Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2004

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File No.: 333-104916

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

c/o Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Holdings, L.P.

1000 Boardwalk

Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401

(609) 449-6515

(Address, Including Zip Code and Telephone Number, Including

Area Code, of Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices)

Commission File No.: 333-104916-07

TRUMP CASINO FUNDING, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

c/o Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Holdings, L.P.

1000 Boardwalk

Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401

(609) 449-6515

(Address, Including Zip Code and Telephone Number, Including

Area Code, of Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrants (1) have filed all Reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨.

Indicate by check mark whether either one of the Registrants is an accelerated filer (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x.

As of May 14, 2004, there were 100 shares of Trump Casino Funding, Inc.’s common stock, par value $.01 per share, outstanding. Trump Casino Funding, Inc. meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions H(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-Q and is therefore filing this form with the reduced disclosure format.

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

Table of Contents

PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1 - FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands)

See accompanying notes.

1

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(unaudited)

(in thousands)

See accompanying notes.

2

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CAPITAL/(DEFICIT)

FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2004

(unaudited)

(in thousands)

See accompanying notes.

3

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(unaudited)

(in thousands)

See accompanying notes.

4

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(unaudited)

(1) Organization and Operations

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements include those of Trump Casino Holdings, L.L.C., a Delaware single member limited liability company (“TCH”), and its subsidiary, Trump Casino Funding, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“TCF”). TCH’s wholly-owned subsidiaries include: (i) TCF, (ii) Trump Marina Associates, L.P. (“Marina Associates”), (iii) Trump Marina, Inc., (iv) Trump Indiana, Inc. (“Trump Indiana, Inc.”), (v) Trump Indiana Realty, L.L.C. (“Trump Indiana Realty”) and (vi) THCR Management Holdings, L.L.C. (“THCR Management”) and its subsidiary, THCR Management Services, L.L.C. (“Trump 29 Services”).

The sole member of TCH (the “Company”) is Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Holdings, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“THCR Holdings”). THCR Holdings is owned approximately 63.4% by Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“THCR”), as both a general and limited partner, and approximately 36.6% by Donald J. Trump as a limited partner.

On March 25, 2003, TCH was capitalized. Simultaneously, Marina Associates, Trump Marina, Inc., Trump Indiana, Inc., Trump Indiana Realty, THCR Management and Trump 29 Services became wholly-owned subsidiaries of TCH. As a result of this reorganization, the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements present the condensed consolidated financial statements of TCH and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and March 31, 2004 and for each of the three months in the period ended March 31, 2003 and 2004.

Marina Associates owns and operates Trump Marina Hotel Casino (“Trump Marina”), a casino hotel located in the marina district of Atlantic City, New Jersey (the “Marina District”). Trump Indiana, Inc. owns and operates Trump Casino and Hotel, a riverboat gaming facility operating in Buffington Harbor, in Gary, Indiana (the “Trump Indiana Riverboat”). THCR Management is the sole member of Trump 29 Services. Trump 29 Services manages the day-to-day operations of Trump 29 Casino (“Trump 29”) located in Coachella Valley, California (near Palm Springs) pursuant to a five year management agreement (the “Trump 29 Management Agreement”) commencing on April 16, 2002, between Trump 29 Services and Twenty-Nine Palms Enterprises Corporation, a corporation wholly-owned by the Twenty Nine Palms Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, a federally recognized Native American Tribe and the owner of Trump 29 Casino (the “Tribe”). Trump Marina, Inc. is the general partner of Marina Associates. Trump Indiana Realty has no material assets or operations. At March 31, 2004, THCR Management has no assets or operations, other than Trump 29 Services.

TCH’s primary activity is gaming. The Company views each casino property as an operating segment, and all such operating segments have been aggregated into one reporting segment. Each casino property derives its revenues from casino operations, room rentals, food and beverage sales, and entertainment revenues.

TCH and TCF have no operations and their ability to service their debt is dependent upon the successful operations of Trump Marina and the Trump Indiana Riverboat, and the management fees generated pursuant to the Trump 29 Management Agreement.

The Company has incurred recurring operating losses which totaled $22.7 million, $15.7 million and $27.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2001, 2002 and 2003, respectively, and has a working capital deficit of $35.2 million at March 31, 2004. The recurring operating losses are primarily the result of substantial debt service obligations on outstanding indebtedness. In 2004, the Company’s debt service obligation is approximately $70 million. Additionally, the Company has experienced increased competition and other challenges in its markets. Due to these factors, the Company has not been able to expand its operations or reinvest in the maintenance of its owned properties at desired levels. Furthermore, the Company does not currently have any short-term borrowing capacity available. Although the Company anticipates that it will have sufficient funds on hand to provide for the scheduled debt service obligations on its outstanding indebtedness during 2004, there can be no assurances such funds will be available. Additionally, there can be no assurance that THCR will have funds available to provide for scheduled debt service obligations on its consolidated indebtedness and the impact, if any, on the Company if such funds were insufficient.

