Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y y / / y y New - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011

INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION

• J. Robison Hays III
• J. Robison Hays III

Senior Vice President Senior Vice President Corporate Finance & Strategy Corporate Finance & Strategy Senior Vice President Senior Vice President – Corporate Finance & Strategy Corporate Finance & Strategy

2

Safe Harbor Safe Harbor

In keeping with the SEC’s “Safe Harbor” guidelines, certain statements made during this presentation In keeping with the SEC’s “Safe Harbor” guidelines, certain statements made during this presentation could be considered forward could be considered forward-

• looking and subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause

looking and subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause results to differ materially from those projected. When we use the words “will likely result,” “may,” results to differ materially from those projected. When we use the words “will likely result,” “may,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “should,” “expect,” “believe,” “intend,” or similar expressions, we intend to “anticipate,” “estimate,” “should,” “expect,” “believe,” “intend,” or similar expressions, we intend to identify forward identify forward-looking statements Such forward looking statements Such forward-looking statements include but are not limited to looking statements include but are not limited to identify forward identify forward looking statements. Such forward looking statements. Such forward looking statements include, but are not limited to, looking statements include, but are not limited to,

• ur business and investment strategy, our understanding of our competition, current market trends and
• ur business and investment strategy, our understanding of our competition, current market trends and
• pportunities, projected operating results, and projected capital expenditures.
• pportunities, projected operating results, and projected capital expenditures.

These forward These forward-

• looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which

looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated including without limitation: could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated including without limitation: could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated including, without limitation: could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated including, without limitation: general volatility of the capital markets and the market price of our common stock; changes in our general volatility of the capital markets and the market price of our common stock; changes in our business or investment strategy; availability, terms and deployment of capital; availability of qualified business or investment strategy; availability, terms and deployment of capital; availability of qualified personnel; changes in our industry and the market in which we operate, interest rates or the general personnel; changes in our industry and the market in which we operate, interest rates or the general economy, and the degree and nature of our competition. These and other risk factors are more fully economy, and the degree and nature of our competition. These and other risk factors are more fully discussed in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission discussed in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission discussed in the Company s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. discussed in the Company s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. EBITDA EBITDA is is defined defined as as net net income income before before interest, interest, taxes, taxes, depreciation depreciation and and amortization amortization. . EBITDA EBITDA yield yield is is defined defined as as trailing trailing twelve twelve month month EBITDA EBITDA divided divided by by the the purchase purchase price price. . EBITDA, EBITDA, FFO, FFO, AFFO, AFFO, CAD CAD and and

• ther
• ther terms

terms are are non non-

• GAAP

GAAP measures, measures, reconciliations reconciliations of

• f which

which have have been been provided provided in in prior prior earnings earnings releases releases and and filings filings with with the the SEC SEC. . This This overview

• verview is

is for for informational informational purposes purposes only

• nly and

and is is not not an an offer

• ffer to

to sell, sell, or

• r a

a solicitation solicitation of

• f an

an offer

• ffer to

to buy buy or

• r sell,

sell, any any securities securities of

• f Ashford

Ashford Hospitality Hospitality Trust, Trust, Inc Inc. . and and may may not not be be relied relied upon upon in in connection connection with with the the purchase purchase or

• r sale

sale of

• f any

any such such security security with with the the purchase purchase or

• r sale

sale of

• f any

any such such security security.

3

Ashford Overview Ashford Overview

Ashford Ashford Hospitality Hospitality Trust, Trust, Inc Inc. . is is a a self self-

• administered

administered real real estate estate investment investment trust trust listed listed on

• n the

the NYSE NYSE (symbol (symbol: : AHT) AHT) that that invests invests in in the the hospitality hospitality industry industry across across all all segments segments and and at at all all levels levels of

• f the

the capital capital structure structure. . Ashford Ashford differentiates differentiates itself itself from from its its peers peers in in the the hospitality hospitality REIT REIT p p y p y sector sector as as a a result result of

• f its

its unique unique perspective perspective on

• n hotel

hotel and and capital capital markets, markets, its its broad broad investment investment philosophy, philosophy, high high levels levels

• f
• f

management management ownership,

• wnership, and

and its its depth depth of

• f experience

experience in in asset asset management management. . Ashford Ashford believes believes these these attributes attributes enable enable it it to to successfully successfully manage manage the the impact impact of

• f lodging

lodging cycles cycles and and deliver deliver

• utsized
• utsized shareholder

shareholder value value. .

4

Timeline Timeline

9: :05 05am am to to 9 9: :40 40am am

• Company

Company & & Industry Industry Overview Overview: : Monty Monty J J. . Bennett, Bennett, Chief Chief Executive Executive Officer Officer 9: :40 40am am to to 10 10: :00 00am am

• Capital

Capital Structure Structure & Balance Balance Sheet Sheet: David David J Kimichik Kimichik Chief Chief Financial Financial Officer Officer

• Capital

Capital Structure Structure & Balance Balance Sheet Sheet: David David J. Kimichik, Kimichik, Chief Chief Financial Financial Officer Officer 10 10: :00 00am am to to 10 10: :10 10am am

• Coffee

Coffee Break Break & & Sign Sign-

• Ups

Ups for for 1 1-

• on
• n-
• 1

1’s ’s 10 10: :10 10am am to to 10 10: :40 40am am

• Asset

Asset Overview Overview: : Monty Monty J J. . Bennett, Bennett, Chief Chief Executive Executive Officer Officer 10 10: :40 40am am to to 11 11: :00 00am am

• Transaction

Transaction Overview Overview: Douglas Douglas A. Kessler, Kessler, President President Transaction Transaction Overview Overview: Douglas Douglas A. Kessler, Kessler, President President 11 11: :00 00am am to to 11 11: :05 05am am

• Conclusion

Conclusion: : Monty Monty J J. . Bennett, Bennett, Chief Chief Executive Executive Officer Officer 11 11 05 05 t 11 11 30 30 11 11:05 05am am to to 11 11:30 30am am

• Q&

Q& A A 11 11: :30 30am am to to 12 12: :30 30pm pm

• Optional

Optional Lunch Lunch w/ w/ Management Management p / g

5

COMPANY & INDUSTRY OVERVIEW COMPANY & INDUSTRY OVERVIEW COMPANY & INDUSTRY OVERVIEW COMPANY & INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Monty J. Bennett Monty J. Bennett Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer

6

Overview Overview

• Based

Based on

• n historical

historical cycles, cycles, now now is is the the time time to to be be investing investing in in lodging lodging – – it’s it’s still still early early in in the the cycle cycle

• Ashford

Ashford is is best best positioned positioned to to take take advantage advantage of

• f the

the up up-cycle cycle:

• Ashford

Ashford is is best best positioned positioned to to take take advantage advantage of

• f the

the up up-cycle cycle:

– Attractive Attractive capital capital structure structure – Materially Materially reduced reduced share share count count Best Best in in class class asset asset management management – Best Best-in in-class class asset asset management management – Reinstated Reinstated common common dividend dividend with with 3 3.3% yield yield and and strong strong coverage coverage – Proven Proven management management team team that that has has led led to to consistent consistent outsized

• utsized returns

returns Highl Highl aligned aligned management management team team – Highly Highly-

• aligned

aligned management management team team – Potential Potential EBITDA EBITDA multiple multiple expansion expansion

7

Historical Occupancy Historical Occupancy

66

Seasonally-Adjusted % Occupancy

Cycle Peak R PAR

60 62 64

65.3% Cycle Peak O Cycle Peak RevPAR Cycle Peak RevPAR 65.2% C l P k RevPAR

56 58 60

Occupancy 65.5% Cycle Peak Occupancy Cycle Peak Occupancy

52 54

Source: Smith Travel Research (non Source: Smith Travel Research (non-

• seasonally adjusted

seasonally adjusted monthly figures) monthly figures)

8

monthly figures) monthly figures)

Historical Real Room Rates Historical Real Room Rates

$115.00

Seasonally-Adjusted Real ADR (2011 $'s)

Cycle Peak ADR / RevPAR

$105 00 $110.00

Cycle Peak ADR / RevPAR Cycle Peak ADR

$100.00 $105.00 $95.00 $90.00

9

Source: Smith Travel Research (non Source: Smith Travel Research (non-

• seasonally adjusted nominal monthly figures)

seasonally adjusted nominal monthly figures)

Real RevPAR is Cyclical Real RevPAR is Cyclical

$70 $72

Seasonally-Adjusted Real RevPAR (2011 $'s)

$64 $66 $68 $58 $60 $62 $52 $54 $56 $58

Source: Smith Travel Research (non Source: Smith Travel Research (non-

• $52

10

seasonally adjusted nominal monthly figures) seasonally adjusted nominal monthly figures)

Real RevPAR is Cyclical Real RevPAR is Cyclical

$71.00 $73.00

Peak SA Real RevPAR of Past Cycles (2011 $'s)

