsidiary REITs were to fail to qualify as a REIT, and any available relief provisions did not apply, the non-qualifying REIT would not be allowed to take a deduction for distributions to its stockholders in computing its taxable income, and it would be subject to federal and state corporate income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on its taxable income at regular corporate rates. Moreover, unless entitled to statutory relief, the non-qualifying REIT would not qualify as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which REIT qualification was lost.

Any determination that Host Inc. or one of its subsidiary REITs does not qualify as a REIT will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and could materially reduce the value of Host Inc.’s common stock. The additional tax liability of Host Inc. or the subsidiary REIT for the year, or years, in which the relevant entity did not qualify as a REIT would reduce its net earnings available for investment, debt service or distributions to stockholders. Furthermore, the non-qualifying entity no longer would be required to make distributions to stockholders as a condition to REIT qualification and all of its distributions to stockholders would be taxable as ordinary C corporation dividends to the extent of its current and accumulated earnings and profits. This means that, if Host Inc. were to fail to qualify as a REIT, Host Inc.’s stockholders currently taxed as individuals would be taxed on those dividends at capital gain rates and Host Inc.’s corporate stockholders generally would be entitled to the dividends received deduction with respect to such dividends, subject in each case to applicable limitations under the Code. Host Inc.’s failure to qualify as a REIT also would cause an event of default under Host L.P.’s credit facility, which default could lead to an acceleration of the amounts due thereunder, which, in turn, would constitute an event of default under Host L.P.’s outstanding debt securities.

If our leases are not respected as true leases for federal income tax purposes, each of Host Inc. and its subsidiary REITs would fail to qualify as a REIT.

To qualify as a REIT, Host Inc. must satisfy two gross income tests, pursuant to which specified percentages of its gross income must be passive income, such as rent. For the rent paid pursuant to the hotel leases with our TRS, which rental income currently constitutes substantially all of Host Inc.’s and each of our subsidiary REITs’ gross income, to qualify for purposes of the gross income tests, our leases must be respected as true leases for federal income tax purposes and must not be treated as service contracts, joint ventures or some other type of arrangement. We believe that the leases will be respected as true leases for federal income tax purposes. There can be no assurance, however, that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) will agree with this characterization. If the leases were not respected as true leases for federal income tax purposes, neither Host Inc. nor either of our subsidiary REITs would be able to satisfy either of the two gross income tests applicable to REITs and each likely would lose its REIT status.

If our affiliated lessees fail to qualify as taxable REIT subsidiaries, each of Host Inc. and its subsidiary REITs would fail to qualify as a REIT.

Rent paid by a lessee that is a “related party tenant” of Host Inc. will not be qualifying income for purposes of the two gross income tests applicable to REITs. We lease substantially all of our hotels to our subsidiary that is taxable as a regular C corporation and that has elected to be treated as a taxable REIT subsidiary with respect to Host Inc. So long as any affiliated lessee qualifies as a taxable REIT subsidiary, it will not be treated as a “related party tenant.” We believe that our affiliated lessees have qualified and will continue to qualify, and that the taxable REIT subsidiaries of each of our subsidiary REITs have qualified and will continue to qualify, to be treated as taxable REIT subsidiaries for federal income tax purposes. There can be no assurance, however, that the IRS will not challenge the status of a taxable REIT subsidiary for federal income tax purposes or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in disqualifying any of our affiliated lessees (including the taxable REIT subsidiaries of our subsidiary REITs) from treatment as a taxable REIT subsidiary, it is possible that Host Inc. or a subsidiary REIT would fail to meet the asset tests applicable to REITs and substantially all of its income would fail to qualify for the gross income tests. If Host Inc. or a subsidiary REIT failed to meet either the asset tests or the gross income tests, each likely would lose its REIT status.

Despite the REIT status of each of Host Inc. and its subsidiary REITs, we remain subject to various taxes.

One of the subsidiary REITs of Host Inc. will be required to pay federal income tax at the highest regular corporate rate on “built-in gain” recognized as a result of the sale of one or more of its hotel assets prior to the expiration of the applicable 10-year holding period, including certain hotels acquired from Starwood and its affiliates in 2006. The total amount of gain on which the subsidiary REIT would be subject to corporate income tax if all of its built-in gain assets were sold in a taxable transaction prior to the expiration of the applicable 10-year holding period would be material to it. In addition, we expect that we could recognize other substantial deferred tax liabilities in the future without any corresponding receipt of cash.

Notwithstanding Host Inc.’s status as a REIT, Host Inc. and our subsidiaries (including our subsidiary REITs) are subject to some federal, state, local and foreign taxes on their income and property. For example, Host Inc. and our subsidiary REITs will pay tax on certain types of income that are not distributed and will be subject to a 100% excise tax on transactions with a taxable REIT subsidiary that are not conducted on an arm’s length basis. Moreover, the taxable REIT subsidiaries of Host Inc. and our subsidiary REITs are taxable as regular C corporations and will pay federal, state and local income tax on their net income at the applicable corporate rates, and foreign taxes to the extent that they own assets or conduct operations in foreign jurisdictions.

Host L.P. is obligated under its partnership agreement to pay all such taxes (and any related interest and penalties) incurred by Host Inc.

If the IRS were to challenge successfully Host L.P.’s status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, Host Inc. would cease to qualify as a REIT and would suffer other adverse consequences.

We believe that Host L.P. qualifies to be treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. As a partnership, it is not subject to federal income tax on its income. Instead, each of its partners, including Host Inc., is required to report and pay tax, if applicable, on such partner’s allocable share of its income. No assurance can be provided, however, that the IRS will not challenge Host L.P.’s status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, or that a court would not sustain such a challenge. If the IRS were successful in treating Host L.P. as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, Host Inc. would fail to meet the gross income tests and certain of the asset tests applicable to REITs and, accordingly, cease to qualify as a REIT. If Host L.P. fails to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or Host Inc. fails to qualify as a REIT, either failure would cause an event of default under Host L.P.’s credit facility that, in turn, could constitute an event of default under Host L.P.’s outstanding debt securities. Also, the failure of Host L.P. to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax purposes would cause it to become subject to federal, state and foreign corporate income tax, which tax would reduce significantly the amount of cash available for debt service and for distribution to its partners, including Host Inc.

As a REIT, each of Host Inc. and its subsidiary REITs is subject to limitations on its ownership of debt and equity securities.

Subject to certain exceptions, a REIT generally is prohibited from owning securities in any one issuer to the extent that (1) the value of such securities exceeds 5% of the value of the REIT’s total assets, (2) the securities owned by the REIT represent more than 10% of the issuer’s outstanding voting securities, or (3) the REIT owns more than 10% of the value of the issuer’s outstanding securities. A REIT is permitted to own securities of a subsidiary in an amount that exceeds the 5% value test and the 10% vote or value test if the subsidiary elects to be a taxable REIT subsidiary. However, a REIT may not own securities of taxable REIT subsidiaries that represent in the aggregate more than 25% of the value of the REIT’s total assets. If Host Inc. or any of its subsidiary REITs were to violate these ownership limitations, each likely would lose its REIT status.

Each of Host Inc. or its subsidiary REITs may be required to pay a penalty tax upon the sale of a hotel.

The federal income tax provisions applicable to REITs provide that any gain realized by a REIT on the sale of property held as inventory or other property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business is treated as income from a “prohibited transaction” that is subject to a 100% excise tax. Under existing law, whether property, including hotels, is held as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business is a question of fact that depends upon all of the facts and circumstances with respect to the particular transaction. We intend to hold our hotels for investment with a view to long-term appreciation, to engage in the business of acquiring and owning hotels and to make occasional sales of hotels consistent with our investment objectives. There can be no assurance, however, that the IRS might not contend that one or more of these sales are subject to the 100% excise tax.

Risks Relating to Redemption of OP Units

A holder who offers its OP units for redemption may have adverse tax consequences.

A holder whose OP units are redeemed will be treated for federal and state income tax purposes as having sold the OP units. The sale of these units is a taxable event and the holder thereof will be treated as realizing an amount equal to the sum of (1) the value of the common stock or cash the holder receives, and (2) the amount of Host L.P.’s nonrecourse liabilities allocated to the redeemed OP units. The gain or loss recognized by the holder of OP units is measured by the difference between the amount realized by the holder and the holder’s basis in the OP units redeemed (which basis includes the amount of Host L.P.’s nonrecourse liabilities allocated to the redeemed OP units). It is possible that the amount of gain and/or the tax liability related thereto that the holder recognizes and pays could exceed the value of the common stock or cash that the holder receives.

If a holder of OP units elects to offer them for redemption, the original receipt of the OP units may be subject to tax.

If a holder of OP units elects to have its units redeemed, particularly within two years of receiving them, there is a risk that the original receipt of the OP units may be treated as a taxable sale under the “disguised sale” rules of the Internal Revenue Code. Subject to several exceptions, the tax law generally provides that a partner’s contribution of property to a partnership and a simultaneous or subsequent transfer of money or other consideration from the partnership to the partner will be presumed to be a taxable sale. In particular, if money or other consideration is transferred by a partnership to a partner within two years of the partner’s contribution of property, the transactions are presumed to be a taxable sale of the contributed property, unless the facts and circumstances clearly establish that the transfers are not a sale. On the other hand, if two years have passed between the original contribution of property and the transfer of money or other consideration, the transactions will not be presumed to be a taxable sale, unless the facts and circumstances clearly establish that they should be so treated.

Differences between an investment in shares of Host Inc. common stock and OP units may affect redeemed holders of OP units.

If a holder of OP units elects to have OP units redeemed, we will determine whether the holder receives cash or shares of Host Inc.’s common stock in exchange for the OP units. Although an investment in shares of Host Inc.’s common stock is substantially similar to an investment in OP units, there are some differences between ownership of OP units and ownership of Host Inc. common stock. These differences include form of organization, management structure, voting rights, liquidity and federal income taxation, some of which may be material to investors.

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.

Properties

See Section “Our Hotel Properties” of Item 1 above for a discussion of our hotel properties.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

On April 27, 2005, we initiated a lawsuit against Keystone-Texas Property Holding Corporation (“Keystone”) seeking a declaration that a provision of the ground lease for the property under the San Antonio Marriott Rivercenter was valid and claiming that Keystone had breached that lease provision. On October 18, 2006, Keystone filed an amended counterclaim and later, a third party claim, alleging that we had tortiously interfered with Keystone’s attempted sale of the property and that we slandered Keystone’s title to the property.

On February 8, 2010, we received an adverse jury verdict in the 166^th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas. The jury found that we tortiously interfered with the attempted sale by Keystone of the land under the San Antonio Marriott Rivercenter and awarded Keystone $34.3 million in damages, plus statutory interest. In addition, the jury found that we slandered Keystone’s title to the property and awarded Keystone $39 million in damages, plus statutory interest. Keystone only will be entitled to receive one of these damage awards. On February 12, 2010, the jury awarded Keystone $7.5 million in exemplary damages with respect to the second claim. The trial court, however, subsequently granted our motion to disregard the jury’s exemplary damages award. On June 3, 2010, the trial court issued its final judgment awarding Keystone: (i) $39 million in damages for slander of title; or (ii) alternatively, $34.3 million for tortious interference of contract; (iii) approximately $6.8 million in pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; (iv) approximately $3.5 million in attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs; and (v) an additional $750,000 in attorneys’ fees for any appeal to the court of appeals and Texas Supreme Court.

On November 23, 2011, a three-judge panel of the San Antonio Court of Appeals issued its memorandum opinion denying our appeal of the trial court’s June 3, 2010 final judgment. In addition, the panel overturned the trial court’s decision to grant our motion to disregard the jury’s $7.5 million award of exemplary damages.