5

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

As a result of these factors, management has reviewed various financing alternatives. The Company‘s parent company, THCR, announced that it has entered into an exclusivity agreement with DLJ Merchant Banking Partners III, L.P. (“DLJMB”) in connection with a proposed $400 million equity investment by DLJMB to sponsor a comprehensive recapitalization of THCR and its subsidiaries, including TCH and its subsidiaries. On the same date as the announcement of the Potential Recapitalization, certain credit agencies downgraded certain of THCR’s indebtedness, including the TCH Notes (as defined below). The consummation of the Potential Recapitalization is contingent upon a variety of factors. No assurances can be made that the Potential Recapitalization will occur, or if it does occur, that it will occur on terms acceptable to THCR to allow THCR to meet its obligations as they become due. Additionally, management has implemented programs to obtain cash flow savings and will continue to attempt to implement such programs in the upcoming year if the Potential Recapitalization does not occur. These programs include labor savings through increased automation of the slot machine product on the gaming floor and the further reduction of planned capital expenditures and maintenance programs. However, there can be no assurances that these programs would be successful for any protracted period of time. Accordingly, the financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets, or the amounts and classification of liabilities that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty or the Potential Recapitalization.

Subject to the foregoing, the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, certain information and note disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed or omitted.

All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared without audit. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of only normal recurring adjustments necessary to present fairly the financial position, the results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented, have been made.

These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 filed with the SEC and available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov.

Our business is seasonal in nature; therefore, results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004 are not necessarily indicative of the operating results for a full year.

Reclassifications

Certain other reclassifications and disclosures have been made to prior year financial statements for them to be in conformity with the current year presentation.

(2) Potential Recapitalization

On February 12, 2004, THCR, our ultimate parent company, announced that it has entered into an exclusivity agreement with DLJMB, an affiliate of Credit Suisse First Boston, or CSFB, in connection with a proposed $400 million equity investment by DLJMB to sponsor a comprehensive recapitalization of THCR and its subsidiaries, or the Potential Recapitalization. Consummation of such recapitalization is subject to a variety of conditions, as discussed below. DLJMB’s proposed investment is expected to be in the form of THCR’s common stock and is expected, if consummated, to result in a substantial deleveraging of THCR’s balance sheet. DLJMB would also become the majority shareholder of THCR, with Donald J. Trump continuing as the Chairman of THCR’s Board of Directors and as a significant equity holder.

6

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

DLJMB’s investment is contingent upon a number of factors, including (i) obtaining regulatory approvals from the casino gaming regulatory authorities, (ii) a restructuring of the Trump Atlantic City Associates, an affiliate of TCH, 11.25% First Mortgage Notes due 2006, or the TACA Notes ($1.3 billion outstanding at March 31, 2004) and the TCH Notes (approximately $493.8 million outstanding at March 31, 2004) at a discount to the face amount of such notes, and (iii) reaching a definitive agreement with DLJMB and Mr. Trump concerning the specific terms of DLJMB‘s investment, including, but not limited to, DLJMB’s purchase price for THCR’s common stock, percentage of equity ownership, the Company‘s pro forma debt and equity capitalization, and corporate governance terms.

Certain holders of the TCH Notes have formed a committee, or the TCH Noteholder Committee, to discuss the Potential Recapitalization with THCR, and the TCH Noteholder Committee has also engaged advisors. Certain holders of the TACA Notes have also formed a committee, or the TACA Noteholder Committee, and have also engaged advisors. THCR and DLJMB have proposed certain key terms of the Potential Recapitalization to the TCH Noteholder Committee and the TACA Noteholder Committee which may be different than the terms of a consummated recapitalization plan, if any.

Although THCR has had extensive discussions with DLJMB regarding the potential transaction, it has not entered into any definitive agreements with DLJMB or any other parties, including note holders, concerning the proposed DLJMB transaction or any other recapitalization (other than the exclusivity agreement with DLJMB and an agreement to pay DLJMB expenses in certain circumstances and a substantial fee if certain transactions occur within specified periods and DLJMB does not participate). There is no assurance that the terms of a definitive agreement concerning DLJMB’s proposed investment in THCR will be reached between THCR and DLJMB, that THCR’s debt will be restructured, or that any Potential Recapitalization will be consummated. Furthermore, the impact of the Potential Recapitalization on existing security holders is uncertain. As noted above, the Potential Recapitalization is conditioned upon the holders of the TACA Notes and the TCH Notes agreeing to a reduction in the face amount of their notes.

If the Potential Recapitalization or other recapitalization plan is not consummated, the Company will continue to consider alternatives to optimize stakeholder return, reduce its consolidated indebtedness and improve its capital structure, including the alternatives described above and others. There is no assurance that any such alternatives will be achieved.

(3) TCH Notes Offering

On March 25, 2003, TCH and TCF consummated an offering, or the TCH Notes Offering, consisting of: (i) $425.0 million principal amount of First Priority Mortgage Notes due March 15, 2010 bearing interest at a rate of 11.625% per year payable in cash, sold at a price of 94.832% of their face amount for an effective yield of 12.75%, or the First Priority Mortgage Notes, and (ii) $50.0 million principal amount of Second Priority Mortgage Notes due September 15, 2010 bearing interest at a rate of 11.625% per year payable in cash, plus 6.0% through the issuance of payable-in-kind notes, or the Second Priority Mortgage Notes, together with the First Priority Mortgage Notes, the TCH Notes.

In connection with the TCH Notes Offering, Donald J. Trump, purchased in a concurrent private offering $15.0 million aggregate principal amount of additional Second Priority Mortgage Notes at the same purchase price at which the initial purchasers purchased the Second Priority Mortgage Notes.

