Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

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 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. ¨

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

The aggregate market value of shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 18, 2004 (based on the closing sale price as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on June 18, 2004) was approximately $4,298,113,000.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2005 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K. We expect to file our proxy statement by April 10, 2005.

Table of Contents

Items 1 & 2    Business and Properties

Host Marriott Corporation is a Maryland corporation and operates as a self-managed and self-administered real estate investment trust, or REIT. Host Marriott Corporation owns properties and conducts operations through Host Marriott, LP, a Delaware limited partnership of which Host Marriott Corporation is the sole general partner and in which it holds 94% of the partnership interests. In this report, we use the terms “we” or “our” to refer to Host Marriott Corporation and Host Marriott, L.P. together, unless the context indicates otherwise. We also use the term “HMC” to specifically refer to Host Marriott Corporation and the terms “operating partnership” or “Host LP” to refer to Host Marriott, L.P. (and its consolidated subsidiaries), in cases where it is important to distinguish between HMC and Host LP.

As of February 28, 2005, our lodging portfolio consisted of 107 upper-upscale and luxury full-service hotels containing approximately 55,000 rooms. Our portfolio is geographically diverse with hotels in most of the major metropolitan areas in 26 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/conference 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 our Internet website, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or 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 Overview

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. The lodging industry has several key participants:

1

Table of Contents

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

The lodging industry is highly competitive. Competition for a given hotel is based primarily on the brand affiliation, guest facilities, amenities, level of service, quality of accommodations, location and room rates. Competition is often specific to the individual markets in which the properties are located. Catering to a wide variety of tastes and needs, the lodging industry is broadly segmented into six groups: luxury, upper-upscale, upscale, midscale (with and without food and beverage service) and economy. Most of our hotels operate in urban and resort markets either as luxury properties, under such brand names as Ritz-Carlton^®, Fairmont^® and Four Seasons^®, or as upper-upscale properties, under such brand names as Marriott^®, Hyatt^®, Westin^® and Hilton^®.⁽¹⁾

Our industry is influenced by the cyclical relationship between the supply of, and demand for, hotel rooms.

Lodging demand growth typically is related to the vitality of the overall economy in addition to local market factors that stimulate travel to specific destinations. Extended periods of strong demand growth tend to encourage new development. The rate of supply growth may be influenced by a number of factors, including availability of capital, interest rates, construction costs and unique market considerations. The relatively long lead-time required to complete development of hotels can result in increasing demand, with no new supply, as well as new supply entering the market when demand is decreasing, both of which have the effect of increasing the volatility of the cyclical behavior of the industry. The development of upper-upscale and luxury hotels in urban and resort/conference locations frequently requires the longest lead-time.

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, leading to slight declines in occupancy levels. However, the growth of hotel revenues remained very strong as occupancy declines were more than offset by increases in average daily rate during that period. In 2001, the already weakening economy was significantly affected by the September 11 terrorist attacks. From 2001 through 2003, demand slowed significantly due to the threat of further terrorist attacks, the war in Iraq and the continuation of a weak economy, all of which combined to reduce both occupancy and average daily rates. As the economic recovery strengthened, demand growth began to accelerate early in 2004 initially leading to increases in occupancy and later to modest improvements in average room rates. 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 long permitting, approval and development lead-times.

2

Table of Contents

The charts below detail the supply demand and RevPAR growth for the U.S. lodging industry and for the luxury and upper-upscale segment for 2000 to 2004 based on data provided by Smith Travel Research. RevPAR is defined as the product of the average daily room rate charged and the average daily occupancy achieved and is a commonly used measure of hotel operations. For more information on RevPAR and a discussion of how we use this measure, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Operations and Financial Condition—Overview.”

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

Luxury and Upper-Upscale Supply, Demand and RevPAR Growth

Business Strategy

Our primary business objective is to provide superior total returns to our stockholders through a combination of appreciation in asset values and growth in earnings and dividends. In order to achieve this objective we seek to:

3

Table of Contents

Asset Management.    We believe that we can maximize the value of our existing portfolio through aggressive asset management. We are the largest REIT owner of upper-upscale and luxury properties in the United States and our hotels are managed by many of the top brands in the industry. The size and composition of our portfolio and our experience with multiple brands allows us to benchmark similar hotels and identify best practices, value enhancement opportunities and efficiencies that can be communicated to our managers. We continue to evaluate key performance indicators to ensure an appropriate level of assistance is provided to our managers to maximize opportunities at each asset. Areas of focus include enhancing revenue management for rooms, food and beverage and other services, reducing operating costs and identifying operating efficiencies, all of which improve the long-term profitability of the hotel.

Our asset management and development departments work closely with our managers in overseeing capital expenditure budgets to ensure that our hotels are in superior physical condition, highly competitive in the market and compliant with brand standards. We also work with our managers to ensure that renewal and replacement expenditures are efficiently spent in order to maximize the profitability of the hotel. In addition to best practices driving the profitability of our hotels we pursue opportunities to enhance asset value by completing selective capital improvements outside the scope of the typical renewal and replacement capital expenditures. These capital improvements may include converting underutilized space to alternative uses (including additional meeting space, timeshare or condominium units), building additional meeting space or exhibit halls, and installing energy management systems and highly efficient water recycling systems. When appropriate, we also consider the complete repositioning of a hotel in a given market, which often includes a complete renovation of guest rooms, meeting rooms and public space modifications. Other value enhancement opportunities will include utilizing underdeveloped land or buildings for other real estate investments, such as timeshare and condominium units, to maximize the value for each of our assets.

Acquisitions.    Our acquisition strategy focuses on 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:

Prior to 2003, our acquisitions were limited by the lack of suitable targets that would complement our portfolio and provide adequate returns, as well as a limited ability to raise capital due to weak investment markets. Consequently, our activity was primarily focused on acquiring the interests of limited or joint venture partners and consolidating our ownership of assets already included in our portfolio. When the capital markets

4

Table of Contents

strengthened late in 2003, suitable single asset and portfolio acquisition opportunities became available. Since that time, we acquired four properties, including two resorts in Hawaii, the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa and the Fairmont Kea Lani Maui.

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.