We believe that the memorandum opinion contains numerous legal errors and we intend to continue to vigorously pursue these issues on appeal. On January 17, 2012, we filed a motion seeking rehearing from the three-judge panel and a motion for rehearing by the entire seven-judge court of appeals.

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures

Not Applicable.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

In the following table we set forth certain information regarding those persons currently serving as executive officers of Host Inc. as of February 22, 2011. Host L.P. does not have executive officers.


Name and Title	Age	Business Experience Prior to Becoming an Executive Officer of Host Inc.
Richard E. Marriott Chairman of the Board	73	Richard E. Marriott joined our company in 1965 and has served in various executive capacities. In 1979, Mr. Marriott was elected to the Board of Directors. In 1984, he was elected Executive Vice President and in 1986, he was elected Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors. In 1993, Mr. Marriott was elected Chairman of the Board.

W. Edward Walter President, Chief Executive Officer and Director	56	W. Edward Walter joined our company in 1996 as Senior Vice President for Acquisitions and was later named Treasurer and Chief Operating Officer before becoming our Chief Financial Officer in 2003 and President, Chief Executive Officer and Director in October 2007.

Elizabeth A. Abdoo Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary	53	Elizabeth A. Abdoo joined our company in June 2001 as Senior Vice President and General Counsel and became Executive Vice President in February 2003. She was elected Secretary in August 2001.

Minaz B. Abji Executive Vice President, Asset Management	58	Minaz B. Abji joined our company in 2003 as Executive Vice President, Asset Management. Prior to joining us, Mr. Abji was President of Canadian Hotel Income Properties REIT, a Canadian REIT located in Vancouver, British Columbia where he worked since 1998.

Larry K. Harvey Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer	47	Larry K. Harvey rejoined our company in February 2003 as Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller. In February 2006, he was promoted to Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer. He was elected Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer in 2007. He served as Treasurer until February 2010 and continues to serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

Gregory J. Larson Executive Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Fund Management	47	Gregory J. Larson joined our company in October 1993. In 1998, Mr. Larson joined the Treasury group as Vice President of Corporate Finance. He assumed leadership of the Investor Relations department in 2000, was promoted to Senior Vice President in 2002, and was elected Treasurer in 2005. In November 2007, Mr. Larson was selected to lead our corporate strategy and fund management business and elected to Executive Vice President.

James F. Risoleo Executive Vice President & Managing Director, Europe	56	James F. Risoleo joined our company in 1996 as Senior Vice President for Acquisitions, and was elected Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer in 2000. Effective January 1, 2012, he became managing director of the Company’s European business activities.

Joanne G. Hamilton Executive Vice President, Human Resources	54	Joanne G. Hamilton joined our company as Executive Vice President, Human Resources in January 2010. Prior to joining our company, she was the Chief Human Resource Officer for Beers & Cutler, an accounting and consulting firm based in Vienna, Virginia from 2007 to 2010. Prior to joining Beers & Cutler, Ms. Hamilton served as Senior Vice President of Human Resources for Spirent PLC, a global telecommunications company, from 2002 to 2007.

Name and Title

Age

Business Experience Prior to Becoming an
Executive Officer of Host Inc.

Brian G. Macnamara

Senior Vice President,

Corporate Controller

Brian G. Macnamara joined our company in February 1996, was promoted to Vice President, Assistant Corporate Controller in February 2007, and was elected Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller in September 2007. Prior to serving as Assistant Corporate Controller, Mr. Macnamara served as Vice President, Financial Reporting and Corporate Real Estate.

PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host Inc.

Host Inc.’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and trades under the symbol “HST.” The following table sets forth, for the fiscal periods indicated, the high and low sales prices per share of Host Inc.’s common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape and dividends declared per share:


					Dividends
	Stock Price				Declared
	High		Low		Per Share
2010
1^st Quarter	$	14.96	$	10.46	$	0.01
2^nd Quarter		17.09		12.83		0.01
3^rd Quarter		15.91		12.64		0.01
4^th Quarter		17.97		13.95		0.01
2011
1^st Quarter	$	19.88	$	16.62	$	0.02
2^nd Quarter		18.30		15.60		0.03
3^rd Quarter		17.81		10.19		0.04
4^th Quarter		14.90		9.78		0.05

Under the terms of our senior notes indenture and the credit facility, Host Inc.’s ability to pay dividends and make other payments is dependent on its ability to satisfy certain financial requirements. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Financial Condition” and “Risk Factors—Financial Risks and Risks of Operation—Our ability to pay dividends and to make distributions may be limited or prohibited by the terms of our indebtedness or preferred units.”

As of February 16, 2012, there were 28,014 holders of record of Host Inc.’s common stock. However, because many of the shares of its common stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of stockholders, we believe that there are considerably more beneficial holders of its common stock than record holders. As of February 16, 2012, there were 1,828 holders of OP units (in addition to Host Inc.). OP units are redeemable for cash, or, at our election, convertible into Host Inc.’s common stock.

Host Inc.’s ability to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code is facilitated by limiting the number of shares of its stock that a person may own. Its charter provides that, subject to limited exceptions, no person or persons acting as a group may own, or be deemed to own by virtue of the attribution provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, more than 9.8% in value or in number, whichever is more restrictive, of shares of Host Inc.’s outstanding common stock, preferred stock or any other class of stock, each considered as a separate class or series for this purpose. Host Inc.’s Board of Directors has the authority to increase the ownership limit from time to time, but does not have the authority to do so to the extent that, after giving effect to such increase, any five beneficial owners of capital stock could beneficially own in the aggregate more than 49.5% of the outstanding capital stock. See “Risk Factors—Risks of Ownership of Host Inc.’s Common Stock—There are limitations on the acquisition of Host Inc. common stock and changes in control.”

Stockholder Return Performance

The following graph compares the five-year cumulative total stockholder return on Host Inc.’s common stock against the cumulative total returns of the Standard & Poor’s Corporation Composite 500 Index and the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust (“NAREIT”) Equity Index. The graph assumes an initial investment of $100 in Host Inc.’s common stock and in each of the indexes, and also assumes the reinvestment of dividends.

Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Stockholder Returns 2006 – 2011

LOGO


	2006		2007		2008		2009		2010		2011
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.	$	100.00	$	72.81	$	33.92	$	52.39	$	80.45	$	67.17
NAREIT Equity Index	$	100.00	$	84.31	$	52.50	$	67.20	$	85.98	$	93.10
S&P 500 Index	$	100.00	$	105.46	$	66.51	$	84.11	$	96.78	$	98.82

This performance graph shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or incorporated by reference into any filing of Host Inc. or Host L.P. (or any of their respective subsidiaries) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.

Market for Registrant’s Common Units, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host L.P.

There is no established public trading market for our OP units and transfers of OP units are restricted by the terms of Host L.P.’s partnership agreement. Under the terms of our senior notes indenture and our credit facility, Host L.P.’s ability to make distributions and other payments is dependent on its ability to satisfy certain financial requirements. See “Risk Factors—Financial Risks and Risks of Operation—Our ability to pay dividends and to make distributions may be limited or prohibited by the terms of our indebtedness or preferred units.” The following table sets forth, for the fiscal periods indicated, Host L.P.’s distributions declared per common OP unit:


	Distributions
	Declared Per
	Common Unit
2010
1^st Quarter	$	.0102
2^nd Quarter		.0102
3^rd Quarter		.0102
4^th Quarter		.0102
2011
1^st Quarter	$	.0204
2^nd Quarter		.0306
3^rd Quarter		.0409
4^th Quarter		.0511

The number of holders of record of Host L.P.’s common OP units on February 16, 2012 was 1,828. The number of outstanding common OP units as of February 16, 2012 was 703,107,908, of which 692,672,814 were owned by Host Inc. Under the terms of our senior notes indenture and the credit facility, Host L.P.’s ability to make distributions and other payments is dependent on its ability to satisfy certain financial requirements. In addition, under the terms of Host L.P.’s preferred OP units, we are not permitted to make distributions on our common OP units unless all cumulative distributions have been paid on our preferred OP units. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Financial Condition” and “Risk Factors—Financial Risks and Risks of Operation—Our ability to pay dividends and to make distributions may be limited or prohibited by the terms of our indebtedness or preferred units.”

Fourth Quarter 2011 Host L.P. Purchases of Equity Securities


Period	Total Number of Units Purchased		Average Price Paid Per Common Unit	Total Number of Common Units Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plan or Programs		Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Common Units that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs
September 10, 2011— October 9, 2011		1,537	1.021494 shares of Host Inc. Common Stock*		—		—
October 10, 2011— November 9, 2011		48,095	1.021494 shares of Host Inc. Common Stock*		—		—
November 10, 2011— December 9, 2011		11,218	1.021494 shares of Host Inc. Common Stock*		—		—
December 10 2011— December 31, 2011		10,060	1.021494 shares of Host Inc. Common Stock*		—		—

Total		70,910			—		—

*	Reflects common OP units redeemed by Host Inc. in exchange for shares of its common stock.

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data (Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.)

The following table presents certain selected historical financial data which has been derived from audited consolidated financial statements for the five years ended December 31, 2011. The following information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”:


	Calendar year
	2011			2010			2009			2008		2007
	(in millions, except per share amounts)
Income Statement Data:
Revenues	$	4,998		$	4,428		$	4,135		$	5,108	$	5,215
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(12	)		(128	)		(197	)		382		532
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax (1)		(4	)		(4	)		(61	)		32		202
Net income (loss)		(16	)		(132	)		(258	)		414		734
Net income (loss) attributable to Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.		(15	)		(130	)		(252	)		395		703
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders		(15	)		(138	)		(261	)		386		694
Basic earnings (loss) per common share :
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(.01	)		(.20	)		(.34	)		.68		.94
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		(.01	)		(.01	)		(.11	)		.06		.39
Net income (loss)		(.02	)		(.21	)		(.45	)		.74		1.33
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share:
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(.01	)		(.20	)		(.34	)		.66		.94
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		(.01	)		(.01	)		(.11	)		.06		.38
Net income (loss)		(.02	)		(.21	)		(.45	)		.72		1.32
Dividends declared per common share (2)		.14			.04			.25			.65		1.00
Balance Sheet Data:
Total assets	$	13,068		$	12,411		$	12,555		$	11,950	$	11,811
Debt		5,753			5,477			5,837			5,876		5,515
Preferred stock		—			—			97			97		97

(1)	Discontinued operations reflects the operations of properties classified as held for sale, the results of operations of properties prior to their disposition and the gain or loss on those dispositions.

(2)	See Item 5. “Market for Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host Inc.”

Selected Financial Data (Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.)


	Calendar year
	2011			2010			2009			2008		2007
	(in millions, except per unit amounts)
Income Statement Data:
Revenues	$	4,998		$	4,428		$	4,135		$	5,108	$	5,215
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(12	)		(128	)		(197	)		382		532
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax (1)		(4	)		(4	)		(61	)		32		202
Net income (loss)		(16	)		(132	)		(258	)		414		734
Net income (loss) attributable to Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.		(15	)		(132	)		(257	)		411		728
Net income (loss) available to common unitholders		(15	)		(140	)		(266	)		402		719
Basic earnings (loss) per common unit:
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(.01	)		(.21	)		(.34	)		.68		.96
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		(.01	)		—			(.10	)		.06		.37
Net income (loss)		(.02	)		(.21	)		(.44	)		.74		1.33
Diluted earnings (loss) per common unit:
Income (loss) from continuing operations		(.01	)		(.21	)		(.35	)		.66		.95
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		(.01	)		—			(.10	)		.06		.37
Net income (loss)		(.02	)		(.21	)		(.45	)		.72		1.32
Distributions declared per common unit (2)		.143			.0408			.025			.65		1.00
Balance Sheet Data:
Total assets	$	13,068		$	12,410		$	12,553		$	11,948	$	11,809
Debt		5,753			5,477			5,837			5,876		5,515
Preferred units		—			—			97			97		97

(1)	Discontinued operations reflects the operations of properties classified as held for sale, the results of operations of properties prior to their disposition and the gain or loss on those dispositions.