Included in the $96.9 million principal amount (including call premium) of THCR Holdings Senior Notes purchased with the net proceeds of the TCH Notes Offering, $1.7 million principal amount of THCR Holdings Senior Notes were held by Mr. Trump. THCR Holdings also acquired an additional $15.0 million principal amount of THCR Holdings Senior Notes on the closing date of the TCH Notes Offering in a private transaction with Donald J. Trump. The purchase price of the aggregate $16.7 million principal amount of THCR Holdings Senior Notes acquired from Mr. Trump consisted of shares of stock of THCR valued at $15.0 million, plus a cash amount equal to $1.7 million, plus the applicable redemption premium of 2.583% (approximately $430,000) and accrued interest of approximately $0.7 million on the entire $16.7 million principal amount of THCR Holdings Senior Notes being sold by Mr. Trump.

7

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Financing costs, including underwriters’ discounts of 2.5% to the purchasers of the TCH First Priority Mortgage Notes and 10% to the purchasers of the TCH Second Priority Mortgage Notes and direct transactional fees (including accounting, legal and printing), have been capitalized as deferred bond and loan issuance costs in the accompanying balance sheet and are being amortized to interest expense over the term of the debt.

In connection with the TCH Notes Offering, TCH recorded a net gain of $7,931,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2003, which consists of a net gain of $10,451,000 on the retirement of Trump’s Castle Funding’s 11.75% Mortgage Notes, due 2003, or the Castle Mortgage Notes, and Trump’s Castle Fundings 13.875% Pay-In-Kind Notes, due 2005, or the Castle PIK Notes, the settlement of Trump Indiana, Inc.’s interest swap for $851,000 and the write-off of unamortized loan costs of approximately $1,669,000.

The interest rate on TCH’s First Priority Mortgage Notes will increase by 0.5% per annum if the First Priority Leverage Ratio for any fiscal year, commencing with the year ending December 31, 2003, exceeds 4.8 to 1.0, and by 1.0% per annum if the First Priority Leverage Ratio exceeds 5.3 to 1.0. Similarly, the rate of interest payable in cash on TCH’s Second Priority Mortgage Notes will increase by 0.5% per annum or 1.0% per annum if the First Priority Leverage Ratio for any fiscal year, commencing with the year ending December 31, 2003, exceeds 4.8 to 1.0 or 5.3 to 1.0, respectively. For these purposes, the term “First Priority Leverage Ratio” for any year is defined generally as the ratio of (a) the total outstanding principal amount of First Priority Mortgage Notes (plus other indebtedness, if any, ranking pari passu with TCH’s First Priority Mortgage Notes) as of December 31, of such year to (b) the Consolidated EBITDA of TCH without duplication, the sum of consolidated net income, plus consolidated income tax expense, plus consolidated depreciation and amortization expense, plus consolidated fixed charges and non-cash charges related to regulatory write downs for the year.

The First Priority Leverage Ratio for the year ending December 31, 2003 resulted in an increase in the interest rates on the TCH Notes of 1.0%. Such increase is effective from and after March 15, 2004 to March 14, 2005, at which point the rates of interest payable on the TCH Notes would be restored to their original levels, unless the First Priority Leverage Ratio computation for fiscal 2004 results in an increase. The estimated impact on our interest expense for the period March 15, 2004 through March 14, 2005 will be approximately $4,900,000.

8

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

(4) Financial Information of Trump Casino Funding

Financial information relating to Trump Casino Funding is as follows:

(5) Debt Renegotiation Costs

Marina Associates and Trump Indiana, Inc. were seeking to refinance or modify the terms of their long-term debt in 2002. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, debt renegotiation costs of $378,000 were expensed in the accompanying Statements of Operations. Debt renegotiation costs include the costs associated with transactional fees earned upon the successful consummation of the TCH Notes Offering on March 25, 2003.

(6) Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46 (“FIN 46”), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an interpretation of ARB 51.” The primary objectives of this interpretation are to provide guidance on the identification of entities for which control is achieved through means other than through voting rights (“variable interest entities”) and how to determine when and which business enterprise (the “primary beneficiary”) should consolidate the variable interest entity. This new model for consolidation applies to an entity in which either (i) the equity investors (if any) do not have a controlling financial interest; or (ii) the equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance that entity’s activities without receiving additional subordinated financial support from other parties. In addition, FIN 46 requires that the primary beneficiary, as well as all other enterprises with a significant variable interest in a variable interest entity, make additional disclosures. Certain disclosure requirements of FIN

9

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

46 were effective for financial statements issued after January 31, 2003. In December 2003, the FASB issued FIN 46 (revised December 2003), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” (“FIN 46-R”) to address certain FIN 46 implementation issues. The effective dates and impact of FIN 46 and FIN 46-R are as follows: (i) Special-purpose entities (“SPEs”) created prior to February 1, 2003 - the company must apply either the provisions of FIN 46 or early adopt the provisions of FIN 46-R at the end of the first interim or annual reporting period ending after December 15, 2003; (ii) Non-SPEs created prior to February 1, 2003 - the company is required to adopt FIN 46-R at the end of the first interim or annual reporting period ending after March 15, 2004; and (iii) All entities, regardless of whether an SPE, that were created subsequent to January 31, 2003 - the provisions of FIN 46 were applicable for variable interests in entities obtained after January 31, 2003. The adoption of the provisions applicable to SPEs and all other variable interests obtained after January 31, 2003 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, consolidated results of operations, or liquidity. Adoption of this pronouncement had no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, consolidated results of operations, or liquidity.

(7) Other Assets

Included in Other Assets is a $1,822,000 payment for sales and use tax assessed on Trump Indiana, Inc.’s riverboat vessel which is being appealed. Trump Indiana, Inc. made this payment in 2002 in order to avoid incurring interest and penalties while this matter is under appeal. Trump Indiana, Inc.’s appeal is based on the fact that it pays property taxes on the riverboat vessel as the vessel was determined to be real property by the taxing authority, and therefore, not susceptible to a use tax. Management believes that the amount will be fully recoverable upon settlement of the appeal.