Dispositions.    During 2004 and 2003, and continuing into the first quarter of 2005, we have taken advantage of market conditions in order to sell certain non-core assets at favorable prices. During this period we sold 21 hotels, including the recently completed sale of four properties in January 2005. Proceeds from these dispositions have been, or will be, used to repay debt, fund acquisitions, fund return on investment, or ROI, projects, or for general corporate purposes. Generally these properties have been in smaller markets where we believe the potential for growth is slower, or where the properties required substantial capital investments in order to generate the returns we require while meeting our high quality standards.

Operating Structure

Our operating structure is as follows:

HMC was formed in 1998 as a Maryland corporation in connection with our reorganization to qualify as a REIT and, at that time, we reorganized our business and contributed our hotels and certain other assets to the operating partnership and its subsidiaries. As a result of this reorganization, HMC became the sole general partner of Host LP. For each share of HMC common stock, the operating partnership has issued one unit of operating partnership interest, or OP unit, to HMC. When distinguishing between HMC and Host LP, the primary difference is the approximately 6% of the partnership interests of Host LP not held by us as of February 28, 2005.

5

Table of Contents

All of our assets are owned by us or through our 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, 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 HMC 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 HMC common stock, instead of a cash redemption.

As a REIT, certain tax laws limit the amount of “non-qualifying” income that HMC can earn, including income derived directly from the operation of hotels. As a result, we lease substantially all of our properties to a subsidiary designated as a taxable REIT subsidiary for Federal income tax purposes or to third party lessees. The lessees enter into agreements with third parties to manage the operations of the hotels. Taxable REIT subsidiaries may hold other assets that engage in other activities that produce non-qualifying income such as the development of timeshare or condominium units, subject to certain restrictions. 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 consists primarily of 107 upper-upscale and luxury hotels containing approximately 55,000 rooms as of February 28, 2005. It is geographically diverse within North America, with hotels in most of the major metropolitan areas in 26 states, Washington, D.C., Toronto and Calgary, Canada and Mexico City, Mexico. We believe that the broader brand name recognition and resources of the premium brands our properties are operated under help generate revenues and drive increased profitability over the long-term. Our locations include central business districts of major cities, near airports and resort/conference locations, which because of their locations, typically benefit from significant barriers to entry by competitors. Historically, our properties in urban and resort/conference locations have achieved higher RevPAR than similar properties in suburban locations. Our hotels have an average of approximately 512 rooms per hotel. Thirty-five, or 33% of our hotels, have more than 500 rooms and nine of our hotels exceed 1,000 rooms. Our hotels typically include meeting and banquet facilities, a variety of restaurants and lounges, swimming pools, exercise facilities or spas, 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 20 years, although most of the properties have benefited from substantial renovations or major additions, as well as scheduled renewal and replacement and other capital improvements.

The following chart details our portfolio by brand as of February 28, 2005:

Capital Expenditures.    In order to maximize the value of our portfolio and to maintain our high standards, as well as those of our managers, we spend a considerable amount of time in reviewing potential capital expenditures at our properties, including renewals and replacements, expansions, repositionings and other capital investments. Our capital expenditures generally fall into two broad categories, renewal and replacement expenditures and repositioning/return on investment (or “ROI”) projects.

6

Table of Contents

Renewal and Replacement Expenditures.    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 items 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 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 each hotel’s annual gross revenues for refurbishments, and on average, we spend approximately $180 million to $220 million on replacements and refurbishments of soft and hard goods each year. In addition to amounts required to be escrowed under the management agreement, we will fund infrastructure improvements and, on average, spend approximately $20 million to $30 million annually, generally leading to total renewal and replacement capital expenditures of $200 million to $250 million on an annual basis. All capital expenditure decisions, however, take into account the economic environment and our cash requirements, and as a result, we will occasionally spend more or less than these amounts.

Repositioning/Return on Investment Projects.    We have also undertaken several projects over the past two years which are designed to increase the ROI for our portfolio. In certain instances, these repositioning or ROI projects have coincided with the timing of regular maintenance cycles at the properties where we have used the opportunity to improve and upgrade the hotel, such as at the New York Marriott Marquis where we redesigned and expanded the food and beverage operations. Other ROI projects are designed to take advantage of changing market conditions and the superior location of our properties. For example, we commenced construction of an extensive renovation and repositioning at the Newport Beach Marriott, which is expected to cost approximately $60 million. The renovation will include the addition of a spa, 20 new luxury suites, redesigned guestrooms, a new restaurant concept and updated meeting space.

Foreign Operations.    We currently own four Canadian properties and one Mexican property containing a total of 1,953 rooms. During each of 2004, 2003 and 2002, approximately 3% 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, guest facilities, amenities, price 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 other 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^®, Fairmont^®, 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. In addition, repeat guest business is enhanced by guest reward or guest recognition 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 typically reflect sixteen weeks of results compared to twelve weeks for each of the first three quarters of the fiscal year for our Marriott-managed hotels. For our non-Marriott managed hotels, the first quarter includes two months of operations, the second and third quarters include three months of operations and the fourth quarter includes four months of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial

7

Table of Contents

Condition—Reporting Periods” for more information on our fiscal calendar. Hotel sales have historically averaged 22%, 25%, 21% and 32% for the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively.

Hotel Properties.    The following table sets forth the location and number of rooms of our 107 full-service hotels as of February 28, 2005. Each hotel is operated as a Marriott brand hotel unless otherwise indicated by its name.

8

Table of Contents

Other Real Estate Investments

In addition to our 107 full-service hotels, we maintain investments in a joint venture and partnerships that in the aggregate own two 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, 2004, the combined balance sheet of these investments included approximately $1.6 billion in assets and $.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.

Further, the majority of our investment balance is the result of our interest in CBM Joint Venture LLC, or CBM Joint Venture. We and Marriott International, Inc., or Marriott International, each currently own a 50% interest in the CBM Joint Venture, which owns 120 Courtyard by Marriott properties. On December 15, 2004, we announced the pending sale of 85% of our interest in the CBM Joint Venture for approximately $92 million. Under the terms of the agreements, we have the right to have our remaining interest redeemed under certain conditions between 2007 and 2009. The transaction is expected to close in March 2005.

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. These

9

Table of Contents

properties were subleased in 1998 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. Rent payable under the subleases is guaranteed by Crestline up to a maximum of $30 million. At the expiration of these leases, Hospitality Properties Trust will return our initial security deposit of approximately $67 million.