(2)	See Item 5. “Market for Registrant’s Common Units, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities for Host L.P.”

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this report.

Overview

Host Inc. operates as a self-managed and self-administered REIT. Host Inc. is the sole general partner of Host L.P. and holds 98.5% of its partnership interests. Host L.P. is a limited partnership operating through an umbrella partnership structure. As of February 22, 2012, we own 121 hotels, primarily consisting of luxury and upper upscale properties. Host Inc. is the largest lodging REIT in NAREIT’s composite index. A REIT is a legal entity that owns real estate assets and, through payments of dividends to stockholders, is permitted to reduce or eliminate federal income taxes at the corporate level.

Our hotels are operated under brand names that are among the most respected and widely recognized in the lodging industry. The majority of our properties are luxury and upper upscale that are located in central business districts of major cities, near airports and in resort/conference destinations that benefit from significant barriers to entry by competitors. In 2011, approximately 79% of our revenues were generated by our urban and resort/conference hotels. While our hotels are still subject to competitive pressures, we believe this strategy should allow us to achieve room rate and occupancy premiums in excess of those of our competitors. We seek to maximize the value of our portfolio through aggressive asset management by assisting the managers of our hotels in optimizing property operations and by completing strategic capital improvements.

Our Customers

The majority of our customers fall into three broad groups: transient business, group business and contract business, which accounted for approximately 59%, 36%, and 5%, respectively, of our 2011 room sales. Similar to the majority of the lodging industry, we further categorize business within these categories based on characteristics they have in common as follows:

Transient business broadly represents individual business or leisure travelers. Business travelers make up the majority of transient demand at our hotels. Therefore, we will be significantly more affected by trends in business travel versus leisure demand. The three key subcategories of the transient business group are:

•

Retail: This is the benchmark rate that a hotel publishes and offers to the general public. It typically is for travelers that do not have access to negotiated or discount rates. It includes the “rack rate,” which typically is applied to rooms during high demand periods and is the highest rate category available. Retail room rates will fluctuate more freely depending on anticipated demand levels (e.g. seasonality and weekday vs. weekend stays).

•

Special Corporate: This is a negotiated rate offered to companies and organizations that provide significant levels of room night demand to the hotel or to hotel brands generally. These rates are typically negotiated annually at a discount to the anticipated retail rate.

•

Discount: This category encompasses all discount programs, such as AAA and AARP discounts, government per diem, rooms booked through wholesale channels, frequent guest program redemptions, and promotional rates and packages offered by a hotel.

Group business represents clusters of guestrooms booked together, usually with a minimum of 10 rooms. The three key sub-categories of the group business category are:

•

Association: group business related to national and regional association meetings and conventions.

•

Corporate: group business related to corporate meetings (e.g., product launches, training programs, contract negotiations, and presentations).

•

Other: group business predominately related to social, military, education, religious, fraternal and youth and amateur sports teams, otherwise known as SMERF business.

The final category is contract demand, which refers to blocks of rooms sold to a specific company for an extended period of time at significantly discounted rates. Contract rates are usually utilized by hotels that are located in markets that are experiencing consistently lower levels of demand. Airline crews are typical generators of contract demand for our hotels.

Understanding Our Performance

Our Revenues and Expenses. Our hotels are operated by third-party managers under long-term agreements, pursuant to which they typically earn base and incentive management fees based on the levels of revenues and profitability of each individual hotel. We provide operating funds, or working capital, which the managers use to purchase inventory and to pay wages, utilities, property taxes and other hotel-level expenses. We generally receive a cash distribution from our hotel managers each four-week or monthly accounting period, which distribution reflects hotel-level sales less property-level operating expenses (excluding depreciation).

Revenues for owned hotels represent 95% of our total revenue. The following table presents the components of our hotel revenue as a percentage of our total revenue:


	% of 2011 Revenues
• Rooms revenue. Occupancy and average daily room rate are the major drivers of rooms revenue. The business mix of the hotel (group versus transient and premium versus discount business) is a significant driver of room rates.		60	%

• Food and beverage revenue. Occupancy and the type of customer staying at the hotel are the major drivers of food and beverage revenue (i.e., group business typically generates more food and beverage business through catering functions when compared to transient business, which may or may not utilize the hotel’s restaurants).		29	%

• Other revenue. Occupancy, the nature of the property (i.e., resort, etc.) and its price point are the main drivers of other ancillary revenue, such as parking, golf course, spa, entertainment and other guest services.		6	%

Hotel operating expenses represent approximately 98% of our total operating costs and expenses. The following table presents the components of our hotel operating expenses as a percentage of our total operating costs and expenses:


	% of 2011 Operating Costs and Expenses
• Rooms expense. These costs include housekeeping, reservation systems, room supplies, laundry services and front desk costs. Occupancy is the major driver of rooms expense. These costs can increase based on increases in salaries and wages, as well as the level of service and amenities that are provided.		18	%

• Food and beverage expense. These expenses primarily include food, beverage and labor costs. Occupancy and the type of customer staying at the hotel (i.e., catered functions generally are more profitable than outlet sales) are the major drivers of food and beverage expense, which correlates closely with food and beverage revenue.		23	%


	% of 2011 Operating Costs and Expenses
• Other departmental and support expenses. These expenses include labor and other costs associated with other ancillary revenues, such as parking, golf courses, spas, entertainment and other guest services, as well as labor and other costs associated with administrative departments, sales and marketing, repairs and minor maintenance and utility costs.		27	%

• Management fees. Base management fees are computed as a percentage of gross revenue. Incentive management fees generally are paid when operating profits exceed certain threshold levels.		4	%

• Other property-level expenses. These expenses consist primarily of real and personal property taxes, ground rent, equipment rent and property insurance. Many of these expenses are relatively inflexible and do not necessarily change based on changes in revenues at our hotels.		12	%

• Depreciation and amortization expense. This is a non-cash expense that changes primarily based on the acquisition and disposition of hotel properties and the level of past capital expenditures.		14	%

The expense components listed above are based on those presented in our consolidated statements of operations. It also is worth noting that wage and benefit costs are spread among various line items. Taken separately, these costs represent approximately 55% of our hotel operating expenses.

Key Performance Indicators. Revenue per available room (“RevPAR”) is a commonly used measure within the hotel industry to evaluate hotel operations. RevPAR is defined as the product of the average daily room rate charged and the average daily occupancy achieved. RevPAR does not include food and beverage or parking, telephone or other guest service revenues generated by the property. Although RevPAR does not include these ancillary revenues, it generally is considered the key indicator of core revenues for many hotels.

RevPAR changes that are driven predominately by occupancy have different implications on overall revenue levels, as well as incremental operating profit, than do changes that are driven predominately by average room rate. For example, increases in occupancy at a hotel would lead to increases in rooms revenues and ancillary revenues, such as food and beverage revenue, as well as additional incremental costs (including housekeeping services, utilities and room amenity costs). RevPAR increases due to higher room rates, however, would not result in additional room-related costs, with the exception of those charged as a percentage of revenue. As a result, changes in RevPAR driven by increases or decreases in average room rates have a greater effect on profitability than changes in RevPAR caused by occupancy levels.

In discussing our operating results, we present RevPAR and certain other financial data for our hotels on a comparable hotel basis. Comparable hotels are those properties that we have owned for the entirety of the reporting periods being compared. Comparable hotels do not include the results of properties acquired or sold, or that incurred business interruption due to significant property damage or large scale capital improvements.

We also evaluate the performance of our business through certain non-GAAP financial measures. Each of these non-GAAP financial measures should be considered by investors as supplemental measures to GAAP performance measures such as total revenues, operating profit, net income and earnings per share. We provide a more detailed discussion of these non-GAAP financial measures, how management uses such measures to evaluate our financial condition and operating performance and a discussion of certain limitations of such measures in “—Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” Our non-GAAP financial measures include:

•

NAREIT Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and Adjusted FFO per diluted share. We use NAREIT FFO and Adjusted FFO per diluted share as a supplemental measure of company-wide profitability. NAREIT adopted FFO in order to promote an industry-wide measure of REIT operating performance. We also

adjust NAREIT FFO for gains and losses on extinguishment of debt, acquisition costs and litigation gains or losses outside the ordinary course of business, which we believe provides useful supplemental information about our ongoing operating performance.

•

Hotel adjusted operating profit. Hotel adjusted operating profit measures property-level results before debt service, depreciation and corporate expenses and is a supplemental measure of aggregate property-level profitability. We use hotel adjusted operating profit to evaluate the profitability of our comparable hotels.

•

EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA. Earnings before income taxes, interest expense, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”), is a commonly used measure in many industries. Management believes that such measure provides useful information to investors regarding our results of operations as it helps us and our investors evaluate the ongoing operating performance of our properties and facilitates comparisons between us and other lodging REITs, hotel owners who are not REITs and other capital-intensive companies. We adjust EBITDA when evaluating our performance because we believe that the exclusion of certain items, such as gains and losses related to real estate transactions and impairment losses (“Adjusted EBITDA”), provides useful supplemental information to investors regarding our ongoing operating performance.

Summary of 2011 Operating Results


	Operating Results (in millions, except per share and hotel statistics) Year ended December 31,
	2011			2010			% Change 2010 to 2011			2009			% Change 2009 to 2010
Total revenues	$	4,998		$	4,428			12.9	%	$	4,135			7.1	%
Comparable hotel revenues (a)		4,315			4,087			5.6			N/A			4.2
Net loss		(16	)		(132	)		87.9			(258	)		48.8
Adjusted EBITDA		1,018			834			22.1			798			4.5

Diluted loss per share	$	(.02	)	$	(.21	)		90.5	%	$	(.45	)		53.3	%
NAREIT FFO per diluted share		.89			.68			30.9			.51			33.3
Adjusted FFO per diluted share		.92			.74			24.3			.79			(6.3	)
Comparable hotel RevPAR (a)	$	129.97		$	122.47			6.1	%		N/A			5.8	%

(a)	Comparable hotel operating statistics for 2011 and 2010 are based on 104 comparable hotels as of December 31, 2011. The percent change from 2009 and 2010 are based on 108 comparable hotels as of December 31, 2010.

During 2011, RevPAR at our comparable hotels increased 6.1% compared to 2010 as a result of improvements in overall lodging demand, combined with low supply growth in the industry. While the recovery in the overall economy has been slower than we expected, 2011 marked the second year of solid growth in the lodging industry as increases in business investment and corporate profits, as well as low levels of new supply, offset the effects of lower than anticipated GDP growth and continued high unemployment. As expected during the recovery process, initially the growth in RevPAR was driven primarily by improvements in occupancy. During 2011, as occupancy approached more normalized levels, RevPAR growth was driven increasingly by increases in average rates. For 2011, RevPAR growth reflects the 4.3% increase in average daily rates, and an occupancy improvement of 1.3 percentage points. The RevPAR growth of our properties was tempered, however, by the effects of major capital projects that were on-going throughout the year, particularly those at some of our largest properties, such as the Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers and the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown. RevPAR would have increased an additional 40 basis points for the full year if the results of these two properties were excluded. Combined with the improvements in RevPAR, total owned hotel revenues increased 7.0% due to the inclusion of the operations of 14 hotels acquired in 2010 and 2011 (the “Recent Acquisitions”), which increased revenues by $353 million and $57 million, respectively.