(8) Twenty-Nine Palms Development

THCR Management operates Trump 29, a casino owned by the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of California, a sovereign Native American nation through its sole ownership of the Twenty-Nine Palms Enterprises Corporation, or Twenty-Nine Palms, pursuant to the Trump 29 Management Agreement. The term of the Trump 29 Management Agreement is five years and expires during April 2007. Commencing in April 2005, an affiliate of the Tribe has the option of buying-out THCR Management from the Trump 29 Management Agreement for an early termination fee as defined in the Trump 29 Management Agreement. Pursuant to the Trump 29 Management Agreement, in consideration for the Management Services, THCR Management receives an annual fee based on a percentage of Net Revenues (as defined in the Trump 29 Management Agreement) for each year of the term (the “Management Fee”). Subject to the rights of the Tribe’s lenders and payment of certain priority amounts under the Trump 29 Management Agreement, the management fee is payable monthly in amounts equal to the accrued management fee for the preceding month plus any accrued, unpaid amounts. Management fee revenue was $964,000 and $2,285,000 for the three month periods ended March 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively.

(9) Investment In Buffington Harbor Entities

The Company accounts for its investment in the Buffington Harbor Riverboats, L.L.C. (“BHR”) (a 50% joint venture between Trump Indiana, Inc. and Majestic Star Casino, L.L.C. (“Majestic Star”)) under the equity method of accounting. Trump Indiana, Inc. and Majestic Star formed BHR and entered into an agreement (the “BHR Agreement”) relating to the joint ownership, development and operation of all common land-based and waterside operations in support of each of Trump Indiana, Inc.’s and Majestic Star’s separate riverboat casinos at Buffington Harbor. Trump Indiana, Inc. and Majestic Star are equally responsible for the operating expenses of the common land-based facilities at the site. There can be no assurance that Trump Indiana, Inc. and/or Majestic Star will be able to fund their respective share of future capital contributions or operating expenses.

10

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

In accordance with the BHR Agreement, Trump Indiana, Inc. and Majestic Star pay berthing and other fees in an amount to cover the operating expenses of BHR. Berthing fees and other fees paid are included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statements of operations.

Selected financial information of BHR as of December 31, 2003 and March 31, 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2004 are as follows:

In September 2000, Buffington Harbor Parking Associates (“BHPA”) was formed as a joint venture between Trump Indiana, Inc. and an affiliate of Majestic Star for the purpose of constructing and operating a parking garage. The estimated cost of the parking garage, including the land, was approximately $25,000,000. BHPA separately leases the parking garage to each of (i) Trump Indiana, Inc. pursuant to a parking lease, dated June 19, 2001 (the “Trump Indiana Garage Lease”), and (ii) Majestic Star under a substantially identical lease agreement. The term of the Trump Indiana Garage Lease is until December 31, 2018. The initial rent installment, paid by Trump Indiana, Inc. for the Trump Indiana Garage Lease, was approximately $8,800,000, which is being amortized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. In addition, Trump Indiana, Inc. is obligated to pay BHPA a monthly rent equal to (i) 50% of BHPA’s debt service on the $17,100,000 financing (the “Financing”) to build the parking garage and (ii) 50% of any construction costs incurred by BHPA in excess of the net proceeds of the Financing. In the event either lessee defaults on its rental obligation under its garage lease with BHPA, the other party will be obligated to pay rent in an amount sufficient to satisfy 100% of BHPA’s debt service obligations on the Financing.

11

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Selected financial information of BHPA as of December 31, 2003 and March 31, 2004 and for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2004 are as follows:

(10) Income Taxes

Indiana Wagering Tax Add-Back

In July 1999, the Indiana Department of Revenue (“Department”) issued a Letter of Findings to an Indiana gaming company that the Riverboat Wagering Tax (“RWT”), a tax deducted in computing Federal taxable income, is not deductible when computing Indiana adjusted gross income because the RWT represents a tax that is “based on or measured by income.” The entity that received the Letter of Findings, with the assistance of the Indiana Casino Association, of which Trump Indiana, Inc. is a member, is vigorously contesting this finding in the Indiana Tax Court on the basis that the RWT is an excise tax, which is excluded from Indiana’s add-back requirements. In April 2004, the Indiana Tax Court found in favor of the Department. The Company has estimated that the amount of potential exposure for the period from commencement of operations in June 1996 through March 31, 2004, including interest, is approximately $19,108,000. Given the court ruling, this amount has been included in income tax provision on the Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The Company, along with its peers in the Indiana gaming market, plans to appeal this decision and contest this matter vigorously before the Indiana Supreme Court.

12

Table of Contents

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

(11) Subsequent Events

On April 12, 2004, the twelve Atlantic City casino properties executed an agreement with the New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority (“NJSEA”) and the New Jersey Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (“CRDA”) to, among other things, enhance purses, fund breeder’s awards and establish account wagering at New Jersey horse racing tracks (“NJSEA Subsidy Agreement”).

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement provides that the casinos, pro rata according to their gross revenue, shall: (a) provide $34 million to the NJSEA in cash and donate $52 million to the NJSEA from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to, in the aggregate, be used by the NJSEA through 2008 to enhance such purses, fund such breeder’s awards and establish such account wagering; and (b) donate $10 million from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to be used by the CRDA as grants to such other North Jersey projects as it shall determine.