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 7 to the annual consolidated financial statements— “Investments in Affiliates” and “Leases.”

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 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 agreements with our managers typically include the terms described below. As of December 31, 2004, no individual hotel’s sales represent more than 6% of our total hotel sales.

10

Table of Contents

11

Table of Contents

Employees

On February 28, 2005, we had 192 employees, including approximately 30 employees at the Sacramento Host Airport hotel. Fourteen of our employees at the Sacramento Host Airport 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.

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.

Investment and Other Policies

The following is a discussion of our policies with respect to investments, financing, lending and certain other activities. Our policies are determined by HMC’s Board of Directors and may be amended or revised from time to time at their discretion, without notice to or approval by our security holders. We cannot assure you that our objectives set forth in these policies will be attained. We are restricted by REIT laws in performing some business activities. See “Risk Factors—Applicable REIT Laws May Restrict Certain Business Activities.”

Investment Policies

Investments in Real Estate or Interests in Real Estate.    Our investment objective is to provide superior total returns to our stockholders through a combination of appreciation in asset values and growth in earnings and dividends. In order to achieve this objective we seek to:

In addition to wholly owned assets, 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. 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.    We also may invest in securities of other entities engaged in real estate activities or invest in securities of other

12

Table of Contents

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 HMC to be an “investment company” within the meaning of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.

Dispositions

Generally, we will consider dispositions of properties or ownership interests if we believe that the sale price of a property would exceed the hold value of the property, taking into consideration both the current and anticipated operating performance of the property, the property’s capital expenditure requirements, possible tax consequences of the sale and other circumstances. We are more likely to sell what we consider “non-core” properties that no longer fit within our business strategy of owning upper-upscale and luxury properties in urban and resort/conference locations with relatively high barriers to entry and where further large scale development is limited and where growth prospects appear slower than for our overall portfolio.

Financing Policies

To the extent that the Board of Directors determines to seek additional capital, we may raise such capital through HMC common and preferred equity offerings, OP unit offerings, debt financing (including senior, secured and subordinated debt of Host LP) or retention of cash flow or a combination of these methods.

Debt Financing.    Our organizational documents do not contain restrictions on incurring debt; however, the indenture for our senior notes and our existing credit facility does impose limitations on the incurrence of indebtedness. We may, 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 as well as other factors. Our borrowing policies will also reflect the goals of obtaining an EBITDA-to-interest coverage ratio of 3.0x or greater (under our senior notes indenture) and having debt consisting of 15% to 30% variable rate debt and a balanced maturity schedule with an average maturity of no less than five years. 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.

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, 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.

HMC Equity Offerings and Host LP Unit Offerings.    We may seek to raise additional capital through equity offerings by HMC or OP unit offerings by Host LP. HMC’s charter provides the authority to issue up to 750 million shares of common stock and 50 million shares of preferred stock. The net proceeds of all equity capital raised by HMC 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. Conversely, OP unit offerings by Host LP will dilute the percentage ownership interest of HMC in Host LP. We may, under certain circumstances, purchase shares of HMC common stock in the open market or purchase HMC common stock and Host LP OP units in private transactions with our stockholders.

13

Table of Contents

Retention of Cash Flow.    Financing through the retention of cash flow is limited due to the REIT requirement that at least 90% of our taxable income must be distributed to our stockholders. Our taxable income may also differ significantly from our reported cash flows.

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.

Reporting Policies

We are subject to the information reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Pursuant to these requirements, we will file periodic reports, proxy statements and other information, including certified financial statements, with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Policies With Respect to Other Activities

We may, but do not presently intend to, make investments other than as previously described. We have authority to offer our securities, including in exchange for property and may engage in such activities in the future. We also may make loans to joint ventures in which we may participate in the future to meet working capital needs. We do not intend to engage in trading, underwriting, agency distribution or sale of securities of other issuers.

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. We believe 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 as part of HMC’s conversion to a REIT.

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 limited partnership units.

On August 23, 2000, MacKenzie Patterson and 10 other unit holders (together, plaintiffs hold 28 units) filed this lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court against us alleging breach of contract, fraud, and conversion in the MHP II roll-up. Plaintiffs allege 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. Plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages. The Court has set a discovery cut-off of April 30, 2005 and has scheduled trial to begin on July 12, 2005.

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

14

Table of Contents

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 HMC’s conversion to a REIT, and have sought damages of approximately $17 million.

On June 23, 2004, we reached a preliminary agreement with plaintiffs to settle the case for $2.5 million (including attorneys’ fees). We subsequently executed a more formal settlement agreement on September 27, 2004, and the Circuit Court entered an order preliminarily approving settlement on October 13, 2004. On October 15, 2004, counsel to the class action plaintiffs mailed notice of the proposed settlement to each class member. No class members elected to opt out of the settlement. At the fairness hearing held on January 10, 2005, the Court issued the Final Order and Judgment. No appeal from the Final Order and Judgment was filed and class counsel distributed the settlement funds to the class members on or about February 16, 2005.

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

None.

15

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

In the following table we set forth certain information regarding those persons currently serving as our executive officers as of February 28, 2005.

16

Table of Contents

17

Table of Contents

PART II

Item 5.    Market for our common stock and related stockholder 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 closing sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape.

On September 8, 2004, our Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.05 per share on our common stock. We did not declare dividends on our common stock for the period from January 2003 through September 2004. 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 “Management Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition—Liquidity and Capital Resources.” and “Risk Factors—Financial Risks and Risks of Operation—Our ability to pay dividends may be limited by the terms of our indebtedness.”

As of February 15, 2005, there were 27,366 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, 2005, there were 2,334 holders of OP units (in addition to HMC). OP units are redeemable for cash, or, at our election, convertible into HMC 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% in value or in number, whichever is more restrictive, of shares of HMC’s outstanding common stock, preferred stock or any other stock, each considered as a separate class or series for this purpose. 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 Ownership of HMC: Common Stock—There are limitations on the acquisition of HMC common stock and changes in control.”

18

Table of Contents

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, 2004. The historical information contained in the following table for our 2001 through 2004 primarily represents gross hotel-level revenues and expenses of our properties. During 2000, 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.

19

Table of Contents

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 own 107 full-service luxury and upper-upscale hotel properties and, as of February 28, 2005, HMC was the largest hotel REIT in the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust’s composite index. A REIT is a legal entity that holds real estate interests and, through payments of dividends to stockholders, is permitted to reduce or avoid federal income taxes at the corporate level. HMC operates as a self-managed and self-administered REIT, which means that we are managed by a board of directors and executive officers. We conduct our operations through Host LP and its subsidiaries, which hold substantially all of our assets. HMC is the sole general partner of Host LP and owns approximately 94% of the partnership interests.

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^®, Fairmont^®, Hilton^® and Westin^®. Approximately 85% of our hotels (as measured by sales) are managed by Marriott International or its affiliates and branded under the Marriott or Ritz-Carlton brand names. The majority of our properties are located in central business districts of major cities, near airports and in resort/conference locations. The target profile for our portfolio includes luxury and upper-upscale full-service properties in urban and resort/conference locations which benefit from significant barriers to entry by competitors. Though hotels meeting this target profile will still be subject to competitive pressures, we believe this will allow us to maintain room rate and occupancy premiums over our competitors. We also seek to maximize the value of our portfolio through aggressive asset management, by assisting the managers of our hotels in maximizing property operations and by completing strategic capital improvements. The majority of our customers fall into three broad groups: transient business, group business, and contract business (approximately 54%, 43% and 3%, respectively, of our business in 2004). 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. The remainder of our customer base results from contracts for a specified number of rooms over a fixed period.

Our hotels are operated by 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, property taxes and other expenses. We generally receive a cash distribution, which reflects hotel-level sales less property-level operating expenses (excluding depreciation), from our hotel managers each four week or monthly accounting period, depending on the manager.

20

Table of Contents

Hotel revenue is approximately 97% of our total revenue. The following table presents the components of our hotel revenue as a percentage of our total revenue:

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

Key Performance Indicators

We have several key indicators that we use to evaluate the performance of our business. Revenue per available room, or RevPAR, is a commonly used measure within the hotel industry to evaluate hotel operations.

21

Table of Contents

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 evaluate the results of individual hotels between periods and our comparable hotels. See “Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics” for further discussion of what we consider to be our comparable hotels.

RevPAR changes driven predominately by occupancy have different implications on overall revenue levels as well as incremental operating profit than do changes driven predominately by average room rate. For example, increases in occupancy at a hotel would lead to increases in rooms revenues and ancillary revenues, such as food and beverage, 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 typically increases 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. Competitive set determinations are highly subjective, however, and our methodology for determining a hotel’s competitive set may differ materially from those used by other owners and/or managers.

We assess profitability by measuring changes in our operating margins, which are operating profit as a percentage of total revenues. Another key profitability indicator we use is hotel adjusted operating profit which is a non-GAAP measure, and which is used to evaluate the profitability of our comparable hotels. 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.

Outlook

For 2004, RevPAR increased approximately 7.3% at our comparable hotels as compared to 2003. We believe that lodging demand will continue to grow in 2005 and, in particular, as corporate group and corporate transient business strengthen, we believe that RevPAR at our hotels will continue to increase. Improvements in RevPAR for the first half of 2004 were primarily driven by increases in occupancy at our hotels. In the second half of 2004, increases in RevPAR were attributable to increases in both occupancy and average room rates. We expect that demand will continue to grow and allow for additional growth in average room rates in 2005. This is a result of a number of positive trends such as strong U.S. GDP growth, low supply growth of new hotels, a continued increase in corporate transient demand and a solid group booking pace. Historically, we have seen that lodging demand in the United States correlates to GDP growth, with typically a one to two quarter lag period,

22

Table of Contents

especially within the luxury and upper-upscale sectors of the lodging industry. Therefore, given the relatively strong U.S. GDP growth in 2004 and the GDP forecasts for 2005, we are optimistic about improvements in lodging demand in 2005. As a result of these trends, we expect our comparable hotel RevPAR to increase approximately 6.5% to 8.5% for 2005.

In addition to the favorable demand trends forecast to affect the lodging industry in general, we believe we will 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 geographic 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/conference hotels. 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, will lead to an imbalance between supply and growing demand that will allow for improved RevPAR performance at our hotels.

In terms of profitability measures, operating margins were relatively unchanged for the first half of 2004. However, operating margins increased in the second half of 2004, as the average room rate increases at our hotels began to exceed the rate of inflation for the first time since 2000, resulting in an overall increase for the full year for our comparable hotels. Operating margins continue to be affected by certain of our costs, primarily wages, benefits, utilities and sales and marketing, which increased at a rate greater than inflation. We expect these costs to continue to increase at a rate greater than inflation in the near term. As noted above, approximately 31% of our revenues are from food and beverage operations. During 2004, food and beverage revenue growth at our comparable hotels was 5.7%. As the economy continues to expand in 2005, we expect to see an increase in our catering revenues, which should improve our food and beverage operating margins.

We also may see improvements in RevPAR and operating margins as we continue our strategy of recycling assets. As noted below, over the past year we have been acquiring upper-upscale and luxury properties in urban and resort/conference locations, where further large-scale lodging development is limited, and selling assets in suburban, secondary and tertiary markets. The assets we have been acquiring have higher RevPAR, higher operating margins and, we believe, higher growth potential than those we have sold. Over time, this should contribute to improvements in overall RevPAR and operating margins.

During 2004, the average RevPAR penetration index for our comparable hotels modestly declined, but it remains at a premium in relation to our competitive set. This follows a similar decline in our average RevPAR penetration index for our comparable hotels in 2003. Market share at our urban and airport hotels increased slightly in 2004, reversing the prior year trend as a result of the increase in business travel, however, market share continued to decline at our suburban properties and our larger convention hotels. We believe that this decline in market share over the past two years occurred because:

As lodging demand continues to grow and, in particular, as corporate group and corporate transient business strengthens, we believe that our hotels may regain the majority of the market share lost in 2003 and 2004.

23

Table of Contents

While we believe the combination of improved demand trends and low supply growth trends in the lodging industry creates the possibility for improvements in our business in 2005, there can be no assurances that any increases in hotel revenues or earnings at our properties will continue. The trends discussed above may not occur for any number of reasons, including:

All of the above, as well as the risks set forth in the section “Forward-Looking Statements” may result in lower revenues or higher operating costs and declining operating margins.

Management’s Priorities

Based on forecasted operating conditions, our key management priorities over the next several years include the following:

In furtherance of these objectives, we acquired three hotels in 2004 valued at approximately $502 million (the Fairmont Kea Lani Maui, the Embassy Suites Chicago Downtown-Lakefront and the Scottsdale Marriott at McDowell Mountains). We sold nine non-core properties in 2004 for $254 million and another four properties in January 2005 for $128 million. We also committed to sell by March 2005, subject to several closing conditions, 85% of our interest in the CBM Joint Venture, which owns 120 Courtyard by Marriott properties.

Additionally, we raised $1.2 billion through financing activities in 2004, using those funds along with funds raised through asset dispositions to acquire properties and to repay or refinance $1.1 billion in senior notes and $116 million in mortgage debt, all of which improved our interest coverage ratio and our overall leverage ratio.

Similarly, in 2004 we spent approximately $44 million on repositioning and ROI projects, including commencing a $60 million renovation and repositioning of our Newport Beach Marriott hotel. As part of this project, we have negotiated to sell land which currently houses a tennis facility at this property to a high-end condominium developer. In 2005, we committed to invest approximately $60 million for the development of a 105,000 square-foot exhibit hall at the Orlando World Center Marriott Resort and Convention Center, or the Orlando Marriott World Center. We expect to spend $200 million to $400 million on such investments in the next several years. By contrast, we had limited our expenditures on such development projects in 2002 and 2003 based on our assessment of the relatively weak operating environment and to preserve capital.

24

Table of Contents

For further detail on each of the above transactions, see the discussion in “Liquidity and Capital Resources.” We believe we successfully executed on a number of these management priorities in 2004 based on the positive trends in the hotel industry noted above, as well as improving conditions in the financial markets. There can be no assurances, however, that these trends will continue in 2005 or that we will be able to continue to execute on all, or any, of these priorities in 2005 or over the next several years.

Results of Operations

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

2004 Compared to 2003

Hotel Sales Overview. Hotel sales increased $357 million, or 11.2%, to $3.5 billion for 2004 as compared to $3.2 billion for 2003. Hotel sales for 2004 include approximately $59 million of sales for the three hotels acquired in 2004 and exclude sales for the properties we have sold or classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2004 for all periods presented, which have been reclassified to discontinued operations. See “Discontinued Operations” below. Comparable hotel sales increased 6.4%, or $203 million, to $3.4 billion. The growth in revenues reflects the increase in comparable RevPAR of 7.3% for 2004, as a result of strong increases in occupancy of 2.9 percentage points, as well as an increase in average room rate of 2.9%. Food and beverage revenues for our comparable hotels increased 5.7%, primarily due to an increase in catering revenues and the overall increase in occupancy.

We discuss operating results for our full-service hotels on a comparable basis, which is properties that we have owned throughout the entire year, while eliminating the results of properties acquired or sold, or that incurred significant property damage or large scale capital improvements during these periods. As of December 31, 2004, 103 of our full-service hotels have been classified as comparable hotels. The following discussion is of the sales results of our comparable hotels considering the mix of business (i.e. transient or group), property type (i.e. urban, suburban, resort/conference or airport) and geographic region. See “Comparable Hotel Operating Statistics” for a complete description of our comparable hotels and further detail on these classifications.

25

Table of Contents

Comparable Hotel Sales by Customer Mix.    The majority of our customers fall into two broad groups: transient and group travelers. Continuing a trend we noted in the first three quarters of 2004, the business mix of our portfolio is showing a shift in transient room nights, from lower-rated discount business to higher-rated corporate and premium business.

For 2004, total transient room revenue for our comparable Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotels was up 6.8% compared to last year, as premium and corporate occupancy increased to 29.3% of total transient demand, up from 25.8% last year, while our average transient room rate increased by 5.4%. This indicates that our hotel managers are having greater success in reducing the number of rooms sold at discounted rates as a result of improving transient demand. We believe the upward trend in occupancy and average room rate should continue as a result of increased corporate and premium business in the fourth quarter.

For 2004, total group room revenue for our comparable Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotels was up 8.2% compared to last year, primarily due to an increase in occupancy of approximately 7.5%, while our average group room rate was up slightly, or 0.7%. This increase reflects the increased business travel and the steady growth in the economy. Additionally, our managers improved overall occupancy by accepting greater numbers of advance room reservations for groups, which resulted in fewer rooms available for transient business. We expect this trend to reverse in 2005.

Comparable Hotel Sales by Property Type.    For full year 2004, revenues increased consistently across all of our hotel property types. Comparable hotel RevPAR increased 6.8%, 6.4%, 7.0% and 12.0% for urban, suburban, resort/conference and airport properties, respectively. The largest increases were for our airport hotels, which reflects a significant increase in business travel in 2004 compared with the significantly depressed levels of 2002 and 2003.

The performance of our portfolio is significantly affected by the size of our hotels, including our large convention hotels, the majority of which are included in urban properties. Convention hotels have historically outperformed in the early stages of an industry downturn; however, they also lag the industry in performance in the early stages of recovery. This is due to the longer booking lead-time for large group business and the level of transient demand required for the greater capacity of rooms. As with other recoveries, we expect that these hotels will ultimately outperform and their performance will stay relatively strong for a longer period of time.

Comparable Hotel Sales by Geographic Region.    During 2004, we experienced RevPAR gains in most regions. Full year 2004 comparable hotel RevPAR in our New England region improved 11.0% over the prior year. The region benefited from the Democratic National Convention during the third quarter and was led by the Boston Hyatt, which was converted from the Swissôtel brand in late 2003, where RevPAR improved by 25.6% for the year.

Comparable hotel RevPAR increased 9.2% for our DC Metro region due primarily to a 5.2% increase in average room rates in 2004. Growth was slowed during the year by rooms renovations at four of our hotels in the region. We expect that the region will experience strong RevPAR growth in 2005 due to the Presidential inauguration, the overall strength of the market and the negative effect of the rooms renovations in 2004.

For our Atlanta region, comparable hotel RevPAR grew by 6.0%. The improvement was led by The Grand Hyatt, Atlanta, The Four Seasons, Atlanta and The Ritz-Carlton, Atlanta, where RevPAR increased 9.7%, 10.9% and 9.9%, respectively.