Rate increases for the year have been driven primarily by increases in transient business across all segments in the category, as well as improvements in corporate group business. Group demand has recovered more slowly as weak association group demand has offset the improvement in corporate group demand.

Food and beverage revenue for 2011 increased by 10.5% compared to 2010, which increase was driven by a 5.5% improvement in comparable hotel food and beverage revenue and incremental food and beverage revenues from our Recent Acquisitions of $74 million, or 5.7% for the year. Improvements in banquet and audio-visual revenue were a significant driver of the growth in comparable food and beverage revenues.

As a result of these trends, total comparable revenues for our owned hotels increased $228 million, or 5.6%, to approximately $4.3 billion for the year. In addition to the hotel revenues for our owned hotels described above, our other revenues increased $54 million due to incremental revenue from the 53 Courtyard by Marriott hotels leased from Hospitality Properties Trust that previously had been sublet (the “HPT portfolio”; see “—Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations”). Therefore, total revenues increased $570 million, or 12.9%, to approximately $5.0 billion for 2011.

Operating margins (calculated based on GAAP operating profit as a percentage of GAAP revenues) increased 150 basis points for the full year 2011. Operating margins calculated using GAAP measures are significantly affected by several items, including our Recent Acquisitions. Our comparable hotel adjusted operating profit margins, which exclude, among other items, operations from our recently acquired hotels, depreciation and corporate expenses, increased 90 basis points.

Net loss for Host Inc. decreased $116 million in 2011 to a loss of $16 million and Adjusted EBITDA increased $184 million, or 22.1%, to $1,018 million. Net loss, GAAP operating profit and Adjusted EBITDA all were affected negatively by the forfeiture of the $15 million deposit on the terminated transaction to acquire the Grand Hyatt, Washington, D.C. in December 2011.

Host Inc.’s diluted loss per common share decreased $.19 to a loss in 2011 of $.02. The reduction in our loss per diluted share reflects the improvement in operating results at our hotels as described above. Host Inc.’s NAREIT FFO per diluted share and Adjusted FFO per diluted share of $.89 and $.92, respectively, increased 30.9% and 24.3% for 2011. For 2011, the $15 million deposit forfeiture discussed above reduced NAREIT FFO per diluted share and Adjusted FFO per diluted share by $.02.

The trends and transactions described above for Host Inc. similarly affected the operating results for Host L.P, as the only significant difference between the Host Inc. and Host L.P. statements of operations relates to the treatment of income attributable to the outside partners of Host L.P. For the year, Host L.P.’s net loss declined $116 million to $16 million, and the loss per diluted unit declined $.19 to $.02 per unit.

Investing Activities

Acquisitions. We believe that the lodging industry continues to present opportunities to purchase assets with high growth potential at a significant discount to replacement cost. Many of the prospective acquisition opportunities are expected to be driven by debt maturities on over-leveraged assets that were refinanced in 2006 and 2007 as owners may look to sell as they face refinancing challenges with lower loan to value ratios and higher interest rates. In many cases, we expect that these owners will seek to meet their financing obligations through an all cash sale of the hotel. As the recovery continues, we expect to see more competition in the acquisition market, especially from private equity and foreign sovereign wealth firms. During 2011, we completed the following acquisitions:

•

On September 1, 2011, we acquired the remaining 51% partnership interest in the Tiburon Golf Ventures, L.P., which owns the golf club surrounding The Ritz-Carlton, Naples Golf Resort, for $11 million. We previously held a 49% limited partner interest in the entity.

•

On April 29, 2011, we acquired a 75% common voting interest and a preferred interest in the joint venture that owns the 364-room Hilton Melbourne South Wharf, Australia. The total transaction value, including

the 25% voting interest retained by the previous owners, was A$142 million ($152 million) and included the assumption of an existing A$80 million ($86 million) mortgage loan. We are entitled to receive a cumulative priority return of 12% based on our initial investment of A$45 million ($48 million) plus 75% of the distributable cash after our partner’s subordinated preferred interest.

•

On March 23, 2011 we acquired the 775-room New York Helmsley Hotel for $313.5 million. The property is managed by Starwood and will be converted to the Westin brand in 2012.

•

On March 17, 2011, we acquired the 1,625-room Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego for $572 million (which includes the payment of $19 million for the existing FF&E replacement fund). The transaction was comprised of cash consideration of $566 million, including the repayment of $403 million of existing loans and the issuance of approximately 0.3 million OP units valued at $6 million.

•

On February 18, 2011, we acquired a portfolio of seven midscale and upscale hotels totaling 1,207 rooms in New Zealand for approximately NZ$190 million ($145 million), at which time we entered into an NZ$105 million ($80 million) mortgage. The properties are operated by Accor under the ibis and Novotel brands.

Also during the year, as part of the expansion of the Euro JV, we transferred the Le Méridien Piccadilly to Fund II thereof and received proceeds from the transfer of $40 million. Fund II also purchased the Pullman Bercy, Paris in 2011 for approximately €96 million ($132 million).

Redevelopment and Return on Investment Capital Expenditures. During 2011 and 2010, we invested a total of $215 million and $114 million, respectively, in redevelopment and ROI expenditures that primarily consisted of large-scale redevelopment projects at numerous properties. We expect that our investment in redevelopment and ROI expenditures in 2012 will total approximately $235 million to $275 million. Significant redevelopment capital expenditures during the year included the following projects:

•

Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers – the complete renovation of all 1,777 rooms, as well as major mechanical upgrades to the heating and cooling system;

•

Atlanta Marriott Perimeter Center – complete redevelopment of the hotel, including rooms renovation, lobby enhancements, mechanical systems upgrades, parking garage and exterior enhancements;

•

Chicago Marriott O’Hare – complete redevelopment of the hotel, including rooms renovation, new meeting space and the creation of a new great room and lobby;

•

San Diego Marriott Marquis & Marina – continuation of the extensive renovation and redevelopment project begun in 2010; and

•

Sheraton Indianapolis – renovation of rooms, lobby, fitness center, bar and restaurant, as well as the conversion of an existing tower into 129 apartments.

Included in our ROI expenditures are capital projects at our recently acquired hotels that we considered as part of our initial investment. In 2011, acquisition capital expenditures accounted for $13 million of our ROI capital expenditures as we began the renovation of all 270 rooms at the W New York – Union Square and the rebranding of the New York Helmsley Hotel to a Westin, including a redesign of all 773 rooms and a new lobby bar and restaurant. These projects will continue in 2012 and will include the planned renovation of all of the guestrooms at the Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego. During 2012, we anticipate that these projects will account for $80 million to $100 million of our ROI expenditures.

Renewal and Replacement Capital Expenditures. In addition to the redevelopment/ROI expenditures described above, we spent $327 million and $195 million on renewal and replacement expenditures during 2011 and 2010, respectively. During 2011, our renewal and replacement projects included the renovation of over 5,300 rooms, 98,000 square feet of public space and 515,000 square feet of meeting space. These expenditures are

designed to ensure that our high standards for product quality are maintained and to enhance the overall competitiveness of our properties in the marketplace. Major projects completed in 2011 included the renovation of the 45,000 square foot Broadway ballroom and 975 rooms at the New York Marriott Marquis, over 87,500 square feet of meeting space and 1,200 rooms in the main tower of the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown and 98,700 square feet of meeting space at the Sheraton Boston. Major renewal and replacement projects that were underway during the fourth quarter of 2011 included all 884 rooms at the JW Marriott Desert Springs and 39,750 square feet of meeting space at the New Orleans Marriott. We expect our investment in renewal and replacement expenditures in 2012 will total approximately $310 million to $330 million.

Dispositions. We disposed of one non-core property in 2011 for proceeds of $6 million. During 2012, we plan to increase our disposition activity, subject to market conditions that remain challenging. We believe that transaction activity will increase as the year progresses and we remain committed to our strategy of reducing our exposure to non-core hotels located in secondary and tertiary markets. We also will consider selling properties in primary markets on an opportunistic basis.

Financing Activities

During 2011, we continued to make progress in our goal to strengthen the balance sheet by lowering our debt-to-equity ratio and improving our overall credit statistics, as defined in our credit facility and senior note indentures. As our operations have improved during 2010 and 2011, we have focused on strategically raising and deploying capital to improve our overall leverage ratios, while at the same time completing substantial investments in our portfolio through acquisitions and capital investments. Specifically, during the year we completed the following significant financing transactions.

•

We issued $300 million of 6% Series Y senior notes and $500 million of 5⁷/8% Series W senior notes for aggregate net proceeds of $784 million.

•

Proceeds from the senior notes issuances were used to redeem or repay $454 million of debt, including the remaining $250 million of 7¹/8% Series K senior notes, $154 million of exchangeable senior debentures and $50 million under our credit facility. Additionally, we intend to use the proceeds from the issuance of the Series Y senior notes, along with available cash, to redeem the remaining $388 million of our 2⁵/8% exchangeable senior debentures (the “2007 Debentures”) on April 15, 2012, at which time they can be put to us for cash by the holders.

•

In June 2011, holders of $134 million of our 3¹/4% exchangeable debentures (the “2004 Debentures”) elected to exchange their debentures for 8.8 million common shares of Host Inc. upon our notice of intent to redeem $150 million of the debentures in May. The remaining $16 million was paid in cash.

•

We entered into a new senior revolving credit facility that replaced our existing senior revolving credit facility that allows for revolving borrowings in an aggregate principal amount of up to $1 billion, an increase of $400 million. The interest rate spread for LIBOR-based borrowings ranges from 175 to 275 basis points. The spread on U.S. dollar based borrowings based on our credit statistics as of December 31, 2011 is 200 basis points. The new facility has an initial maturity of November 2015 with an option to extend for one additional year, subject to certain conditions and the payment of an extension fee.

•

We refinanced the $79 million mortgage loan that we had assumed as part of the acquisition of the Hilton Melbourne South Wharf, lowering the all-in interest rate by 400 basis points to 6.77%.

•

We issued 19.1 million common shares under our “at the market” offering programs. The shares were issued at an average price of $17.09 per share for net proceeds of $323 million. Proceeds from these issuances were used to fund acquisitions and capital investments.

We believe, based on the overall strength of our balance sheet, that we have sufficient liquidity and access to the capital markets in order to pay our near-term debt maturities, fund our capital expenditures programs and take advantage of investment opportunities (for a detailed discussion, see “—Liquidity and Capital Resources”).

2012 Outlook

While the uncertain economic conditions and the European sovereign debt crisis will clearly impact our business, we believe that, other than in Europe, lodging demand will continue to grow based on a number of positive signs. These signs include consensus estimates for U.S. GDP growth of 2.2% in 2012, coupled with expected increases in business investment, a key driver for the lodging industry, rising corporate profit and slight improvements in employment. We believe the combination of these factors will result in solid growth in the lodging industry in 2012. As the recovery continues, we anticipate that improvements in RevPAR will be driven by increases in both rate and occupancy, though rate growth likely will be the key driver.

At the same time, we also anticipate that supply growth in the lodging industry will continue to remain at historically low levels in 2012 as the disruption in the credit markets and weak lodging performance caused a significant decline in new hotel construction starts over the last two years. This decline particularly may be relevant for the markets and lodging sectors in which we compete due to the long-term planning and high level of investment associated with luxury and upper upscale lodging properties in urban and resort destinations. As a result, we believe that supply growth should remain below the historical trend for the lodging industry for 2012, resulting in occupancy gains that will have a positive effect on revenues and cash flow growth.