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement further provides, with respect to the obligations of the NJSEA and the CRDA, for: (a) legislation by December 2004 which establishes and funds a $62 million Casino Expansion Fund to be administered by the CRDA and made available pro rata to each casino for use in expanding its casino hotel facility in the amounts of and at the times at which it makes its donation payments to the CRDA (“Casino Expansion Fund Act”); (b) a moratorium until January 2009, which casinos may enforce by court injunction, on the conduct of “casino gaming” at any New Jersey racetrack, unless casinos controlling a majority of the hotel rooms controlled by the casinos in Atlantic City otherwise agree; (c) a moratorium until January 2006 on the authorization of “casino gaming” at any New Jersey racetrack, the violation of which shall terminate the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement and all further payments to the NJSEA and require that the NJSEA return all undistributed cash and that the CRDA return all undistributed donated CRDA obligations to the casinos; and (d) a license through August 2008, at no cost to the casino industry, for the display of messages promoting Atlantic City generally in prominent locations at the Meadowlands and Monmouth racetracks.

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement finally provides that, if the Casino Expansion Fund Act is not enacted by the New Jersey Legislature by December 2004: (a) the casinos shall provide $7 million in cash to the NJSEA by December 10, 2004 and donate $13 million from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to the NJSEA to, in the aggregate, be used by the NJSEA to enhance such purses, fund such breeder’s awards and establish such account wagering; (b) the moratorium on the conduct of “casino gaming” at New Jersey racetracks shall expire as of January 2006; and (c) the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement shall otherwise terminate.

In addition to the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement, prominent leaders of the New Jersey Legislature have publicly stated their intent that the Legislature, by December 2004, enact the Casino Expansion Fund Act; in increments over a three year period, repeal the 4.25% tax on complimentaries it imposed as of July 2003; and refrain from imposing any new or increased casino industry specific taxes for four years.

Based on total gaming win for all twelve Atlantic City casino properties for the nine months ended March 31, 2004, Trump Marina’s pro rata share of the total industry contributions is estimated to be approximately 5%.

13

Table of Contents

ITEM 2 - MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

This report includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this report regarding the prospects of our industry or our prospects, plans, financial position or business strategy, may constitute forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “plans,” “forecasts,” “continue” or “could” or the negatives of these terms or variations of them or similar terms. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that these expectations will prove to be correct. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations include business, competition, regulatory and other uncertainties and contingencies discussed in this report that are difficult or impossible to predict and which are beyond our control. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements included in this document. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this report. We do not intend to update these statements unless the securities laws require us to do so.

In this section, the words “Company,” “we,” “our,” “ours,” and “us” refer to Trump Casino Holdings, L.L.C. (“TCH”) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, unless otherwise noted. Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, TCH owns and operates the Trump Marina Hotel Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey (“Trump Marina”) and the Trump Casino and Hotel, a riverboat gaming facility operating in Buffington Harbor, in Gary, Indiana (the “Trump Indiana Riverboat”). Through another subsidiary, TCH also manages the Trump 29 Casino located in Coachella Valley, California, near Palm Springs (“Trump 29”). Terms not defined in this section shall have the meanings ascribed to them elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Overview

The Company has incurred recurring operating losses, which totaled $15.7 million and $27.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003, respectively and has a working capital deficit of $35.2 million at March 31, 2004. The recurring operating losses are primarily the result of substantial debt service obligations on outstanding indebtedness. In 2004, the Company’s debt service obligation is approximately $70 million. Additionally, the Company has experienced increased competition and other challenges in its markets. Due to these factors, the Company has not been able to reinvest in the maintenance of its owned properties at desired levels or expand its operations. Furthermore, the Company does not currently have any short-term borrowing capacity available. Although the Company anticipates that it will have sufficient funds on hand to provide for the scheduled debt service obligations on its outstanding indebtedness during 2004, there can be no assurances such funds will be available.

Potential Recapitalization

As a result of the factors discussed above, management has reviewed various financing alternatives. THCR announced that it has entered into an exclusivity agreement with DLJMB in connection with a proposed $400 million equity investment by DLJMB to sponsor a comprehensive recapitalization of THCR and its subsidiaries. On the same date as the announcement of the Potential Recapitalization, certain credit agencies downgraded certain of THCR’s indebtedness. The Potential Recapitalization is contingent upon a variety of factors. No assurances can be made that the Potential Recapitalization will occur, or if it does occur, that it will occur on terms acceptable to THCR to allow THCR to meet its obligations as they become due. Additionally, management has implemented programs to obtain cash flow savings and will continue to attempt to implement such programs in the upcoming year if the Potential Recapitalization does not occur. These programs include labor savings through increased automation of the slot machine product on the gaming floor and the further reduction of planned capital expenditures and maintenance programs. However, there can be no assurances that these programs would be successful for any protracted period of time. Accordingly, the financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets, or the amounts and classification of liabilities that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty or the Potential Recapitalization. See “Factors That May Affect Our Future Results.”

Factors That May Affect Our Future Results

Some of the factors that may affect our future results are discussed below. For a discussion of other factors that may affect our future results, please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, previously filed with the SEC and available for inspection on our website at www.trump.com.

We have substantial indebtedness and interest expense which limit our capital expenditures.

TCH has substantial indebtedness and associated interest expense. At March 31, 2004, our consolidated long-term debt was approximately $514.2 million. The TCH Notes are guaranteed by Marina Associates, Trump Indiana, Inc. and Trump 29 Services and are secured by substantially all of the fixed and other assets of such entities on a priority basis. Management believes that this indebtedness and associated interest expense hinders the Company’s ability to reinvest in the maintenance of its owned properties at desired levels.