$70.98 $71.68 $71.33 $67.00 $69.00 23% Real Growth $61 00 $63.00 $65.00 40% Nominal Growth (6.3% Nominal $57.00 $59.00 $61.00 $57.86 Nominal CAGR) $55.00 $ 1992 - 2000 2003 - 2007 2010 - 2016E (Current)

(8.6 Years) (4.8 Years) (6.7 Years)

* Assumes 2.4% CPI growth * Assumes 2.4% CPI growth Source: Smith Travel Research Source: Smith Travel Research (non (non-seasonally adjusted nominal seasonally adjusted nominal

11

(non (non-seasonally adjusted nominal seasonally adjusted nominal monthly figures) monthly figures)

PKF’s Nominal US RevPAR Forecast PKF’s Nominal US RevPAR Forecast

7.9% 7.1% 8.9% 9.3% 10.0% 15.0% 5.9% 5.5% % 5.4% 4.6% 0.0% 5.0%

• 2.1%
• 5.0%

5-Year RevPAR Growth CAGR: 7.0% 16 6%

• 15.0%
• 10.0%
• 16.6%
• 20.0%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011F 2012F 2013F 2014F 2015F Historical RevPAR Growth Forecasted RevPAR Growth

Source: Smith Travel Research / Source: Smith Travel Research / PKF Research (forecast) PKF Research (forecast)

12

PKF Research (forecast) PKF Research (forecast)

Attractive Supply/Demand Imbalance Attractive Supply/Demand Imbalance

• Demand

Demand increase increase is is currently currently expected expected to to outpace

• utpace supply

supply increase increase through through 2014 2014

10.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Growth

• 2 0

0.0 2.0

• ver-Year % G
• 6.0
• 4.0
• 2.0

Year-o

• 8.0

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011F 2012F 2013F 2014F 2015F Supply Growth Demand Growth

13

Supply Growth Demand Growth

Source: Smith Travel / PKF Research (forecast) Source: Smith Travel / PKF Research (forecast)

Potential EBITDA Growth Rates Potential EBITDA Growth Rates

• Given

Given the the strong strong potential potential RevPAR RevPAR gains gains in in the the industry, industry, those those companies companies with with high high flow flow-

• throughs

throughs could could experience experience significant significant EBITDA EBITDA growth growth experience experience significant significant EBITDA EBITDA growth growth

CUMULATIVE 5-YEAR EBITDA GROWTH COMPOUNDED 5-YEAR REVPAR GROWTH RATE 55.3% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0% 7.5% 8.0% DA FLOW % 20.0% 22.1% 24.6% 27.1% 29.6% 32.2% 34.9% 37.5% 25.0% 27.6% 30.7% 33.8% 37.0% 40.3% 43.6% 46.9% 30.0% 33.2% 36.8% 40.6% 44.4% 48.3% 52.3% 56.3% 35 0% 38 7% 43 0% 47 4% 51 8% 56 4% 61 0% 65 7% 5-YEAR EBITD 35.0% 38.7% 43.0% 47.4% 51.8% 56.4% 61.0% 65.7% 40.0% 44.2% 49.1% 54.1% 59.2% 64.4% 69.7% 75.1% 45.0% 49.7% 55.3% 60.9% 66.6% 72.5% 78.4% 84.5% 50.0% 55.3% 61.4% 67.6% 74.0% 80.5% 87.1% 93.9% 55 0% 60 8% 67 5% 74 4% 81 4% 88 6% 95 8% 103 3%

N t Hi hli ht d b t PKF’ 5 N t Hi hli ht d b t PKF’ 5 j ti b d PKF’ 5 j ti b d PKF’ 5 R PAR CAGR d i t 5 R PAR CAGR d i t 5 EBITDA fl EBITDA fl lti f PKF’ EBITDA h i ti lti f PKF’ EBITDA h i ti

55.0% 60.8% 67.5% 74.4% 81.4% 88.6% 95.8% 103.3% 60.0% 66.3% 73.7% 81.2% 88.8% 96.6% 104.6% 112.6% 65.0% 71.8% 79.8% 87.9% 96.2% 104.7% 113.3% 122.0% 70.0% 77.4% 85.9% 94.7% 103.6% 112.7% 122.0% 131.4%

14

Note: Highlighted box represents PKF’s 5 Note: Highlighted box represents PKF’s 5-year projection, based on PKF’s 5 year projection, based on PKF’s 5-year RevPAR CAGR and approximate 5 year RevPAR CAGR and approximate 5-

• year EBITDA flow

year EBITDA flow resulting from PKF’s EBITDA change regression equation resulting from PKF’s EBITDA change regression equation

RevPAR Cycle & Stock Returns RevPAR Cycle & Stock Returns

32% 35%

Lodging Stock Total Return CAGRs From Current Real RevPAR Level to Cycle Peak Stock Price

28% 32% 30% 25% 30% 15% 20% 5% 10% 0% May '92 - May '01 Apr '03 - May '07 Average

Source: Bloomberg; equally Source: Bloomberg; equally-weighted total return index includes: AHT, BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, SHO, MAR, HOT & HLT weighted total return index includes: AHT, BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, SHO, MAR, HOT & HLT

15

Source: Bloomberg; equally Source: Bloomberg; equally weighted total return index includes: AHT, BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, SHO, MAR, HOT & HLT weighted total return index includes: AHT, BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, SHO, MAR, HOT & HLT

Industry Summary Industry Summary

• Now

Now is is the the time time to to be be investing investing in in lodging lodging

• Occupancy

Occupancy still still has has to to grow grow by by about about 600 600 bps bps to to get get to to previous previous peaks peaks previous previous peaks peaks

• Real

Real ADR ADR is is still still well well below below its its long long-

• term

term average, average, much much less less its its previous previous peaks peaks

• Current

Current forecasts forecasts are are for for nominal nominal RevPAR RevPAR to to grow grow by by 5 5% % to to 7% % over

• ver the

the next next 5 5 years+ years+

• The

The hotel hotel demand demand / supply supply imbalance imbalance looks looks good good at at least least / pp y pp y g through through 2014 2014

• Strong,

Strong, multi multi-

• year

year EBITDA EBITDA growth growth is is a a real real possibility possibility with with good good flows flows good good flows flows

• Stock

Stock returns returns have have been been attractive attractive when when buying buying at at this this point point in in the the RevPAR RevPAR cycle cycle

16

Ashford Snapshot Ashford Snapshot

Portfolio Statistics Portfolio Statistics Total Enterprise Value Total Enterprise Value $4.4 B $4.4 B Financial Financial Statistics Statistics Recent Share Price Recent Share Price $11.95 (5/6/11) $11.95 (5/6/11) p Total Gross Assets Total Gross Assets $5.0 B $5.0 B Peer Comparison Peer Comparison 2 2nd

nd Largest

Largest # of Hotels # of Hotels 125 125 ( / / ) ( / / ) # Fully Diluted Shares # Fully Diluted Shares 76.0 M 76.0 M Leverage Ratio Leverage Ratio 60.9% 60.9% Debt Wtd Debt Wtd Avg Maturity Avg Maturity 4 6 Years 4 6 Years # of Hotels # of Hotels 125 125 # of Owned Rooms # of Owned Rooms 26,257 26,257 # of # of Property Managers Property Managers 6 6 Debt Wtd. Debt Wtd. Avg. Maturity

• Avg. Maturity

4.6 Years 4.6 Years Debt Wtd. Avg. Cost Debt Wtd. Avg. Cost 3.19% 3.19% Quarterly Quarterly Dividend Dividend $0.10 $0.10 $ ADR $ ADR $131.94 $131.94 $ RevPAR $ RevPAR $92.20 $92.20 RevPAR Growth RevPAR Growth % % 7.6% 7.6% Dividend Yield Dividend Yield 3.3% 3.3% TTM AFFO per Share TTM AFFO per Share $1.60 $1.60 Dividend Dividend Coverage Coverage 4.0x 4.0x

17

Significant Industry Dilution Significant Industry Dilution

140 0 160.0 120.0% # of

Peer Common Stock Issuances / (Repurchases) - Q2 '07 to Q1 '11

Peers Include: BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO & SHO 100.0 120.0 140.0 80.0% 100.0% f Common Sh '07 = 100%) 40.0 60.0 80.0 40.0% 60.0% hares Issued (Millions) ce Index (Q2 (20.0)

• 20.0

0.0% 20.0% d / (Repurcha er Stock Pric

S Bl b S Bl b

ased) Pe # of Common Shares Issued / (Repurchased) Peer Stock Price Index Peer Stock Price Index # of Common Shares Issued / (Repurchased)

18

Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg

Significant Shareholder Accretion Significant Shareholder Accretion

50.0 60.0 120% # of C %)

Ashford Common Stock Issuances / (Repurchases) - Q2 '07 to Q1 '11

20 0 30.0 40.0 80% 100% Common Sh Q2 '07 = 100%

• 10.0

20.0 40% 60% ares Issued / (Millions) ce Indexed (Q (30.0) (20.0) (10.0) 0% 20% / (Repurchas HT Stock Pric ed) AH # of Common Shares Issued / (Repurchased) AHT Stock Price AHT Stock Price # of Common Shares Issued / (Repurchased) / ( p )

19

Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg

/ ( p )

Significantly Reduced Share Count Significantly Reduced Share Count

286% 300 0% 350.0%

% Change in Fully Diluted Share Count : Q2 ‘07 vs. Current

286% 200.0% 250.0% 300.0% 132% 75% 96% 109% 88% 116% 100.0% 150.0% 24%

• 50 0%

0.0% 50.0%

• 47%
• 100.0%

50.0% AHT BEE DRH FCH HST HT LHO SHO PEER AVG

20

Source: Company Filings & Street Research. Source: Company Filings & Street Research.