Based on the trends discussed above and the forecast redevelopment and ROI projects, as well as other capital expenditures at our properties, we anticipate that comparable hotel RevPAR will increase 4% to 6% during 2012. We believe that the positive trends in the lodging industry create the opportunity for business improvements, which, when combined with our strategy to enhance our portfolio through acquisitions and capital projects, ultimately will improve the competitive position of our properties and increase stockholder value. However, there can be no assurances that any increases in hotel revenues or earnings at our properties will continue for any number of reasons, including, but not limited to, slower than anticipated growth in the economy and changes in travel patterns. See also “Risk Factors.”

Results of Operations

The following table reflects certain line items from our audited statements of operations and other significant operating statistics (in millions, except operating statistics and percentages):


	2011			2010			% Change 2010 to 2011			2009			% Change 2009 to 2010
Revenues:
Owned hotel revenues	$	4,745		$	4,229			12.2	%	$	4,028			5.0	%
Other revenues (1)		253			199			27.1			107			86.0

Operating costs and expenses:
Property-level costs (2)		4,565			4,100			11.3			3,870			5.9
Corporate and other expenses		111			108			2.8			116			(6.9	)
Gain on insurance settlement		2			3			(33.3	)		—			N/M(5	)
Operating profit		324			223			45.3			149			49.7
Interest expense		371			384			(3.4	)		379			1.3
Loss from discontinued operations		(4	)		(4	)		—			(61	)		(93.4	)

All hotel operating statistics (3):
RevPAR	$	130.70		$	121.46			7.6	%	$	112.57			7.9	%
Average room rate	$	181.88		$	173.17			5.0	%	$	170.93			1.3	%
Average occupancy		71.9	%		70.1	%		1.7	pts.		65.9	%		4.3	pts.

Comparable hotel operating statistics (4):
RevPAR	$	129.97		$	122.47			6.1	%		N/A			5.8	%
Average room rate	$	180.32		$	172.95			4.3	%		N/A			0.1	%
Average occupancy		72.1	%		70.8	%		1.3	pts.		N/A			3.8	pts.

Host Inc.:
Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests	$	1		$	2			(50	)%	$	6			(66.7	)%
Net loss attributable to Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.		(15	)		(130	)		88.5			(252	)		48.4

Host L.P.:
Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests	$	1		$	—			N/M		$	1			N/M
Net loss attributable to Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.		(15	)		(132	)		88.6	%		(257	)		48.6	%

(1)

Includes the results of the 53 hotels leased from HPT in 2011, and the 71 hotels leased from HPT in 2010 and 2009, which operations we consolidated beginning July 7, 2010 as a result of the termination of the subleases with our subtenant. The line item also includes rental income earned prior to the sublease terminations.

(2)	Amounts represent operating costs and expenses per our consolidated statements of operations, less corporate and other expenses and the gain on insurance settlement.

(3)	Operating statistics are for all properties as of December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, and include the results of operations for hotels we have sold prior to their disposition.

(4)	Comparable hotel operating statistics for 2011 and 2010 are based on 104 comparable hotels as of December 31, 2011. The percent change from 2009 and 2010 are based on 108 comparable hotels as of December 31, 2010.

(5)	N/M=Not Meaningful

Hotel Sales Overview


	2011		2010		% Change 2010 to 2011			2009		% Change 2009 to 2010
	(in millions)							(in millions)
Revenues
Rooms	$	3,022	$	2,661		13.6	%	$	2,484		7.1	%
Food and beverage		1,427		1,291		10.5			1,234		4.6
Other		296		277		6.9			310		(10.6	)

Owned hotel revenues		4,745		4,229		12.2			4,028		5.0
Other revenues		253		199		27.1			107		86.0

Total revenues	$	4,998	$	4,428		12.9		$	4,135		7.1

2011 Compared to 2010. In 2011, hotel sales grew 12.2% for our owned hotels, due to strong growth in RevPAR at our properties, as well as the inclusion of operations for 10 hotels acquired in early 2011 and a full year of operations for four hotels acquired in 2010 (“Recent Acquisitions”). Revenues for properties sold in 2011 or 2010 have been reclassified to discontinued operations.

Rooms. The increase in room revenue in 2011 reflects our 6.1% improvement in comparable hotel RevPAR, which was driven by the 4.3% increase in average room rates. Rooms’ revenue increased an additional 7.9% due to incremental revenues from our Recent Acquisitions.

Food and beverage. The increase in food and beverage revenue reflects an increase of 5.5% at our comparable hotels, with the majority of growth generated from our banquet and audio-visual revenue. Food and beverage revenue increased an additional 5.7% due to incremental revenues from our Recent Acquisitions.

Other. The increase in other revenues for owned hotels in 2011 primarily is due to incremental revenues from our Recent Acquisitions. We also began to see improvement in the fourth quarter in spa and golf revenues as group business improved.

Other revenues. For 2011, the increase primarily was driven by the inclusion of a full year of revenues for the leased HPT hotels, which includes hotel revenues of $214 million, compared to $123 million of hotel revenues and $44 million of rental income recorded in 2010. On July 7, 2010, in connection with the termination of subleases for 71 hotels leased from HPT, we began recording the operations of the hotels instead of rental income. On December 30, 2011, we entered into a settlement with our subtenant related to the termination of the subleases, which resulted in an additional $7 million of income being recorded in 2011 to compensate us for a portion of our losses subsequent to the sublease termination.

While management evaluates the performance of each individual hotel against its competitive set in a given market, overall we evaluate the portfolio operating results using three different criteria: property type (i.e. urban, suburban, resort/conference or airport), geographic region and mix of business (i.e. transient, group or contract).

Comparable Hotel Sales by Property Type. The following tables set forth performance information for 2011 and 2010:

Comparable Hotels Portfolio by Property Type (a)


	As of December 31, 2011				Year ended December 31, 2011							Year ended December 31, 2010
	No. of Properties		No. of Rooms		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Percent Change in RevPAR
Urban		50		32,282	$	194.40		73.7	%	$	143.33	$	186.87		73.2	%	$	136.76		4.8	%
Suburban		28		10,564		145.56		67.9			98.77		139.45		66.0			91.98		7.4
Resort/Conference		13		8,082		215.19		67.5			145.24		204.83		65.3			133.76		8.6
Airport		13		6,275		122.85		76.6			94.09		116.03		73.9			85.73		9.7

All Types		104		57,203		180.32		72.1			129.97		172.95		70.8			122.47		6.1

(a)	The reporting period for 2011 is from January 1, 2011 to December 30, 2011 and for 2010 is from January 2, 2010 to December 31, 2010 for our Marriott hotels. For further discussion, see “—Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics—Reporting Periods.”

During 2011, comparable hotel RevPAR increased across all of our hotel property types. Our airport properties led the portfolio with a 9.7% increase for the year, driven by an improvement in average room rates of 5.9%, as well as strength at our San Francisco airport hotels. Our resort/conference hotels also experienced a significant RevPAR increase of 8.6%, led by our Hawaiian properties. Our urban properties lagged the portfolio as a whole, with a RevPAR increase of 4.8%. Strong performance in our west coast urban markets, particularly San Francisco and San Diego, was offset by renovation disruption at the Sheraton New York Hotel and Towers and Philadelphia Marriott Downtown, as well as weak overall demand in our Washington, D.C. and Atlanta urban markets. RevPAR improved at our suburban hotels by 7.4% for the year, driven by an increase in rate of 4.4% and an increase in occupancy of 1.9 percentage points.

Comparable Hotel Sales by Geographic Region. The following tables set forth performance information for 2011 and 2010:

Comparable Hotels by Region (a)


	As of December 31, 2011				Year ended December 31, 2011							Year ended December 31, 2010
	No. of Properties		No. of Rooms		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Percent Change in RevPAR
Pacific		26		14,581	$	172.15		75.4	%	$	129.74	$	161.38		71.6	%	$	115.55		12.3	%
Mid-Atlantic		10		8,352		241.47		77.9			188.17		225.63		79.9			180.38		4.3
South Central		9		5,687		147.86		68.6			101.36		142.83		67.1			95.80		5.8
Florida		9		5,677		183.14		69.7			127.71		178.23		68.7			122.37		4.4
DC Metro		12		5,416		194.48		74.0			143.90		191.55		74.0			141.83		1.5
North Central		10		4,358		145.00		70.6			102.33		139.68		69.0			96.39		6.2
New England		7		3,924		171.39		71.3			122.28		172.19		69.6			119.83		2.1
Atlanta		7		3,846		157.31		65.0			102.32		156.55		64.5			101.00		1.3
Mountain		7		2,889		157.90		65.0			102.59		149.32		63.2			94.30		8.8
International		7		2,473		170.64		65.3			111.46		157.91		65.7			103.80		7.4

All Regions		104		57,203		180.32		72.1			129.97		172.95		70.8			122.47		6.1

(a)	The reporting period for 2011 is from January 1, 2011 to December 30, 2011 and for 2010 is from January 2, 2010 to December 31, 2010 for our Marriott hotels. For further discussion, see “—Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics—Reporting Periods.”

For 2011, comparable hotel RevPAR improved across all of our geographic regions when compared to 2010. Our Pacific region was the top performing region, with a RevPAR increase of 12.3% that was driven by strong group and transient demand in our Hawaiian, San Diego and San Francisco markets.

The 8.8% RevPAR improvement in our Mountain region was driven primarily by strong growth in the Phoenix market, which increased by 13.3% for 2011. The increase in the Phoenix market was a result of strong group demand, aided by the construction of a new ballroom and meeting space at the Westin Kierland in 2010, as well as increases in both group and transient rates.

The North Central region had an increase in RevPAR of 6.2%, led by our Chicago market, which had increases in both transient and group demand, resulting in RevPAR growth of 6.9%.

RevPAR in our South Central region grew 5.8% for the year, driven mainly by our Houston market, which saw strong increases in rate of 5.5% and occupancy of 3.5 percentage points as a result of an increase in retail and corporate transient demand.

Results in our Florida region were mixed. The Miami and Ft. Lauderdale market experienced a 7.3 percentage points improvement in occupancy, primarily due to strong group demand, aided by the renovation of the Miami Biscayne Bay Marriott, which was completed in 2010. RevPAR growth at our Orlando World Center Marriott had an increase of just 1%, due to lower than expected group demand.

The RevPAR growth in our Mid-Atlantic region of 4.3% lagged the portfolio as a whole due to lower levels of rate growth and the effect of new supply in the New York market, as well as significant renovations at the Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers and the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown.

Our DC Metro and Atlanta regions underperformed the portfolio as a whole, with RevPAR growth of 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively. For our DC Metro market, weak group and transient demand, along with discounted leisure rates, slowed rate growth. Our Atlanta market was negatively affected by the decline in city-wide demand, as well as renovations at the JW Marriott, Buckhead, particularly in the second half of 2011.

Hotel Sales by Business Mix. The majority of our customers fall into three broad groups: transient, group and contract business. The information below is derived from business mix data for 104 of our hotels for which information is available from our managers.

In 2011, overall transient revenues increased 6.9% when compared to 2010, reflecting a 4.6% improvement in average rate and a 2.2% increase in room nights. Average daily rates improved consistently for all transient segments. The improvement in transient demand was driven by increases in special corporate room nights.

During 2011, group revenues increased approximately 5.3%. Average daily rates improved 3.4%, reflecting a consistent rate growth for all group customer segments. Overall, group demand improved 1.7% for the year. The improvement was due entirely to an increase in demand in the corporate group segment, as association and other group business declined during 2011.

2010 Compared to 2009. In 2010, hotel sales grew 5.0% for our owned hotels, reflecting strong growth in RevPAR at our properties, as well as increases in food and beverage revenues, partially offset by a decline in attrition and cancellation fees. Revenues for properties sold in 2010 or 2009 have been reclassified to discontinued operations.

Rooms. The increase in room revenue in 2010 was consistent with the overall increase in RevPAR, primarily due to occupancy gains at our hotels. While the majority of the increase is due to the 5.8% increase in RevPAR at our comparable hotels, there also was a 1.7% increase related to the revenues recorded at the hotels acquired during the year.

Food and beverage. The increase in food and beverage revenue in 2010 primarily was attributable to increased occupancy, which contributes to greater demand for catering and banquet business.

Other. The decrease in other revenues for owned hotels in 2010 is primarily a result of a decline in attrition and cancellation fees of approximately $37 million.

Other revenues. For 2010, the increase primarily was driven by the inclusion of the revenues for the leased HPT hotels. For 2010, revenues for hotels leased from HPT include hotel revenues of $123 million and rental income of $44 million. For 2009, revenues for hotels leased from HPT include rental income of $79 million. The property revenues and rental income recorded, less the hotel expenses and rental expenses for the HPT properties, resulted in net losses of $13 million and $1 million for 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Comparable Hotel Sales by Property Type. The following tables set forth performance information for 2010 and 2009:

Comparable Hotels Portfolio by Property Type (a)


	As of December 31, 2010				Year ended December 31, 2010							Year ended December 31, 2009
	No. of Properties		No. of Rooms		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Percent Change in RevPAR
Urban		52		33,123	$	185.53		72.5	%	$	134.50	$	182.59		69.0	%	$	125.90		6.8	%
Suburban		29		10,964		138.29		65.6			90.73		139.71		61.1			85.32		6.3
Resort/Conference		13		8,082		204.83		65.3			133.76		215.19		61.1			131.57		1.7
Airport		14		6,956		115.98		71.8			83.30		115.61		68.5			79.18		5.2

All Types		108		59,125		171.43		70.2			120.26		171.25		66.4			113.66		5.8

(a)	The reporting period for 2010 is from January 2, 2010 to December 31, 2010 and for 2009 is from January 3, 2009 to January 1, 2010 for our Marriott hotels. For further discussion, see “—Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics—Reporting Periods.”

During 2010, comparable hotel RevPAR increased across all of our hotel property types. Our urban properties led the portfolio, with a 6.8% increase in RevPAR for the year. The continued improvement in demand has allowed our operators to begin to increase the average room rates at our urban properties, which improved 1.6% overall for the year. Our suburban properties also experienced a significant RevPAR increase in 2010, driven by strength in the suburban Boston, Orange County and San Francisco markets. Our resort/conference hotels lagged the portfolio as a whole, as the 7.9% improvement in RevPAR at our resort/conference properties in our Florida region were partially offset by the RevPAR declines in the Phoenix and Palm Springs markets. RevPAR at our Airport properties improved 5.2% for the year, driven by strong demand growth in the Chicago and San Francisco airport markets.

Comparable Hotel Sales by Geographic Region. The following tables set forth performance information for 2010 and 2009:

Comparable Hotels by Region (a)


	As of December 31, 2010				Year ended December 31, 2010							Year ended December 31, 2009
	No. of Properties		No. of Rooms		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Average Room Rate		Average Occupancy Percentages			RevPAR		Percent Change in RevPAR
Pacific		26		14,581	$	161.38		71.6	%	$	115.55	$	166.08		67.1	%	$	111.38		3.7	%
Mid-Atlantic		10		8,328		225.63		79.9			180.38		219.22		76.4			167.47		7.7
North Central		13		5,897		133.87		63.9			85.52		130.80		61.8			80.85		5.8
South Central		9		5,687		142.83		67.1			95.80		143.88		63.8			91.83		4.3
Florida		9		5,677		178.23		68.7			122.37		182.88		62.9			115.04		6.4
DC Metro		12		5,416		191.55		74.0			141.83		190.52		73.6			140.13		1.2
Atlanta		8		4,253		152.04		63.8			96.94		152.32		58.2			88.63		9.4
New England		7		3,924		172.19		69.6			119.83		165.77		65.2			108.10		10.8
Mountain		7		2,889		149.32		63.2			94.30		157.85		59.4			93.69		0.7
International		7		2,473		157.91		65.7			103.80		143.29		61.6			88.21		17.7

All Regions		108		59,125		171.43		70.2			120.26		171.25		66.4			113.66		5.8

(a)	The reporting period for 2010 is from January 2, 2010 to December 31, 2010 and for 2009 is from January 3, 2009 to January 1, 2010 for our Marriott hotels. For further discussion, see “—Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics—Reporting Periods.”

For 2010, comparable hotel RevPAR improved across all of our geographic regions when compared to 2009. Our New England region was the top performing U.S. region, with RevPAR growth of 10.8%, driven by RevPAR growth of 11.6% in the Boston market. This increase was due to strong group and transient demand, as occupancy increased 5.0 percentage points and average room rates increased 3.9%.

The 9.4% RevPAR growth in our Atlanta region was driven primarily by strong city-wide and transient business in the fourth quarter. Strong demand from both group and transient customers drove a 9.0 percentage point occupancy increase in the fourth quarter.

RevPAR in our Mid-Atlantic region grew 7.7% for the year, driven by RevPAR growth at our New York properties of 9.5%. For our New York properties, rate improved 5.7% and occupancy improved by 3.0 percentage points.

Our Florida region had an increase in RevPAR of 6.4% for the year, led by strong performance at our resort/conference hotels in this region. RevPAR at our Florida resort/conference hotels increased 7.9% for the year, driven primarily by an increase in occupancy of 6.6 percentage points; however, this increase was affected by lower group demand as well as significant renovations at the Orlando World Center Marriott Resort and Convention Center in the fourth quarter.

The RevPAR increase for the year in our North Central region was driven by our Chicago hotels, as RevPAR increased 8.8% due to strong transient demand and rate increased 2.6%.

Results in our Mountain region were mixed, as the Denver market experienced a 7.9% increase in RevPAR primarily due to strong group and transient demand, while the Phoenix market experienced a 3.9% decline in RevPAR, which was partially attributable to the renovation of a significant amount of meeting space at two hotels and the construction of a new ballroom at the Westin Kierland.

Our DC Metro region underperformed the portfolio in terms of RevPAR growth, which underperformance reflects difficult comparisons to the prior year, particularly during the first quarter, due to the 2009 presidential inauguration and other government-related activities.

Hotel Sales by Business Mix. The majority of our customers fall into three broad groups: transient, group and contract business. The information below is derived from business mix data for 108 of our hotels for which information is available from our managers.

In 2010, overall transient revenues increased 7.6% when compared to 2009, reflecting an increase in total room nights of 4.9%, and an increase in average rates of 2.6%. The rate increase was driven primarily by a 5.0% increase in average rate for corporate transient business and a shift in mix away from discounted business.

During 2010, group revenues increased approximately 3.5%, reflecting an increase in total room nights of 6.7%, partially offset by a decrease in average rates of 3.0%. Typically, recovery in the group segment will follow improvement in transient demand due to longer booking lead times. As a result, a large portion of the 2010 group business was sold at the lower rates in effect in prior periods. Therefore, while we did experience improvements in group demand, improvements in overall group revenue continues to lag that of transient revenue.

Property-level Operating Expenses


	2011		2010		% Change 2011 to 2010			2009		% Change 2010 to 2009
	(in millions)							(in millions)
Rooms	$	832	$	734		13.4	%	$	681		7.8	%
Food and beverage		1,062		965		10.1			933		3.4
Other departmental and support expenses		1,261		1,151		9.6			1,099		4.7
Management fees		189		171		10.5			158		8.2
Other property-level expenses		569		488		16.6			386		26.4
Depreciation and amortization		652		591		10.3			613		(3.6	)

Total property-level operating expenses	$	4,565	$	4,100		11.3		$	3,870		5.9

2011 compared to 2010 and 2010 compared to 2009. Our operating costs and expenses, both of which are fixed and variable, are affected by a number of factors. As previously discussed, room expense is affected mainly by occupancy, which drives costs related to items such as housekeeping, reservation systems, room supplies, laundry services and front desk costs. Food and beverage expense correlates closely with food and beverage revenues, and is affected by occupancy as well as the type of customers staying at the hotel. However, the most significant expense for both room expense and food and beverage expense is related to wages and employee benefits, which comprise approximately 55% of these expenses in any year. Other property-level expenses consist of property taxes, which are highly dependent on local jurisdiction taxing authorities, and property and general liability insurance, and do not necessarily change based on changes in revenues at our hotels. The overall increases in operating expenses in 2011 and 2010 are consistent with higher overall RevPAR at our properties and increases in occupancy and rates at our hotels. The increase also is a result of the inclusion of expenses for Recent Acquisitions, which were $295 million and $45 million in 2011 and 2010, respectively. Property-level operating expenses exclude the costs associated with hotels we have sold during the periods presented, which costs are included in discontinued operations.

Rooms. The increase in rooms expenses reflects a 5.7% increase in expenses at our comparable hotels, due primarily to higher wages, benefits, travel agent commissions and reservations expenses, as well as the increase in occupancy during the year. Rooms expense also increased 8.0% due to the inclusion of an incremental $59 million in expenses from our Recent Acquisitions. The increase in rooms expenses in 2010 was consistent with the overall increase in occupancy during the year and higher wage costs.

Food and beverage. The increase in food and beverage expenses at our hotels reflects a 4.8% increase at our comparable hotels due to increases in food and beverage business, however, the overall productivity for the department improved. Food and beverage expense also increased 5.6% due to the inclusion of an incremental $54 million in expenses from our Recent Acquisitions. The increase in food and beverage costs in 2010 reflects the increase in revenues, partially offset by the positive shift in the mix of business to more catering and audio visual revenues. However, for 2010, weak productivity in banquet sales hurt overall profitability.

Other departmental and support expenses. The increase in other departmental and support expenses in 2011 resulted from the Recent Acquisitions, along with increases in sales and marketing and administrative expenses. The increase in revenues drove an increase in non-controllable hotel expenses during 2010, such as credit card commissions, bonus expense, loyalty rewards program expenses and cluster and shared service allocations.

Management fees. Our base management fees, which generally are calculated as a percentage of total revenues, increased 9.8% for 2011 and 3.9% in 2010, which is a result of the increase in revenues at our comparable hotels, as well as the inclusion of management fees for our Recent Acquisitions. The incentive management fees, which are based on the level of operating profit at each property after the owner has received a priority return on its investment, increased 16.0% in 2011 and 17.5% in 2010, consistent with the increase in operating profit at those properties earning the incentive fees.

Other property-level expenses. These expenses generally do not vary significantly based on occupancy and include expenses such as property taxes and insurance. For 2011 and 2010, the increase was driven primarily by the inclusion of the HPT hotel expenses discussed below.

For 2011, expenses for hotels leased from HPT include rental expense of $68 million due to HPT, as well as $159 million of hotel expenses. For 2010, expenses for hotels leased from HPT include rental expense of $84 million due to HPT, as well as the $96 million of hotel expenses incurred subsequent to the sublease termination. For 2009, expenses for hotels leased from HPT represent rental expense due to HPT of $80 million.

Depreciation and amortization. The increase in depreciation expense in 2011 is due to the inclusion of depreciation expense for newly acquired properties and recent capital expenditures. The decline in depreciation expense in 2010 is due to impairment charges of approximately $20 million recorded in 2009.

Other Income Statement Line Items

Corporate and Other Expenses. Corporate and other expenses primarily consist of employee salaries and bonuses and other costs, such as employee stock-based compensation expense, travel, corporate insurance, legal fees, acquisition-related costs, audit fees, building rent and systems costs. Corporate expenses increased approximately $3 million in 2011 due to the $15 million loss on the forfeited deposit for the Grand Hyatt Washington, D.C. transaction and the accrual of $5 million of additional litigation costs, which was largely offset by the decline in employee stock compensation. The stock based compensation is based on employee performance, as well as Host Inc.’s stockholder return relative to other REITs and to other lodging companies and will vary significantly due to fluctuations in Host Inc.’s stock price.

Corporate expenses decreased $8 million in 2010 compared to 2009. The decrease primarily was due to litigation costs of $41 million accrued in 2009 for a potential litigation loss. The decrease was offset partially by an increase in stock-based compensation expense and bonus accruals, as they returned to more normalized levels in 2010, and an increase of $10 million due to costs associated with consummated property acquisitions.

Gain on Insurance Settlement. During 2011, we recorded a gain of $2 million related to the receipt of business interruption insurance for our two properties in Christchurch, New Zealand, both of which were affected by an earthquake in February 2011. The two properties were damaged substantially and remain closed. We believe the property damage is covered under our insurance policy. We recorded a gain on insurance settlement of $3 million in 2010 for business interruption insurance related to our two hotels in Chile, both of which were affected by the earthquake in July 2010.

Interest Expense. The decrease in interest expense during 2011 is due primarily to a decrease in costs associated with debt extinguishments (including the acceleration of deferred financing costs and original issue discounts), which totaled $9 million in 2011, compared to $21 million in 2010. After adjusting for debt extinguishment, interest expense was comparable to 2010 levels. In addition, savings from the fixed-to-floating interest rate swap that we entered into in the second half of 2009 for our $300 million mortgage on The Ritz-Carlton, Naples and Newport Beach Marriott Hotel & Spa reduced interest expense by $6 million for 2011 and 2010 and $1 million in 2009.

The increase in interest expense during 2010 from 2009 is due primarily to costs associated with debt extinguishments totaling $21 million, compared to a net gain of $9 million on debt extinguishments in 2009. This increase was offset partially by a net decrease in our overall debt balance, which resulted in interest savings of approximately $23 million.

Equity in Earnings (Losses) of Affiliates. The increase in earnings of affiliates during 2011 primarily is due to the inclusion of the operations of the Le Méridien Piccadilly and the Pullman Paris Bercy in Fund II of the Euro JV and also reflects a 5.5% growth in RevPAR at the comparable hotels within the joint venture due to rate improvements. In 2009, we determined that the carrying value of our investment in the Euro JV exceeded its fair value on an other-than-temporary basis. As a result, we recorded an impairment charge of $34 million, which significantly decreased equity in earnings (losses) of affiliates for 2009, particularly when compared to 2011 and 2010.

Benefit for Income Taxes. We lease substantially all of our properties to consolidated subsidiaries designated as TRS for federal income tax purposes. The difference between hotel-level operating cash flow and the aggregate rent paid to Host L.P. by the TRS represents taxable income or loss, on which we record an income tax provision or benefit. The decrease in the tax benefit in each of 2011 and 2010 reflects year-over-year improvements in property operations recognized by our TRS, as well as increases in foreign taxes in 2011.

Discontinued Operations. Discontinued operations consist of one hotel disposed of in 2011, two hotels disposed of in 2010 and six hotels disposed of in 2009 and represent the results of operations and the gains on the disposition of these hotels during the indicated periods. The following table summarizes the revenues, loss before taxes, and the gain (loss) on dispositions, net of tax, of the hotels which have been reclassified to discontinued operations, which includes assets held for sale and the results of sold hotels prior to their disposition for the periods presented (in millions):


	2011			2010			2009
Revenues	$	5		$	14		$	81
Loss before taxes		(4	)		(3	)		(88	)
Gain (loss) on dispositions, net of tax		—			(2	)		26

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Liquidity and Capital Resources of Host Inc. and Host L.P. The liquidity and capital resources of Host Inc. and Host L.P. are derived primarily from the activities of Host L.P. Host L.P. generates the capital required by our business through its operations, the direct or indirect incurrence of indebtedness and the issuance of OP units. Host Inc. is a REIT and its only material asset is the ownership of partnership interests of Host L.P.; therefore, its financing and investing activities are conducted through Host L.P., except for the issuance of its common and preferred stock. Proceeds from stock issuances by Host Inc. are contributed to Host L.P. in exchange for OP units. Additionally, funds used by Host Inc. to pay dividends or to repurchase stock are provided by Host L.P. Therefore, while we have noted those areas in which it is important to distinguish between Host Inc. and Host L.P., we have not included a separate discussion of the liquidity and capital resources of each entity as the discussion below can be applied to both Host Inc. and Host L.P.

Overview. We look to maintain a capital structure and liquidity profile with an appropriate balance of cash, debt and equity in order to provide financial flexibility, given the inherent volatility in the lodging industry. During 2011, as operations have improved, we maintained our focus on strategically decreasing our debt-to-equity ratio through (i) acquisitions and other investments, the majority of which were completed with available cash and proceeds from equity issuances, and (ii) the repayment and refinancing of senior notes and mortgage debt to extend maturity dates and lower interest rates.

We also look to structure our debt profile to allow us to access different forms of financing, primarily senior notes, exchangeable debentures and corporate credit facility draws, as well as mortgage debt. Generally, this means that we will look to minimize the number of assets that are encumbered by mortgage debt, minimize near-term maturities, and maintain a balanced maturity schedule. As of December 31, 2011, 107 of our 121 hotels were unencumbered by mortgage debt and approximately 81% of our debt consists of senior notes, exchangeable

debentures and borrowings under our credit facility, all of which are not collateralized by specific hotel properties. Additionally, our maturities for 2012 are 6.9% of our total debt ($7 million of senior notes and $388 million of exchangeable debentures). We also entered into a new senior revolving credit facility that expanded our revolving borrowing capacity to $1 billion and has an initial maturity of November 2015. As a result, our liquidity position remains very strong, with approximately $826 million of cash and cash equivalents and $883 million of available capacity under our credit facility. As a result of the current operating environment and the flexibility provided by our credit facility, we anticipate that over time we will reduce our available cash balances closer to the $100 million to $150 million level. We believe that we have sufficient liquidity and access to the capital markets to take advantage of opportunities to enhance our portfolio, withstand declines in operating cash flow, pay our near-term debt maturities and fund our capital expenditures programs. We may continue to access the capital markets if favorable conditions exist in order to further enhance our liquidity and to fund cash needs. The chart below details our significant cash flows for the three years ended December 31, 2011 (in millions):


	2011			2010			2009
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year	$	1,113		$	1,642		$	508
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		(287	)		(529	)		1,134

Cash and cash equivalents, end of year	$	826		$	1,113		$	1,642

Operating activities
Cash provided by operating activities	$	661		$	520		$	552
Investing activities
Acquisitions and investments		(1,096	)		(434	)		(7	)
Dispositions and return of investment		47			12			251
Capital expenditures		(542	)		(309	)		(340	)
Financing activities
Issuances of debt		955			500			906
Net draws (repayments) on credit facility		63			56			(410	)
Repurchase of senior notes, including exchangeable debentures		(404	)		(821	)		(139	)
Debt prepayments and scheduled maturities		(210	)		(364	)		(342	)
Host Inc.:
Common stock issuances		323			406			767
Redemption of preferred stock		—			(101	)		—
Dividends on common stock		(70	)		(20	)		(42	)
Host L.P.:
Common OP unit issuance		323			406			767
Redemption of preferred units		—			(101	)		—
Distributions on common OP units		(71	)		(20	)		(43	)

Cash Requirements. We use cash primarily for acquisitions, capital expenditures, debt payments, operating costs, corporate and other expenses, as well as dividends and distributions to stockholders and unitholders. As a REIT, Host Inc. is required to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income, excluding net capital gain, on an annual basis. Funds used by Host Inc. to make cash distributions are provided by Host L.P. Our primary sources of cash are cash from operations, proceeds from the sale of assets, borrowings under our credit facility and debt and equity issuances.

Below is a schedule of our debt maturities through 2014. As of December 31, 2011, our weighted average interest rate is 6.3% and our weighted average maturity is 4.4 years. See “—Financial Condition” for more information on our debt maturities. During 2011, we took advantage of lower interest rates to issue new debt and used the proceeds to repay near-term maturities, resulting in the issuance of approximately $955 million of senior notes and mortgage debt, that has been or will be used to fund the repayment or redemption of $792 million of senior notes and exchangeable debentures (including the $388 million of 2007 Debentures that we expect to be put to us in April of 2012) and $210 million of mortgage debt.

Remaining Debt Maturities 2012 – 2014

(in millions)


	2012		2013		2014
2.625% Exchangeable Senior Debentures (1)	$	388	$	—	$	—
Senior notes		7		—		500
3.250% Exchangeable Senior Debentures (2)		—		—		175
Mortgage loan, Orlando World Center Marriott		—		246		—
Mortgage loan, JW Marriott, Washington, D.C (3)		—		110		—
Mortgage loan, Harbor Beach Marriott Resort & Spa		—		—		134
Mortgage loan, The Ritz-Carlton, Naples and Newport Beach Marriott Hotel & Spa		—		—		300
Other bonds		—		—		32
Principal amortization on other debt		5		3		1

Total maturities	$	400	$	359	$	1,142

(1)	Our 2.625% Exchangeable Senior Debentures are due in 2027, but are subject to a put option by the holders on April 15, 2012, which we anticipate they will exercise. The $388 million represents the face amount of the outstanding principal at December 31, 2011.

(2)	Our 3.250% Exchangeable Senior Debentures are due in 2024, but are subject to a put option by the holders on April 15, 2014. The $175 million represents the face amount of the outstanding principal at December 31, 2011.

(3)	This mortgage can be extended for one year, at our option, provided that debt coverage exceeds certain ratios and other conditions are met.

Capital Resources. As of December 31, 2011, we had approximately $826 million of cash and cash equivalents, which was a decrease of $287 million from December 31, 2010. We also had $883 million available under our credit facility at December 31, 2011. As of December 31, 2011, our secured mortgage indebtedness totaled approximately $1.0 billion, which represents approximately 17% of our overall indebtedness, and is secured by 14 of our hotels. We depend primarily on external sources of capital to finance future growth, including acquisitions. As a result, the liquidity and debt capacity provided by our credit facility and the ability to issue senior unsecured debt are key components of our capital structure. Therefore, our financial flexibility (including our ability to incur debt, make distributions and make investments) is contingent on our ability to maintain compliance with the financial covenants, which include, among other things, the allowable amounts of leverage, interest coverage and fixed charges. During 2010 and 2011, we have decreased our near-term debt maturities, expanded our borrowing capacity under our senior revolving credit facility and maintained compliance with our senior note and credit facility covenants.

If, at any time, we determine that market conditions are favorable, after taking into account our liquidity requirements, we may seek to issue and sell shares of Host Inc. common stock in registered public offerings, including through sales directly on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under our existing or a future “at the market” offering program, or to issue and sell shares of Host Inc. preferred stock. We also may seek to cause Host L.P. to issue debentures exchangeable for shares of Host Inc. common stock or senior notes. Given our total debt level and maturity schedule, we will continue to redeem or refinance senior notes and mortgage debt from time to time, taking advantage of favorable market conditions. In February of 2012, Host Inc.’s Board of Directors authorized repurchases up to $500 million of senior notes, exchangeable debentures and mortgage debt (other than in accordance with its terms). Separately, the Board of Directors authorized redemptions and repurchases of all or a portion of $175 million principal amount of our 3¹/4% exchangeable debentures. Any redemption of the 3¹/4% exchangeable debentures will not reduce the $500 million of Board authority noted above to repurchase other debt securities. We may purchase senior notes and exchangeable debentures for cash through open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions, a tender offer or, in some cases, through the early redemption of such securities

pursuant to their terms. Repurchases of debt, if any, will depend on prevailing market conditions, our liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. Any refinancing or retirement before the maturity date would affect earnings and FFO per diluted share as a result of the payment of any applicable call premiums and the acceleration of previously deferred financing costs. Accordingly, in light of our priorities in managing our capital structure and liquidity profile, and given the movement in prevailing conditions in the capital markets and relative pricing, we may, at any time, subject to applicable securities laws, be considering, or be in discussions with respect to, the purchase or sale of common stock, exchangeable debentures and/or senior notes. Any such transactions may, subject to applicable securities laws, occur simultaneously.

On April 21, 2011, Host Inc. entered into a new Sales Agency Financing Agreement with BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC, through which Host Inc. may issue and sell, from time to time, shares of common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $400 million. The agreement followed the completion of $400 million of sales under a similar agreement, also with BNY Mellon Capital Markets, Inc., that was entered into in 2010. The sales will be made in “at the market” offerings under “SEC” rules, including sales made directly on the NYSE. BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC is acting as sales agent. Host Inc. is not under an obligation to sell any shares. During 2011, we issued 19.1 million shares, through this new program and the remaining capacity of the 2010 program, at an average price of $17.09 per share, for net proceeds of $323 million. As of December 31, 2011, we have $174 million of capacity remaining under this program.

Counterparty Credit Risk. We are subject to counterparty credit risk, which relates to the ability of counterparties to meet their contractual payment obligations or the potential non-performance of counterparties to deliver contracted commodities or services at the contracted price. We assess the ability of our counterparties to fulfill their obligation to determine the impact, if any, of counterparty bankruptcy or insolvency on our financial condition. We are exposed to credit risk with respect to cash held at various financial institutions, access to our credit facility and amounts due or payable under our derivative contracts. Our credit exposure in each of these cases is limited. Our exposure with regard to our cash and the $883 million available under our credit facility is mitigated, as the credit risk is spread among a diversified group of investment grade financial institutions. At December 31, 2011, the exposure risk related to our derivative contracts totaled $22 million and the counterparties were investment grade financial institutions.

Sources and Uses of Cash. During 2011, our sources of cash included cash from operations, proceeds from debt and equity issuances and proceeds from the sale or transfer of assets. Uses of cash during the year consisted of acquisitions, investments in our joint ventures, capital expenditures, operating costs, debt repayments and repurchases and distributions to equity holders. During 2012, we anticipate that our primary uses of cash will include acquisitions and investments, capital expenditures at our hotels, the repayment or repurchase of our debt maturing in the near-term and distributions to equity holders. We anticipate that our primary sources of cash for 2012 will include cash from operations and proceeds from equity and debt issuances and hotel dispositions.

Cash Provided by Operations. Our cash provided by operations for 2011 increased $141 million to $661 million compared to 2010 due to improvements in our GAAP operating profit, after adjusting for non-cash items, which primarily consist of depreciation expense.

Cash Used in Investing Activities. Approximately $1.6 billion of cash was used in investing activities during 2011. This included approximately $1.0 billion of acquisitions, which is net of debt and other liabilities assumed and $542 million of capital expenditures. We also invested approximately $49 million of cash in our unconsolidated joint ventures, which was offset partially by the $40 million of proceeds we received for the transfer of the Le Méridien Piccadilly to the Euro JV Fund II.

During 2011, we purchased 10 hotel assets located in New York, San Diego, Melbourne, Australia, and four cities in New Zealand for an aggregate amount of approximately $1.1 billion. We recognized the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and any non-controlling interests in the acquiree at the fair value on the acquisition date.

While we continue to actively explore potential acquisitions, given the nature of the transactions, we cannot assure you that we will be successful in acquiring any one or more hotel properties that we may review, bid on or negotiate to purchase. We may acquire additional properties through various structures, including transactions involving single assets, portfolios, joint ventures and acquisitions of all or substantially all of the securities or assets

of other REITs. We anticipate that future acquisitions will be funded primarily by proceeds from equity offerings of Host Inc., or issuance of OP units by Host L.P., but potentially also from the proceeds from sales of properties from our existing portfolio, the incurrence of debt, available cash or advances under our credit facility.

In 2011, total capital expenditures increased $233 million to $542 million. Our renewal and replacement capital expenditures for 2011 were approximately $327 million, which reflects an increase of approximately 68% from 2010 levels. Our renewal and replacement capital expenditures are generally funded by the furniture, fixture and equipment funds established at certain of our hotels (typically funded with approximately 5% of property revenues) and by our available cash. We also spent approximately $215 million in 2011 on ROI/redevelopment projects, which reflects an increase of approximately 89% compared to 2010 levels, as these projects include some of our largest hotels. Capital expenditures have totaled approximately $2.5 billion over the past five years. As a result, we believe that our properties are in a strong competitive position with respect to their market competitors.

The following table summarizes significant investment activities and dispositions that have been completed as of December 31, 2011 (in millions):


Transaction Date		Description of Transaction	Cash Paid			Host’s Investment
*Investments/* *Acquisitions*
September	2011	Acquisition of the remaining 51% of Tiburon Golf Ventures	$	(11	)	$	(11	)
June –December	2011	Investment in the Asian JV		(19	)		(19	)
September	2011	Investment in Euro JV Fund II—Pullman Bercy, Paris acquisition		(20	)		(20	)
June	2011	Initial investment in Euro JV Fund II—transfer of the Le Méridien Piccadilly (1)		—			(19	)
April	2011	Acquisition of a 75% controlling interest in the Hilton Melbourne South Wharf (2)		(48	)		(114	)
March	2011	Acquisition of the New York Helmsley Hotel		(314	)		(314	)
March	2011	Acquisition of the Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego (3)		(566	)		(572	)
February	2011	Acquisition of the New Zealand portfolio		(145	)		(145	)
January – December	2011	Investment in Euro JV Fund I		(11	)		(11	)
September	2010	Acquisition of the JW Marriott, Rio de Janeiro		(47	)		(47	)
September	2010	Acquisition of a 90% ownership interest of the W New York, Union Square (4)		(78	)		(169	)
August	2010	Acquisition of the Westin Chicago River North		(165	)		(165	)
July	2010	Acquisition of the Le Méridien Piccadilly		(53	)		(98	)
April	2010	Purchase of a mortgage note on a portfolio of hotels		(53	)		(53	)

		Total acquisitions	$	(1,530	)	$	(1,757	)

*Dispositions*
August	2011	Disposition of South Bend Marriott				$	6
June	2011	Proceeds from transfer of Le Méridien Piccadilly (1)					40
June	2010	Disposition of The Ritz-Carlton, Dearborn					3
February	2010	Disposition of Sheraton Braintree					9

		Total dispositions				$	58

(1)	Our initial investment in the Euro JV Fund II was funded in conjunction with the transfer of the Le Méridien Piccadilly. We received cash proceeds of $40 million and recorded $19 million for the fair value of the asset transferred.

(2)	The investment price represents our 75% interest and a preferred interest in the joint venture that indirectly owns the hotel.

(3)	Includes payment of $19 million for the FF&E replacement fund retained at the property. Additionally, $6 million of the acquisition was funded through the issuance of common OP units by Host L.P.

(4)	The investment price represents our 90% interest in the joint venture that acquired the hotel, including our portion of the assumption by the joint venture of a $115 million mortgage loan (which was subsequently repaid in 2010) and other liabilities valued at $8.5 million.

Cash Provided by/Used in Financing Activities. Net cash provided by financing activities was $628 million for 2011, as compared to cash used in financing activities of $343 million in 2010. During 2011, cash used consisted of debt repayments or repurchases of approximately $704 million, while we received proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion through the issuance of debt and equity securities.

The following table summarizes significant debt issuances and assumptions, net of deferred financing costs, that have been completed as of December 31, 2011 (in millions):


Transaction Date		Description of Transaction	Transaction Amount
*Debt Issuances*
November	2011	Proceeds from the issuance of 6%, $300 million Series Y senior notes	$	295
November	2011	Issuance of mortgage debt on the Hilton Melbourne South Wharf		79
May	2011	Proceeds from the issuance of 5⁷/8%, $500 million Series W senior notes (2)		489
April	2011	Draw on credit facility to acquire Hilton Melbourne South Wharf (1)		50
March	2011	Draw on credit facility for the repayment of the mortgage debt secured by our four Canadian properties		103
February	2011	Issuance of mortgage debt on our portfolio of hotels in New Zealand		80
October	2010	Proceeds from the issuance of 6%, $500 million Series U senior notes (3)		492
July	2010	Draw on credit facility for the acquisition of the Le Méridien Piccadilly		56

		Total	$	1,644

*Debt Assumptions*
April	2011	Assumption of mortgage debt on the Hilton Melbourne South Wharf (1)	$	86
September	2010	Assumption of the 6.385% mortgage debt on W New York, Union Square (1)		115
July	2010	Assumption of the mortgage debt on the Le Méridien Piccadilly (1)		51

		Total	$	252

(1)	These amounts are no longer outstanding at December 31, 2011. They have been refinanced, repaid, or in the case of the Le Méridien Piccadilly mortgage debt, transferred to our Euro JV.

(2)	The 5⁷/8% Series W senior notes were exchanged for the 5⁷/8% Series X senior notes due in 2019 in January 2012.

(3)	The 6% Series U senior notes were exchanged for the 6% Series V senior notes due in 2020 in February 2011.

The following table presents significant debt repayments, including prepayment premiums, since the beginning of January 2010 (in millions):


Transaction Date		Description of Transaction	Transaction Amount
*Cash Repayments*
November	2011	Repayment of mortgage loan on the Hilton Melbourne South Wharf	$	(78	)
August-December	2011	Repurchase of $138 million face amount of the 2007 Debentures		(139	)
June	2011	Repayment of credit facility with proceeds from transfer of the Le Méridien Piccadilly to the European JV Fund II		(40	)
June	2011	Redemption of a portion of the 2004 Debentures		(16	)
June	2011	Redemption of $250 million face amount of 7¹/8% Series K senior notes		(253	)
May	2011	Repayment of credit facility with proceeds from the Series W senior notes issuance		(50	)
March	2011	Repayment of the 5.2% mortgage debt secured by our four Canadian properties		(132	)
December	2010	Repayment of a portion of the mortgage loan secured by the Orlando World Center Marriott		(54	)
December	2010	Repayment of 9.8% mortgage loan secured by the JW Marriott, Desert Springs		(71	)
November	2010	Redemption of $250 million face amount of 7¹/8% Series K senior notes		(253	)
October	2010	Defeasance of 6.385% mortgage debt on W New York, Union Square		(120	)
August	2010	Redemption of $225 million face amount of 7¹/8% Series K senior notes		(230	)
February	2010	Repayment of 7.4% mortgage loan secured by the Atlanta Marriott Marquis		(124	)
January	2010	Redemption of $346 million face amount of 7% Series M senior notes		(352	)
2010/2011		Principal amortization		(18	)

		Total cash repayments	$	(1,930	)

*Non-cash Debt Transactions*
June	2011	Extinguishment of the mortgage debt on the Le Méridien Piccadilly through transfer to the Euro JV Fund II (1)	$	(52	)
June	2011	Exchange of a portion of the 2004 Debentures for common stock		(134	)