14

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

The rate of interest payable on the TCH Notes increased on March 15, 2004, thereby increasing TCH’s interest expense.

The interest rate on the TCH Notes will increase by 0.5% per annum if TCH’s First Priority Leverage Ratio for any fiscal year, commencing with the year ended December 31, 2003, exceeds 4.8 to 1.0, and by 1.0% per annum if the First Priority Leverage Ratio exceeds 5.3 to 1.0. The First Priority Leverage Ratio for the year ended December 31, 2003 resulted in an increase in the interest rates on the TCH Notes of 1.0%. Such increase is effective from and after March 15, 2004 to March 14, 2005, at which point the rates of interest payable on the TCH Notes would be restored to their original levels, unless the First Priority Leverage Ratio computation for fiscal 2004 results in an increase. The estimated impact on interest expense for such period will be approximately $4,900,000. This will further constrain the ability of TCH to improve its properties, particularly Trump Marina in the intensely competitive Marina District of Atlantic City.

THCR, our parent, is pursuing the Potential Recapitalization which is intended to reduce debt and provide capital, the completion of which cannot be assured.

Recently, our parent company, Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc., or THCR, announced the Potential Recapitalization to attempt to reduce the high levels of indebtedness and interest expense of its subsidiaries, including TCH, and infuse equity capital into THCR and its subsidiaries.

The Potential Recapitalization depends upon the occurrence of several events, including:

Whether or not the Potential Recapitalization will progress will depend on whether the Special Committee, DLJMB, key holders of the TCH Notes and TACA Notes, and Mr. Trump are able to agree on the definitive terms of the recapitalization that, once agreed to, would then be proposed for regulatory and other required consents and approvals. There is no assurance any such agreement will be reached, or that if it is reached, that all necessary consents and approvals will be obtained.

The Company and DLJMB have proposed certain key terms of the Potential Recapitalization to the TCH Noteholder Committee and the TACA Noteholder Committee which may be different than the terms of a consummated recapitalization plan, if any.

Certain Possible Consequences of the Potential Recapitalization

If the parties can agree on the terms of a Potential Recapitalization, they will likely seek to implement it through a series of steps, any one of which may not be successful, including the restructuring of the notes which may, given the number of holders of the notes, be effected through a court approved plan of reorganization. In any such proceeding, THCR anticipates that its trade creditors would be paid in full. There is no assurance that any such plan would be approved by the requisite vote of stakeholders. It is also possible that, if a THCR sponsored plan is not agreed upon, bondholders may propose any number of alternative plans, some of which may involve noteholders seeking to foreclose on their collateral. Pursuant to any plan, noteholders may receive new notes, cash, other property, equity securities, or a combination of any of these. Any such new notes may be secured or

15

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

unsecured, senior or subordinated, and have payment and other terms substantially different from the TCH Notes, or the TACA Notes.

If the Potential Recapitalization is approved and implemented, it is expected to result in a substantial deleveraging of THCR and its subsidiaries and reduction in their debt service. If the plan is approved and implemented, the holders of common stock of THCR prior to the transaction, including Mr. Trump (on account of his existing shares) are likely to have their existing interests substantially diluted and the value of that interest may be less than now. Further, DLJMB will own a majority equity interest in THCR (likely at the THCR or THCR Holdings level), and will be in a position to control THCR and its subsidiaries, including TCH, subject to agreed upon contractual limitations, if any.

Even if the Potential Recapitalization is consummated, and facilitates the desired expansion and development of THCR’s properties, the change may not lead to the hoped for increase in the volume and profitability of THCR’s business.

Alternatives to the Potential Recapitalization

If the Potential Recapitalization or other recapitalization plan is not consummated, THCR will continue to consider alternatives to optimize stakeholder return, reduce its consolidated indebtedness and improve its capital structure, including the alternatives described above and others. There is no assurance that any such alternatives will be achieved.

Our ability to raise capital through refinancing is subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties.

If the Potential Recapitalization is not consummated, the ability of TCH to pay the principal amount of its public debt at maturity (whether scheduled or by acceleration thereof) is primarily dependent upon their ability to obtain refinancing. There is no assurance that the general state of the economy, the status of the capital markets generally, or the receptiveness of the capital markets to the gaming industry or to TCH and its subsidiaries will be conducive to refinancing debt at any given time or on more favorable terms. On February 12, 2004, the date of announcement of the Potential Recapitalization, Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s downgraded the debt ratings of the TCH Notes. These rating downgrades and any future rating downgrades could impair TCH’s ability to raise debt financing for any purpose if it determined to do so.

Restrictions contained in the indentures governing our public indebtedness may impose limits on our ability to pursue certain business strategies.

The indentures governing the TCH Notes contain operating and financial restrictions that limit our discretion on various business matters. These restrictions include covenants limiting our ability to:

16

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

These restrictions may severely restrict our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the gaming industry. This reduced flexibility could hurt our results of operations and our ability to meet our debt service obligations with respect to our indebtedness.

Taxation of the gaming industry, already significant, may increase in the future which would reduce our profitability.