Common Stock Buybacks Common Stock Buybacks

• If

If we we were were to to reissue reissue the the 73 73. .6 6 million million shares shares repurchased, repurchased, it it would would be be a a gain gain of

• f nearly

nearly $ $640 640 million million

Repurchased @ $3 26 Per

Impact of Common Repurchases (73.6M Shares)

$239.9 Repurchased @ $3.26 Per Share

$640M Gain

$879.5 Current Value @ $11.95 Per Share $- $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000 ($Millions) 21

Preferred Stock Buybacks Preferred Stock Buybacks

• When

When we we reissued reissued the the 3 3. .1 1 million million preferred preferred shares shares we we repurchased, repurchased, we we realized realized a a gain gain of

• f $

$53 53 million million

Impact of Preferred Repurchases (3.1M Shares)

$20.3 Repurchased @ $6.47 Per Share

$53M Gain

$72.9 Reissued @ $23.178 Per Share $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 ($Millions) 22

Share Repurchase Philosophy Share Repurchase Philosophy

Estimate multiple Estimate multiple economic recovery economic recovery scenarios scenarios Estimate potential Estimate potential returns from returns from buybacks buybacks Compare returns Compare returns to holding cash & to holding cash & buying assets buying assets Analyze industry Analyze industry trends& company trends& company cash flows cash flows Healthy debate & Healthy debate & discussion with discussion with Board Committee Board Committee Methodically Methodically execute buyback execute buyback strategy strategy cash flows cash flows Board Committee Board Committee strategy strategy

23

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management

50% 50% Fl Fl

Revenues in line with Revenues in line with peers despite larger peers despite larger l t l t i i

Flows Flows

select select- service exposure service exposure Better EBITDA flows Better EBITDA flows th th

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class

Class Asset Asset Management Management

RevPAR RevPAR Penetration Penetration Growth Growth Remington Remington + Constant + Constant Brand Brand Pressure Pressure

than peers than peers Better EBITDA margin Better EBITDA margin growth than peers growth than peers

Consistent Consistent Capex Capex

growth than peers growth than peers EBITDA in line with EBITDA in line with peers despite slightly peers despite slightly

Capex Capex Spending Spending

peers, despite slightly peers, despite slightly lower revenue growth lower revenue growth

24

Recently Reinstated Dividend Recently Reinstated Dividend

• Ashford

Ashford reinstated reinstated its its quarterly quarterly common common dividend dividend in in the the 1 1Q Q ‘10 10 at at $0 0. .10 10 per per share, share, giving giving it it a a dividend dividend yield yield a a full full 100 100 bps bps above above the the peer peer average average above above the the peer peer average average

• Ashford

Ashford has has nearly nearly the the highest highest dividend dividend yield yield of

• f the

the legacy legacy lodging lodging REITs REITs

%

Di id d Yi ld ( f 5/6/11)

4.7% 4.1% 4.0% 3.4% 3.3% 2.9% 4.0% 5.0%

Dividend Yield (as of 5/6/11)

2.9% 2.3% 2.1% 1.6% 1 0% 2.0% 3.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% CHSP CLDT INN HT AHT DRH PEB AVG LHO HST FCH BEE SHO

25

Source: Company filings & Bloomberg. Source: Company filings & Bloomberg.

Consistent Earnings Growth Consistent Earnings Growth

$1 50 $1.60 $1.60 $1.80

Ashford's Historical AFFO per Share

$1.13 $1.28 $1.31 $1.12 $1.50 $1.20 $1.40 $1.60 $0.96 $0.80 $1.00 $0.41 $0 20 $0.40 $0.60 $- $- $0.20 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1Q 2011 TTM

26

TTM

AFFO per Share Outperformance AFFO per Share Outperformance

140%

TTM AFFO Per Share (2007Q2 = 100%)

Peers Include: BEE, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, SHO

+27%

100% 120% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40%

• 73%

0%

Ashford Peer Average

Source: SNL

27

Total Shareholder Return Total Shareholder Return -

• AHT Outperforms Peers

AHT Outperforms Peers

202% 250%

Trailing Total Shareholder Returns (as of 5/6/11)

Peers Include: BEE, CHSP, CLDT, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, PEB, & SHO

202% 125% 108% 150% 200% 56% 21% 44% 63% 99% 0% 108% 29% 50% 100% 5.0%

• 27%
• 45%
• 34%
• 16%
• 50%

0%

• 100%

1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 4-Yr 5-Yr 6-Yr 7-Yr AHT Peer Avg

Source Source: : Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment

28

g

g, g,

Total Shareholder Return Total Shareholder Return – – AHT Outperforms S&P 500 AHT Outperforms S&P 500

202% 250%

Trailing Total Shareholder Returns (as of 5/6/11)

202% 125% 150% 200% 56% 125% 44% 63% 99% 52% 30% 39% 50% 100% 21% 21% 1%

• 3%

12% 30% 39% 0% 50%

• 50%

1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 4-Yr 5-Yr 6-Yr 7-Yr AHT S&P 500

Source Source: : Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment

29

g, g,

Total Shareholder Return Total Shareholder Return -

• AHT Outperforms RMZ

AHT Outperforms RMZ

250%

Trailing Total Shareholder Returns (as of 5/6/11)

202% 125% 150% 200% 56% 125% 44% 63% 99% 99% 47% 97% % 100% 21% 44% 27% 2%

• 8%

15% 47% 0% 50%

• 50%

1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 4-Yr 5-Yr 6-Yr 7-Yr AHT RMZ

Source Source: : Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment

30

g, g,

Total Shareholder Return Total Shareholder Return – – AHT Outperforms NAREIT AHT Outperforms NAREIT

327% 350%

Trailing Total Shareholder Returns (as of 4/29/11)

200% 250% 300% 132% 71% 113% 103% 87% 100% 150% 200% 34% 27% 40% 71% 22% 8% 8% 14% 41% 0% 50%

• 8%
• 50%

1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 4-Yr 5-Yr 6-Yr 7-Yr AHT NAREIT

Source Source: : Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment Bloomberg, assumes dividend reinvestment

31

g, g,

Most Highly Most Highly-

• Aligned Management Team

Aligned Management Team

21% 25%

Insider Ownership %

21% 16% 20% 10% 15% 6% 4% 3% 3% 5% 10% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% AHT HT CLDT INN FCH HST PEB CHSP DRH SHO BEE LHO

32

Source: Company Filings Source: Company Filings

Accretive Highland Transaction Accretive Highland Transaction

• 28

28 hotel hotel portfolio portfolio ( (19 19 full full-

• service,

service, 9 9 select select-

• service)

service) with with 8 8,084 084 rooms rooms ) ,

• Total

Total consideration consideration of

• f $

$1 1. .3 3 billion billion ( ($ $158 158, ,000 000 per per key) key) key) key)

• 2010

2010 EBITDA EBITDA multiple multiple 13 13. .4 4x x

• Operational

Operational upside upside

– 2010 2010 EBITDA EBITDA flows flows of

• f 18

18% % vs vs. . AHT’s AHT’s of

• f 104

104% % – Remington Remington took took over

• ver management

management of

• f 17

17 assets assets – NOI NOI 36 36% % below below peak peak

33

Hotel REIT EBITDA Multiples Hotel REIT EBITDA Multiples

2012E TEV/EBITDA MULTIPLES

• Ashford

Ashford currently currently trades trades at at 13 13. .8 8x x 2012 2012 EBITDA, EBITDA, slightly slightly above above the the industry industry average average

17.6x 17.0x 18.0x

2012E TEV/EBITDA MULTIPLES

(As of 5/6/11) 13.8x 13 3x 13 3x 13 1 14.0x 15.0x 16.0x 13.3x 13.3x 13.1x 12.6x 12.2x 11.8x 11.8x 11.7x 11.3x 11.1x 10.8x 11 0x 12.0x 13.0x 10.0x 11.0x BEE HST DRH LHO AHT PEER AVG SHO PEB CHSP HT INN CLDT FCH

34

Source: Company filings, Bloomberg and street research & First Call estimates Source: Company filings, Bloomberg and street research & First Call estimates

Hotel REIT FFO Multiples Hotel REIT FFO Multiples

2012E FFO/SHARE MULTIPLES

• However,

However, Ashford Ashford has has materially materially the the lowest lowest FFO/share FFO/share multiple multiple of