Our Pacific region, which had lagged behind the portfolio as a whole during 2002 and 2003, continued to improve as comparable hotel RevPAR increased 8.0%, with significant increases in occupancy. The primary reason this region had been underperforming over the past three years was due to the decline in travel related to the area’s technology companies, particularly in the San Francisco Bay area. The improvement in the Pacific region in 2004 reflects an increase in comparable hotel RevPAR at our San Francisco market hotels of 14.5%.

26

Table of Contents

The results for the Pacific region also reflect a 6.5% increase in comparable hotel RevPAR at our properties in the Los Angeles market. Overall, we expect the Pacific region to continue to exhibit improving performance in 2005.

Comparable hotel RevPAR in our Mid-Atlantic region improved 10.7% over the prior year. Our New York City properties benefited from the Republican National Convention in the third quarter and strong demand in the fourth quarter.

For 2004, comparable hotel RevPAR in the Florida region improved 7.1% over 2003. During August and September, four hurricanes caused significant damage in Florida. Our 12 properties in the region and the New Orleans Marriott experienced varying levels of property damage and business interruption. During 2004, we recorded $3 million of non-recoverable losses. We believe that the hurricanes could have a modest impact on business next year, as planners of group business may elect to book business in other markets during the hurricane season.

RevPAR in other regions was relatively unchanged from 2003. RevPAR declined 0.9% in our South Central region, while RevPAR in our North Central and Mountain regions experienced comparable RevPAR increases of 2.2% and 2.7%, respectively.

Comparable hotel RevPAR for our international properties increased 17.5% for 2004. Our four Canadian properties, three of which are in Toronto, experienced increases in RevPAR of 24.5%, as the region has recovered from the SARs related travel restrictions in 2003 and the effect of the favorable appreciation of the Canadian dollar compared to the U.S. dollar.

Rental Income.    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. In 2003, operations at the leased limited-service hotel properties suffered because a significant portion of these properties underwent renovations to enable them to compete with newer hotels and the weak economic conditions in their markets. While several leased properties were still under renovation in 2004, the properties that underwent renovations in 2003 performed substantially better. This was the primary reason for the increase in total rental income of $6 million to $106 million during 2004.

Operating Costs and Expenses.    Operating costs and expenses increased $244 million, or 8.2%, to $3.2 billion. The operating costs and expenses include the costs of three properties acquired in 2004, totaling approximately $48 million, and exclude the costs for properties we sold or that are classified as held for sale, the results of which are included in discontinued operations. Property-level expenses, which account for 98% of our total operating costs and expenses, increased $237 million, or 8.1%, to approximately $3.2 billion. Comparable hotel expenses increased $127 million, or 5.1%, to $2.6 billion. The increase in operating costs and expenses is due to additional costs associated with an increase in occupancy at our hotels and an increase in wage, benefit, utility and sales and marketing costs, all of which we believe will continue to increase at a rate greater than inflation.

Operating costs and expenses also include base and incentive management fees, which are earned based on the operating performance of our individual hotels. Due to the difficult operating environment over the past three years, less than half of our hotels reached the necessary thresholds in 2004 that would require us to incur incentive management fees to our managers. In 2004 and 2003, incentive management fees totaled $38 million and $36 million, respectively. We expect the number of hotels reaching these thresholds and the incentive fees earned to further increase in 2005.

Corporate and Other Expenses.    Corporate and other expenses primarily consist of employee salaries and bonuses and other costs such as employee stock-based compensation expense, corporate insurance, audit fees, building rent and system costs. During 2004, the $7 million increase is primarily due to an increase in stock

27

Table of Contents

compensation expense, as a result of the significant appreciation in our stock price since December 31, 2003 and an increase in the number of shares that may be issued that are subject to performance criteria established by the Compensation Policy Committee of the Board of Directors.

Interest Expense.    During 2004, interest expense decreased $5 million. Interest expense for 2004 includes $32 million of interest which was previously classified as dividends on Convertible Preferred Securities (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements). Interest expense also includes $55 million and $31 million of call premiums and accelerated deferred financing costs and original issue discounts that were associated with debt prepayments made in 2004 and 2003, respectively. After excluding these items, interest expense decreased approximately $60 million due to the significant amount of debt repayments and refinancings that have occurred in 2003 and 2004. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Cash Requirements—Debt Repayments and Refinancings.”

Net Gains on Property Transactions.    Net gains on property transactions are due primarily to the recognition of deferred gains. In 1994, we sold a portfolio of Fairfield Inns by Marriott and received a note receivable in partial payment. Subsequently, we recorded a loss on the note due to a decline in the operations of the hotels. During 2004, the owner filed for bankruptcy and several properties were sold. We recognized a previously deferred gain of approximately $12 million based on the amount of the proceeds we received.

Loss on Foreign Currency and Derivative Contracts.    During 2004, the loss on foreign currency and derivative contracts is primarily due to the approximate $7 million loss from the foreign currency exchange contracts related to mortgage debt that was secured by three of our Canadian hotels for the majority of 2004 as the U.S. dollar continued to decline in relation to the Canadian dollar. These contracts were deemed ineffective for hedge accounting purposes in 2003, which resulted in an $18 million loss at that time. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Debt and Effect of Financial Covenants—Mortgage Debt Covenants” for further discussion.

Minority Interest Expense.    Minority interest expense consists of our minority partners’ share of the income or loss in consolidated hotel partnerships and the approximate 6% ownership in Host LP.

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. The decrease in the loss can be attributed to a decrease in the net loss of CBM Joint Venture LLC in 2004 and an increase in the income from our investment in Tiburon Golf Ventures, L.P. See “Investments in Affiliates” for a discussion of these partnerships.

Discontinued Operations.    Discontinued operations consist of nine hotels sold in 2004, eight hotels sold in 2003, one hotel sold in 2002, the gain on the disposition and business interruption proceeds for the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel in 2003 and 2002 and four properties classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2004, all of which were sold in January 2005. 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 2004, the nine hotels sold generated net proceeds of approximately $246 million with a net gain on disposition of approximately $52 million. Our revenues for the 21 properties sold in 2003 and 2004 or classified as held for sale at December 31, 2004 and the final disposition of insurance proceeds for the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel were $133 million for 2004 and $442 million for 2003. Income before taxes for the same periods was $12 million and $191 million, respectively.

2003 Compared to 2002

Hotel Sales.    Hotel sales declined $68 million, or 2.0%, to approximately $3.2 billion. Hotel sales for 2003 include approximately $10 million for one hotel acquired in 2003 and exclude sales for the properties we have sold in 2004 and 2003 or classified as held for sale in 2004, which have been reclassified to discontinued

28

Table of Contents

operations. See “Discontinued Operations” below. We discuss operating results for our hotels on a comparable basis, and as of December 31, 2003, 112 of our 117 full-service hotels owned on that date were classified as comparable for 2003 and 2002. 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. Comparable hotel RevPAR by property type decreased 4.3%, 4.5%, 3.5% and 3.9% for urban, suburban, resort/conference and airport properties, respectively.

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 other 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 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 decrease in demand was primarily attributable to a reduction in city-wide convention activity in 2003. 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.

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.

Corporate and Other Expenses.    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 employee stock-based compensation expense.

Interest Expense.    Interest expense increased 6.6% 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.

29

Table of Contents

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 hedge accounting purposes. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Debt and Effect of Financial Covenants—Mortgage Debt Covenants” for further discussion.

Minority Interest Expense.    Minority interest expense consists of our minority partners’ share of the income or loss in consolidated hotel partnerships and the approximate 7% ownership interest in Host LP. The decrease in minority interest expense is due to the decline in our operations discussed above.

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 consist of nine hotels sold in 2004, eight hotels sold in 2003, one hotel sold in 2002, the gain on the disposition and business interruption proceeds for the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel in 2003 and 2002 and four properties classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2004. For 2003, the eight hotels sold generated net proceeds of approximately $184 million with a net gain on disposition of approximately $9 million. Discontinued operations for 2003 also includes a $56 million gain on the disposition of World Trade Center hotel. For 2003 and 2002, our revenues for all properties included in discontinued operations were $442 million and $334 million, respectively, and our income before taxes was $191 million and $45 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 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 New York Marriott 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 revenue from continuing operations.

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 reporting periods being compared, and (ii) that have not sustained substantial property damage or undergone large-scale capital projects during the reporting periods being compared. Of the 111 full-service hotels that we owned on December 31, 2004, 103 have been classified as comparable hotels for 2004 versus 2003 comparisons. The operating results of the following eight hotels that we owned as of December 31, 2004 are excluded from comparable hotel results for these periods:

30

Table of Contents

In addition, the operating results of the 17 hotels we disposed of in 2004 and 2003 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.

We evaluate the operating performance of our comparable hotels based on both geographic region and property type. These divisions are generally consistent with industry data provided by hospitality research firms such as Smith Travel Research.

Geographic regions consist of the following (only states in which we own hotels are listed):

Property types consist of the following:

31

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth performance information for our comparable full-service hotels by geographic region and property type as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:

The following statistics are for all of our full-service properties as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and the results of operations for nine hotels sold in 2004 and eight hotels sold in 2003 prior to their disposition.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Requirements

HMC is required to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of its taxable income in order to qualify as a REIT. Funds used by HMC to make these distributions are provided from Host LP. 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.

32

Table of Contents

Cash Balances.    As of December 31, 2004, we had $347 million of cash and cash equivalents, which was a decrease of $417 million from December 31, 2003. The decrease is primarily attributable to significant debt prepayments and acquisitions in 2004. For a further discussion, see “Sources and Uses of Cash” below. In the third quarter of 2004, we amended and restated our credit facility, which now provides aggregate revolving loan commitments of $575 million, an increase of $275 million. We have no amounts outstanding under the credit facility. Due to the volatile operating environment in 2002 and 2003, our cash balances have been in excess of the $100 million to $150 million which we had historically maintained. With the added flexibility and capacity of our new credit facility and the continuing growth of the economy, we expect to lower our cash balances to previous levels over the next several quarters.

As of December 31, 2004, we also had an additional $154 million of cash which was restricted as a result of lender requirements (including reserves for debt service, real estate taxes, insurance, as well as cash collateral and excess cash flow deposits). The restricted cash balance includes $37 million which is held in escrow in accordance with debt covenant requirements where cash flows after debt service from certain properties did not meet certain required minimum levels (see “Financial Condition—Mortgage Debt” below). The restricted cash balances do not have a significant effect on our liquidity.

Debt Repayments and Refinancings.    With the proceeds from asset sales and the insurance proceeds received for the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel, we repaid or redeemed a total of approximately $400 million of debt in 2004. We also made $61 million of scheduled principal payments. In addition, we refinanced approximately $830 million of our debt in 2004. The combined effect of these transactions lowered our average interest rate by approximately 65 basis points. As a result of the repayments and refinancings completed during both 2003 and 2004, our annual interest expense obligations, excluding the effect of call premiums and accelerated deferred financing costs, have declined approximately $80 million based on interest rates as of December 31, 2004. We have no significant debt maturities prior to February 2006, though principal amortization will total approximately $66 million in 2005. We believe we have sufficient cash to deal with our near-term debt maturities, as well as any unanticipated decline in the cash flow from our business.

Reducing our leverage and future interest payments through debt repayments and refinancings 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 with proceeds from additional asset sales ($317 million of which remains available under this authorization). Senior notes redeemed in connection with a refinancing transaction do not affect the availability under this authorization. As a result, we may continue to redeem or refinance additional senior notes, our Convertible Preferred Securities (QUIPs) debt and mortgage debt from time to time to take advantage of favorable market conditions. We may purchase senior notes and QUIPs debt 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 defined herein, as a result of the payment of any applicable call premiums and the acceleration of previously deferred financing costs. During 2004, we incurred interest expense resulting from the payment of call premiums of approximately $40 million and the acceleration of deferred financing costs and original issue discounts totaling approximately $14 million.

Capital Expenditures.    Typically, our renewal and replacement capital expenditures range from $200 million to $250 million on an annual basis. Based on the improved economy in 2004, we have increased spending compared to 2003, where we had reduced our capital expenditures based on our assessment of the operating environment, including delaying certain projects due to the start of the war in Iraq, and to preserve capital. For 2004, renewal and replacement capital expenditures totaled approximately $206 million. During 2003, our capital expenditures were focused on property maintenance and improvements designed to maintain appropriate levels of quality. We spent approximately $181 million on renewal and replacement capital expenditures in 2003. Our renewal and replacement capital expenditures are generally funded by the furniture, fixture and equipment funds established at certain of our hotels (typically funded annually with approximately 5% of property revenues) and by our available cash.

33

Table of Contents

During 2004, we also spent approximately $44 million on repositioning/ROI projects. These projects have historically generated strong returns and over the next several years we expect to spend $200 million to $400 million on such investments. Repositioning /ROI projects include substantial repositionings or expanding room, ballroom, meeting, conference and exhibit hall facilities (often through the conversion of underutilized space), constructing or expanding spa facilities and installing energy management systems. In addition, we will continue to seek opportunities to enhance the value of our portfolio by identifying and executing strategies that capitalize on alternate uses of our assets, such as the development of timeshare or condominium units on excess land or the conversion of existing rooms to timeshare or condominium units such as the previously discussed renovation and repositioning of the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel. The renovation is expected to cost approximately $60 million and will include the addition of a spa and 20 new luxury suites, redesigned guest rooms, a new restaurant concept and updated meeting space. We also recently announced a commitment to invest approximately $60 million for the development of an exhibit hall for the Marriott Orlando World Center hotel. In addition, we are pursuing the development of 120 timeshare units on a beachfront parking lot at the Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa.

On September 3, 2004, we also converted the 590-room Denver Southeast Marriott to the Four Points by Sheraton Denver Southeast and are currently utilizing 475 rooms. We spent approximately $2 million in 2004 and expect to spend a total of $5 million for the conversion, which we believe will result in improved cash flows. We are also in the process of negotiating a contract to sell the Marriott Mountain Shadows Resort, which has been temporarily closed since September 2004. The sale of the hotel is contingent on, among other items, obtaining local government approval for the proposed redevelopment.

Acquisitions.    We remain interested in pursuing single asset and portfolio acquisitions and believe that there will be opportunities in the near term and over the next several years to acquire assets that are consistent with our target profile of upper-upscale and luxury properties. An example of this strategy is the July 15, 2004 acquisition of the 450-suite Fairmont Kea Lani Maui, a luxury resort hotel located on 21 acres of Wailea’s Polo Beach, for $355 million. We also acquired the 270-suite Scottsdale Marriott at McDowell Mountains on September 22, 2004 for approximately $58 million, $34 million of which was funded through the assumption of the existing mortgage debt on the hotel and the 455-suite Chicago Embassy Suites Downtown-Lakefront for $89 million in May 2004. In addition, during 2004, we purchased a retail building adjacent to one of our hotels and the land under the JW Marriott Hotel at Lenox in Atlanta, which we previously leased, for a combined total of approximately $30 million.

We may acquire properties through various structures, including transactions involving portfolios, single assets, joint ventures and acquisitions of all or substantially all of the securities or assets of other REITs or similar real estate entities. We anticipate that our acquisitions will be financed through a combination of methods, including proceeds from equity offerings of HMC, issuance of OP Units by Host LP, advances under our credit facility, our available cash and the incurrence or assumption of indebtedness. We may, from time to time, be in the process of identifying, analyzing and negotiating possible acquisition transactions and we expect to continue to do so in the future. We cannot be certain as to the size or timing of acquisition opportunities or of our ability to obtain additional acquisition financing, if needed. Additionally, the number of potential acquirers for individual hotel properties has increased due to the improvement of both the capital markets and the lodging industry and, as a result, the cost of acquiring properties has increased. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to find acquisition targets that provide a suitable return on investment.

Sources and Uses of Cash

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

34

Table of Contents

Cash Provided by Operations.    Our cash provided by operations decreased $10 million to $360 million for 2004 from $370 million for 2003. Cash from operations in 2003 included $156 million in business interruption proceeds related to the disposition of the New York Marriott World Trade Center hotel. Excluding this transaction, cash provided by operations increased approximately $146 million in 2004.

Cash Provided by or Used in Investing Activities.    Cash used in investing activities for 2004 was $501 million compared to $153 million for 2003. Activity for 2004 primarily included the acquisition of three hotel properties and other assets for total cash expenditures of approximately $503 million, the net proceeds of approximately $246 million from the sale of nine non-core properties, and capital expenditures at our properties of approximately $250 million.

In January of 2005, we also completed the disposition of four hotels for total proceeds of approximately $128 million. The net proceeds from these sales will be used to repay debt, fund acquisitions or repositioning/ROI projects, or for general corporate purposes. On December 30, 2004, we received approximately $47 million in payment of a note receivable from a minority partner in a consolidated partnership that owns two hotels. At the request of the minority partner, the partnership purchased preferred units of Vornado Realty Trust (the “Vornado Preferred Units), which we held as of December 31, 2004. As the Vornado Preferred Units are not publicly traded, we have recorded them in other assets at their cost basis in our consolidated balance sheet. On January 3, 2005, these securities were transferred to the minority partner in redemption of his partnership interest. We also paid approximately $14 million to a second partner for the remaining minority interests in the partnership. No gain or loss was recognized on this transaction.

On December 15, 2004, we executed a sale agreement with an affiliate of Sarofim Realty Advisors (“Sarofim”) and Marriott International, whereby Sarofim will acquire 85% of our interest in CBM Joint Venture for approximately $92 million. We and Marriott International each currently own a 50% interest in CBM Joint Venture, which owns 120 Courtyard by Marriott properties totaling approximately 17,500 rooms. As part of the transaction, CBM Joint Venture will be converted into a limited partnership and we will have the right to cause the partnership to redeem our remaining interest in the partnership under certain conditions between December 8, 2007 and December 8, 2009. Starting December 9, 2009, the partnership will have the right to redeem our remaining interest. The sale is expected to close by March 2005 and is subject to several closing conditions, including: no significant decrease in the net worth of CBM Joint Venture (but not considering a decrease in net worth due to changes in market conditions); the entering into by CBM Joint Venture of new management agreements and ground leases with Marriott International and its affiliates; Sarofim’s ability to complete the refinancing of certain secured debt and to obtain certain lender consents; and other customary closing conditions. There can be no assurances that the sale will be completed. There have been no cash distributions to us from CBM Joint Venture since 2001.

35

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes significant investing activities that have been completed since the beginning of fiscal year 2003 (in millions):