Indiana Wagering Tax Add-Back

In July 1999, the Indiana Department of Revenue (“Department”) issued a Letter of Findings to an Indiana gaming company that the Riverboat Wagering Tax (“RWT”), a tax deducted in computing Federal taxable income, is not deductible when computing Indiana adjusted gross income because the RWT represents a tax that is “based on or measured by income.” The entity that received the Letter of Findings, with the assistance of the Indiana Casino Association, of which Trump Indiana, Inc. is a member, is vigorously contesting this finding in the Indiana Tax Court on the basis that the RWT is an excise tax, which is excluded from Indiana’s add-back requirements. In April 2004, the Indiana Tax Court found in favor of the Department. The Company has estimated that the amount of potential exposure for the period from commencement of operations in June 1996 through the period ended March 31, 2004, including interest, is approximately $19,108,000. Given the court ruling, this amount has been included in income tax provision on the Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The Company, along with its peers in the Indiana gaming market, plans to appeal this decision and contest this matter vigorously before the Indiana Supreme Court.

NJSEA Subsidy Agreement

On April 12, 2004, the twelve Atlantic City casino properties executed an agreement with the New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority (“NJSEA”) and the New Jersey Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (“CRDA”) to, among other things, enhance purses, fund breeder’s awards and establish account wagering at New Jersey horse racing tracks (“NJSEA Subsidy Agreement”).

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement provides that the casinos, pro rata according to their gross revenue, shall: (a) provide $34 million to the NJSEA in cash and donate $52 million to the NJSEA from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to, in the aggregate, be used by the NJSEA through 2008 to enhance such purses, fund such breeder’s awards and establish such account wagering; and (b) donate $10 million from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to be used by the CRDA as grants to such other North Jersey projects as it shall determine.

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement further provides, with respect to the obligations of the NJSEA and the CRDA, for: (a) legislation by December 2004 which establishes and funds a $62 million Casino Expansion Fund to be administered by the CRDA and made available pro rata to each casino for use in expanding its casino hotel facility in the amounts of and at the times at which it makes its donation payments to the CRDA (“Casino Expansion Fund Act”); (b) a moratorium until January 2009, which casinos may enforce by court injunction, on the conduct of “casino gaming” at any New Jersey racetrack, unless casinos controlling a majority of the hotel rooms controlled by the casinos in Atlantic City otherwise agree; (c) a moratorium until January 2006 on the authorization of “casino gaming” at any New Jersey racetrack, the violation of which shall terminate the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement and all further payments to the NJSEA and require that the NJSEA return all undistributed cash and that the CRDA return all undistributed donated CRDA obligations to the casinos; and (d) a license through August 2008, at no cost to the casino industry, for the display of messages promoting Atlantic City generally in prominent locations at the Meadowlands and Monmouth racetracks.

The NJSEA Subsidy Agreement finally provides that, if the Casino Expansion Fund Act is not enacted by the New Jersey Legislature by December 2004: (a) the casinos shall provide $7 million in cash to the NJSEA by December 10, 2004 and donate $13 million from the regular payment of their CRDA obligations to the NJSEA to, in the aggregate, be used by the NJSEA to enhance such purses, fund such breeder’s awards and establish such account wagering; (b) the moratorium on the conduct of “casino gaming” at New Jersey racetracks shall expire as of January 2006; and (c) the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement shall otherwise terminate.

17

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

In addition to the NJSEA Subsidy Agreement, prominent leaders of the New Jersey Legislature have publicly stated their intent that the Legislature, by December 2004, enact the Casino Expansion Fund Act; in increments over a three year period, repeal the 4.25% tax on complimentaries it imposed as of July 2003; and refrain from imposing any new or increased casino industry specific taxes for four years.

Based on total gaming win for all twelve Atlantic City casino properties for the nine months ended March 31, 2004, Trump Marina’s pro rata share of the total industry contributions is estimated to be approximately 5%.

Future changes in state taxation of casino gaming companies in jurisdictions in which we operate cannot be predicted, and any such changes could adversely affect our profitability.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of our financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Management periodically evaluates its policies and the estimates and assumptions related to such policies. The TCH Properties operate in a highly regulated industry and is subject to regulations that describe and regulate operating and internal control procedures. TCH believes its most critical accounting policies and significant estimates are described below.

Revenue Recognition and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The majority of our revenue is from gaming activities, and the majority of such revenue is derived from cash, which by nature does not require complex estimations. We extend credit to customers on a discretionary basis to certain qualified patrons. Credit play as a percentage of total dollars wagered has been approximately 20% for the past three years. We establish credit limits based upon the particular patron’s creditworthiness, as determined by an examination of various factors including a credit check of the patron, checking the patron’s personal checking account balance, and checking the patron’s credit limits and indebtedness at other casinos. We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for those customers whose checks have been unable to be deposited due to non-sufficient funds. This allowance is based on a specific review of customer accounts as well as a review of the history of write-offs of returned markers. Management believes that the reserve recorded is reasonable; however, these estimates could change in the near term based on actual collection experience with each returned marker.

Long-lived Assets

Management has determined that its policy associated with TCH’s long-lived assets and the related estimates is critical to the preparation of the consolidated financial statements. TCH has a significant investment in long-lived property and equipment. Management estimates that the undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of these assets exceed the current carrying value of these assets. Any adverse change to the estimate of these undiscounted cash flows could necessitate an impairment charge that would adversely affect operating results. Management estimates the useful lives for TCH’s assets based on historical experience and the estimates of assets’ commercial lives. Should the actual life of a class of assets differ from the estimated useful life, an impairment charge would be recorded. Management reviews useful lives and obsolescence and assesses commercial viability of TCH’s assets periodically.

Self-Insurance Reserves

Self-insurance reserves represent the estimated amounts of uninsured claims related to employee health medical costs, workers’ compensation, and personal injury claims that have occurred in the normal course of business. These reserves are established by management based upon specific review of open claims, with consideration of incurred but not reported claims as of the balance sheet date. The costs of the ultimate disposition of these claims may differ from these reserve numbers.