• f the

the peers peers

32.1x 30.0x 35.0x

2012E FFO/SHARE MULTIPLES

(As of 5/6/11) 13 7 14 0x 14 0x 15.8x 20.0x 25.0x 5.3x 8.9x 9.8x 10.8x 11.2x 11.6x 12.9x 13.3x 13.7x 14.0x 14.0x 5.0x 10.0x 15.0x 0.0x 5.0x AHT SHO INN HT CHSP FCH CLDT LHO DRH PEER AVG HST PEB BEE

35

Source: Company filings, Bloomberg and street research & First Call estimates Source: Company filings, Bloomberg and street research & First Call estimates

Company Summary Company Summary

• Ashford

Ashford is is best best-

• positioned

positioned into into the the recovery recovery

• More

More levered levered capital capital structure structure p

• Significantly

Significantly reduced reduced share share count count magnifies magnifies EBITDA EBITDA growth growth impact impact to to earnings earnings & & stock stock price price g

• Very

Very competitive competitive reinstated reinstated dividend dividend with with growth growth potential potential

• Proven

Proven asset asset management management expertise expertise g p

• Proven

Proven & & most most-

• aligned

aligned management management team team

• Significant

Significant potential potential accretion accretion from from recent recent Highland Highland acquisition acquisition Significant Significant potential potential accretion accretion from from recent recent Highland Highland acquisition acquisition

• Potential

Potential for for multiple multiple expansion expansion relative relative to to peers peers

36

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May May 11 11, , 2011 2011

CAPITAL STRUCTURE CAPITAL STRUCTURE & BALANCE SHEET & BALANCE SHEET

David J. Kimichik David J. Kimichik Chief Financial Officer Chief Financial Officer Chief Financial Officer Chief Financial Officer

38

Overview Overview

• Ashford

Ashford has has a a capital capital structure structure built built for for this this part part of

• f the

the cycle cycle:

– Well Well-

• laddered

laddered maturities maturities – Effectively Effectively no no recourse recourse debt debt – Higher Higher leverage leverage than than peers peers to to maximize maximize shareholder shareholder returns returns Higher Higher leverage leverage than than peers peers to to maximize maximize shareholder shareholder returns returns – Continued Continued benefit benefit from from interest interest rate rate hedges hedges through through March March 2013 2013 A A management management team team that that appreciates appreciates the the expensive expensive nature nature of

• f

– A A management management team team that that appreciates appreciates the the expensive expensive nature nature of

• f

issuing issuing equity equity A A recently recently reinstated reinstated dividend dividend that that is is well well covered covered with with potential potential – A A recently recently reinstated reinstated dividend dividend that that is is well well-covered covered with with potential potential to to grow grow

39

Current Capital Structure Current Capital Structure

Current ($ Millions) Current ($ Millions) Cash & Cash Equivalents Cash & Cash Equivalents $92.4 $92.4 Total Debt (AHT Share) Total Debt (AHT Share) $3,186.6 $3,186.6 Assets Assets Hotel Gross Assets Hotel Gross Assets $4,595.8 $4,595.8 Interest Rate Hedges Interest Rate Hedges $90 1 $90 1 Interest Rate Hedges Interest Rate Hedges $90.1 $90.1 Mezz Book Value Mezz Book Value $3.0 $3.0 Other Other $319.6 $319.6 Total Gross Assets Total Gross Assets $5 008 5 $5 008 5 Total Gross Assets Total Gross Assets $5,008.5 $5,008.5 Equity (# of shares) Equity (# of shares) Common Common 61.0 61.0 OP Units OP Units 15.0 15.0 Total Diluted Shares Total Diluted Shares 76.0 76.0 Preferred Series A D & E (par value) Preferred Series A D & E (par value) $345 1 $345 1

40

Preferred Series A,D & E (par value) Preferred Series A,D & E (par value) $345.1 $345.1

Debt Maturity Schedule Debt Maturity Schedule

$1,200,000

AHT Debt Maturity Schedule

$800,000 $1,000,000 ) $600,000 Debt (000's) $200,000 $400,000 $ $0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Beyond

41

Fixed-Rate Floating-Rate

Impact of Interest Rate Hedges in 2011 Impact of Interest Rate Hedges in 2011

Principal Principal Interest Expense Interest Expense (est.) (est.) Interest Rate Interest Rate (est.) (est.) (est.) (est.) (est.) (est.) Total Debt Total Debt $3.3 billion $3.3 billion $176 million $176 million 5.3% 5.3% Swap Swap Impact Impact ($31.5 ($31.5 million) million) p p Flooridor Flooridor Impact Impact (if Libor stays (if Libor stays ($40.5 million) ($40.5 million) f y f y below 50 bps in below 50 bps in 2011) 2011) TOTAL TOTAL $3.3 $3.3 billion billion $104 million $104 million 3.2% 3.2%

Note: Assumes 30 Note: Assumes 30-Day Libor of 25 bps Day Libor of 25 bps

42

Note: Assumes 30 Note: Assumes 30 Day Libor of 25 bps Day Libor of 25 bps

Interest Rate Hedging Strategy Interest Rate Hedging Strategy

• In

In the the summer summer of

• f 2007

2007 we we began began to to explore explore various various ways ways to to hedge hedge against against a a potential potential recession recession

• After

After months months of

• f thorough

thorough analysis, analysis, we we determined determined that that one

• ne of
• f the

the g y , y , most most highly highly correlated correlated economic economic data data points points to to hotel hotel revenues revenues was was 30 30-

• day

day LIBOR LIBOR

• As

As a a result, result, we we made made the the decision decision in in March March 2008 2008 to to swap swap $1. .8 8 billion billion , p $

• f
• f our
• ur fixed

fixed-

• rate

rate debt debt from from 5 5. .84 84% % to to L+ L+264 264

• Though

Though some some thought thought that that this this was was increasing increasing our

• ur risk

risk profile, profile, we we believed believed that that it it actually actually was was more more conservative conservative since since it it was was a a better better y pairing pairing of

• f the

the cash cash flows flows of

• f our
• ur assets

assets and and liabilities liabilities

• One

One of

• f two

two things things would would have have to to happen happen for for interest interest rates rates to to dramatically dramatically increase, increase, both both of

• f which

which are are positives positives for for the the hotel hotel y , p business business: : 1 1) ) economic economic growth growth or

• r 2

2) ) inflation inflation

43

LIBOR / RevPAR Correlation (March 2008) LIBOR / RevPAR Correlation (March 2008)

10 0% 15.0% 300 400

Change in 30-Day LIBOR vs. TTM RevPAR Growth (5 Month Lag)

As of March 2008

0 0% 5.0% 10.0% 100 200 TTM RevPA LIBOR (bps)

• 5.0%

0.0% 300

• 200
• 100

AR Growth (5 e in 30-Day L

• 15.0%
• 10.0%
• 500
• 400
• 300

5 Month Lag Y-o-Y Change 1989 - Present R-Squared: .67 2000 - Present R-Squared: .91

• 20.0%
• 600

89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 g) Y

Y-o-Y Change in 30-Day LIBOR (bps) TTM RevPAR Growth (5 Month Lag) 44

Source: Smith Travel Research, British Bankers Association website, Morgan Stanley. Source: Smith Travel Research, British Bankers Association website, Morgan Stanley.

LIBOR / RevPAR Correlation (Current) LIBOR / RevPAR Correlation (Current)

10 0% 15.0% 300 400 TT s)

Change in 30-Day LIBOR vs. TTM RevPAR Growth (5 Month Lag)

As of April 2011

% 5.0% 10.0% 100 200 TM RevPAR LIBOR (bps

• 5.0%

0.0%

• 200
• 100

Growth (5 M ge in 30-Day

• 15.0%
• 10.0%
• 500
• 400
• 300

Month Lag) Y-o-Y Chang 1989 - Present R-Squared: .55 2000 - Present R-Squared: .70

• 20.0%
• 600

89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 Y

Y-o-Y Change in 30-Day Libor (bps) TTM RevPAR Growth (5 Month Lag)

Source: Smith Travel Research, British Bankers Association website, Morgan Stanley. Source: Smith Travel Research, British Bankers Association website, Morgan Stanley.

45

Expanding to Flooridors Expanding to Flooridors

Source: San Francisco Federal Reserve 46

Understanding Flooridor Strategy Understanding Flooridor Strategy

Flooridor Flooridor # Date Date P h d P h d Year Year Eff ti Eff ti Notional Notional A t A t LIBOR LIBOR R Price Paid Price Paid Theoretical Theoretical M i M i Total Total Value Value R i d* R i d* IRR IRR

Flooridor Purchase History Flooridor Purchase History

# Purchased Purchased Effective Effective Amount Amount Range Range Maximum Maximum Benefit Benefit Received* Received* 1 Dec Dec ’08 ’08 2009 2009 $1.8B $1.8B 0.75% 0.75% -

• 1.25%

1.25% $3.0M $3.0M $9.0M $9.0M $8.5M $8.5M 582% 582% 2 Mar ’09 Mar ’09 2010 2010 $3.6B $3.6B 0.75% 0.75% -

• 1.25%

1.25% $8.5M $8.5M $18.0M $18.0M $18.0M $18.0M 81% 81% $ $ $ $ 3 Jul ’09 Jul ’09 2010 2010 $1.8B $1.8B 1.25% 1.25% -

• 1.75%

1.75% $7.1M $7.1M $9.0M $9.0M $9.0M $9.0M 29% 29% 4 Jul ’09 Jul ’09 2011 2011 $1.8B $1.8B 0.50% 0.50% -

• 2.75%

2.75% $15.2M $15.2M $40.5M $40.5M $40.5M $40.5M 92% 92% 5 Oct ’09 Oct ’09 2009 2009 $2.7B $2.7B 1.00% 1.00% -

• 2.00%

2.00% $6.8M $6.8M $6.9M $6.9M $6.9M $6.9M 3% 3% TOTAL TOTAL $ $40 40.6M $83.4M $83.4M $82.9M $82.9M 99% 99%

* Value is equal to income received + current market value * Value is equal to income received + current market value

47

Value is equal to income received + current market value Value is equal to income received + current market value

Interest Rate Hedge Update Interest Rate Hedge Update

Swapped back to Swapped back to fixed fixed-

• rate at

rate at 4.09% in October 4.09% in October $32 32 million of million of annual savings annual savings through March through March Able to lock in Able to lock in nearly all nearly all potential swap potential swap 2010 2010 g 2013 2013 p p p p benefit benefit Current market Current market Eliminated risk Eliminated risk

• f LIBOR
• f LIBOR

increases increases Current market Current market value of all value of all hedges is $ hedges is $90 90 million million million million

48

Understanding Swap/Flooridor Strategy Understanding Swap/Flooridor Strategy

$350,000 $400,000

Ashford Corporate EBITDA & Hedge Income ($ Thousands)

$250,000 $300,000 $ , $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $- $50,000 TTM Hedge Income TTM EBITDA

49

How We Manage Leverage / Risk How We Manage Leverage / Risk

• Ashford

Ashford is is comfortable comfortable having having leverage leverage of

• f 50

50% % to to 60 60% % net net debt debt to to cost cost

• We

We believe believe the the relatively relatively higher higher leverage leverage produces produces better better

• We

We believe believe the the relatively relatively higher higher leverage leverage produces produces better better long long-

• term

term shareholder shareholder returns returns without without adding adding material material risk risk to to the the platform platform W f th th f ll i f ll i it it i d t

Maximize non Maximize non-recourse recourse

• We

We focus focus on

• n the

the following following items items in in order

• rder to

to manage manage our

• ur

leverage leverage: :

Preference for longer duration Preference for longer duration Maximize non Maximize non recourse recourse Proper mix of fixed vs floating Proper mix of fixed vs floating Proactively Proactively ladder ladder the maturities the maturities Proper mix of fixed vs. floating Proper mix of fixed vs. floating

50

Ashford’s Unique View on Equity Ashford’s Unique View on Equity

• Ashford

Ashford does does not not subscribe subscribe to to a a static, static, long long-

• term

term CAPM CAPM version version of

• f our
• ur cost

cost of

• f equity

equity

• We

We believe believe rather rather that that the the cost cost of

• f equity

equity can can ebb ebb and and flow flow

• We

We believe, believe, rather, rather, that that the the cost cost of

• f equity

equity can can ebb ebb and and flow flow throughout throughout hotel hotel & & economic economic cycles cycles

• We

We prefer prefer to to look look at at expected expected equity equity returns returns over

• ver the

the next next 3 3 to to 5 i d t d t i d t i h dl h dl t 5 years years in in order

• rder to

to determine determine our

• ur hurdle

hurdle rates rates

25% 30%

Cost of Equity Comparison - AHT vs. Peers

Higher Cost

10% 15% 20% 0% 5% Trough Peak Trough Peak AHT Peers

Lower Cost

51

AHT Peers

Reinstated Dividend w/ Attractive Yield Reinstated Dividend w/ Attractive Yield

• Ashford

Ashford reinstated reinstated its its quarterly quarterly common common dividend dividend for for the the 1 1st

st

quarter quarter 2011 2011 at at $0 0. .10 10 per per share share

• This

This equates equates to to an an annual annual dividend dividend yield yield of

• f 3 3% at

at the the current current

• This

This equates equates to to an an annual annual dividend dividend yield yield of

• f 3.3% at

at the the current current stock stock price price of

• f $

$11 11. .95 95

25.0% $0.25 A d per 10 0% 15.0% 20.0% $0 10 $0.15 $0.20 Annualized D

• n Dividend

are 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% $0.00 $0.05 $0.10 Dividend Yie terly Commo Sha $ 1Q 04 2Q 04 3Q 04 4Q 04 1Q 05 2Q 05 3Q 05 4Q 05 1Q 06 2Q 06 3Q 06 4Q 06 1Q 07 2Q 07 3Q 07 4Q 07 1Q 08 2Q 08 3Q 08

• -

1Q 11 Current eld Quart Di id d Di id d Yi ld

52

Dividend Dividend Yield

Reinstated Dividend w/ Growth Potential Reinstated Dividend w/ Growth Potential

• Given

Given the the material material reduction reduction in in

• ur
• ur

common common share share count, count, Ashford Ashford is is the the best best positioned positioned lodging lodging REIT REIT to to cover cover and and potentially potentially grow grow its its dividend dividend and and potentially potentially grow grow its its dividend dividend

4.0x 4 0 4.5x

AFFO per Share / Dividend Coverage

Though Ashford didn’t pay

2 5 3.0x 3.5x 4.0x

g f p y a dividend in 2009 & 2010, it could have covered its peak dividend at 1.3x in 2009 & 1.8x in 2010

0.9x 1.4x 1.4x 1.5x 1.6x 1 0 1.5x 2.0x 2.5x 0.0x 0.0x 0.0x 0.5x 1.0x 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1Q TTM N/A N/A

53

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1Q TTM

Summary Summary

• Ashford

Ashford thinks thinks about about its its capital capital structure structure differently differently than than its its peers peers

− We We are are comfortable comfortable with with relatively relatively higher higher leverage leverage because because we we We We are are comfortable comfortable with with relatively relatively higher higher leverage leverage because because we we actively actively managed managed our

• ur balance

balance sheet sheet by by: : Minimizing Minimizing recourse recourse debt debt Continually Continually pushing pushing out

• ut maturities

maturities Continually Continually pushing pushing out

• ut maturities

maturities Laddering Laddering our

• ur maturities

maturities Have Have a a proper proper mix mix of

• f fixed

fixed & & floating floating rate rate debt debt − We We also also don’t don’t subscribe subscribe to to a a static static view view of

• f our
• ur cost

cost of

• f

equity, equity, which which has has caused caused us us to to make make capital capital allocation allocation decisions decisions differently differently than than our

• ur peers

peers

• Ashford

Ashford has has an an attractive, attractive, well well-

• covered

covered common common dividend dividend with with growth growth potential potential

54

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011

ASSET OVERVIEW ASSET OVERVIEW ASSET OVERVIEW ASSET OVERVIEW

Monty J. Bennett Monty J. Bennett Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer

56

Overview Overview

• Broadly

Broadly diversified diversified portfolio portfolio with with a a focus focus on

• n:

– Top Top 25 25 markets markets – Coastal Coastal locations locations Coastal Coastal locations locations – Hilton Hilton & & Marriott Marriott brand brand families families – Franchised Franchised properties properties

• Current

Current valuation valuation is is materially materially lower lower than than replacement replacement cost cost

• Current

Current valuation valuation is is materially materially lower lower than than replacement replacement cost cost

• Best

Best-

• in

in-

• class

class asset asset management management

• Remington

Remington property property management management affiliation affiliation is is a a strategic strategic advantage advantage

• Analytically

Analytically rigorous rigorous capex capex management management

• We

We continually continually reinvest reinvest significant significant capital capital into into our

• ur hotels

hotels to to

• We

We continually continually reinvest reinvest significant significant capital capital into into our

• ur hotels

hotels to to maximize maximize their their returns returns

57

Significant Growth Since IPO Significant Growth Since IPO

25,481 26,257 30,000

# of Owned Rooms

, 22,913 22,141 20,458 20,000 25,000 13,184 15,492 15,000 5,095 5,000 10,000 1,094 2,381 , IPO 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Current

58

Broad Geography Broad Geography

• Ashford’s

Ashford’s geographic geographic footprint footprint encompasses encompasses 30 30 states states and and Washington Washington DC DC

WEST WEST COAST COAST

West Coast includes Alaska

COAST COAST MIDDLE MIDDLE AMERICA AMERICA EAST EAST TEXAS TEXAS EAST EAST COAST COAST

EBITDA b R i

TEXAS TEXAS

EBITDA by Region EAST COAST: 50% WEST COAST: 26% TEXAS: 9% MIDDLE AMERICA: 15% 59 MIDDLE AMERICA: 15%

MSA MSA

• The

The vast vast majority majority of

• f Ashford’s

Ashford’s EBITDA EBITDA comes comes from from top top 25 25 markets, markets, with with 90 90% % coming coming from from top top 50 50 markets markets

16 16% 10 10%

As % of 2010 EBITDA

74 74% 16 16% 74 74% Top 25 Top 50 Other

60

Chain Scale Chain Scale

• Approximately

Approximately 60 60% % of

• f Ashford’s

Ashford’s EBITDA EBITDA comes comes from from luxury luxury & upper upper upscale upscale assets assets

As % of 2010 EBITDA

1% 1% 37% 37% 3% 3%

f

59 59% 37% 37% Luxury Upper Upscale Upscale Upper Midscale

61

Luxury Upper Upscale Upscale Upper Midscale

Brand Family Brand Family

• Nearly

Nearly 85 85% % of

• f Ashford’s

Ashford’s EBITDA EBITDA comes comes from from Marriott Marriott and and Hilton Hilton branded branded assets assets

As % of 2010 EBITDA

3%4% 4% 4% 4%

f

52% 52% 32 32% Marriott Hilton Hyatt Starwood Intercontinental Independent

62

p

Transient vs. Group vs. Contract Transient vs. Group vs. Contract

• Our

Our customers customers are are predominantly predominantly transient, transient, with with a a strong strong emphasis emphasis on

• n corporate

corporate business business

25% 25% 4% 4% 55 55% 16 16% Transient - Corporate Transient - Leisure Group Contract

63

Replacement Cost per Key Replacement Cost per Key

$295,000 $300 000 $350,000

Replacement Cost Per Key Estimate

At current price of $11.95, AHT trades for approximately $167,000 per , $233,000 $250,000 $300,000 key – a 28% discount to replacement cost $145,000 $150,000 $200,000 $50,000 $100,000 $- Full-Service (15,475 Keys) Select-Service (10,782 Keys) Total (26,257 Keys)

64

Source: Estimated based on JP Morgan Research Report Source: Estimated based on JP Morgan Research Report Note: Total excludes recently purchased WorldQuest asset Note: Total excludes recently purchased WorldQuest asset

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management

• What

What makes makes Ashford’s Ashford’s asset asset management management team team different? different?

Analytical rigor Analytical rigor Strategic Strategic relationship relationship with Remington with Remington Brand influence Brand influence Best Best-

• in

in-

• class

class asset asset asset asset management management

65

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management -

• RevPAR

RevPAR

• Despite

Despite Ashford Ashford having having 1 1/ /3 3 of

• f its

its portfolio portfolio select select-

• service,

service, its its average average annual annual RevPAR RevPAR growth growth is is just just 38 38 bps bps lower lower than than its its peers, peers, which which focus focus primarily primarily in in full full-service service assets assets peers, peers, which which focus focus primarily primarily in in full full service service assets assets

400 bps

Annual RevPAR Growth Spread – AHT vs. Peers

Peers Include: BEE, CHSP, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, PEB, SHO

100 60 100 bps 200 bps 300 bps

• 80
• 50
• 38
• 200 bps
• 100 bps

0 bps

• 220
• 400 bps
• 300 bps

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD AVG

66

Source: Company filings Source: Company filings

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management – – RevPAR Yield RevPAR Yield

• Despite

Despite a a weak weak year year in in 2010 2010, , Ashford Ashford has has still still been been able able to to grow grow its its market market share share over

• ver the

the past past several several years years

• Better

Better branded branded assets assets have have a more more difficult difficult time time maintaining maintaining

• Better

Better branded branded assets assets have have a more more difficult difficult time time maintaining maintaining share share in in the the early early stages stages of

• f a

a recovery recovery

80 bps

Annual Change in RevPAR Yield Index

40 50 50 12 20 bps 40 bps 60 bps 80 bps

• 10

12

• 40 bps
• 20 bps

0 bps 20 bps

• 70
• 80 bps
• 60 bps

40 bps 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD AVG

67

Source: Company filings Source: Company filings

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management -

• Flows

Flows

• Ashford

Ashford consistently consistently beats beats its its peers peers in in hotel hotel EBITDA EBITDA flow flow-

• throughs,

throughs, and and on

• n average

average ranks ranks # #1 1 among among peers peers over

• ver the

the past past four four years years

• Ashford’s

Ashford’s affiliate affiliate manager, manager, Remington, Remington, gives gives it it a a competitive competitive advantage advantage in in managing managing costs costs over

• ver its

its peers peers

Hotel EBITDA Flow-Throughs 104% 80% 100% 120% g

Peers Include: BEE, CHSP, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, PEB, SHO

51% 37% 53% 62% 39% 8% 49% 41% 24% 20% 40% 60% 80% 8% 0% 20% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD AHT Peer Average

68

Source: Company filings Source: Company filings

g

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management -

• Margins

Margins

• Ashford’s

Ashford’s EBITDA EBITDA margin margin change change consistently consistently outperforms

• utperforms its

its peers, peers, and and on

• n average

average ranks ranks # #1 1 among among peers peers over

• ver the

the past past four four years years

• Ashford

Ashford is is the the only

• nly hotel

hotel REIT REIT whose whose 2010 2010 margins margins were were higher higher than than y g g they they were were in in 2006 2006

Change in Hotel EBITDA Margins (in bps)

Peers Include: BEE, CHSP, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, PEB, SHO

114 86 219 78 53 147 100 100 200 300

• 58
• 406
• 106

500

• 400
• 300
• 200
• 100

406

• 487
• 600
• 500

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD AHT Peer Average

69

Source: Company filings Source: Company filings

g

Best Best-

• in

in-

• Class Asset Management

Class Asset Management -

• EBITDA

EBITDA

• Ashford’s

Ashford’s asset asset management management expertise expertise allows allows it it to to have have EBITDA EBITDA growth growth in in line line with with peers peers despite despite lower lower revenue revenue growth growth growth growth

260 300 bps 400 bps Annual EBITDA Growth Spread – AHT vs. Peers

Peers Include: BEE, CHSP, DRH, FCH, HST, HT, LHO, PEB, SHO

130 0 b 100 bps 200 bps

• 90

200

• 120
• 4
• 200 bps
• 100 bps

0 bps

• 200
• 400 bps
• 300 bps

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD AVG

70

Source: Company filings Source: Company filings

Advantages of Remington Advantages of Remington

More More

• wner
• wner-
• friendl

friendl y cost y cost Additional Additional brand brand advocate advocate Less Less disruption disruption during during Check against Check against

• ther
• ther

managers managers Aligned with Aligned with hi hi structure structure Constant Constant accessibility accessibility renovations renovations Reacts rapidly Reacts rapidly to real to real-

• time

time changes changes

• wnership
• wnership

Immediate Immediate h b h b changes changes attention attention Operate the Operate the Company Company Share best Share best practices practices across brands across brands Keeps project Keeps project management management in in-

• house

house hotels as if hotels as if they owned they owned them them “drivers” are “drivers” are

• perationally
• perationally

focused focused

71

Remington Company “Drivers” Remington Company “Drivers”

50 50% Flows % Flows RevPAR RevPAR Empowered Empowered Yield Yield Growth Growth Empowered Empowered Associates Associates Top Top 25 25% % GSS GSS Annual Annual Product Product Audit Audit

72

Remington Outperformance Remington Outperformance

800

2007-2010 Cumulative Outperformance: Remington vs. Non- Remington AHT Managers (bps difference)

506 566 669 600 700 506 400 500 100 200 300 100 Total Revenue Improvement RevPAR Index Improvement GOP Flow

73

Capex Spend History Capex Spend History

• We

We consistently consistently spend spend much much more more than than the the FF&E FF&E reserve reserve to to keep keep our

• ur properties

properties in in good good shape, shape, but but refrain refrain from from spending spending any any optional

• ptional dollars

dollars which which don’t don’t meet meet return return hurdles hurdles

12.8% 11.1% 12.0% 14.0%

Capex as a % of Total Hotel Revenue

any any optional

• ptional dollars

dollars which which don t don t meet meet return return hurdles hurdles

11.1% 8.3% 7.4% 7.1% * 8.0% 10.0% 2 0% 4.0% 6.0% 0.0% 2.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011E*

* E ti t b d * E ti t b d l d d d PKF f t d l d d d PKF f t d 2011 2011 US R PAR th f US R PAR th f 7 1% %

74

* Estimate based on * Estimate based on capex capex planned spend and PKF forecasted planned spend and PKF forecasted 2011 2011 US RevPAR growth of US RevPAR growth of 7.1% %

Capital Management Strategy Capital Management Strategy

Normal Capex Normal Capex PIPs PIPs Lender Requirements Lender Requirements

ROIs ROIs

Asset Manager & Asset Manager & Property Manager Input Property Manager Input Guest Service Scores Guest Service Scores

75

Case Study Case Study – – Hilton Fort Worth Hilton Fort Worth

• Rebranded

Rebranded from from Radisson Radisson to to Hilton Hilton 1Q Q06 06 after after $ $10 10. .5 5 million million renovation renovation ($ $36 36, ,000 000 per per key) key)

• Reduced

Reduced room room count count by by taking taking 220 220-

• room

room east east tower tower out

• ut of
• f hotel

hotel inventory inventory and and y sold sold it it as as an an office

• ffice building

building for for $ $4 4. .1 1 million million

• Following

Following renovation, renovation, guest guest mix mix shifted shifted from from group group to to higher higher-

• rated

rated transient transient business business

• Achieved

Achieved higher higher returns returns

• n
• n

smaller smaller asset asset basis basis

76

Case Study Case Study – – Hilton Fort Worth Hilton Fort Worth

Before Before After After Current Current

• Before

Before & & After After Renovation Renovation: :

T12 12 Apr ‘ Apr ‘05 05 T12 Apr ‘07 T12 Apr ‘07 2010 2010

Total Revenue Total Revenue $15.0M $15.0M $13.7M $13.7M $14.8M $14.8M NOI NOI $2.6M $2.6M $1.9M $1.9M $3.1M $3.1M RevPAR RevPAR Index Index 84% 84% 98% 98% 127% 127% NOI NOI Margin Margin 17.4% 17.4% 13.8% 13.8% 20.7% 20.7%

77

Highland Potential Highland Potential

• In

In 2010 2010, , the the Highland Highland portfolio portfolio achieved achieved EBITDA EBITDA flow flow of

• f only
• nly

18 18% %, compared compared to to Ashford’s Ashford’s flow flow of

• f 104

104% %

• Had

Had Highland Highland achieved achieved Ashford’s Ashford’s flow, flow, an an additional additional $8. .7 7 g , $ million million of

• f EBITDA

EBITDA would would have have been been realized realized

• Replacing

Replacing Crestline Crestline management management with with Remington Remington provides provides significant significant upside upside potential potential g p p

• Repositioning

Repositioning

• pportunities
• pportunities

for for Melrose, Melrose, Churchill, Churchill, and and Silversmith Silversmith

• Opportunities

Opportunities to to convert convert brand brand-managed managed assets assets to to franchise franchise Opportunities Opportunities to to convert convert brand brand managed managed assets assets to to franchise franchise

• Potential

Potential to to increase increase RevPAR RevPAR index index with with capex capex

• Courtyard

Courtyard Tremont Tremont ranked ranked as as one

• ne of
• f the

the worst worst Courtyards Courtyards in in intent intent to to return return intent intent to to return return

• Opportunity

Opportunity to to increase increase service service scores scores at at HGI HGI Austin Austin and and

• ther
• ther properties

properties

78

Summary Summary

• Broadly

Broadly diversified diversified portfolio portfolio with with a a focus focus on

• n:

– Top Top 25 25 markets markets – Coastal Coastal locations locations Coastal Coastal locations locations – Hilton Hilton & & Marriott Marriott brand brand families families – Franchised Franchised properties properties

• Current

Current valuation valuation is is materially materially lower lower than than replacement replacement cost cost

• Current

Current valuation valuation is is materially materially lower lower than than replacement replacement cost cost

• Best

Best-

• in

in-

• class

class asset asset management management

• Remington

Remington property property management management affiliation affiliation is is a a strategic strategic advantage advantage

• Analytically

Analytically rigorous rigorous capex capex management management

• We

We continually continually reinvest reinvest significant significant capital capital into into our

• ur hotels

hotels to to

• We

We continually continually reinvest reinvest significant significant capital capital into into our

• ur hotels

hotels to to maximize maximize their their returns returns

• Significant

Significant upside upside potential potential for for Highland Highland portfolio portfolio

79

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011

TRANSACTIONS OVERVIEW TRANSACTIONS OVERVIEW TRANSACTIONS OVERVIEW TRANSACTIONS OVERVIEW

Douglas A. Kessler Douglas A. Kessler President President President President

81

Overview Overview

• Ashford

Ashford is is disciplined disciplined and and thorough thorough in in how how it it approaches approaches its its transactions transactions

• Proactive

Proactive in in thinking thinking about about today’s today’s impact impact and and the the range range of

• f
• Proactive

Proactive in in thinking thinking about about today s today s impact impact and and the the range range of

• f

future future possibilities possibilities

• Despite

Despite its its size, size, Ashford Ashford is is not not just just a a property property aggregator, aggregator, but but f tl f tl t d t d t f t lli lli billi billi d ll d ll f frequently frequently trades trades out

• ut of
• f assets,

assets, selling selling over

• ver a

a billion billion dollars dollars of

• f

assets assets since since inception inception

• Carefully

Carefully monitor monitor real real-

• time

time trends trends in in the the capital capital and and lodging lodging y g g g g markets markets

• Assess

Assess qualitative qualitative issues, issues, but but ultimate ultimate decisions decisions are are determined determined by by quantitative quantitative analysis analysis determined determined by by quantitative quantitative analysis analysis

82

Ashford Underwriting Ashford Underwriting

• Ashford’s

Ashford’s underwriting underwriting process process is is a a highly highly focused focused one

• ne that

that ensures ensures both both the the qualitative qualitative and and quantitative quantitative goals goals of

• f the

the company company are are met met

Ashford Underwriting Ashford Underwriting

company company are are met met

Qualitative Qualitative Quantitative Quantitative

Physical asset Physical asset Market Market Accretion Accretion Cost of capital Cost of capital Market Market Strategic consistency Strategic consistency Non Non-

• financial risk

financial risk Cost of capital Cost of capital Investment returns Investment returns Financial risk Financial risk

83

Qualitative Underwriting Qualitative Underwriting

Hilton & Hilton & Marriott Marriott Top Top 25 25 markets markets Capex Capex Marriott Marriott markets markets Market Market trends trends AHT AHT exposure exposure Value Value-

• add

add Franchise Franchise Full Full-

• service

service Supply Supply

84

Quantitative Underwriting Quantitative Underwriting

RevPAR RevPAR Index Peak Index Peak Capex lift Capex lift Leverage Leverage

Creating Creating the the proforma proforma

RevPAR RevPAR forecasts forecasts Sensitivity Sensitivity

proforma proforma

Costs Costs analysis analysis Remington Remington input input analysis analysis Supply Supply impact impact input input

85

Quantitative Underwriting Quantitative Underwriting

Meets or Meets or Meets or Meets or exceeds IRR exceeds IRR hurdles hurdles Stock Stock price price i i FFO per FFO per share share i accretion accretion accretion accretion

86

Capital Recycling Capital Recycling

• Capital

Capital recycling recycling is is an an essential essential part part of

• f our
• ur overall
• verall strategy

strategy

• Sold

Sold more more than than $ $1 1 billion billion of

• f assets

assets since since its its IPO IPO in in 2003 2003

• Potential

Potential reasons reasons for for dispositions dispositions: :

Non Non-Core Core Non Non-Core Core Supply Supply Non Non-Core Core Market Market Non Non-Core Core Brand Brand Supply Supply Growth Growth D bt D bt B tt U f B tt U f S ll ’ S ll ’ Debt Debt Maturity Maturity Better Use of Better Use of Capital Capital Seller’s Seller’s Market Market Market Market Concentration Concentration Portfolio Sale Portfolio Sale Trade Trade Non Non-

• value

value Add Capex Add Capex

87

Capital Recycling Capital Recycling

$1,181 $1 200 $1,400

Dispositions ($ Millions)

56 Assets , $1,000 $1,200 $600 $800 23 10 Assets $312 $439 $152 $200 $400 7 A t 10 Assets Assets 2 Assets 3 Assets 1 Asset $30 $113 $29 $106 $152 $- $200 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Assets

88

Highland Transaction Background Highland Transaction Background

$2.2 billion privatization in 2007 $2.2 billion privatization in 2007 Ashford $17.5 JV (25/75) with Prudential in Ashford $17.5 JV (25/75) with Prudential in

Crowne Plaza Atlanta Crowne Plaza Atlanta-

• Ravinia

Ravinia Hyatt Regency Long Island Hyatt Regency Long Island

mezz 6 tranche mezz 6 tranche $1.5 5 billion debt billion debt senior, $ senior, $172 172 million debt million debt junior junior

The Melrose (D C ) The Melrose (D C )

j Borrower $ Borrower $440 440 million equity million equity A i d 4 t h ti i ti t A i d 4 t h ti i ti t

The Melrose (D.C.) The Melrose (D.C.)

Acquired mezz 4 tranche participation at a Acquired mezz 4 tranche participation at a discount with Pru discount with Pru Commenced consensual discussions with Commenced consensual discussions with

Renaissance Palm Springs Renaissance Palm Springs Sugar Land Marriott Sugar Land Marriott

all involved parties all involved parties Acquired portfolio in 72/28 JV with Pru Acquired portfolio in 72/28 JV with Pru -

• $150m equity and $1.1b debt restructure

$150m equity and $1.1b debt restructure

89

$ q y $ $ q y $

Highland Transaction Summary Highland Transaction Summary

Transformational Transformational 28 28-hotel, $1.3 billion hotel, $1.3 billion acquisition with 8,084 rooms acquisition with 8,084 rooms Ashford had two competitive advantages Ashford had two competitive advantages

Nashville Renaissance Nashville Renaissance

Ashford had two competitive advantages Ashford had two competitive advantages in the deal: 1) existing mezz lender & 2) in the deal: 1) existing mezz lender & 2) complex transaction skill set complex transaction skill set P i il P i il l d l f ll l d l f ll

Hilton Boston Back Bay Hilton Boston Back Bay

Primarily upper Primarily upper-

• upscale and luxury full

upscale and luxury full- service assets service assets Expands Ashford’s presence in key Expands Ashford’s presence in key

Ritz Ritz-

• Carlton Atlanta

Carlton Atlanta Plaza San Antonio Marriott Plaza San Antonio Marriott

markets (Washington D.C and NY/NJ) markets (Washington D.C and NY/NJ) and into new markets (Boston and and into new markets (Boston and Nashville) Nashville)

Hyatt Savannah Hyatt Savannah The Churchill (D.C.) The Churchill (D.C.)

Significant growth potential with affiliate Significant growth potential with affiliate manager Remington taking over manager Remington taking over management of management of 17 17 hotels hotels

90

Highland Transaction Portfolio Highland Transaction Portfolio

Name Name Location Location Rooms Rooms Manager Manager Renaissance Palm Springs Renaissance Palm Springs Palm Springs, CA Palm Springs, CA 410 410 Remington Remington The Melrose The Melrose Washington, DC Washington, DC 240 240 Remington Remington The Churchill The Churchill Washington, DC Washington, DC 173 173 Remington Remington Hilton Tampa Westshore Hilton Tampa Westshore Tampa, FL Tampa, FL 238 238 Remington Remington C Pl R i i C Pl R i i A l GA A l GA 495 495 R i R i Crowne Plaza Ravinia Crowne Plaza Ravinia Atlanta, GA Atlanta, GA 495 495 Remington Remington The Silversmith The Silversmith Chicago, IL Chicago, IL 143 143 Remington Remington Sheraton Annapolis Sheraton Annapolis Annapolis, MD Annapolis, MD 196 196 Remington Remington HGI BWI Airport HGI BWI Airport Baltimore, MD Baltimore, MD 158 158 Remington Remington Omaha Marriott Omaha Marriott Omaha, NE Omaha, NE 299 299 Remington Remington Westin Princeton Westin Princeton Princeton, NJ Princeton, NJ 296 296 Remington Remington Hilton Parsippany Hilton Parsippany New York NY New York NY 354 354 Remington Remington Hilton Parsippany Hilton Parsippany New York, NY New York, NY 354 354 Remington Remington Hampton Inn Parsippany Hampton Inn Parsippany New York, NY New York, NY 152 152 Remington Remington Sugar Land Marriott Sugar Land Marriott Houston, TX Houston, TX 300 300 Remington Remington Plaza San Antonio Marriott Plaza San Antonio Marriott San Antonio, TX San Antonio, TX 252 252 Remington Remington Portsmouth Renaissance Portsmouth Renaissance Portsmouth, VA Portsmouth, VA 249 249 Remington Remington HGI Virginia Beach HGI Virginia Beach Virginia Beach, VA Virginia Beach, VA 176 176 Remington Remington HGI A ti HGI A ti A ti TX A ti TX 254 254 R i t R i t HGI Austin HGI Austin Austin, TX Austin, TX 254 254 Remington Remington Hilton Boston Back Bay Hilton Boston Back Bay Boston, MA Boston, MA 390 390 Hilton Hilton Hyatt Regency Savannah Hyatt Regency Savannah Savannah, GA Savannah, GA 351 351 Hyatt Hyatt Hyatt Regency Long Island Hyatt Regency Long Island New York, NY New York, NY 358 358 Hyatt Hyatt Courtyard Denver Airport Courtyard Denver Airport Denver, CO Denver, CO 202 202 Marriott Marriott Ritz Ritz-

• Carlton Atlanta

Carlton Atlanta Atlanta, GA Atlanta, GA 444 444 Marriott Marriott Courtyard Boston Tremont Courtyard Boston Tremont Boston MA Boston MA 315 315 Marriott Marriott

91

Courtyard Boston Tremont Courtyard Boston Tremont Boston, MA Boston, MA 315 315 Marriott Marriott Courtyard Gaithersburg Courtyard Gaithersburg Gaithersburg, MD Gaithersburg, MD 210 210 Marriott Marriott Nashville Renaissance Nashville Renaissance Nashville, TN Nashville, TN 673 673 Marriott Marriott DFW Airport Marriott DFW Airport Marriott Dallas, TX Dallas, TX 491 491 Marriott Marriott Residence Inn Tampa Downtown Residence Inn Tampa Downtown Tampa, FL Tampa, FL 109 109 McKibbon McKibbon Courtyard Savannah Courtyard Savannah Savannah, GA Savannah, GA 156 156 McKibbon McKibbon TOTAL TOTAL 8,084 8,084

Portfolio Upgrade Portfolio Upgrade

90 0% 100.0%

Legacy Ashford vs. Highland 2010 EBITDA Concentration

73% 57% 62% 75% 67% 76% 63% 60 0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% % 30 0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 24% 0 0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 0.0% Top 25 Markets Luxury / Upper- Upscale Full-Service Urban Legacy Ashford Highland

92

g y g

Highland Transaction Highland Transaction -

• Price Per Key Comparison

Price Per Key Comparison

$300

Highland Purchase Price Per Key Comparison ($ Thousands)

$200 $250

47% discount to recent peer acquisitions

35% discount to 2007 Highland

$300 $244 $100 $150

Highland purchase

$158 $158 $50 $100 $- Peer Purchase Avg. - 2009 to Current AHT Highland Purchase 2007 Highland Purchase AHT Highland Purchase

S R l C it l A l ti & fili S R l C it l A l ti & fili

93

Source: Real Capital Analytics & company filings. Source: Real Capital Analytics & company filings.

Replacement Cost per Key Replacement Cost per Key

$300 000 $350,000

Replacement Cost Per Key Estimate

Highland was purchased for $158,000 per key - a 44% d l $218,000 $281,000 $233,000 $250,000 $300,000 discount to replacement cost $150,000 $200,000 $50 000 $100,000 $- $50,000 Legacy AHT (20,458 Keys) Highland (5,799 Keys) Total (26,257 Keys)

Source: Estimated based Source: Estimated based

• n JP Morgan Research
• n JP Morgan Research

94

g y ( , y ) g ( , y ) ( , y )

• n JP Morgan Research
• n JP Morgan Research

Report Report

Transaction Conclusions Transaction Conclusions

• Disciplined

Disciplined and and thorough thorough in in underwriting underwriting transactions transactions

• Proactive

Proactive in in thinking thinking about about today’s today’s impact impact and and longer longer range range goals goals

• Capital

Capital recycling recycling is is an an essential essential part part of

• f our
• ur strategy

strategy Cap ta Cap ta ecyc g ecyc g s a esse t a esse t a pa t pa t o

• ou
• u st ategy

st ategy

• Carefully

Carefully monitor monitor real real-

• time

time trends trends in in the the capital capital and and lodging lodging markets markets

• Assess

Assess qualitative qualitative issues, issues, but but ultimate ultimate decisions decisions are are determined determined by by quantitative quantitative analysis analysis quantitative quantitative analysis analysis

• The

The Highland Highland transaction transaction is is transformational transformational

– Improves Improves overall

• verall portfolio

portfolio quality quality – Expands Expands our

• ur presence

presence into into new new markets markets Expands Expands our

• ur presence

presence into into new new markets markets – There There are are significant significant operational

• perational efficiencies

efficiencies to to be be had had – Acquired Acquired at at an an outstanding

• utstanding price

price per per key key

95

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011

CONCLUSION CONCLUSION CONCLUSION CONCLUSION

Monty J. Bennett Monty J. Bennett Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer

97

Conclusion Conclusion

NOW IS THE RIGHT TIME TO INVEST IN THE CYCLE NOW IS THE RIGHT TIME TO INVEST IN THE CYCLE

• Occupancy, Real ADR and Real RevPAR are well below

Occupancy, Real ADR and Real RevPAR are well below historical averages historical averages

• Historically, investing at this point in the cycles yielded

Historically, investing at this point in the cycles yielded 30 30%+ %+ 5 5-year IRRs year IRRs

• Whether GDP growth is rapid or slow, as long as it’s

Whether GDP growth is rapid or slow, as long as it’s positive, hotel REITs should perform well positive, hotel REITs should perform well positive, hotel REITs should perform well positive, hotel REITs should perform well

98

Conclusion Conclusion

ASHFORD IS THE RIGHT PLATFORM ASHFORD IS THE RIGHT PLATFORM

• Potential Highland accretion

Potential Highland accretion

• Reinstated dividend with room to grow

Reinstated dividend with room to grow

• Levered capital stock should amplify EBITDA growth

Levered capital stock should amplify EBITDA growth

• Share count has been cut in half

Share count has been cut in half

• Proven asset management abilities with Remington

Proven asset management abilities with Remington affiliation affiliation

• Highly

Highly-

• aligned management team

aligned management team

99

Q&A SESSION Q&A SESSION Q&A SESSION Q&A SESSION

100

Analyst / Investor Day Analyst / Investor Day y / y y / y

New York City New York City May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011