Back to GetFilings.com

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

HOST MARRIOTT CORPORATION

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

(240) 744-1000

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (i) 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 (ii) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x    No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). 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. ¨

The aggregate market value of shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 20, 2003 (based on the closing sale price as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on June 20, 2003) was approximately $2,126,064,000.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2004 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K. We expect to file our proxy statement by April 14, 2004.

Items 1 & 2    Business and Properties

We are a Maryland corporation and we operate as a self-managed and self-administered real estate investment trust, or REIT. We own our properties and conduct our operations through Host Marriott, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership of which we are the sole general partner and in which we hold 93% of the partnership interest. In this report we use the terms “operating partnership” or “Host LP” to refer to Host Marriott, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and its consolidated subsidiaries. The terms “we” or “our” refer to Host Marriott and Host LP together, unless the context indicates otherwise.

As of February 15, 2004, our lodging portfolio consisted of 113 upper-upscale and luxury full-service hotels containing approximately 57,000 rooms. Our portfolio is geographically diverse with hotels in most of the major metropolitan areas in 28 states, Washington, D.C., Toronto and Calgary, Canada and Mexico City, Mexico. Our locations include central business districts of major cities, near airports and resort/convention locations.

The address of our principal executive office is 6903 Rockledge Drive, Suite 1500, Bethesda, Maryland, 20817. Our phone number is 240-744-1000. Our Internet website address is www.hostmarriott.com.

We make available free of charge, on or through our Internet website, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed 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 Exchange Act.

In addition, at the Investor Information section of our website, we have a Corporate Governance page that includes, among other things, copies of our Code of Business Conduct and Conflicts of Interest Policy for directors, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for employees, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and the charters for each of our standing committees of our Board of Directors, which are: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Policy Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Copies of these charters and policies are also available in print to stockholders upon request.

The Lodging Industry

The lodging industry in the United States consists of both private and public entities which operate in an extremely diversified market under a variety of brand names. Competition in the industry is based primarily on the level of service, quality of accommodations, location and room rates. In order to cater to a wide variety of tastes and needs, the lodging industry is broadly divided into six groups: luxury, upper-upscale, upscale, midscale (with and without food and beverage service) and economy. Most of our hotels operate in urban markets either as luxury properties under such brand names as Ritz-Carlton and Four Seasons or as upper-upscale properties under such brand names as Marriott, Hyatt, Westin and Hilton.

Supply and demand growth in the lodging industry and the markets in which we operate may be influenced by a number of factors, including growth of the economy, interest rates, unique local considerations and the relatively long lead time required to develop urban and resort/convention, upper-upscale and luxury hotels. Properties in the upper-upscale segment of the lodging industry benefited from a favorable imbalance between supply and demand during the early 1990’s, driven in part by low construction levels and high gross domestic product, or GDP growth. From 1998 through 2000, supply moderately outpaced demand, which caused slight declines in occupancy rates; however, the impact of the occupancy decline was more than offset by increases in the average daily rate during that period. In 2001, the weakening economy was significantly affected by the September 11 terrorist attacks leading to a significant decline in demand. Over the past two years demand growth has been slowed primarily due to the threat of additional terrorist acts, the war in Iraq and, in 2002, continued weakness in the economy. We expect the rate of supply growth, which has declined significantly since 2000, to continue to be relatively low for at least the next two years due to the limited availability of development financing for new construction. We believe that demand growth will begin to accelerate during the first half of 2004, as the economy continues to strengthen and business travel increases.

1

Business Strategy

Our primary business objective is to provide superior total returns to our shareholders through a combination of appreciation in net asset value per share, growth in earnings and dividends. In order to achieve this objective we seek to:

We believe we are well-qualified to pursue our business strategies. Our management team has extensive experience in acquiring and financing lodging properties. We believe that management’s industry knowledge, relationships and access to market information provide a competitive advantage with respect to identifying, evaluating, financing, acquiring and opportunistically disposing of lodging properties and that this competitive advantage carries over to the work we do to improve and maintain the quality of our assets. These efforts include maximizing the value of our existing portfolio by overseeing our managers in their efforts to reduce operating costs and to increase revenues at our hotels, monitoring property and brand performance, pursuing expansion and repositioning opportunities, overseeing capital expenditure budgets and forecasts, assessing return on capital expenditure opportunities and analyzing competitive supply conditions in each of our markets.

Our acquisition strategy focuses on hotels operating as upper-upscale and luxury hotels. We continue to believe there will be opportunities to acquire these hotels at attractive multiples of cash flow and at discounts to replacement cost. Our acquisition strategy continues to focus on:

From 1999 through mid-2003, our acquisitions were limited by the lack of suitable targets that complement our portfolio, inadequate returns and capital limitations due to weak investment markets. Consequently, our activity has been primarily focused on acquiring the interests of limited or joint venture partners, consolidating our ownership of assets already included in our portfolio, and as described in “Operating Structure,” purchasing the lessee interests, which were created as part our conversion to a REIT. We believe that as a result of the capital markets strengthening in 2003, suitable single asset and portfolio acquisition opportunities have become available; however, the number of competitive bidders for such opportunities has also correspondingly increased. We are interested in exploring acquisitions that can be accomplished, at least in part, through the issuance of operating partnership units of Host LP, particularly where such an acquisition would result in an overall improvement in our credit profile.

2

We have not acquired hotels outside of the United States in recent years due to the difficulty in identifying opportunities that meet our return criteria. However, we intend to continue to evaluate acquisition opportunities in international locations, and will pursue these only when we believe they will offer satisfactory returns after adjustments for currency and country-related risks.

Operating Structure

Our operating structure is as follows:

As a result of our conversion to a REIT, we became the sole general partner of Host LP. For each share of our common stock we issue, Host LP issues one unit of operating partnership interest, or OP unit, to us. When distinguishing between ourselves and Host LP, the primary difference is the approximate 7% of the partnership interests of Host LP not held by us as of February 15, 2004. Our conversion to a REIT in 1998 also created the opportunity for our shareholders to generally avoid double taxation on dividend distributions (as non-REIT corporations generally are taxed on earnings prior to distributing dividends to shareholders), provided we meet certain requirements, including the distribution of at least 90% of our taxable income. As a result, we believe this structure affords our shareholders with both a potential tax advantage, as well as the increased liquidity associated with being a publicly traded company.

All of our assets are owned through Host LP or its subsidiaries, all of which are general or limited partnerships or limited liability companies. The OP units owned by holders other than us are redeemable at the option of the holders, generally beginning one year after the date of issuance of the holder’s OP units. Upon redemption of an OP unit, a holder may receive cash from us in an amount equal to the market value of one share of our common stock. We have the right, however, to acquire any OP unit offered for redemption directly from the holder in exchange for one share of our common stock, instead of a cash redemption by us.

As a REIT, certain tax laws limit the amount of “non-qualifying” income we can earn, including income derived directly from the operation of hotels. As a result, we lease substantially all of our properties to a subsidiary of the operating partnership designated as a taxable REIT subsidiary for Federal income tax purposes

3

or to third party lessees. The lessees enter into agreements with third party hotel operators to manage the operations of the hotels. Other assets that produce non-qualifying income may also be held in taxable REIT subsidiaries. Unlike other subsidiaries of a REIT, taxable income of a taxable REIT subsidiary is subject to Federal and state income taxes.

Lodging Properties Portfolio

Overview.    Our lodging portfolio consisted primarily of 113 upper-upscale and luxury hotels containing approximately 57,000 rooms as of February 15, 2004. It is geographically diverse, with hotels in most of the major metropolitan areas in 28 states, Washington, D.C., Toronto and Calgary, Canada and Mexico City, Mexico. Our locations include central business districts of major cities, near airports and resort/convention locations where further large-scale development opportunities are limited. These hotels, because of their locations, typically benefit from significant barriers to entry by competitors. Historically, our properties in urban and resort/convention locations have had higher RevPAR (as defined herein) results than similar properties in suburban locations. Our hotels have an average of approximately 504 rooms per hotel. Fifteen of our hotels have more than 750 rooms. Our hotels typically include meeting and banquet facilities, a variety of restaurants and lounges, swimming pools, gift shops and parking facilities, the combination of which enable them to serve business, leisure and group travelers. The average age of our properties is 19 years, although many of the properties have had substantial renovations or major additions.

The following chart details our portfolio by brand as of February 15, 2004:

Our properties are operated under premium brand names such as Marriott, Ritz-Carlton, Hyatt and others, which we believe have consistently outperformed other brands in the industry. Consistent with our strategy of engaging the leading hotel management companies to operate our properties, we converted our 498-room Swissôtel Boston to the Boston Hyatt Regency on June 26, 2003 and we converted our 365-room Atlanta Swissôtel to the Westin Buckhead on January 7, 2004. We believe that the broader brand name recognition and resources of Hyatt and Starwood will help improve operations and drive increased profitability in the long term at these hotels.

To maintain the overall quality of our lodging properties we assess annually the need for refurbishments, replacements and capital improvements. Typically, room refurbishments occur at intervals of approximately seven years, based on an annual review of the condition of each property. However, the timing of refurbishments may vary based on the type of property and equipment being replaced and are generally divided into the following types: soft goods, hard goods and infrastructure. Soft goods include items such as carpeting, bed spreads, curtains and wall vinyl and may require more frequent updates to maintain brand quality standards. Hard goods include furniture such as dressers, desks, couches, restaurant chairs and tables and are generally not replaced as frequently. Infrastructure includes the physical plant of the hotel, including such items as the roof, elevators, façade, fire systems, etc., which are regularly maintained and then replaced at the end of their useful lives. The management agreements for the majority of our properties require us to escrow 5% of hotel sales for refurbishments, and on average, we spend approximately $180 million to $220 million on replacements and refurbishments of soft and hard goods. In addition to amounts escrowed under the management agreement, we

4

will fund infrastructure improvements and, on average, spend approximately $20 million to $30 million annually. In addition to capital spending for replacement and refurbishment of the properties, we fund projects where we believe our return on investment will exceed our targeted corporate return on capital. For example, in 2001, we completed a $25 million, 50,000 square foot spa facility for The Ritz-Carlton, Naples. All capital expenditure decisions, however, are based on the economic environment and our cash requirements, and as a result, we will occasionally spend less than these amounts. For example, in 2002 and 2003, we reduced our capital expenditures based on our assessment of the operating environment and to preserve capital. During this period, our capital expenditures were focused on property maintenance and improvements designed to maintain appropriate levels of quality. As a result of the commitment we have historically made to maintaining our assets, we believe that the reductions in capital expenditures during the last two years have not adversely affected the long-term value of our portfolio. As the industry recovers, we plan to return to our strategy of pursuing capital expenditure projects designed to enhance the value of our hotels.

Development Projects.    During 2003, we began construction on a project to expand the Memphis Marriott by 200 rooms and to connect the property to the adjacent convention center. We expect to spend approximately $15 million on the expansion which will be completed in 2004. In January 2002, we opened The Ritz-Carlton, Naples Golf Resort, which is located approximately three miles from our Ritz-Carlton, Naples beachfront hotel. The Golf Resort had a development cost of approximately $75 million and includes 15,000 square feet of meeting space, four food and beverage outlets and full access to the Tiburon Golf Club, a 36-hole Greg Norman designed golf complex bordering the hotel. We own a 49% limited partner interest in the partnership that owns Tiburon Golf Club, and invested $3 million in 2002 to complete the 36-hole golf club.

Foreign Operations.    We currently own four Canadian properties and one Mexican property containing a total of 1,952 rooms. During each of 2003, 2002 and 2001, approximately 3%, or $120 million, of our revenues were attributed to foreign operations, while the remaining 97% were attributed to our domestic properties.

Competition.    The lodging industry is highly competitive, and over the past decade there has been a proliferation of the number of brands in the lodging industry. Competition is often specific to individual markets and is based on a number of factors, including location, brand, price, guest amenities and service, as well as property condition. Our competition includes hotels operated under brands in the upper-upscale and luxury full-service segments, as well as hotels operated under upscale or other lower tier brands in many locations. Many management contracts do not have restrictions on the ability of management companies to convert, franchise or develop other hotel properties in our markets. As a result, our hotels in a given market often compete with hotels which our managers may own, invest in, manage or franchise.

We believe that our properties enjoy competitive advantages associated with their operations under the Marriott, Ritz-Carlton, Four Seasons, Hyatt, Westin and Hilton hotel brand systems. The national 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. Each of our managers maintains national reservation systems. Our website permits users to connect to the reservation systems for each of these brands to reserve rooms at our hotels. In addition, repeat guest business is enhanced by guest rewards programs offered by most of these brands.

Seasonality.    Our hotel sales have traditionally experienced moderate seasonality, which varies based on the individual hotel property and the region. Additionally, hotel revenues in the fourth quarter reflect sixteen or seventeen weeks of results compared to twelve weeks for each of the first three quarters of the fiscal year. Hotel sales by quarter for the years 2001 through 2003 for our lodging properties are as follows:

5

Hotel Properties.    The following table sets forth the location and number of rooms of our 113 full-service hotels as of February 15, 2004. Each hotel is operated as a Marriott brand hotel unless otherwise indicated by its name.

6

Other Real Estate Investments

In addition to our 113 full-service hotels, we maintain investments, which are not consolidated in our financial statements, in a joint venture and partnerships that in the aggregate own four full-service hotels, 120 limited-service hotels, the Tiburon Golf Club, and other investments. Typically, we manage these investments and conduct business through a combination of general and limited partnership and limited liability company interests. As of December 31, 2003, the combined balance sheets of these investments included approximately $1.2 billion in assets and $0.9 billion in debt, principally first mortgages on hotel properties, senior notes secured by the ownership interests in the partnership and mezzanine debt. All of the debt of these entities is non-recourse to us and our subsidiaries.

We also have a leasehold interest in 53 Courtyard by Marriott properties and 18 Residence Inns, which, in a series of related transactions, were sold to Hospitality Properties Trust and leased back prior to 1997. As part of our conversion to a REIT, these properties were subleased to Barceló Crestline Corporation, formerly Crestline Capital Corporation (“Crestline”). The initial term of these leases expire between 2010 and 2012 and are renewable at our option.

For a more detailed discussion of our other real estate investments, including a summary of the outstanding debt balances of our affiliates, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition—Investments in Affiliates” and Notes 3 and 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—”Investments in Affiliates” and “Leases.”

7

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 on, under or in such property. These laws may impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. In addition, certain environmental laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real 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.

Material Agreements

Substantially all of our hotels are managed and operated by third parties pursuant to management agreements with our lessee subsidiaries. The initial term of our management agreements is generally 15 to 20 years with one or more renewal terms. Our management agreements with our operators typically include the terms described below.

8

Employees

On February 15, 2004, we had 182 employees, including approximately 27 employees at the Sacramento Airport Host hotel. Fourteen of our employees at the Sacramento Airport Host hotel are covered by a collective bargaining agreement that is subject to review and renewal on a regular basis. Employees at our other hotels are employed by our management companies.

9

Certain of our third-party managed hotels also are covered by collective bargaining agreements that are subject to review and renewal on a regular basis. We believe that we and our managers generally have good relations with labor unions at our hotels. We and our managers have not experienced any material business interruptions as a result of labor disputes.

Certain Policies

The following is a discussion of our policies with respect to investments, financing, lending and certain other activities. Our policies with respect to these activities are determined by our Board of Directors and may be amended or revised from time to time at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

Investment Policies

Investments in Real Estate or Interests in Real Estate.    We are required to conduct all of our investment activities through Host LP. Our investment objectives are to:

We also may participate with other entities in property ownership through joint ventures, partnerships or other types of co-ownership. Equity investments may be subject to existing mortgage financing and other indebtedness or such financing or indebtedness may be incurred in connection with acquiring investments. Any such financing or indebtedness will have priority over our equity interest in such property.

Investments in Real Estate Mortgages.    While we will emphasize equity real estate investments, we may, at our discretion, invest in mortgages and other similar interests. We do not intend to invest to a significant extent in mortgages or deeds of trust, but may acquire mortgages as a strategy for acquiring ownership of a property or the economic equivalent thereof, subject to the investment restrictions applicable to REITs. In addition, we may invest in mortgage-related securities and/or may seek to issue securities representing interests in such mortgage-related securities as a method of raising additional funds.

Securities of, or Interests in, Persons Primarily Engaged in Real Estate Activities and Other Issuers.    Subject to the percentage ownership limitations and gross income and asset tests necessary for REIT qualification, we also may invest in securities of other entities engaged in real estate activities or invest in securities of other issuers, including for the purpose of exercising control over such entities. We may acquire all or substantially all of the securities or assets of other REITs or similar entities where such investments would be consistent with our investment policies. No such investments will be made, however, unless the Board of Directors determines that the proposed investment would not cause either Host LP or us to be an “investment company” within the meaning of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.

Financing Policies

Neither our nor Host LP’s organizational documents contain restrictions on incurring debt. The indenture for our senior notes and our existing credit facility impose limitations on the incurrence of indebtedness. We may,

10

from time to time, reduce our outstanding indebtedness by repurchasing a portion of such outstanding indebtedness, subject to certain restrictions contained in Host LP’s partnership agreement and the terms of our outstanding indebtedness. We will, from time to time, re-evaluate our borrowing policies in light of then current economic conditions, relative costs of debt and equity capital, market conditions, market values of properties, growth and acquisition opportunities, our goal of obtaining an EBITDA-to-interest coverage ratio of 3.0x or greater and other factors. Consequently, our financing policy is subject to modification and change. We may waive or modify our borrowing policy without notice to, or vote of, the holders of any of our securities or any securities of Host LP.

To the extent that the Board of Directors determines to seek additional capital, we may raise such capital through equity offerings, OP unit offerings, debt financing or retention of cash flow or a combination of these methods. The net proceeds of all equity capital raised will be contributed to Host LP in exchange for OP Units, which will dilute the percentage ownership interest of Host LP’s limited outside (or third party) partners.

In the future, we may seek to extend, expand, reduce or renew our existing credit facility, or obtain new credit facilities or lines of credit for the purpose of making acquisitions or capital improvements or providing working capital or meeting the taxable income distribution requirements for REITs under the Internal Revenue Code. We have issued in the past, and may in the future, issue securities senior to our common shares or Host LP OP units, including preferred shares and debt securities (either of which may be convertible into common shares or OP units or may be accompanied by warrants to purchase common shares or OP units).

We have not established any limit on the number or amount of mortgages that may be placed on any single hotel or on our portfolio as a whole, although one of our current objectives is to reduce our reliance on secured indebtedness.

Lending Policies

We may consider offering purchase money financing in connection with the sale of a hotel where the provision of such financing will increase the value we receive for the property sold.

Policies With Respect to Other Activities

We may, but do not presently intend to, make investments other than as previously described. Other than di minimus amounts, we will make investments only through Host LP. We and Host LP have authority to offer our securities, subject to Board of Director approval, and to repurchase or otherwise reacquire certain securities in the open market or otherwise and may engage in such activities in the future. We and Host LP also may make loans to joint ventures in which we may participate in the future to meet working capital needs. We do not, and Host LP does not, intend to engage in trading, underwriting, agency distribution or sale of securities of other issuers. Our policies with respect to such activities may be reviewed and modified from time to time by our Board of Directors without notice to, or the vote of, the holders of any securities of ours or Host LP.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

Legal Proceedings

We believe all of the lawsuits in which we are a defendant, including the following lawsuits, are without merit and we intend to defend vigorously against such claims; however, no assurance can be given as to the outcome of any of the lawsuits. Management believes that the final resolution of these lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

Accelerated High Yield Growth Fund, Ltd., et al. v. HMC Hotel Properties II Limited Partnership et al., C.A. No. 18254NC.    This litigation represents the last in a series of cases that began in 1996 in response to a tender offer by our predecessor for interests in the Marriott Hotel Properties II Limited Partnership, or MHP II, and expanded to cover the 1998 roll-up of MHP II into Host LP.

11

In late 2001, we reached an agreement to settle two MHP II-related class actions—one in Florida state court, the other in Delaware state court—in which we agreed to pay $12,000 per limited partnership unit of MHP II. The settlement included all claims arising out of both the 1996 tender offer and the REIT conversion. MacKenzie Patterson Special Fund 2, L.P., or MacKenzie Patterson, elected to opt out of this settlement with respect to its 28 limited partnership units.

On August 23, 2000, MacKenzie Patterson filed this lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court against us alleging breach of contract, fraud, and conversion in the MHP II roll-up. MacKenzie Patterson alleges that our acquisition of MHP II violated the partnership agreement and that the general partner breached its fiduciary duties by allowing the roll-up to occur. MacKenzie Patterson is seeking unspecified damages. Discovery is underway in the case.

Joseph S. Roth et al. v. MOHS Corporation et al, Case No. 00CH14500 (“O’Hare Suites”).    On October 5, 2000, Joseph S. Roth and Robert M. Niedelman, filed a putative class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery Division, against us, Marriott International, and MOHS Corporation (one of our subsidiaries and a former general partner of O’Hare Suites). On July 2, 2003, the court ruled on plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, certifying a 256-person class on plaintiffs’ contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims, but denying certification on their six tort claims (which included unjust enrichment, fraud, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and conspiracy to defraud).

The certified class of plaintiffs consists of 256 limited partners who owned units in Mutual Benefit Marriott Chicago Suites Hotel Partners, L.P. as of the date of the roll-up of the partnership into Host LP on December 30, 1998. Plaintiffs allege that we improperly paid incentive management fees to the hotel manager in 1997 and 1998, which resulted in an inadequate appraised value for their limited partner units in connection with the acquisition of O’Hare Suites during our conversion to a REIT. Plaintiffs are seeking damages of approximately $17 million.

On August 18, 2003, plaintiffs filed: (1) a class certification motion for the tort claims for a subclass of approximately 200 former limited partners residing in Illinois and six other states; and (2) a motion for partial summary judgment on their breach of contract claim. On the latter motion, we are seeking our own summary judgment ruling that the incentive management fee payment was appropriate under a proper reading of the partnership agreement, and in light of MOHS’s obligations under its bank agreement. Judge Nowicki heard both motions on February 26, 2004 and is expected to rule on the motions in several months. A trial date has not yet been set.

Item 4.    Submission of matters to a vote of security holders

None

12

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

In the following table we set forth certain information regarding those persons currently serving as our executive officers as of February 15, 2004.

13

14

PART II

Item 5.    Market for our common stock and related shareholder matters

Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, the Chicago Stock Exchange, the Pacific Stock Exchange and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange and is traded under the symbol “HMT.” The following table sets forth, for the fiscal periods indicated, the high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape.

We have not declared dividends on our common stock during 2002 or 2003. See “Management Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition—Overview.” Under the terms of our senior notes indenture and the credit facility, our ability to pay dividends and make other payments is dependent on our ability to satisfy certain financial requirements. See “Risk Factors—Financial Risks—Our future cash distributions on common stock may be limited by the terms of our indebtedness and the terms of our preferred stock.”

As of February 15, 2004, there were 42,311 holders of record of our common stock. However, because many of the shares of our common stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of stockholders, we believe that there are considerably more beneficial holders of our common stock than record holders. As of February 15, 2004, there were 2,492 holders of OP Units, each of which is redeemable for cash, or, at our election, convertible into common stock.

Our ability to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code is facilitated by limiting the number of shares of our stock that a person may own. Our 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% of the lesser of the number or value of shares of common stock outstanding or 9.8% of the lesser of the number or value of the issued and outstanding preferred or other shares of any class or series of our stock. The 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, 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 Related to Stock Ownership—There are possible adverse consequences of limits on ownership of our common stock.”

15

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

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, 2003. The historical information contained in the following table for our 2003, 2002 and 2001 operations primarily represents gross hotel-level revenues and expenses of our properties. During 2000 and 1999, we owned the hotels but leased them to third-party lessees and, accordingly, during these periods our historical revenues primarily represent rental income generated by our leases.

16

Item 7.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis Of Results of Operations and Financial Condition

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements about our business. These statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially because of factors discussed in “Forward Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” contained elsewhere in this report.

Overview

Structure and Business.    We are a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns 113 full-service hotel properties as of February 15, 2004, which operate primarily in the luxury and upper-upscale hotel sectors. As of December 31, 2003, Host Marriott was the largest hotel REIT in the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust’s composite index. Host Marriott conducts its operations through Host LP, of which Host Marriott is the sole general partner.

Our hotels are operated under brand names that are among the most respected and widely recognized in the lodging industry—including Marriott, Ritz-Carlton, Hyatt, Four Seasons, Hilton and Westin. The majority of our properties are located in central business districts of major cities, near airports and in resort/convention locations. The target profile for our portfolio includes luxury and upper-upscale full-service properties in locations where further large scale development is limited, which we believe allows us to maintain room rate and occupancy premiums over our competitors. We seek to maximize the value of our portfolio through aggressive asset management, by directing the managers of our hotels to maximize property operations and by completing strategic capital improvements. The majority of our customers fall into two broad groups: transient and group travelers. Our transient business, which includes the individual corporate and leisure traveler, is generally accommodated at a premium rate when compared to other customer types. Group business includes hotel bookings related to conferences and events. A smaller portion of our customer base results from contracts for a specified number of rooms over a fixed period.

Our hotels are required to be operated by third-party managers. We retain these third party managers under long-term agreements under which they earn base and incentive management fees related to revenues and profitability of each individual hotel. We provide operating funds, or working capital, which the managers use to operate the property including purchasing inventory and paying wages, utilities and property taxes and other expenses. Our results of operations primarily represent hotel-level sales, which are room, food and beverage and other ancillary income such as telephone, parking and other guest services. Operating expenses consist of the costs to provide these services, as well as management fees paid to the operators of our hotels, real and personal property taxes, utilities, ground rent, equipment rent, property insurance, depreciation and other costs. We generally receive a cash distribution, which reflects hotel-level sales less property-level operating expenses (excluding depreciation), from our hotel managers each period.

Key Performance Indicators

We have several key indicators that we use to evaluate the performance of our business. These indicators include room revenue per available room, or RevPAR, and RevPAR penetration index.

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 revenues from food and beverage or parking, telephone, or other guest services generated by the property. Although RevPAR does not include these ancillary revenues, it is generally considered the leading indicator of core revenues for many hotels. We also use RevPAR to compare the results of our hotels between periods and to compare results of our comparable hotels. See “Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics” for further discussion.

17

We assess what causes changes in RevPAR because changes that result from occupancy as compared to those that result from room rate have different implications on overall revenue levels as well as incremental operating profit. For example, increases in occupancy at a hotel would lead to increases in ancillary revenues, such as food and beverage, parking sand other hotel amenities, 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 these additional room-related costs. For this reason, while operating profit would typically increase when occupancy rises, RevPAR increases due to higher room rates would have a greater impact on our profitability.

A related revenue measure for our hotels is the RevPAR penetration index. The RevPAR penetration index reflects each property’s RevPAR in relation to the RevPAR for that property’s competitive set. We use the measure as an indicator of a property’s market share. For example, a RevPAR penetration index of 100 would indicate that a hotel’s RevPAR is, on average, the same as its competitors. A RevPAR penetration index exceeding 100 would indicate that a hotel maintains a RevPAR premium in relation to its competitive set, while a RevPAR penetration index below 100 would be an indicator that a hotel is underperforming its competitive set. One critical component in this calculation is the determination of a hotel’s competitive set. Factors that we consider include geographic proximity, as well as the level of service provided at the property. For example, a hotel located near a convention center might have a competitive set that includes other hotels located in close proximity to the convention center. In addition, a luxury hotel might include other luxury or upper-upscale hotels in its competitive set but not economy hotels. Our methodology for determining a hotel’s competitive set, however, may differ from those used by other owners and/or managers.

One of our key performance indicators is the profitability of each hotel. Among other things, we use hotel adjusted operating profit, which is a non-GAAP measure, to evaluate this. Hotel adjusted operating profit measures property-level results before funding furniture, fixtures and equipment reserves and debt service and is a supplemental measure of individual property-level profitability. The comparable hotel adjusted operating profit that we discuss is an aggregation of the adjusted operating profit for each of our comparable hotels. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures—Comparable Hotel Operating Results” for further discussion. We also use, among other things, FFO per diluted share as a supplemental measure of company-wide profitability. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures—FFO per Diluted Share” for further discussion.

Each of the non-GAAP measures should be considered by investors as supplemental measures to GAAP performance measures such as total revenues, operating profit and earnings per share.

2003 and 2004 Lodging Industry Assessment

We believe the lodging industry was negatively effected in 2003 by low levels of business travel resulting from a weak economy (predominantly in the first half of the year), the war in Iraq, continued changes in terrorist threat levels and travel reductions and restrictions related to severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS. Strong economic growth in the United States economy in the second half of 2003 helped improve lodging demand, but generally not enough to offset the weak lodging demand in the first half.

Our industry outlook for 2004 is more optimistic. Historically, we have seen that lodging demand in the United States correlates to U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth, with typically a one to two quarter lag period especially within the luxury and upper-upscale sectors of the lodging industry. Therefore, given the relatively strong U.S. GDP growth in the second half of 2003 and the forecasts for 2004, we are optimistic about improvement in lodging demand in 2004. In addition, based on these GDP forecasts, as well as the anticipated strengthening of corporate profits and capital investment, we expect an increase in business-related travel and improvement in the pace of group bookings.

In addition to the favorable demand trends forecasted to affect the lodging industry in general, we believe we may be able to capitalize on the low supply growth trends that have existed during the past few years. Supply growth in the lodging industry and the markets in which we operate may be influenced by a number of factors, including growth of the economy, interest rates, local considerations and the relatively long lead time required to build urban and resort/convention hotels. Historically, supply growth has averaged approximately 3% per year.

18

However, since 2000 the growth of new supply for the entire lodging industry has exhibited a declining trend below the historic average (2.6%, 1.9%, 1.6%, and 1.2% in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, respectively) based on data prepared by Smith Travel Research and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The upper-upscale segment experienced stronger supply growth than did the industry as a whole during this period, but also exhibited a declining trend (3.7%, 2.9%, 3.2%, and 1.9% in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, respectively.) We believe that the low construction levels over the past few years, together with low expectations for additional supply growth over the next few years, which is because new full-service hotels typically take several years to build, will lead to an imbalance between supply and growing demand that will allow for improved RevPAR performance at our hotels.

In 2003, our hotel revenues (as presented in our statement of operations) declined 2.3% from 2002 as a result of the factors discussed above. However, because accounting rules require us to reclassify the results of operations of hotels we have sold or designated as held for sale to discontinued operations, the decrease in revenues was actually higher. Hotel sales, including the results of hotels acquired or disposed of during 2003 and 2002 through the date of their respective disposition or acquisition, declined 3.4%, which follows a similar decline of 3.6% in 2002 from 2001. Hotel revenues were also down in the fourth quarter of 2003 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2002, but the decline in revenues was less than the decline in the first three quarters of 2003. In response to the decline in operations of our hotels over the last several years, we have been working with our managers to achieve cost reductions at our properties. We believe these efforts have slowed the decline in the operating margins of our hotels and should create some long-term efficiencies. However, in 2003, our operating margins declined further because significant components of our costs, such as employee wages and benefits, property taxes, insurance and utilities increased at a rate greater than inflation. In addition, other costs, such as property taxes are relatively inflexible and tend to remain somewhat constant regardless of any reduction in hotel property revenues. As a result, a change in our revenues usually results in a greater percentage change in our earnings and cash flows.

During 2003, the average RevPAR penetration index, or market share, for our comparable hotels modestly declined, but it remains at a premium in relation to our competitive set. We believe that this decline in market share occurred because:

As lodging demand continues to grow and, in particular, as corporate group and corporate transient business strengthens, we believe that our hotels will regain the majority of the market share lost in 2003. For 2004, we expect RevPAR to increase 3% to 4% for our comparable hotels. We also expect certain of our costs, such as wages, benefits and insurance, to continue to increase at a rate greater than inflation, which will likely result in flat operating margins for 2004.

While we believe the combination of improved demand trends and low supply growth trends in the lodging industry and our strategic cost reductions create the possibility for improvements in our business in 2004, there can be no assurances that any increases in hotel revenues or earnings at our properties will be achieved. The trends discussed above may not occur for any number of reasons, including slower than anticipated growth in the economy, changes in travel patterns and the continued threat of additional terrorist attacks, all of which may result in lower revenues or higher operating costs and declining operating margins.

19

Management’s Priorities

Based on our primary business objectives and forecasted operating conditions, our key priorities, or financial strategies, over the next several years include the following:

As we discussed previously, our acquisition efforts to acquire new properties over the past several years have been limited by several factors, including a lack of suitable targets that complement our portfolio and capital limitations due to weak equity markets. Similarly, we have limited our capital expenditures the past two years based on our assessment of the operating environment and to preserve capital. As a result, management has focused its priorities more on recycling capital and improving our overall leverage and financial covenants by selling non-core hotels and using the proceeds to refinance or retire outstanding debt. For further detail on steps we have taken to meet our objectives, see the discussion in “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Debt Repayment and Refinancing” and “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Cash Provided by or Used in Investing Activities.”

Results of Operations

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

20

2003 Compared to 2002

As previously discussed, our hotel sales declined 3.4%, however, due to the reclassification of the results of assets sold or designated as held for sale to discontinued operations, hotel revenues on our statement of operations only declined 2.3% for full year 2003, principally due to the decline in room sales of 2.8%. For 2003, our comparable hotel RevPAR of $96.85 was down 4.2% from 2002, reflecting a decline in average room rate of 1.9% and a decrease in occupancy of 1.6 percentage points, primarily due to reduced transient demand for both business and leisure travel. Beginning in the fourth quarter, demand began to improve relative to the first three quarters of 2003, with less than one-half a percent decrease in room rate and a slight decrease in occupancy over the fourth quarter of 2002. While we have begun to see a general increase in demand, the weakest component of our business continues to be the higher-rated individual transient business traveler which historically has paid the highest average room rates. Our managers have partially offset this decline with additional group and contract business that has resulted in lower average room rates.

While our overall results for 2003 declined, we did experience improvements in comparable hotel RevPAR in four geographic regions for the fourth quarter and two regions for the full year. Comparable hotel RevPAR for our Washington D.C. Metro region increased 4.0% for the fourth quarter and 2.5% for the full year. These increases were driven by strong transient demand particularly at our Northern Virginia properties as occupancy increased 0.9 percentage points for both the fourth quarter and full year for the comparable hotels. Our Florida region also had a slight increase in comparable hotel RevPAR for the year, but a slight decrease for the fourth quarter. The results were primarily driven by our properties in the Ft. Lauderdale and Tampa markets, which benefited from stronger group demand and leisure travel.

The relative improvement of these regions was offset by the overall decline in comparable hotel RevPAR in most of our regions. In particular, our New England and South Central regions had significant declines in comparable hotel RevPAR of 15.1% and 5.8%, respectively, for the year and 14.4% and 5.7%, respectively, for the fourth quarter. The comparable hotel results in the South Central region were primarily affected by our hotels in San Antonio where full year occupancy was down 3.4 percentage points and average room rate declined 3.6%. The decrease in demand was primarily attributable to a reduction in city-wide convention activity in 2003. The decline in our New England properties was driven by the performance of our three comparable hotels in Boston which had comparable hotel RevPAR declines of 18.8% and 19.7%, respectively, for the fourth quarter and full year. The New England results discussed above do not include the Boston Copley Marriott which is considered a non-comparable hotel, which had an increase in RevPAR for the fourth quarter of 1.6%.

Our rental income represents lease income from our 71 limited-service hotels and three office property leases, as well as lease income from one full-service hotel. Operations at the leased limited-service hotel properties continued to suffer due to increased competition from full-service and limited-service properties and weak economic conditions in their markets, resulting in a very competitive environment and lower room rates. We expect that there will be slower improvement in these properties in 2004 than in our full-service properties, in part, because a significant portion of these limited-service properties will be undergoing renovation in 2004 to enable them to compete with the newer supply in the future, which will result in a decrease in the number of available rooms in 2004 while these renovations are underway.

In 2003, we also recognized $9.6 million of other income from the settlement of a claim that we brought against our directors and officers insurance carriers for reimbursement of defense costs and settlement payments incurred in resolving a series of related actions brought against us and Marriott International which arose from the sale of certain limited partnerships units to investors prior to 1993.

Operating Costs and Expenses.    The increase in operating costs and expenses is primarily the result of increases in wages, benefits, insurance and utilities at our hotels. Rental and other expense for our limited-service hotel leases, office properties and one full-service hotel that we leased are included in other property-level expenses on the consolidated statements of operations. Consistent with the relatively fixed nature of these costs, our operating expenses increased in both 2003 and 2002 despite the decrease in revenues in both years. We expect that costs such as wages, benefits and insurance will continue to increase at a rate greater than inflation.

21

Corporate and Other Expenses.    Corporate and other expenses primarily consist of employee salaries and other costs such as stock-based employee compensation expense, corporate insurance, audit fees, building rent and system costs. The increase in corporate and other expenses is primarily due to increases in corporate insurance and the appreciation of Host Marriott’s stock price, which affects the stock-based employee compensation expense.

Interest Expense.    Interest expense increased 6.3% over 2002 as a result of the payment of aggregate call premiums of $25 million and the acceleration of deferred financing fees of $6 million associated with the prepayment of our senior notes and various mortgages during 2003. In 2004, we expect that as a result of the retirement of approximately $500 million of debt (including $262 million retired in January 2004) that interest expense will decrease, however we will continue to incur additional expenses such as call premiums and the acceleration of deferred financing to the extent that we prepay or refinance our debt prior to its original maturity.

Loss on Foreign Currency and Derivative Contracts.    The loss on foreign currency and derivative contracts is due primarily to the approximate $18 million loss from the forward currency exchange contracts for our four Canadian hotels being deemed ineffective for accounting purposes. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Debt and Effect of Financial Covenants—Mortgage Debt Covenants” for further discussion.

Minority Interest Income (Expense).    Minority interest income (expense) consists of our minority partners’ share of the income or loss in consolidated hotel partnerships and the approximate 7% percentage ownership in Host LP. The change from 2002 in minority interest primarily reflects earnings in the current year, primarily as a result of the gain on the settlement of the World Trade Center hotel, compared to a net loss in 2002.

Equity in Earnings (Losses) of Affiliates.    Equity in earnings (losses) of affiliates consists of our portion of the earnings (losses) of two partnerships in which we own non-controlling interests and do not consolidate in our financial statements. The increase in the loss can be attributed to an increase in the net loss of CBM Joint Venture LLC in 2003. See “Investments in Affiliates” for a discussion of this partnership.

Discontinued Operations.    Discontinued operations consists of the eight hotels sold in 2003 and one hotel sold in 2002, the gain on the disposition and business interruption proceeds for the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel and five properties classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2003, three of which were sold in January 2004. In accordance with SFAS 144 “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets” or SFAS 144, the results of operations for these properties in the current year and prior periods are reflected in discontinued operations.

For 2003, the eight hotels sold generated net proceeds of approximately $184 million with a net gain on disposition of approximately $65 million, which includes a $56 million gain on the disposition of World Trade Center hotel. For 2003 and 2002, our revenues for these eight properties and the New York Marriott World Trade Center were $222 million and $120 million, respectively, and our income before taxes was $176 million and $23 million, respectively. The St. Louis Marriott Pavilion was transferred to the mortgage lender in January 2002 in a non-cash transaction and we recognized a net gain of $13 million, primarily as a result of the debt extinguished and the forgiveness of management fees net of the fair value of the assets surrendered. For 2003 and 2002, revenues for the five properties classified as held for sale were $42 million and $44 million, respectively, and our income before taxes was $1 million and $4 million, respectively.

On December 3, 2003, we announced the settlement of the outstanding matters relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 affecting the New York Marriott World Trade Center and Financial Center hotels with the hotels’ insurer, Marriott International, Inc. and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. As a result of these settlements, we received net insurance proceeds of approximately $372 million. As a result of this settlement, we recorded a one-time gain of approximately $212 million, which is comprised of approximately $156 million in post-2003 business interruption proceeds and approximately $56 million from the disposition of the World Trade Center hotel. The gain on disposition and the 2003 and 2002 business interruption income, net of expenses, related to the hotel has been reclassified to discontinued operations. The business interruption proceeds received, net of expenses, for the New York Marriott Financial Center hotel are included in rooms revenues from continuing operations.

22

2002 Compared to 2001

Revenues.    Hotel revenues declined 0.2% for full year 2002 principally due to the decline in room sales of 0.6%. As discussed previously, revenues (as presented in our statements of operations) do not reflect the actual decline in revenues because of the reclassification of the results of assets sold or designated as held for sale to discontinued operations. Actual room sales decreased 3.6% in 2002 from 2001. For 2002, our comparable hotel RevPAR of $100.12 was down 5.1%, which was comprised of a decline in average room rate of 5.9% and a decrease in occupancy of 0.6 percentage points. The decline in comparable hotel RevPAR was primarily attributable to reduced transient demand for business and leisure travel. While the decrease in comparable hotel RevPAR is due in part to the reduction in business and leisure travel, it is also the result of the change in business mix at our properties. Transient business, which includes corporate and premium business travelers, which generally pay the highest average room rates has decreased by over 3% since 2000 as a percentage of room sales. Our managers have partially offset this decline with additional group and contract business that have lower average room rates. As a result, while occupancy increased slightly, the average room rate declined significantly.

Although most regions had comparable hotel RevPAR declines in line with our overall portfolio, we did have two regions that had stronger results. Our South Central region comparable hotel RevPAR declined by only 1.1% primarily due to strong results from our three San Antonio hotels. The Mid-Atlantic region also outperformed the overall portfolio with a comparable hotel RevPAR decline of 2.5%. This was due to positive comparable hotel RevPAR at our Philadelphia Convention Center Marriott and Four Seasons, Philadelphia properties, offset by declines at our suburban properties in this region.

The Pacific region had the largest comparable hotel RevPAR decline at 8.3%. These results were largely due to the collapse of the technology market in the San Francisco area with all our hotels in that market having RevPAR declines. The North Central Region also had declines in comparable hotel RevPAR of 6.6%, which was a function of poor results in most of the region with our Chicago and Minneapolis properties reporting significant declines.

Our rental income further declined primarily due to increased competition and weak economic conditions for the leased limited-service hotels.

Operating Costs and Expenses.    Operating costs and expenses decreased primarily as a result of our efforts and those of our managers to control operating costs at the hotels and the overall decline in occupancy. Rental expense for our limited-service hotels and office properties are included in other property-level expenses on the consolidated statements of operations. These costs, which include wages, benefits and insurance, increased at a rate greater than inflation throughout the year.

Corporate Expenses.    Corporate expenses decreased principally due to a decrease in stock-based compensation. As a result of the decline in Host Marriott’s stock price and our operations in 2002, certain performance thresholds were not met and a portion of the shares previously granted were forfeited.

Minority Interest Expense.    The variance in minority interest expense was due to the decrease in our results of operations as described above.

Equity in Earnings (Losses) of Affiliates.    The decrease in equity in earnings (losses) of affiliates can be primarily attributed to an increase in the net loss of CBM Joint Venture LLC. See “Investments in Affiliates” for a discussion of this partnership.

Discontinued Operations.    During January 2002, we transferred the St. Louis Marriott Pavilion to the mortgage lender in a non-cash transaction. We recorded a gain, net of taxes, of $13 million in 2002 and a loss from operations of $3 million in 2001 as discontinued operations. We also reclassified the operations from properties disposed of in 2003 and properties classified as held for sale in 2003 as discontinued operations in 2002 and 2001. For 2002 and 2001, revenues for these properties were $164 million and $209 million and our income before taxes was $27 million and $8 million, respectively.

23

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Requirements

Host Marriott is required to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income in order to qualify as a REIT. Because we are required to distribute almost all of our taxable income, we depend primarily on external sources of capital to finance future growth, including acquisitions.

Cash Balances.    As of December 31, 2003, we had $764 million of cash and cash equivalents, which was an increase of $403 million from December 31, 2002. Over the past two years our cash balances have been in excess of the $100 million to $150 million, which we had historically maintained. We expect to reduce our cash balance through the repayment of indebtedness, the acquisition of additional hotels and further investments in our portfolio. Cash increased for the year principally as a result of our settlement of outstanding matters relating to our New York Marriott World Trade Center and Financial Center hotels for net proceeds of approximately $372 million, the sale of eight hotels for net proceeds of approximately $184 million and Host Marriott’s two equity offerings for net proceeds of approximately $500 million, the proceeds of which were contributed to Host LP. As described in more detail below, cash was used principally for debt repayments, regularly scheduled principal payments and the acquisition of the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa. In addition, we have $116 million of cash, which is restricted as a result of lender restrictions (including reserves for debt service, real estate taxes, insurance, furniture and fixtures, as well as cash collateral and excess cash flow deposits). The restricted cash balances do not have a significant effect on our liquidity. We also currently have $250 million of availability under our credit facility and have no amounts outstanding under the facility.

Debt Repayments and Refinancings.    Proceeds from the sale of eight hotels in 2003, combined with the insurance settlement proceeds from the New York World Trade Center and Financial Center hotels and scheduled principal payments, enabled us to repay or redeem a total of approximately $240 million of debt in 2003 and $262 million of debt in January 2004. In addition, we refinanced approximately $800 million of our debt in 2003, lowering our average interest rate to 7.7% and extending our debt maturities. The refinancing and repayment of this debt will result in an annual reduction in interest expense of approximately $40 million. We have approximately $28 million of our mortgage debt maturing through December 31, 2004. Additionally, during 2004 we will have $58 million of regularly scheduled principal payments on our mortgage debt. We believe we have sufficient cash to deal with our near-term debt maturities, as well as any decline in the cash flow from our business.

Reducing future cash interest payments and our leverage remains a key management priority. In November 2003, Host Marriott’s Board of Directors authorized us to purchase or retire up to $600 million of our senior notes ($382 million of which remains outstanding after the January 2004 repayment of $218 million of 8.45% Series C senior notes). As a result, we may continue to redeem or refinance additional senior notes and mortgage debt from time to time with proceeds from additional asset sales or to take advantage of favorable market conditions. We may purchase senior notes 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 fees. For example, during 2003 and the period from January 1, 2004 through February 1, 2004, we incurred interest expense resulting from the payment of call premiums and the acceleration of deferred financing fees totaling $30 million and $11 million, respectively for those periods.

Capital Expenditures.    We reduced our capital expenditures over the past two years because of the uncertain economic environment and our need to conserve cash. For 2003, total capital expenditures for our existing properties were approximately $201 million. Typically, we spend approximately $200 million to $250 million annually on renewals and replacements and other capital improvements. We spent approximately $181 million on renewal and replacement capital expenditures in 2003, reflecting our decision to delay certain projects

24

due to the start of the war in Iraq. Several of these projects have now begun and should be completed by the first quarter of 2004. Capital expenditures were 6.0% and 5.3% of hotel sales for 2003 and 2002, respectively. We expect renewal and replacement capital expenditures for 2004 to be approximately $255 million to $265 million (including approximately $20 million of projects which were in progress at December 31, 2003, but were not fully funded), the vast majority of which would be funded by the furniture, fixture and equipment reserves established at our hotels (typically funded annually with 5% of property revenues) and, to a lesser extent by our available cash. As of December 31, 2003, our furniture, fixture and equipment reserves totaled approximately $150 million. As a result of the challenging environment in 2003, we spent approximately $3 million on return on investment projects. In 2004, we currently estimate that we will increase our spending on return on investment projects to approximately $35 million as we are in the early stages of several large-scale repositioning projects. In addition, we spent $7 million on the $15 million, 200-room expansion of the Memphis Marriott, which we expect to complete in 2004.

Acquisitions.    We remain interested in pursuing single asset and portfolio acquisitions and believe that there will be opportunities over the next several years to acquire assets that are consistent with our target profile of upper-upscale and luxury properties in urban and resort/convention locations where further large scale development is limited, such as the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa, which we purchased for approximately $321 million in the fourth quarter of 2003. We are currently in preliminary discussions with other sellers of hotels that meet our investment objectives, but have not entered into any definitive agreements. Any additional acquisitions may be funded, in part, from the proceeds of equity offerings by Host Marriott or the issuance of OP units by Host LP, as well as proceeds from asset sales and available cash. Because we are generally restricted in our ability to incur new debt as discussed herein, we generally will not finance any acquisitions through the issuance of debt securities until our EBITDA-to-interest coverage is 2.0x or greater. We cannot be certain as to the size or timing of acquisition opportunities or of our ability to obtain additional acquisition financing, if needed.

Sources and Uses of Cash

Our principal sources of cash are cash from operations, the sale of assets, borrowings under our credit facility and our ability to obtain additional financing through various capital markets. Our principal uses of cash are debt repayments, capital expenditures, asset acquisitions, operating costs, corporate expenses and distributions to our equity holders.

Cash Provided by Operations.    Cash provided by operations decreased from $380 million in 2002 to $373 million in 2003. The decrease in cash provided by operations in 2003 primarily reflects the overall reduction in hotel operating profit. Additionally, the 2002 cash provided by operations included a one-time, $50 million payment from Marriott International related to negotiated changes in our management agreements with respect to working capital balances at our hotels. Previously, we had recorded this amount in our balance sheet as “due from managers.” There was no income statement impact of this payment.

Cash Provided by or Used in Investing Activities.    Cash used in investing activities decreased from $222 million in 2002 to $156 million in 2003. Activity for 2003 primarily included net proceeds of $184 million from the sale of eight hotels, property insurance proceeds of $185 million for the New York World Trade Center hotel, the acquisition of the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa for $321 million, and capital expenditures of $201 million as discussed above in “Capital Expenditures.” The 2002 cash used in investing activities included a one-time $75 million payment from Marriott International related to negotiated changes in our management agreements with respect to furniture, fixture and equipment escrow funds for our hotels. There was no income statement impact of this payment from Marriott International.

25

The following table summarizes significant investing activities that have been completed since the beginning of fiscal year 2002 (in millions):

As discussed previously, we continue to pursue opportunities to dispose of non-core assets and expect to complete the sale of two additional non-core properties by the end of the first quarter of 2004. Similar to the hotels already sold in 2003 and the four properties disposed of in the first quarter of 2004, the hotels currently under contract for sale are generally smaller hotels in secondary markets with lower growth prospects. We believe that, if consummated, sales of non-core properties could result in proceeds of up to $500 million in 2004. If the proceeds from these sales are used to retire debt, operating profit will decrease, but net income may improve based on the amount of the reduction in future interest payments. Similarly, if these funds are used to purchase new hotels or reinvest in existing hotels, future operating profit and net income may improve. However, there can be no assurance that operating profit or net income will improve.

Cash Used in and Provided by Financing Activities.    Cash provided by financing activities for 2003 was $186 million, compared to cash used in financing activities of $149 million for 2002. Significant financing activities during 2003 included two separate issuances of common stock by Host Marriott totaling 51 million shares for net proceeds of approximately $501 million. The proceeds were contributed to Host LP which used a significant portion of the proceeds to finance the acquisition of the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa. Host LP also issued $725 million in 7 ¹/8% Series J senior notes due in 2013. The net proceeds were used to redeem $429 million of our existing 7 ⁷/8% Series A senior notes due in 2005 and $282 million of our 8.45% Series C senior notes due in 2008 on December 8, 2003. The terms of the Series A and C senior notes required that we pay a premium in exchange for the right to retire this debt in advance of its maturity date. In conjunction with the redemption, we recorded a loss of approximately $28 million for the payment of the premium and the acceleration of the related deferred financing fees in the fourth quarter of 2003.

During December 2003, we announced the settlement of all outstanding matters related to the New York Marriott World Trade Center and Financial Center hotels with our insurer, Marriott International and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. As a result of this settlement, we received net proceeds of approximately $372 million, substantially all of which were used to repay debt. During the fourth quarter, we used the proceeds to repay the $65 million mortgage debt on the World Trade Center hotel and made a partial prepayment of $33 million of mortgage debt on our Canadian properties. The remainder of the proceeds was used

26

in the first quarter of 2004 for a partial prepayment of $44 million of debt secured by mortgages on two Ritz-Carlton properties and to retire the remaining outstanding Series C senior notes of approximately $218 million. In conjunction with the redemption of the Series C senior notes, we will record a loss of approximately $11 million for the payment of the call premium and the acceleration of the related deferred financing fees in the first quarter of 2004.

The following table summarizes significant financing activity, except for the credit facility, payment of distributions and non-cash equity and derivative transactions completed since the beginning of fiscal year 2002 (in millions):

Financial Condition

Debt and Effect of Financial Covenants

As of December 31, 2003, our debt totaled $5.5 billion (as described fully in note 4 to our consolidated financial statements). As of December 31, 2003, the weighted average interest rate of our debt was approximately 7.7% and the average maturity was 5.5 years. Additionally, approximately 85% of debt had a fixed rate of interest. As of December 31, 2003 and 2002, the outstanding senior notes balance includes $37 million and $40 million, respectively, of fair value adjustments for interest rate swap agreements.

27

Over time, we expect to decrease the proportion of fixed rate debt in our capital structure to 75% to 80% of our total debt, although there can be no assurances that we will be able to achieve this result on terms acceptable to us. We may do this through the use of derivative instruments including interest rate swaps or through the periodic refinancings of fixed rate mortgage debt with floating rate debt. In furtherance of this objective, in August 2003 we entered into two interest rate swap agreements maturing in October 2007. Under the agreements, we receive fixed rate payments at 9.25% and make floating rate payments based on six-month LIBOR plus 590 basis points (7.08% at December 31, 2003) on a combined notional amount of $242 million. These agreements have the effect of swapping our interest obligations on $242 million in principal amount of 9.25% Series G senior notes to a floating rate of interest. In addition, in September 2003 we refinanced the $95 million mortgage debt secured by the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C. with an $88 million floating-rate mortgage loan with an interest rate of one-month LIBOR plus 210 basis points (3.3% at December 31, 2003.) In connection with the refinancing, we also purchased an interest rate cap, which has the effect of limiting the interest rate on the new floating rate mortgage loan to not greater than 8.1% for the first two years of the loan. We may continue to enter into similar swaps or refinancings in the future. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” for a discussion of our sensitivity to interest rates.

Credit Facility and Senior Notes Covenants.    Under the terms of our senior notes indenture and the credit facility, our ability to incur indebtedness and pay dividends is subject to restrictions and the satisfaction of various conditions, including an EBITDA-to-interest coverage ratio (as defined in the senior notes indenture) for Host LP of at least 2.0 to 1.0. We do not currently meet this interest coverage ratio. As a result, Host Marriott is limited in its ability to pay dividends on its common and preferred stock, except to the extent necessary to maintain Host Marriott’s status as a REIT. In addition, we cannot incur indebtedness, except indebtedness specifically permitted under our senior notes indenture and the credit facility, which in both cases mainly consist of borrowings under the credit facility and borrowings in connection with a refinancing of existing debt. For this reason, we generally cannot currently finance significant capital expenditures, acquisitions or other growth through the issuance of new debt (other than borrowings under our credit facility). Accordingly, we would expect that until such time as our coverage ratio is greater than 2.0 to 1.0 our acquisitions or other growth will generally be funded with available cash, the proceeds of asset sales or the issuance of additional equity.

Under our credit facility, we are required to use the proceeds of asset sales to reinvest in our assets, acquire new properties or to permanently reduce the revolving loan commitment in effect at the time. In general, in the event that we consummate asset sales during any 12 month period that generate net proceeds in excess of 1% of our total assets (calculated using undepreciated real estate assets), the revolving loan commitment will automatically be reduced by the amount of such proceeds to the extent that such proceeds are not reinvested or committed to be reinvested in our business within 364 days following the date the 1% threshold is exceeded. The May 2003 amendment to the credit facility provided for certain exceptions to this general rule. For instance, when the revolving loan commitment is $250 million or less, further revolving loan commitment reductions occur with respect to asset sales proceeds that are not reinvested only to the extent that amounts are outstanding under the credit facility. If no amounts are outstanding, a commitment reduction can be avoided if we achieve commensurate reductions in the amount of our secured indebtedness or indebtedness under our senior notes indenture.

Our senior notes indenture has parallel requirements with respect to asset sales in excess of 1% of our total assets during any 12 month period. Under our senior notes indenture, amounts in excess of the 1% threshold must be either reinvested in the business or used to repay amounts outstanding under our credit facility (our availability under the credit facility would also be permanently reduced by the amount of the repayment). If asset sale proceeds are not used for either of these purposes, then we are required to offer to repurchase our senior notes at par with the excess sale proceeds.

In November 2003, we crossed the 1% threshold. As a result, the revolving loan commitment would automatically be reduced unless we reinvest or commit to reinvest the net sale proceeds from all such dispositions by November 2004. Based on investments we have made (in particular, the acquisition of the Hyatt

28

Regency Maui Resort and Spa on November 13, 2003 for $321 million), as well as other planned capital expenditures, the dispositions to date will not result in a reduction of the credit facility availability. We will, however, continue to be subject to these credit facility commitment reduction provisions and senior notes indenture requirements with respect to future dispositions, if any.

Mortgage Debt Covenants.    Substantially all of our mortgage debt is recourse solely to specific assets except in instances of fraud, misapplication of funds and other customary recourse provisions. As of February 15, 2004, we have 29 assets that are secured by mortgage debt. Eleven of these assets are secured by mortgage debt that have restrictive covenants which require the mortgage servicer or lender to retain and hold in escrow the cash flow after debt service when it declines below specified operating levels. The effect of these covenants is discussed below:

As this loan is denominated in United States dollars and the functional currency of the properties is Canadian dollars, we entered into currency forward contracts to buy U.S. dollars at a fixed price at the time we entered into the loan. These forward contracts hedge the currency exposure of converting Canadian dollars into U.S. dollars on a monthly basis to cover debt service payments, including the original final balloon payment of approximately $84 million. These contracts had been designated as cash flow hedges of the debt service and balloon payment and were recorded at fair value on the balance sheet with offsetting changes recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income. In December 2003, we made a partial repayment of approximately $33 million of the Canadian mortgage loan in addition to the April 2003 repayment mentioned above. We also terminated foreign currency forward contracts in an amount equal to the aggregate repayment. As a result of these prepayments, the forward currency exchange contracts were deemed ineffective hedges for accounting purposes and we recorded a loss on the contracts of approximately $18 million in 2003. We will record the change in the fair value of the outstanding forward currency contracts in operations each period. In conjunction with the December 2003 prepayment,

29

one of the hotels and the $10 million deposit was released from the collateral. The current loan is still subject to the escrow provisions and we anticipate that additional cash of approximately $4 million will be required to be escrowed in 2004.

Credit Ratings

Currently, we have $3.2 billion of senior notes outstanding that are rated by Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s. As a result of our significantly reduced operating levels over the past few years, the ratings on our senior notes have been downgraded or placed on negative credit watch. On February 13, 2003, Standard and Poor’s downgraded its rating on our senior debt from BB- to B+. At the same time Standard & Poor’s also downgraded its rating on Host Marriott’s preferred stock from B- to CCC+. On August 6, 2003, Moody’s announced that it had placed its Ba3 rating of our senior unsecured debt and its B3 rating of Host Marriott’s preferred stock under review for possible downgrade. On December 4, 2003, Moody’s concluded its review and changed its ratings outlook on our senior notes and Host Marriott’s preferred stock to stable. While we have no senior note maturities until 2006, if our operations were to decline further, or if our credit ratios do not otherwise improve, the ratings on our senior notes could be further reduced. If we were unable to subsequently improve our credit ratings, our cost to issue additional senior notes, either in connection with a refinancing or otherwise, or to issue additional preferred stock would likely increase.

Dividend Policy

Host Marriott is required to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income in order to qualify as a REIT, including taxable income we recognize for tax purposes but with regard to which we do not receive corresponding cash. Funds used by Host Marriott to pay dividends on its common and preferred stock are provided through distributions from Host LP. For every share of common and preferred stock of Host Marriott, Host LP has issued to Host Marriott a corresponding common OP unit and preferred OP unit. As of February 15, 2004, Host Marriott is the owner of substantially all of the preferred OP units and approximately 93% of the common OP units. The remaining 7% of the common OP units are held by various third-party limited partners. As a result of the minority position in Host LP common OP units, these holders share, on a pro rata basis, in amounts being distributed by Host LP. As a general rule, when Host Marriott pays a common or preferred dividend, Host LP pays an equivalent per unit distribution on all common or corresponding preferred OP units. For example, if Host Marriott paid a five cent per share dividend on its common stock, it would be based on payment of a five cent per common OP unit distribution by Host LP to Host Marriott and all other common OP unit holders.

Our failure to meet the EBITDA-to-interest coverage ratio in our senior notes indenture and credit facility, as previously discussed, restricts our ability to pay dividends on our common and preferred equity, except to the extent necessary to maintain Host Marriott’s status as a REIT. Required income distributions for 2002 were satisfied in part by the payment of dividends on the preferred stock in 2002 and in the first three quarters of 2003.

Taxable income generated by the insurance recovery on the World Trade Center and Financial Center hotels was sufficient to allow Host Marriott to pay the preferred stock dividend for the fourth quarter of 2003. We expect that the taxable income generated by the insurance recovery will also be sufficient to allow Host Marriott to pay up to the first three quarters of preferred stock dividends in 2004. Preferred dividend payments beyond those supported by the taxable income generated by this settlement will depend on, among other factors, taxable income or loss from operations in 2004 or our ability to meet a minimum EBITDA-to-interest coverage ratio (both as required by the senior notes indenture).

Host Marriott did not pay a dividend on its common stock (and, correspondingly, Host LP did not make a distribution on its common OP units) in 2002 and 2003. Host Marriott does not currently expect to pay a meaningful common dividend for 2004 other than to satisfy any remaining 2003 income distribution requirements. The decision to reinstate the common dividend (including the amount of any such dividend) will be made by the Board of Directors and will depend on several factors, including those described above for distributions on the preferred stock, as well as our liquidity and any accrued unpaid dividends on the preferred stock.

30

Investments in Affiliates

We have made investments in certain ventures which we do not consolidate and, accordingly, are accounted for under the equity method of accounting in accordance with our accounting policies as described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements. Over the past several years we have actively marketed and sold our interests in various partnerships which are no longer consistent with our core portfolio. As a result, except for the partnerships described below any remaining interests are insignificant and/or the partnerships have no recourse to the company. We have included the table below and the following discussion to provide investors with additional information on these investments. Investments in affiliates consist of the following at December 31, 2003:

We and Marriott International each own a 50% interest in CBM Joint Venture, which owns, through two limited partnerships, 120 Courtyard by Marriott properties totaling 17,550 rooms. The joint venture, CBM Joint Venture LLC, has approximately $901 million of debt. This debt consists of first mortgage loans secured by the properties owned by each of the two partnerships, senior notes secured by the ownership interest in one partnership and mezzanine debt. The mezzanine debt is an obligation of a subsidiary of the joint venture and the lender is an affiliate of Marriott International. None of the debt is recourse to, or guaranteed by, us or any of our subsidiaries. RevPAR at the Courtyard hotels declined 3.7% for 2003 when compared to the same period in 2002. Based on our current forecasts for the full year 2004, the hotels in one of these two partnerships are not expected to generate sufficient cash flow from operations to fund the partnership’s debt service obligations. To the extent that there is insufficient cash flow to fund its debt service obligations, the partnership will continue to make use of (i) available unrestricted cash balances, (ii) a senior note debt service reserve, (iii) certain rights to require repayment to the partnership of a portion of ground rent and certain management fees it has previously paid to Marriott International, and (iv) subordination provisions for current payments in its ground leases and management agreements to cover any shortfall. As of December 31, 2003, the joint venture has deferred a total of $3.8 million in ground rent and base management fees. Interest does not accrue on such deferred amounts, but these amounts must be repaid prior to distributions to equity holders. In addition, we anticipate that the joint venture will continue to defer interest payments on the mezzanine debt for at least the first half of 2004. As of December 31, 2003, the joint venture has deferred $28 million of interest payments on the mezzanine debt. Deferral of these interest payments is not a default under the mezzanine debt agreements. To the extent deferred, unpaid mezzanine debt interest amounts have been added to principal and earn interest at 13%. As of December 31, 2003, the partnerships and the joint venture maintained aggregate unrestricted cash balances of approximately $17 million. We did not receive any cash distributions from this investment during 2003 or 2002.

We currently have a 49% limited partner interest in Tiburon Golf Ventures, L.P., which owns the Greg Norman-designed golf club surrounding The Ritz-Carlton, Naples Golf Resort. Cash distributions from this investment were $1 million in both 2003 and 2002.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We are party to various transactions, agreements or other contractual arrangements with unconsolidated entities (which we refer to as “off-balance sheet arrangements”) under which we have certain contingent liabilities and guarantees. As of December 31, 2003, we are party to the following material off-balance sheet arrangements:

Tax Sharing Arrangements.    Under tax sharing agreements with former affiliated companies (such as Marriott International, Host Marriott Services Corporation and Barceló Crestline Corporation (formerly Crestline

31

Capital Corporation)), we are obligated to pay certain taxes (Federal, state, local and foreign, including any related interest and penalties) relating to periods in which the companies were affiliated with us. For example, a taxing authority could adjust an item deducted by a former affiliate during the period that this former affiliate was owned by us. This adjustment could produce a material tax liability that we may be obligated to pay under the tax sharing agreement. In addition, under the partnership agreement between Host Marriott and Host LP, Host LP is obligated to pay certain taxes (Federal, state, local and foreign, including any related interest and penalties) incurred by Host Marriott, as well as any liabilities the IRS successfully may assert against Host Marriott. We do not expect any amounts paid under the tax sharing arrangement to be material.

Tax Indemnification Agreements.    For reasons relating to tax considerations of the former and current owners of nine hotels, we have agreed to restrictions on selling the hotels, or repaying or refinancing the mortgage debt for varying periods depending on the hotel. These agreements require that we indemnify the owners for their tax consequences resulting from our selling the hotel or refinancing the mortgage debt during the period under the agreement. We have also agreed not to sell more than 50% of the original allocated value attributable to the former owners of a portfolio of 11 additional hotels, or to take other actions that would result in the recognition and allocation of gain to the former owners of such hotels for income tax purposes. Because the timing of these potential transactions is within our control, we believe that the likelihood of any material indemnification to be remote and therefore not material to our financial statements.

Guarantees.    We have certain guarantees, which consist of commitments we have made to third parties for leases or debt, that are not on our books due to various dispositions, spin-offs and contractual arrangements, but that we have agreed to pay in the event of certain circumstances including default by an unrelated party. We consider the likelihood of any material payments under these guarantees to be remote. The largest guarantees (by dollar amount) are listed below:

Information on other guarantees and other off-balance sheet arrangements may be found in Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements.

Contractual Obligations

The table below summarizes our obligations for principal payments on our debt, future minimum lease payments on our operating and capital leases and projected capital expenditures, each as of December 31, 2003 (in millions):

32

Critical Accounting Policies

Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Host Marriott and all consolidated subsidiaries. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. While we do not believe the reported amounts would be materially different, application of these policies involves the exercise of judgment and the use of assumptions as to future uncertainties and, as a result, actual results could differ from these estimates. We evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to the impairment of long-lived assets, on an ongoing basis. We base our estimates on experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. All of our significant accounting policies are disclosed in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. The following represent certain critical accounting policies that require us to exercise our business judgment or make significant estimates:

Changes in these estimates, assumptions, future changes in economic conditions or property-level results could require us to record additional impairment charges, which would be reflected in operations in the future.

33

To the extent a property is classified as held for sale and its fair value less selling costs is lower than the net book value of the property, we will record an impairment loss. See the discussion above concerning the use of estimates and judgments in determining fair values for impairment tests.

34

Lodging Statistics

Reporting Periods for Hotel Operating Statistics and Comparable Hotel Results

The results we report are based on results of our hotels reported to us by our hotel managers. Our hotel managers use different reporting periods. Marriott International, Inc., the manager of the majority of our properties, uses a year ending on the Friday closest to December 31 and reports twelve weeks of operations for the first three quarters and sixteen or seventeen weeks for the fourth quarter of the year for its Marriott-managed hotels. In contrast, other managers of our hotels, such as Hyatt, report results on a monthly basis. Host Marriott, as a REIT, is required by tax laws to report results on a calendar year. As a result, we elected to adopt the reporting periods used by Marriott International modified so that our fiscal year always ends on December 31 to comply with REIT rules. Our first three quarters of operations end on the same day as Marriott International but our fourth quarter ends on December 31.

Two consequences of the reporting cycle we have adopted are: (1) quarterly start dates will usually differ between years, except for the first quarter which always commences on January 1, and (2) our first and fourth quarters of operations and year-to-date operations may not include the same number of days as reflected in prior years. For example, the third quarter of 2003 ended on September 12 and the third quarter of 2002 ended on September 6, though both quarters reflect twelve weeks of operations. In contrast, fourth quarter results for 2003 reflected 110 days of operations, while our fourth quarter results for 2002 reflected 116 days of operations.

In contrast to the reporting periods for our statement of operations, our hotel operating statistics (i.e., RevPAR, average daily rate and average occupancy) are always reported based on the reporting cycle used by Marriott International for our Marriott-managed hotels. This facilitates year-to-year comparisons, as each reporting period will be comprised of the same number of days of operations as in the prior year (except in the case of fourth quarters comprised of seventeen weeks, such as fiscal year 2002, versus sixteen weeks). This means, however, that the reporting periods we use for hotel operating statistics may differ slightly from the reporting periods used for our statements of operations for the first and fourth quarters and the full year. For the hotel operating statistics and comparable hotel results reported herein:

35

Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics

We present certain operating statistics (i.e., RevPAR, average daily rate and average occupancy) and operating results (revenues, expenses and adjusted operating profit) for the periods included in this report on a comparable hotel basis. We define our comparable hotels as full-service properties (i) that are owned or leased by us and the operations of which are included in our consolidated results, whether as continuing operations or discontinued operations, for the entirety of the operating periods being compared, and (ii) that have not sustained substantial property damage or undergone large-scale capital projects during the reporting periods being compared. For 2003 and 2002, we consider 112 of our portfolio of 117 full-service hotels owned on December 31, 2003 to be comparable hotels. The operating results of the following hotels that we owned as of December 31, 2003 are excluded from comparable hotel results for these periods:

In addition, the operating results of the eight hotels we disposed of in 2003 and the one hotel we disposed of in 2002 are also not included in comparable hotel results for the periods presented herein. Moreover, because these statistics and operating results are for our full-service hotel properties, they exclude results for our non-hotel properties and leased limited-service hotels.

36

Hotel Operating Statistics

The following tables set forth performance information for our full-service hotels by geographic region for 2003 and 2002 for our comparable hotels, as well as all full-service hotels.

Comparable by Region

All Full-Service Hotels by Region ⁽¹⁾