18

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46 (“FIN 46”), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an interpretation of ARB 51”. The primary objectives of this interpretation are to provide guidance on the identification of entities for which control is achieved through means other than through voting rights (“variable interest entities”) and how to determine when and which business enterprise (the “primary beneficiary”) should consolidate the variable interest entity. This new model for consolidation applies to an entity in which either (i) the equity investors (if any) do not have a controlling financial interest; or (ii) the equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance that entity’s activities without receiving additional subordinated financial support from other parties. In addition, FIN 46 requires that the primary beneficiary, as well as all other enterprises with a significant variable interest in a variable interest entity, make additional disclosures. Certain disclosure requirements of FIN 46 were effective for financial statements issued after January 31, 2003. In December 2003, the FASB issued FIN 46 (revised December 2003), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” (“FIN 46-R”) to address certain FIN 46 implementation issues. The effective dates and impact of FIN 46 and FIN 46-R are as follows: (i) Special-purpose entities (“SPEs”) created prior to February 1, 2003-the company must apply either the provisions of FIN 46 or early adopt the provisions of FIN 46-R at the end of the first interim or annual reporting period ending after December 15, 2003; (ii) Non-SPEs created prior to February 1, 2003-the company is required to adopt FIN 46-R at the end if the first interim or annual reporting period ending after March 15, 2004; and (iii) All entities, regardless of whether an SPE, that were created subsequent to January 31, 2003-the provisions of FIN 46 were applicable for variable interests in entities obtained after January 1, 2003. The adoption of the provisions applicable to SPEs and all other variable interests obtained after January 1, 2003 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, consolidated results of operations, or liquidity. Adoption of this pronouncement had no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, consolidated results of operations, or liquidity.

Financial Condition - Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash flows from operating activities of the TCH Properties and the management fees generated pursuant to the Trump 29 Management Agreement are TCH’s primary source of liquidity. To a lesser extent, TCH has relied on capital lease financing for its capital resource needs. TCH’s ability to borrow funds for its liquidity needs is severely restricted by covenants in the indentures governing the TCH Notes and by its already high levels of indebtedness and related interest expense. Sources of TCH’s short-term and long-term liquidity include primarily: (i) table win, (ii) slot win, (iii) room occupancy, (iv) food and beverage sales and (v) miscellaneous items, less promotional expenses.

The TCH Properties also compete with other casino/hotels and riverboats based on the quality of customer service, the array of games offered, the attractiveness of a casino/hotel and the extent and quality of the facilities and amenities. In July 2003, the Borgata opened in Atlantic City’s marina district. The Borgata has adversely affected the revenues of Trump Marina. In addition, some of our Atlantic city competitors have recently completed substantial renovations designed to improve their competitive position. Furthermore, alternatives to casino style gambling, such as video lottery terminals, or VLTs, are increasing in the northeast region of the country from which we attract most of our customers. See “Factors That May Affect Our Future Results.”

Because we have substantial indebtedness and related interest expense, we have not been able to refurbish our properties to desired levels or to pursue various capital expansion plans, such as the addition of more hotel rooms. In the recent past, we have experienced increased competition and other challenges in our markets, including increased capital spending by our competitors and increased taxes, which have contributed to our reduced operating results. For these reasons, we have explored various strategies to favorably resolve this situation for all of our constituencies, including the possible sale of some or all of our assets, a restructuring of our indebtedness through out-of-court or in-court proceedings, refinancing of indebtedness, attracting substantial new equity investment and analyzing various other restructuring and reinvestment scenarios. Recently, we announced our plans to pursue a comprehensive recapitalization plan that, if consummated, is intended to decrease our interest expense and improve our liquidity and capital resources.

19

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

TRUMP CASINO HOLDINGS, L.L.C.

CONSOLIDATING CAPITAL EXPENDITURES

(in thousands)

Comparison of Results of Operations for the Three Month Periods Ended March 31, 2003 and 2004

Overview

We own and operate two casino gaming facilities, Trump Marina and the Trump Indiana Riverboat, and manage a third casino gaming facility, Trump 29. These businesses derive substantial benefit from the “Trump” name and its association with quality amenities and first class service. A number of other factors, including proven executive and property level management, combined with our focus on slot revenue, well-targeted marketing programs, stringent cost controls, strong customer service and improved customer access to our owned properties have positioned each property to capitalize on its strong competitive position. We believe that our business strategy discussed above at each property should enable us to capitalize on certain near-term growth opportunities.

In connection with the TCH Notes Offering, Marina Associates, Trump Indiana, Inc., THCR Management and Trump 29 Services became wholly-owned subsidiaries of TCH. There was no other entity, which had significant assets or operations, which became a wholly-owned subsidiary of TCH. Prior to the date of consummation of the TCH Notes Offering, TCH had no significant assets or operations. Accordingly, we have included a discussion and analysis of the financial condition and results of operations of each of Marina Associates, Trump Indiana Inc., and THCR Management. Management‘s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of each of these entities should be read in connection with the respective financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 10-Q. See Note (1) to the “Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited).”

20

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

The financial information presented below reflects the financial condition and results of operations of Trump Marina and Trump Indiana. TCF is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TCH and has no business operations.

21

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - (Continued)

Gaming revenues are the primary source of TCH’s revenues and primarily consist of slot machine/table game win. The following chart details activity for the major components of revenue and certain hotel statistics: