FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY: Limited Service Hotel Loop 1604 at Lower Seguin Road Converse, Texas 78109

Page 1 of 99 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY: Limited Service Hotel Loop 1604 at Lower Seguin Road Converse, Texas 78109 June 30, 2015 This study has been prepared to determine the financial feasibility of developing and operating a prominently branded limited service hotel property 1 in Converse Texas. The exact site is not designated, but it is planned for one of several available tracts near the intersection of Loop 1604 and Lower Seguin Road, a short distance from both the busy I-10 and I-35 corridors. There are preliminary development plans for a nearby or adjacent meeting/conference facility, which will complement the hotel project. The property size is set at 85 units for this study, but could vary to some degree depending on optimum size for the brand selected for development. The target opening date is the 4th quarter of 2016. The hotel will be very near Randolph AFB, and will be convenient to other nearby businesses, restaurants and amenities as well as the planned city conference center. Project quality is assumed to meet the average physical and operating standards required by our 8 brand sample. All projections herein are based on the market performance averages of the brand sample, and retaining the brand in good standing at the time of an assumed sale after 10 years. Average market acceptance for our Brand Pool has been quantified versus market averages, and has been used in developing this study. Operating costs are set at the level of similar hotels in the region. KEY FINDING: Developing and operating the described Limited Service property should generate an unleveraged, pre-tax return on total invested capital exceeding 15%, with a return on equity nearing 40%. This return on invested capital assumes that improvements are completed at the estimated cost of $85,000 per unit, plus $700,000 for land. Project details follow: PO Box 120055 134 Laurel Heights, San Antonio, TX 78212 210-734-3434 Fax 210-735-7970 www.sourcestrategies.org 1 For this project we have selected a series of prominent limited service brands which would be appropriate for development in the local market, and used aggregate performance numbers from this sample. Selected brands and their latest year s performance are included Exhibit V. Subject criteria such as brand value, age and size are based upon sample averages.

Page 2 of 99 Total Investment Land Cost $ 700,000 Improvements $ 7,225,000 @ $85,000 per key 2 Total Investment $ 7,925,000 Pre-Tax Project Return 15.07% 3 Pre-Tax Return on Equity 38.57% 4 This study incorporates the current upturn in the Texas hotel market, the rebound from the recent national recession which began in late 2008, and the continued impact of the Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford Shale Oil and Gas developments In our Market section, we highlight the historical hotel performance in Texas, noting the effect of past recessions. Consequently, our market projections consider how the lodging industry reacts in times of With an anticipated October 2016 opening, cash flow market projections for the subject hotel, before taxes and after renovation reserves, should be available for debt service, income tax and dividends as follows: PROJECT SUMMARY Occupancy Average $ Total Room Percent $ Rate REVPAR Revenue CashFlow** Year I 61.0% $101.40 $61.89 $2,006,588 $838,027 Year II 70.7% $103.44 $73.09 $2,362,926 $1,022,879 Year III 74.6% $105.50 $78.68 $2,543,644 $1,102,962 Year IV 74.6% $107.60 $80.26 $2,594,639 $1,119,540 Year V 74.6% $109.76 $81.87 $2,646,658 $1,136,326 Year VI 73.3% $111.95 $82.12 $2,654,634 $1,131,640 Year VII 72.1% $114.19 $82.36 $2,662,633 $1,126,781 Year VIII 70.9% $116.47 $82.61 $2,670,657 $1,121,741 Year IX 69.7% $118.81 $82.86 $2,678,706 $1,116,573 Year X 68.8% $121.21 $83.44 $2,697,384 $11,833,684*** *Year I ADR equates to approximately $98 in current market dollars.**before Income Tax & Financing expense, but reflecting $1,275,923 in reserves for capital expenditures/property renovation ($15,011 per unit). ***assumes valuing property at Year 10 cash flow at an 10% return-to-buyer, less 4% expense of sale, plus year 10 cash flow. 2. EDC and SSI estimates of land cost and acreage size. 3. After reserve for on-going renovations. 4. Assuming 30% equity and 70% debt at a 5% pre-tax debt cost; calculated weighted average.

Page 3 of 99 The above cash flow, assuming a Year 10 sale, has been discounted at the rate of 15.07% to a present value of $7,923,653, essentially equaling the total budgeted investment of $7,925,000. This 15.07% is the project's unleveraged return, provided capital is kept at this level. An estimated capital budget for improvements of $85,000 per unit 'turn-key' costs for a hotel of this size and quality is reasonable for this brand and quality of product, in our experience (though individual brands in our pool will vary slightly from this target number). If capital outlays vary from budget for this project, returns will vary accordingly. The following table illustrates the linear nature of financial returns as capital requirements escalate or decline and revenue streams remain stable. Effect on Returns if Capital Investment Changes 5 Improvements Budget Land Total Discounted Cash Flow Variance Per Unit Total Cost Investment Total Proj On Equity (85%) $72.3 $6,141 $700 $6,841 17.81% 47.70% (90%) $76.5 $6,503 $700 $7,203 16.83% 44.43% (95%) $80.8 $6,864 $700 $7,564 15.92% 41.40% BUDGET $85.0 $7,225 $700 $7,925 15.07% 38.57% (105%) $89.3 $7,586 $700 $8,286 14.27% 35.90% (110%) $93.5 $7,948 $700 $8,648 13.52% 33.40% (115%) $97.7 $8,309 $700 $9,009 12.82% 31.07% 5. Discounted Cash Flow / Internal Rate of Return.

Page 4 of 99 The first stabilized year, Year III shows the following results: Year III 2018-2019 Room Revenues $2,441,117 Total Revenues $2,543,644 Income Before Fixed Costs $1,408,199 (55.4%) Net Income Before Tax & Fin. $1,044,887 (41.1%) Cash Flow Before Financing $1,102,962 (43.4%) 6 Occupancy % 74.6% Average Daily Rate $105.50 $ REVPAR $78.68 The critical statistic used in this study is REVPAR. REVPAR means revenue per available room per day, and reflects the average daily room revenue yield of every room in a property or market (not just occupied rooms). REVPAR is generated by multiplying occupancy times rate (i.e. REVPAR = % occupancy times average daily rate), and is the most effective and important tool in the evaluation of the success of any lodging concern. SUMMARY OF CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS: Assumptions are summarized as follows (see page 11 for full Market History and Projection study, and page 7 for Methodology): 1. Projections of the local Converse Area Market 7 reflect a fairly even mixture of relatively new hotels, and older, dated properties. The average hotel room in the local market is over 20 years old, over two-thirds through the life cycle of the typical hotel building, and past the peak performance of the first ten years. The typical hotel building becomes stylistically and structurally obsolete after 30+ years, though this life cycle is longer for high-rise/concrete structures, of which this market has several. Out of 1,939 total rooms in the local market, 799, or 41% were built after 2004 (10 years old or less) and 695, or 36% were opened before 1985 (at least 30 years old). There is typically a wide and dramatic gap between the performance of new and older properties, with a range of hotels in the area from very new, to very old and well past the peak performing years. 6 Before deductions of loan principal and interest, before income tax deductions, and before any equity payout. 7 Converse area Zipcodes 78109, 78148, 78154,78233 and 78244

Page 5 of 99 We are comfortable with market projections, and expect market demand to continue growing at a healthy level. We expect occupancy to decline gradually from current levels to an equilibrium of 60%. REVPAR is projected to rise by 2% annually in the next five years (versus a 10.6% growth rate in the past nine years). Detailed local market history and projections commence on page 21. CONVERSE AREA MARKET Year 8 Occupancy % $ REVPAR 2009 52.8% $ 29.14 2011 56.6% $ 32.35 2014 66.7% $ 43.06 9 Projected 2016 67.7% $ 46.26 2018 64.1% $ 46.43 2024 60.4% $ 52.31 Historical Annual Compound Growth Rates Past 9 Year Average 1.4% 4.2% Past 4 Year Average 5.5% 9.7% Past 1 Year Average 8.0% 10.6% Future Annual Compound Growth Rates Next 9 Years -1.0% 2.0% Next 5 Years -1.0% 2.0% 2. Versus the local market's REVPAR dollar projections, the REVPAR index of the subject hotel peaks at 159% of the market average REVPAR in Years III-V. Thereafter, the REVPAR Index declines due to the normal aging cycle. Detailed REVPAR derivation and subsequent projections commence on page 30. SUBJECT HOTEL DERIVATION Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.49 1.49 1.49 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Site Value Adjustment.95.95.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 130% 151% 159% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $56.08 $65.22 $68.27 8. Calendar Year basis 9. 12 months ending March 31, 2015.

Page 6 of 99 The projected REVPAR performance of the subject hotel versus the local area market average REVPAR reflects the fact that this hotel is expected to perform at a level well above the market average. We expect that the hotel's REVPAR index ramp up to a peak of 159% of the market in Years III-V, then slowly lose ground versus the local area's inflationary growth: 3. Expenses are set at the level of similar, limited service hotel products from Smith Travel Research Host Reports operating statistics, inflated at 3% per annum. See page 44 for details.

Page 7 of 99 METHODOLOGY To develop Pro Forma financial results for the proposed project, two major sets of assumptions have been developed. First, the future market's average REVPAR is forecast on a reasonable and economically-sound basis; the performance of the project is dependent on this market forecast and varies from it only due to specific variables of the project. Second, the specific variables of the project are combined and expressed as an index for each quarter of the forecast, an index that is used to adjust the overall market performance to the specific project. MARKET REVPAR FORECAST The large San Antonio Metro is examined historically and projected. The key in the market projections is to stabilize the wider area market in the future at a sustainable, average equilibrium for occupancy, a level which we have determined to be approximately 62% in markets of this type, and lower for less urban areas. This occupancy level is highly relevant as a long-term, equilibrium occupancy, a level where investors are neutral about adding new hotel rooms to the market and an average that will reoccur over long periods of time (e.g. 20 years). After the wider market area is forecast, the performance of the local area market 10 is examined historically and projected. The key in the market projection is to stabilize this market in the future at a sustainable, average equilibrium for occupancy, a level which we have determined to be approximately 60% in markets of this type, and higher for more urban areas. Over the past 20 years, according to the Source Strategies, Inc. database, hotel occupancy in Texas has averaged 60%, and 62% in larger Texas metros. The REVPAR projection of the local market is then the pro forma market environment of the project. This project will vary from the norm for only project-specific differences, and then only relatively. PROJECT VARIABLES: DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT REVPAR INDICES The first variable from the averages to be developed has to do with the fact that each product type and brand have a typical and identifiable influence on REVPAR performance. This 10 Converse area Zipcodes 78109, 78148, 78154,78233 and 78244

Page 8 of 99 variable is based on its consumer acceptance, its product definition, its level of quality, the price it can command from the consumer, its marketing efforts, and other factors. The value of the brand and product type is termed the Base Value. The second adjustment used on the dollar value of the local area's REVPAR is the Brand Age Adjustment. This is made to reflect the average age of similarly branded hotels on the subject property's performance versus the market average. The average opening date for the pool of eight selected hotel brands in similar areas were examined in order to quantify this factor. The third step to developing a project REVPAR index is to determine an adjustment based on any deviation from a normal project. If the number of proposed rooms in the project is significantly above or below the average for that brand, its performance will also vary from the norm. A lower than average number of rooms should increase per room performance and vice versa. This is due to the fact that consumer demand for a single brand is demand at the project's site, regardless of the number of rooms offered by the hotel (a minor exception here would be a convention hotel). An empirical proof of this evaluation of Size is the major increase in volume enjoyed by numerous hotels throughout Texas that have split into two branded operations, using two different names. For example, the Hilton Hotel Towers Austin added $1,000,000 annually to revenues by splitting off its adjacent, ground-based rooms as a Super 8 Motel. By creating another brand, the Super 8 began to fill demand for budget properties in the immediate area, while the Hilton Towers kept its current upscale customer base. Hence, smaller room counts than average generate higher occupancy than average. Further proof is the correlation between project size and occupancy: the smaller the property, the higher the occupancy. 11 Lastly, an 'Other' segment adjustment may be made if the proposed product type is under- or over- supplied in the local market, or for other factors. For example, a product type commanding 10% of the Texas market - but zero locally - would command a higher daily rate or occupancy locally because it is a relatively scarce commodity. Further, a subject product far exceeds the product quality of the brand average, then a positive adjustment should be made. While there is usually a reasonably consistent pattern of site factors for the brand properties selected, these factors often vary because of 11 Study detailed in size factor derivation in analysis section.

Page 9 of 99 unique situations: 1) visibility and access differences between nearby sites; 2) any large variation from the norm in the usual number of rooms for a chain; 3) a nearby property's quality, the quality of management, last renovation; 4) any major new commercial development nearby. Adjustments will be made for these differences based on industry experience. Then the REVPAR potential of the subject Site is developed in two ways. First, all other property factors except site are calculated for the competitors, the site factor then being used to bring the calculated REVPAR into a match with actual REVPAR performance. In other words, combining all factors including a 'plugged' site factor results in the theoretical REVPAR projection equaling actual REVPAR for each property studied, revealing the mathematical value of individual hotel sites. With the development of the adjustments for Brand/product type, overall Brand Age, Segment, project Size, and Site, a revenue projection for the proposed operation begins to take form by combining these factors into a combined index that is applied to the overall market-wide REVPAR projection, resulting in the forecast of the project's dollar REVPAR. However, this combined index changes as the project ages. Consequently, the physical Age of the individual project impacts this REVPAR index. A +12% increase factor is applied to the combined REVPAR index in the peak performing Year III through Year V. A first-year start-up adjustment of -8% and a second year adjustment of +7%, is followed by this +12% adjustment for years III-V. This factor reflects the major revenue-generating power of new versus old properties. In the sixth year and thereafter, the REVPAR index is then diminished at a rate of 1.67% per annum in order to reflect aging and the normal life-cycle of a hotel. For a completely renovated property, this factor is slightly different. This pattern of declining performance with property aging is based on major studies of economic lifecycle patterns. The first study was conducted on a census of all 25,000 Texas rooms built between 1980 and 1982 (study published in September 1994 issues of MarketShare 12 and the October 1994 issue of Hotel & Motel Management); the second investigation was conducted on all 17,231 rooms 12 Now Hotel Brand Report.

Page 10 of 99 built in Texas from 1990 through 1995. These Source Strategies, Inc. studies confirm a similar, major study conducted in 1982 at the Holiday corporation on 160 company-owned Holiday Inn hotels. Combining all of these factors - Product Type, Brand Age, Site, Size, Segment (other), and Newness (Age) - results in the REVPAR stream for the project. A REVPAR stream from which room revenues, estimated rate, occupancy and room-nights sold are derived. At this point, the investment and operational costs can be laid against the revenue line to generate pro forma financial performance and discounted cash flow analysis. The calculation of the statistic of Operating Costs Per Occupied Room (before fixed/capital costs are deducted) is typically the important cost to examine carefully because it is highly stable and predictable, regardless of occupancy and rate. The Smith Travel Research s 2013 Almanac (2012 data) with dollar costs inflated, and Source Strategies, Inc. financial models are the source of operating cost statistics. From national average occupancies, costs are categorized as fixed, semi-variable or variable, resulting in the highly-leveraged profit performance characteristic of lodging products, depending on occupancy and REVPAR performance (i.e. variable costs increase proportionately with higher occupancy levels while fixed costs do not). Furthermore, with a capital expenditures profile provided by the International Society of Hospitality Consultants' CapEx, A Study of Capital Expenditures in the U.S. Hotel Industry, a method has been applied to determine an appropriate amount of renovation reserves to ensure that the property is maintained at the franchisor's required level. All study-area individual hotel/motel five year histories are included in the study, using the Source Strategies, Inc. database of all Texas hotels and motels (includes each hotel s brand, room count, room revenue, occupancy, rate and REVPAR). The methodology of this database is attached as an exhibit.

Page 11 of 99 MARKET REVPAR HISTORY: TEXAS 1. Since 1980, the State of Texas (and the wider U.S. market) has experienced other instances of economic turmoil such as the recent recession. In 1982-1983 the Texas market suffered through six consecutive quarters of major demand declines, with a sharp plummet of 24% in the first quarter of 1983. Two years later, every quarter in 1986 posted significant demand decreases of 19% or more. Before the recession starting in 2009, the most recent period of decline was in 2001, during which the onset of a recession was coupled, and accelerated by, the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Beginning in the Third quarter of 2001, seven of the next eight quarters showed declining room demand, and it was not until the first quarter of 2004 that healthy levels of growth resumed. We have considered the historical market patterns in formulating our projections for all market projections. Though there are differences in each economic downturn, and areas across the state are impacted differently depending on factors driving demand particularly Oil & Gas development and production - there is much that can be discerned from historical negative trending performances and the patterns of subsequent periods of recovery. Historical quarterly periods of economic decline and recession are highlighted in the Texas market data that follows overleaf:

Page 12 of 99 HOTEL MARKET: STATE OF TEXAS - 1980-1989 # Room-1 Total Htls nites Rooms % Growth Vs Yr Ago Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $ 000's Occ. Rate RPAR Sply Real ADR $ Rev 801 1,694 138,446 9,012 286,171 72.3 31.76 22.97 802 1,859 143,967 9,593 321,352 73.2 33.50 24.53 803 1,941 147,589 10,077 331,532 74.2 32.90 24.42 804 1,827 150,272 9,430 296,137 68.2 31.40 21.42 811 1,808 149,062 10,268 349,319 76.5 34.02 26.04 7.7 13.9 7.1 22.1 812 1,990 154,783 11,102 398,057 78.8 35.85 28.26 7.5 15.7 7.0 23.9 813 2,065 157,359 12,026 429,629 83.1 35.73 29.68 6.6 19.3 8.6 29.6 814 1,941 159,855 10,955 368,202 74.5 33.61 25.04 6.4 16.2 7.0 24.3 821 1,944 159,719 11,275 410,194 78.4 36.38 28.54 7.1 9.8 6.9 17.4 822 2,072 164,022 11,554 448,560 77.4 38.82 30.05 6.0 4.1 8.3 12.7 823 2,122 168,756 11,239 426,972 72.4 37.99 27.50 7.2-6.5 6.3-0.6 824 1,909 169,962 9,383 340,781 60.0 36.32 21.79 6.3-14.4 8.1-7.4 831 1,927 171,393 8,574 326,286 55.6 38.06 21.15 7.3-24.0 4.6-20.5 832 2,098 177,954 9,118 367,533 56.3 40.31 22.70 8.5-21.1 3.8-18.1 833 2,192 181,281 9,574 378,280 57.4 39.51 22.68 7.4-14.8 4.0-11.4 834 1,988 181,046 8,445 320,928 50.7 38.00 19.27 6.5-10.0 4.6-5.8 841 2,059 185,074 9,110 370,661 54.7 40.69 22.25 8.0 6.3 6.9 13.6 842 2,263 193,838 9,777 417,810 55.4 42.73 23.69 8.9 7.2 6.0 13.7 843 2,343 198,581 10,267 440,975 56.2 42.95 24.14 9.5 7.2 8.7 16.6 844 2,144 198,042 8,762 357,849 48.1 40.84 19.64 9.4 3.8 7.5 11.5 851 2,168 201,426 11,088 462,103 61.2 41.68 25.49 8.8 21.7 2.4 24.7 852 2,396 207,832 12,005 525,445 63.5 43.77 27.78 7.2 22.8 2.4 25.8 853 2,456 210,876 12,004 521,612 61.9 43.45 26.89 6.2 16.9 1.2 18.3 854 2,201 210,122 10,095 422,314 52.2 41.83 21.85 6.1 15.2 2.4 18.0 861 2,221 209,942 8,935 394,611 47.3 44.16 20.88 4.2-19.4 6.0-14.6 862 2,366 216,430 9,484 438,490 48.2 46.24 22.26 4.1-21.0 5.6-16.5 863 2,398 216,313 9,335 433,948 46.9 46.49 21.81 2.6-22.2 7.0-16.8 864 2,162 214,530 8,011 354,767 40.6 44.29 17.97 2.1-20.6 5.9-16.0 871 2,125 211,297 9,822 439,986 51.6 44.80 23.14 0.6 9.9 1.4 11.5 872 2,323 217,846 10,613 469,942 53.5 44.28 23.71 0.7 11.9-4.2 7.2 873 2,488 223,226 11,609 513,072 56.5 44.20 24.98 3.2 24.4-4.9 18.2 874 2,288 220,113 8,703 389,235 43.0 44.72 19.22 2.6 8.6 1.0 9.7 881 2,225 216,646 10,651 480,022 54.6 45.07 24.62 2.5 8.4 0.6 9.1 882 2,328 219,194 11,468 519,279 57.5 45.28 26.03 0.6 8.1 2.3 10.5 883 2,394 220,718 12,179 551,823 60.0 45.31 27.18-1.1 4.9 2.5 7.6 884 2,183 217,487 10,408 468,241 52.0 44.99 23.40-1.2 19.6 0.6 20.3 891 2,139 214,433 10,972 505,830 56.9 46.10 26.21-1.0 3.0 2.3 5.4 892 2,254 216,409 12,152 568,731 61.7 46.80 28.88-1.3 6.0 3.4 9.5 893 2,380 219,464 13,087 606,723 64.8 46.36 30.05-0.6 7.5 2.3 9.9 894 2,143 214,991 10,915 505,305 55.2 46.30 25.55-1.1 4.9 2.9 7.9 1. Room nights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 13 of 99 HOTEL MARKET: STATE OF TEXAS - 1990-1999 # Room-1 Total Htls nites Rooms % Growth Vs Yr Ago Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $ 000's Occ. Rate RPAR Sply Real ADR $ Rev 901 2,129 214,419 11,679 554,170 60.5 47.45 28.72-0.0 6.4 2.9 9.6 902 2,311 218,824 12,840 624,482 64.5 48.64 31.36 1.1 5.7 3.9 9.8 903 2,488 223,343 12,708 629,223 61.8 49.51 30.62 1.8-2.9 6.8 3.7 904 2,195 215,581 10,531 513,588 53.1 48.77 25.90 0.3-3.5 5.3 1.6 911 2,288 216,607 11,476 565,424 58.9 49.27 29.00 1.0-1.7 3.8 2.0 912 2,450 220,230 12,714 652,416 63.4 51.31 32.55 0.6-1.0 5.5 4.5 913 2,489 221,280 13,203 669,743 64.9 50.73 32.90-0.9 3.9 2.5 6.4 914 2,288 217,777 11,146 556,396 55.6 49.92 27.77 1.0 5.8 2.4 8.3 921 2,311 218,438 11,593 595,139 59.0 51.34 30.27 0.8 1.0 4.2 5.3 922 2,488 222,368 12,751 675,369 63.0 52.97 33.38 1.0 0.3 3.2 3.5 923 2,548 223,434 13,690 721,311 66.6 52.69 35.09 1.0 3.7 3.9 7.7 924 2,359 219,803 11,488 593,804 56.8 51.69 29.36 0.9 3.1 3.5 6.7 931 2,364 220,328 11,903 630,049 60.0 52.93 31.77 0.9 2.7 3.1 5.9 932 2,526 223,631 12,955 711,191 63.7 54.90 34.95 0.6 1.6 3.6 5.3 933 2,587 225,580 14,033 762,508 67.6 54.34 36.74 1.0 2.5 3.1 5.7 934 2,382 221,392 11,714 625,100 57.5 53.36 30.69 0.7 2.0 3.2 5.3 941 2,414 222,471 12,287 671,853 61.4 54.68 33.56 1.0 3.2 3.3 6.6 942 2,593 227,497 13,565 773,762 65.5 57.04 37.38 1.7 4.7 3.9 8.8 943 2,666 230,187 13,848 787,544 65.4 56.87 37.19 2.0-1.3 4.7 3.3 944 2,475 226,119 12,215 677,868 58.7 55.50 32.59 2.1 4.3 4.0 8.4 951 2,457 225,028 12,549 738,394 62.0 58.84 36.46 1.1 2.1 7.6 9.9 952 2,604 229,116 13,526 810,170 64.9 59.90 38.86 0.7-0.3 5.0 4.7 953 2,701 234,593 14,117 841,494 65.4 59.61 38.99 1.9 1.9 4.8 6.9 954 2,602 232,201 12,326 722,297 57.7 58.60 33.81 2.7 0.9 5.6 6.6 961 2,596 233,619 13,221 823,051 62.9 62.26 39.14 3.8 5.4 5.8 11.5 962 2,740 239,156 14,047 878,542 64.5 62.54 40.37 4.4 3.9 4.4 8.4 963 2,735 242,809 14,040 875,250 62.9 62.34 39.18 3.5-0.5 4.6 4.0 964 2,666 241,679 12,572 775,657 56.5 61.70 34.89 4.1 2.0 5.3 7.4 971 2,694 245,315 13,353 861,700 60.5 64.53 39.03 5.0 1.0 3.6 4.7 972 2,774 250,349 14,720 965,813 64.6 65.61 42.39 4.7 4.8 4.9 9.9 973 2,838 254,368 14,874 968,988 63.6 65.15 41.41 4.8 5.9 4.5 10.7 974 2,800 257,088 13,470 873,191 57.0 64.83 36.92 6.4 7.1 5.1 12.6 981 2,847 258,388 14,390 965,828 61.9 67.12 41.53 5.3 7.8 4.0 12.1 982 2,930 263,497 15,481 1,057,929 64.6 68.34 44.12 5.3 5.2 4.2 9.5 983 3,019 270,763 15,927 1,053,109 63.9 66.12 42.28 6.4 7.1 1.5 8.7 984 2,978 271,238 14,316 941,569 57.4 65.77 37.73 5.5 6.3 1.4 7.8 991 3,047 277,678 15,010 1,023,911 60.1 68.22 40.97 7.5 4.3 1.6 6.0 992 3,129 282,933 15,996 1,125,938 62.1 70.39 43.73 7.4 3.3 3.0 6.4 993 3,220 290,145 16,562 1,111,162 62.0 67.09 41.63 7.2 4.0 1.5 5.5 994 3,208 289,149 14,552 968,974 54.7 66.59 36.43 6.6 1.7 1.2 2.9 001 3,226 290,046 15,883 1,114,731 60.8 70.18 42.70 4.5 5.8 2.9 8.9 1. Room-nights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room-nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 14 of 99 HOTEL MARKET: STATE OF TEXAS - 2000-2012 # Room-1 Total Htls nites Rooms % Growth Vs Yr Ago Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $ 000's Occ. Rate RPAR Sply Real ADR $ Rev 20002 3,356 295,709 17,001 1,232,674 63.2 72.51 45.81 4.5 6.3 3.0 9.5 003 3,388 300,371 17,187 1,219,157 62.2 70.94 44.12 3.5 3.8 5.7 9.7 004 3,360 299,047 15,228 1,064,870 55.3 69.93 38.71 3.4 4.6 5.0 9.9 011 3,411 302,343 16,517 1,188,162 60.7 71.94 43.66 4.2 4.0 2.5 6.6 012 3,536 306,089 17,222 1,239,069 61.8 71.95 44.48 3.5 1.3-0.8 0.5 013 3,589 310,957 16,802 1,164,254 58.7 69.29 40.70 3.5-2.2-2.3-4.5 014 3,535 307,914 14,483 960,167 51.1 66.30 33.89 3.0-4.9-5.2-9.8 021 3,576 309,745 15,867 1,110,327 56.9 69.98 39.83 2.4-3.9-2.7-6.6 022 3,684 314,166 17,012 1,225,468 59.5 72.04 42.86 2.6-1.2 0.1-1.1 023 3,707 318,226 16,541 1,158,407 56.5 70.03 39.57 2.3-1.6 1.1-0.5 024 3,644 313,988 14,713 986,554 50.9 67.05 34.15 2.0 1.6 1.1 2.7 031 3,672 316,723 15,361 1,057,864 53.9 68.87 37.11 2.3-3.2-1.6-4.7 032 3,780 318,836 16,737 1,169,718 57.7 69.89 40.32 1.5-1.6-3.0-4.5 033 3,805 323,624 16,776 1,162,518 56.3 69.30 39.05 1.7 1.4-1.0 0.4 034 3,734 320,212 14,914 987,483 50.6 66.21 33.52 2.0 1.4-1.3 0.1 041 3,747 323,147 16,239 1,145,793 55.8 70.56 39.40 2.0 5.7 2.5 8.3 042 3,878 327,926 17,518 1,237,847 58.7 70.66 41.48 2.9 4.7 1.1 5.8 043 3,913 332,549 17,679 1,264,128 57.8 71.50 41.32 2.8 5.4 3.2 8.7 044 3,829 329,158 15,951 1,082,616 52.7 67.87 35.75 2.8 7.0 2.5 9.6 051 3,852 329,449 17,015 1,214,908 57.4 71.40 40.97 2.0 4.8 1.2 6.0 052 3,983 332,254 18,593 1,391,414 61.5 74.84 46.02 1.3 6.1 5.9 12.4 053 4,048 338,115 19,173 1,449,393 61.6 75.59 46.59 1.7 8.5 5.7 14.7 054 3,962 334,144 18,561 1,383,105 60.4 74.52 44.99 1.5 16.4 9.8 27.8 061 3,978 334,912 18,910 1,479,351 62.7 78.23 49.08 1.7 11.1 9.6 21.8 062 4,121 337,788 19,328 1,609,669 62.9 83.28 52.37 1.7 4.0 11.3 15.7 063 4,184 344,093 19,733 1,606,206 62.3 81.40 50.74 1.8 2.9 7.7 10.8 064 4,093 341,556 18,004 1,439,964 57.3 79.98 45.82 2.2-3.0 7.3 4.1 071 4,127 343,745 19,366 1,614,471 62.6 83.37 52.19 2.6 2.4 6.6 9.1 072 4,290 347,178 19,916 1,756,887 63.0 88.21 55.61 2.8 3.0 5.9 9.1 073 4,340 353,440 20,324 1,743,413 62.5 85.78 53.62 2.7 3.0 5.4 8.5 074 4,248 350,908 18,594 1,564,612 57.6 84.15 48.46 2.7 3.3 5.2 8.7 081 4,276 353,555 19,690 1,738,726 61.9 88.31 54.64 3.1 1.7 0.2-0.9 082 4,463 359,217 20,654 1,919,396 63.2 92.93 58.72 3.6 3.7 8.5 10.3 083 4,524 366,163 21,246 1,907,486 63.1 89.78 56.62 3.8 4.6 7.0 22.3 084 4,338 360,500 19,285 1,694,290 58.1 87.86 51.09 2.7 3.7 4.4 8.2 091 4,378 366,440 18,710 1,592,799 56.7 85.13 48.30 3.6-5.0-3.6-8.4 092 4,603 374,553 18,627 1,613,320 54.7 86.61 47.33 4.3-9.8-6.8-15.9 093 4,789 385,834 18,572 1,598,060 52.3 86.05 45.02 5.2-12.6-2.3-5.6 094 4,409 377.400 17,096 1,366,915 49.2 79.95 39.33 4.9-10.6-6.3-13.9 101 4,569 385,457 19,015 1,544,141 54.8 81.21 44.51 4.6 1.8-6.0-4.3 102 4,782 392,775 20,075 1,725,520 56.2 85.96 48.28 4.2 7.5-0.1 8.0 103 4,675 394,600 20,747 1,734,223 57.1 83.59 47.73 2.3 11.7 2.9 8.5 104 4,400 386,300 18,588 1,537,803 52.3 82.73 43.27 2.4 8.7 3.5 12.5 111 4,509 392,003 20,983 1,779,430 59.5 84.80 50.44 1.7 10.3 4.4 15.2 112 4,769 398,204 21,956 1,943,642 60.6 88.52 53.64 1.4 9.4 3.0 12.6 113 4,647 399,800 22,581 1,945,543 61.4 86.16 52.90 1.3 8.8 3.1 12.2 114 4,428 390,500 19.978 1,702,585 55.6 85.22 47.38 1.1 7.5 3.0 10.7 121 4,512 395,077 22,242 1,928,348 62.6 86.70 54.23 0.8 6.0 2.2 8.4 122 4,774 402,032 23,541 2,160,798 64.3 91.79 59.06 1.0 7.2 3.7 11.2 123 4,799 408,200 23,578 2,119,112 62.8 89.88 56.44 2.1 4.4 4.7 8.9 124 4,568 397,300 21,468 1,917,770 58.7 89.33 52.44 1.7 7.5 4.8 12.6 CGR%28yrs 2.8% 3.2% 6.1% 0.4% 2.8% 3.2% 20yrs 3.0% 3.0% 5.8% 0.0% 2.7% 2.7% 10yrs 2.5% 3.3% 5.7% 0.8% 2.3% 3.1% 5yrs 3.0% 2.9% 3.8% -0.1% 0.9% 0.8% 1yr 1.5% 6.2% 10.2% 4.7% 3.8% 8.6% 1. Room-nights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room-nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 15 of 99 We have considered the historical market patterns in formulating our projections for Texas and for sub-markets within Texas. We have continued the past three years of a recovery that has occurred since the acute recession of 2009. This projection reflects a modestly strong rate of growth in Texas overall, driven importantly by the very high strength of Oil & Gas development and production areas. Texas REVPAR Growth History & Projection $70 $60 $50 REVPAR $'s $40 $30 $20 $10 $0 80 85 86 90 95 00 05 8 9 10 11 12 13 Year

Page 16 of 99 Market REVPAR History & Forecast: 2. Over the past nine years, the San Antonio Metro Market has shown an average annual real growth of 3.4% (room-nights sold), annual growth of 4.9% in total room revenues, and a 1.6% annual gain in REVPAR; note that the severe recession of 2009 depressed long-term performance numbers in many markets. Occupancy gained 0.2% per year over the nine years. Supply rose by 3.2% per year, with room rates rising 1.4% annually. Over the past four years, a gain of 4.2% per year in demand was coupled with supply growth of 1.2% annually. Revenues over this period rose an average of 6.6% per year, while REVPAR rose 5.4% annually. Room rates were up 2.3% on average. Occupancy increased over the last four years by 2.9% per year. Over the last two years, demand rose by 2.2% annually. This outpaced a 0.4% annual increase in supply. These results caused occupancy to increase by 1.8% annually, and REVPAR to gain 5.2% per year. Rates increased 3.2% per year, and yearly revenues climbed 5.6%. Most recent history, the 12 months ending March 2015, show continued healthy results. Real demand rose by 4.3%, rates increased 3.2%, revenues rose by 7.7%, occupancy gained 4.2% as supply grew by 0.2%. REVPAR gained 7.5% for the average hotel.

Page 17 of 99 LODGING MARKET HISTORY: SAN ANTONIO METRO # Room 1 Total Htls nites Rooms Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 % Growth Vs Yr Ago Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $000's Occ. Rate RevPar Sply Real ADR $Rev 052 382 34,054 2,115 207,406 68.3 98.05 66.93 053 385 34,752 2,108 195,250 65.9 92.63 61.07 054 375 34,028 1,780 164,241 56.8 92.29 52.46 061 373 34,220 2,012 191,180 65.3 95.03 62.08 062 396 34,744 2,060 222,836 65.2 108.17 70.48 2.0-2.6 10.3 7.4 063 403 35,715 2,181 219,530 66.4 100.64 66.81 2.8 3.5 8.6 12.4 064 389 34,691 1,787 180,748 56.0 101.15 56.63 1.9 0.4 9.6 10.1 071 388 35,045 2,046 207,915 64.9 101.63 65.92 2.4 1.7 6.9 8.8 072 407 35,647 2,050 230,200 63.2 112.29 70.96 2.6-0.5 3.8 3.3 073 412 36,696 2,170 225,743 64.3 104.03 66.87 2.7-0.5 3.4 2.8 074 396 35,961 1,819 186,811 55.0 102.69 56.47 3.7 1.8 1.5 3.4 081 398 36,306 2,091 222,980 64.0 106.66 68.24 3.6 2.2 4.9 7.2 082 425 38,186 2,226 256,637 64.1 115.29 73.85 7.1 8.6 2.7 11.5 083 430 39,045 2,279 249,717 63.5 109.56 69.52 6.4 5.0 5.3 10.6 084 406 38,381 1,816 200,451 51.4 110.38 56.77 6.7-0.2 7.5 7.3 091 407 38,950 1,995 189,268 56.9 94.89 53.99 7.3-4.6-11.0-15.1 092 428 39,884 2,149 207,102 59.2 96.36 57.06 4.4-3.5-16.4-19.3 093 434 41,207 2,264 213,797 59.7 94.42 56.40 5.5-0.7-13.8-14.4 094 405 40,374 1,789 171,482 48.2 95.87 46.17 5.2-1.5-13.1-14.5 101 410 41,593 2,198 203,167 58.7 92.45 54.27 6.8 10.2-2.6 7.3 102 447 43,058 2,393 234,428 61.1 97.97 59.83 8.0 11.3 1.7 13.2 103 455 44,646 2,558 247,615 62.3 96.79 60.28 8.3 13.0 2.5 15.8 104 415 43,177 1,949 194,939 49.1 100.00 49.07 6.9 9.0 4.3 13.7 111 418 43,533 2,342 224,302 59.8 95.78 57.25 4.7 6.6 3.6 10.4 112 449 44,213 2,537 248,804 63.1 98.05 61.84 2.7 6.0 0.1 6.1 113 456 45,609 2,704 265,396 64.4 98.15 63.25 2.2 5.7 1.4 7.2 114 423 44,039 2,113 210,159 52.1 99.47 51.87 2.0 8.4-0.5 7.8 121 428 44,291 2,514 241,144 63.1 95.92 60.49 1.7 7.3 0.1 7.5 122 458 45,118 2,756 276,358 67.1 100.27 67.31 2.0 8.6 2.3 11.1 123 461 46,217 2,783 277,994 65.5 99.88 65.38 1.3 2.9 1.8 4.7 124 430 44,717 2,216 224,112 53.9 101.12 54.48 1.5 4.9 1.7 6.6 131 438 45,151 2,649 266,819 65.2 100.73 65.66 1.9 5.4 5.0 10.6 132 467 45,846 2,769 293,733 66.4 106.06 70.41 1.6 0.5 5.8 6.3 133 466 45,917 2,730 276,958 64.6 101.43 65.56-0.6-1.9 1.6-0.4 134 437 45,149 2,271 237,367 54.7 104.52 57.15 1.0 2.5 3.4 5.9 141 443 45,543 2,654 274,325 64.7 103.38 66.93 0.9 0.2 2.6 2.8 142 463 45,871 2,837 306,095 68.0 107.88 73.33 0.1 2.5 1.7 4.2 143 469 46,106 2,899 308,142 68.3 106.30 72.65 0.4 6.2 4.8 11.3 144 441 45,282 2,397 254,571 57.5 106.21 61.11 0.3 5.5 1.6 7.2 151 447 45,478 2,742 296,581 67.0 108.16 72.46-0.1 3.3 4.6 8.1 CGR%Past9yr 3.2% 3.4% 4.9% 0.2% 1.4% 1.6% 4yrs 1.2% 4.2% 6.6% 2.9% 2.3% 5.4% 2yrs 0.4% 2.2% 5.6% 1.8% 3.2% 5.2% 1yr 0.2% 4.3% 7.7% 4.2% 3.2% 7.5% 1.Roomnights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 18 of 99 3. In the future, San Antonio Metro market occupancy is projected to return to the estimated longterm equilibrium occupancy level of 62% by the end of our forecast. For the next nine years, real demand (room nights sold) is projected at an average 2.6% growth rate, trailing the projected net supply growth of 3.2%. With 3.1% average daily rate inflation, market gross revenues should gain 5.8%, and REVPAR should increase 2.5% annually during the nine year forecast. These assumptions relative to demand, supply, and occupancy reflect the fact that over the past 20 years overall occupancy in Texas has averaged about 60%, a level considered to be 'Equilibrium Occupancy' state-wide. This fact considers that larger and more successful metro area markets generate higher overall occupancy and REVPAR numbers than state averages, while rural areas lag these averages (Source Strategies, Inc. database). 'Equilibrium Occupancy' is further explained by the fact that new investment money will eventually be attracted to an under-supplied market until market occupancy falls and lower returns on capital are the result. The equilibrium occupancy point is where net, new supply is being added at about the same rate as growth in demand, and where return on investment is in balance with the cost of capital. Fueled by moderate, steady demand growth, the Metro market has room for appropriately-positioned new development, added at similar rates to demand. Higher quality new lodging products at or above mid-priced levels are performing very well in the market despite overall performance numbers being moderated by the large number of older, obsolete hotels. These older, existing competitors are highly vulnerable to the superior attractiveness of newly-built lodging. This pattern can be seen in the success of chain operations at or above the mid-priced levels. Note that REVPAR growth for every individual hotel unit is well below the total revenue growth of the market, with average REVPAR in our projection growing 2.4% per annum over the next five years (compared to 1.6% REVPAR average growth of the past nine years). Revenues are forecast to grow by 5.9% per year on the strength of 2.7% growth in real demand and 3.1% growth in price (room-rates). Occupancy over the next five years is expected to drop (-0.7%), as supply rises 3.4% per year..

Page 19 of 99 SAN ANTONIO METRO PROJECTION # Room Total Htls nites Rooms Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 % Growth Vs Yr Ago Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $000's Occ. Rate RevPar Sply Real ADR $Rev 152 472 46,330 2,923 326,317 69.3 111.66 77.40 1.0 3.0 3.5 6.6 153 478 46,567 2,986 328,495 69.7 110.02 76.68 1.0 3.0 3.5 6.6 154 459 46,640 2,469 271,389 57.5 109.93 63.25 3.0 3.0 3.5 6.6 161 465 46,842 2,824 316,163 67.0 111.95 74.99 3.0 3.0 3.5 6.6 162 501 48,646 3,010 346,189 68.0 115.01 78.20 5.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 163 507 48,895 3,075 348,501 68.4 113.32 77.47 5.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 164 487 48,972 2,543 287,917 56.4 113.23 63.90 5.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 171 493 49,184 2,909 335,418 65.7 115.30 75.77 5.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 172 526 50,592 3,085 365,489 67.0 118.46 79.39 4.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 173 533 50,851 3,152 367,930 67.4 116.72 78.65 4.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 174 511 50,931 2,606 303,968 55.6 116.62 64.87 4.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 181 518 51,152 2,982 354,117 64.8 118.76 76.92 4.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 182 548 52,110 3,163 385,865 66.7 122.01 81.37 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 183 555 52,377 3,231 388,442 67.1 120.22 80.61 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 184 532 52,459 2,672 320,915 55.4 120.12 66.49 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 191 539 52,686 3,056 373,859 64.5 122.33 78.84 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 192 570 53,673 3,242 407,377 66.4 125.67 83.41 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 193 577 53,948 3,312 410,097 66.7 123.83 82.63 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 194 553 54,033 2,738 338,806 55.1 123.72 68.16 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 201 561 54,267 3,133 394,702 64.1 126.00 80.81 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 202 593 55,283 3,323 430,089 66.0 129.44 85.49 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 203 600 55,567 3,395 432,960 66.4 127.54 84.69 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 204 576 55,654 2,807 357,694 54.8 127.44 69.86 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 211 584 55,895 3,211 416,707 63.8 129.78 82.84 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 212 617 56,942 3,406 454,066 65.7 133.32 87.63 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 213 625 57,234 3,479 457,098 66.1 131.37 86.81 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 214 599 57,324 2,877 377,635 54.6 131.26 71.61 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 221 607 57,572 3,291 439,938 63.5 133.67 84.91 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 222 642 58,650 3,491 479,380 65.4 137.32 89.82 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 223 650 58,951 3,566 482,581 65.8 135.31 88.98 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 224 623 59,043 2,949 398,689 54.3 135.20 73.40 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 231 632 59,299 3,374 464,465 63.2 137.68 87.03 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 232 667 60,410 3,578 506,106 65.1 141.44 92.06 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 233 676 60,719 3,656 509,485 65.4 139.37 91.20 3.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 234 648 60,815 3,037 422,969 54.3 139.25 75.60 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 241 657 61,078 3,475 492,751 63.2 141.81 89.64 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 242 694 62,222 3,686 536,927 65.1 145.69 94.83 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 243 703 62,541 3,765 540,512 65.4 143.55 93.94 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 244 675 62,639 3,129 448,728 54.3 143.43 77.87 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 251 684 62,910 3,579 522,759 63.2 146.06 92.33 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 252 722 64,088 3,796 569,626 65.1 150.06 97.67 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 253 732 64,417 3,878 573,430 65.4 147.86 96.76 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 254 702 64,518 3,222 476,055 54.3 147.73 80.20 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 261 711 64,798 3,686 554,595 63.2 150.45 95.10 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.1 9yr CGR % 3.2% 2.6% 5.8% -0.6% 3.1% 2.5% '5yrs 3.4% 2.7% 5.9% -0.7% 3.1% 2.4% HISTORY CGR%Past9yr 3.2% 3.4% 4.9% 0.2% 1.4% 1.6% 4yrs 1.2% 4.2% 6.6% 2.9% 2.3% 5.4% 1yr 0.2% 4.3% 7.7% 4.2% 3.2% 7.5% 1.Roomnights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room-nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day.

Page 20 of 99 LOCAL MARKET PERFORMANCE 4. The subject hotel s area market currently generates a REVPAR of about $43 compared to the Texas average of $65. The local Converse area market is lower than the Texas average, primarily due to its current lack of any properties above the mid-market level: PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2015 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TX # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000 S RNS 000 S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 2.9 14 3.0 1,082 3.6 67.6 76.91 52.01 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.2 28 5.9 1,594 5.2 76.5 57.10 43.68 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.1 42 8.9 2,676 8.8 73.3 63.73 46.70 BEST WEST 3.2 10.2 49 10.4 3,931 12.9 67.9 80.07 54.39 COMFO INN 1.1 4.5 21 4.5 1,200 3.9 65.9 56.72 37.38 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.1 29 6.2 2,887 9.5 68.1 98.43 67.04 HAMPTON 2.2 9.4 48 10.1 5,098 16.7 71.3 106.99 76.33 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.3 21 4.5 2,315 7.6 69.3 108.97 75.52 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.2 52 11.1 4,078 13.4 66.2 77.81 51.49 TOT LTD SVE 10.9 45.8 221 46.8 19,510 64.0 68.2 88.32 60.19 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.2 32 6.8 1,437 4.7 72.8 44.69 32.53 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.2 32 6.8 1,437 4.7 72.8 44.69 32.53 DAYS INN 2.1 6.1 27 5.7 1,253 4.1 62.1 46.42 28.84 QUALITY 1.1 3.8 16 3.4 753 2.5 59.3 46.98 27.87 SUPER 8 2.2 9.2 44 9.3 2,065 6.8 67.3 47.25 31.78 TOT BUDGET 5.4 19.1 87 18.4 4,070 13.4 64.0 46.94 30.06 TOT CHAINS 18 1.5 79.3 382 80.9 27,693 90.9 68.0 72.54 49.36 TOT INDEP 5.4 20.7 90 19.1 2,779 9.1 61.4 30.84 18.94 TOT MARKET 23 1.9 100.0 472 100.0 30,473 100 66.7 64.58 43.06 * All figures annualized. Includes taxed and est non-tax room revenues. Independents are categorized by price: $100+, $60-99.99, and under $60)

Page 21 of 99 Local Market REVPAR History & Forecast: 5. Over the past nine years, the local Converse Area Market has shown real growth (roomnights sold) of 7.1%, annual growth of 10% in total room revenues, and a 4.2% annual gain in REVPAR. Occupancy rose 1.4% per year over the nine years. Supply increased 5.5% per year, with room rates rising 2.8% annually. Over the past four years, 6.2% annual demand gains were coupled with a modest increase in supply of 0.7% annually. Revenues over this period rose by 10.5% per year, while REVPAR grew 9.7%, occupancy increased 5.5%, and room rates rose 4%. Over the last two years, real demand rose by 3.6% annually, and supply fell a nominal 0.4%. Rates rose 2.3%, and yearly revenues rose 6%. These results caused occupancy to rise 4% annually, and REVPAR to improve by 6.4% per year. In the year ending the first quarter of 2015, growth rates remained healthy. Real demand increased 8.1%, rates climbed 2.5%, revenues rose by 10.8% and occupancy gained 8% for the year. With a minor supply increase of 0.1%, REVPAR rose a strong 10.6%. Market occupancy averaged 66.7%, just below statewide performance.

Page 22 of 99 LODGING MARKET HISTORY: CONVERSE AREA MARKET # Room 1 Total Htls nites Rooms Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 % Growth Vs Yr Ago Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $000's Occ. Rate RevPar Sply Real ADR $Rev 052 15 1,164 62 3,085 58.7 49.61 29.12 053 15 1,164 70 3,716 65.4 53.09 34.70 054 16 1,193 57 2,775 52.1 48.50 25.28 061 16 1,261 66 3,364 58.2 50.91 29.64 062 16 1,261 69 4,296 59.9 62.50 37.44 8.3 10.5 26.0 39.3 063 16 1,261 75 4,510 64.7 60.05 38.88 8.3 7.3 13.1 21.4 064 16 1,261 53 2,970 45.7 55.97 25.60 5.7-7.2 15.4 7.0 071 16 1,261 63 3,433 55.1 54.87 30.25 0.0-5.3 7.8 2.1 072 17 1,331 69 4,396 57.3 63.33 36.29 5.6 1.0 1.3 2.3 073 17 1,342 79 4,972 63.9 63.05 40.27 6.4 5.1 5.0 10.2 074 18 1,365 71 4,000 56.3 56.54 31.85 8.2 33.1 1.0 34.7 081 20 1,492 73 4,393 54.7 59.83 32.72 18.3 17.3 9.0 28.0 082 20 1,492 77 5,019 56.9 64.92 36.97 12.1 11.4 2.5 14.2 083 19 1,467 85 5,659 62.6 66.96 41.93 9.3 7.1 6.2 13.8 084 18 1,508 60 3,608 43.5 59.76 26.01 10.5-14.6 5.7-9.8 091 20 1,677 79 4,201 52.0 53.48 27.83 12.4 7.1-10.6-4.4 092 20 1,727 84 4,644 53.4 55.37 29.55 15.8 8.5-14.7-7.5 093 20 1,727 96 5,429 60.2 56.78 34.17 17.7 13.1-15.2-4.1 094 20 1,682 71 3,872 45.6 54.82 25.02 11.5 16.9-8.3 7.3 101 20 1,743 88 4,606 56.2 52.23 29.36 3.9 12.2-2.3 9.6 102 21 1,831 96 5,322 57.4 55.69 31.94 6.0 13.9 0.6 14.6 103 22 1,905 109 6,193 62.4 56.59 35.33 10.3 14.4-0.3 14.1 104 22 1,905 73 4,104 41.6 56.25 23.42 13.3 3.4 2.6 6.0 111 22 1,905 93 4,843 54.1 52.25 28.25 9.3 5.1 0.0 5.1 112 22 1,880 103 5,707 60.2 55.43 33.36 2.7 7.7-0.5 7.2 113 22 1,880 112 6,815 64.6 61.04 39.40-1.3 2.1 7.9 10.0 114 22 1,880 82 4,910 47.3 59.98 28.39-1.3 12.2 6.6 19.6 121 22 1,877 102 5,939 60.2 58.45 35.16-1.5 9.6 11.9 22.6 122 23 1,962 118 7,101 65.9 60.40 39.77 4.4 14.2 9.0 24.4 123 23 1,960 122 7,708 67.7 63.15 42.75 4.3 9.3 3.5 13.1 124 23 1,960 93 5,878 51.7 63.05 32.59 4.3 13.8 5.1 19.7 131 23 1,930 107 6,438 61.5 60.26 37.06 2.8 5.1 3.1 8.4 132 23 1,929 114 7,187 64.9 63.13 40.94-1.7-3.2 4.5 1.2 133 23 1,939 120 7,731 67.1 64.54 43.34-1.1-1.9 2.2 0.3 134 23 1,939 94 5,929 52.6 63.17 33.24-1.1 0.8 0.2 0.9 141 23 1,939 109 6,655 62.5 60.98 38.13 0.5 2.2 1.2 3.4 142 23 1,939 122 7,731 69.1 63.39 43.81 0.5 7.2 0.4 7.6 143 23 1,939 128 8,527 71.5 66.84 47.80 0.0 6.5 3.6 10.3 144 23 1,939 104 6,743 58.2 64.97 37.80 0.0 10.5 2.8 13.7 151 23 1,939 119 7,472 68.0 63.00 42.81 0.0 8.7 3.3 12.3 9yrs 5.5% 7.1% 10.0% 1.4% 2.8% 4.2% 4yrs 0.7% 6.2% 10.5% 5.5% 4.0% 9.7% 2yrs -0.4% 3.6% 6.0% 4.0% 2.3% 6.4% 1yr 0.1% 8.1% 10.8% 8.0% 2.5% 10.6% Wider Market History CGR%Past9yr 3.2% 3.4% 4.9% 0.2% 1.4% 1.6% 4yrs 1.2% 4.2% 6.6% 2.9% 2.3% 5.4% 1. Room-nights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room-nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 23 of 99 6. Overall market occupancy is projected to fall toward an equilibrium level of 60%, with 2.7% demand gains and supply rising 3.8% annually for the next nine years. REVPAR should rise 2% annually in the period, based on rates rising 3.1% per year. These assumptions relative to demand, supply, and occupancy reflect the fact that over the past 20 years overall occupancy in Texas has averaged about 60%, a level considered to be 'Equilibrium Occupancy' state-wide. This fact considers that larger and more successful metro area markets generate higher overall occupancy and REVPAR numbers than state averages, while rural and Interstate highways areas lag these averages (Source Strategies, Inc. database). 'Equilibrium Occupancy' is further explained by the fact that new investment money will eventually be attracted to an under-supplied market until market occupancy falls and lower returns on capital are the result. The equilibrium occupancy point is where net, new supply is being added at about the same rate as growth in demand, and where return on investment is in balance with the cost of capital. The local market has room for selectively-positioned new development. Higher quality new lodging products at or above mid-priced levels are performing very well in the market despite overall performance numbers being moderated by the large number of older, obsolete, budgets. These older, existing competitors are highly vulnerable to the superior attractiveness of newly-built, majorbranded lodging. This pattern can be seen in the success of chain operations at or above the midpriced levels. Given our growth assumptions, room supply consequently grows from 1,939 rooms currently to 2,798 in 2024, 44% higher and representing 859 net new rooms (gross new openings, less closings). Note that REVPAR growth for every individual hotel unit is below the total revenue growth of the market, with average REVPAR in our projection rising 2% per annum over the next five years. Revenues during this upcoming period are forecast to rise by 6.1% per year on demand gains of 2.9% per year and 3.1% annual increase in prices (room-rates). Occupancy over the next five years is expected to fall steadily toward equilibrium as supply rises by 4% per year. If supply should grow 280 rooms over forecast (+10%), without demand also growing faster than forecast, average individual hotel REVPAR would decline by 9% versus forecast, dropping from the forecast REVPAR of $52 to $48 by 2024.

Page 24 of 99 LODGING MARKET PROJECTION: CONVERSE AREA MARKET # Room 1 Total Htls nites Rooms Year & and # sold Revenue % 2 $ 3 $ 4 % Growth Vs Yr Ago Quarter Mtls Rooms 000's $000's Occ. Rate RevPar Sply Real ADR $Rev 152 23 1,939 127 8,324 71.9 65.61 47.18 0.0 4.0 3.5 7.7 153 23 1,939 133 9,180 74.4 69.18 51.46 0.0 4.0 3.5 7.7 154 23 1,939 108 7,259 60.5 67.24 40.69 0.0 4.0 3.5 7.7 161 23 1,939 123 8,043 70.7 65.21 46.09 0.0 4.0 3.5 7.6 162 24 2,017 131 8,874 71.6 67.58 48.36 4.0 3.5 3.0 6.6 163 25 2,094 137 9,787 71.3 71.25 50.80 8.0 3.5 3.0 6.6 164 25 2,094 111 7,664 57.4 69.26 39.78 8.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 171 25 2,094 126 8,491 67.1 67.16 45.05 8.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 172 27 2,178 135 9,369 67.9 69.60 47.27 8.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 173 27 2,199 141 10,332 69.6 73.39 51.08 5.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 174 27 2,199 113 8,091 56.1 71.34 40.00 5.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 181 27 2,199 130 8,964 65.5 69.18 45.30 5.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 182 28 2,287 138 9,891 66.3 71.69 47.53 5.0 2.5 3.0 5.6 183 28 2,276 144 10,908 68.9 75.59 52.10 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 184 28 2,276 116 8,542 55.5 73.48 40.80 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 191 28 2,276 133 9,464 64.9 71.25 46.21 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 192 30 2,367 141 10,443 65.7 73.84 48.49 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 193 29 2,355 148 11,517 68.3 77.86 53.14 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 194 29 2,355 119 9,018 55.0 75.68 41.62 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 201 29 2,355 136 9,992 64.2 73.39 47.13 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 202 31 2,450 145 11,025 65.0 76.06 49.46 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 203 31 2,438 152 12,159 67.6 80.20 54.21 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 204 31 2,438 122 9,521 54.5 77.95 42.45 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 211 31 2,438 140 10,549 63.6 75.59 48.08 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 212 32 2,535 149 11,640 64.4 78.34 50.45 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 213 32 2,523 155 12,836 66.9 82.60 55.30 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 214 32 2,523 125 10,052 53.9 80.29 43.30 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 221 32 2,523 143 11,137 63.0 77.86 49.04 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 222 34 2,624 152 12,288 63.8 80.69 51.46 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 223 34 2,612 159 13,552 66.3 85.08 56.41 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 224 34 2,612 128 10,612 53.4 82.70 44.17 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 231 34 2,612 147 11,758 62.4 80.19 50.03 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 232 35 2,716 156 12,974 63.2 83.11 52.49 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 233 35 2,703 163 14,308 65.7 87.63 57.54 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 234 35 2,703 132 11,204 52.9 85.18 45.06 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 241 35 2,703 150 12,413 61.8 82.60 51.03 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 242 37 2,811 160 13,697 62.5 85.60 53.54 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 243 37 2,798 167 15,105 65.0 90.26 58.69 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 244 37 2,798 135 11,829 52.4 87.74 45.96 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 251 37 2,798 154 13,105 61.2 85.08 52.05 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 252 39 2,909 164 14,460 61.9 88.17 54.62 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 253 38 2,895 172 15,947 64.4 92.97 59.87 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 254 38 2,895 138 12,488 51.9 90.37 46.88 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 261 38 2,895 158 13,836 60.6 87.63 53.10 3.5 2.5 3.0 5.6 9yr CGR % 3.8% 2.7% 5.9% -1.0% 3.1% 2.0% '5yrs 4.0% 2.9% 6.1% -1.0% 3.1% 2.0% HISTORY 9yrs 5.5% 7.1% 10.0% 1.4% 2.8% 4.2% 4yrs 0.7% 6.2% 10.5% 5.5% 4.0% 9.7% 1yr 0.1% 8.1% 10.8% 8.0% 2.5% 10.6% 1. Room-nights sold (derived from est. rate and actual revenues) 2. Occupancy nights sold divided by nights available for sale. 3. Avg. price for room-nights sold; Directories, Surveys, & experience. 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

Page 25 of 99 7. A graph of the REVPAR history and projection for the local market shows that the recent recovery from the recession is expected to level off in the coming years:

Page 26 of 99 8. The occupancy projection for the local market is for a near term decline from current elevated performance. Occupancy in the local market will trend toward its long-term average of around 60%:

Page 27 of 99 9. The Room Nights Sold history and projection graph shows the reasonable nature of the trend expectations for the local market:

Page 28 of 99 10. The local market has increased steadily when compared to the San Antonio Metro, rising 13 index points since 2005, and is at 62% versus the wider metro market REVPAR in the latest year: MARKET REVPAR HISTORY Local/Total Market Year & Total Local Quarter Year Quarter MktArea Market Index Index 052 66.93 29.12 44 053 61.07 34.70 57 054 52.46 25.28 48 061 62.08 29.64 48 49 062 70.48 37.44 53 063 66.81 38.88 58 064 56.63 25.60 45 071 65.92 30.25 46 51 072 70.96 36.29 51 073 66.87 40.27 60 074 56.47 31.85 56 081 68.24 32.72 48 54 082 73.85 36.97 50 083 69.52 41.93 60 084 56.77 26.01 46 091 53.99 27.83 52 52 092 57.06 29.55 52 093 56.40 34.17 61 094 46.17 25.02 54 101 54.27 29.36 54 55 102 59.83 31.94 53 103 60.28 35.33 59 104 49.07 23.42 48 111 57.25 28.25 49 52 112 61.84 33.36 54 113 63.25 39.40 62 114 51.87 28.39 55 121 60.49 35.16 58 57 122 67.31 39.77 59 123 65.38 42.75 65 124 54.48 32.59 60 131 65.66 37.06 56 60 132 70.41 40.94 58 133 65.56 43.34 66 134 57.15 33.24 58 141 66.93 38.13 57 60 142 73.33 43.81 60 143 72.65 47.80 66 144 61.11 37.80 62 151 72.46 42.81 59 62 CGR%9yrs 1.6% 4.2% 4yrs 5.4% 9.7% 2yrs 5.2% 6.4% 1yr 7.5% 10.6%

Page 29 of 99 11. The REVPAR forecast calls for the local market REVPAR index to rise slightly in the near term before receding slowly over the later years of our market projection: MARKET REVPAR PROJECTION Local/Total Market Year & Total Local Quarter Year Quarter Market Market Index Index 152 77.40 47.18 61 153 76.68 51.46 67 154 63.25 40.69 64 161 74.99 46.09 61 63 162 78.20 48.36 62 163 77.47 50.80 66 164 63.90 39.78 62 171 75.77 45.05 59 62 172 79.39 47.27 60 173 78.65 51.08 65 174 64.87 40.00 62 181 76.92 45.30 59 61 182 81.37 47.53 58 183 80.61 52.10 65 184 66.49 40.80 61 191 78.84 46.21 59 61 192 83.41 48.49 58 193 82.63 53.14 64 194 68.16 41.62 61 201 80.81 47.13 58 60 202 85.49 49.46 58 203 84.69 54.21 64 204 69.86 42.45 61 211 82.84 48.08 58 60 212 87.63 50.45 58 213 86.81 55.30 64 214 71.61 43.30 60 221 84.91 49.04 58 60 222 89.82 51.46 57 223 88.98 56.41 63 224 73.40 44.17 60 231 87.03 50.03 57 60 232 92.06 52.49 57 233 91.20 57.54 63 234 75.60 45.06 60 241 89.64 51.03 57 59 242 94.83 53.54 56 243 93.94 58.69 62 244 77.87 45.96 59 251 92.33 52.05 56 59 252 97.67 54.62 56 253 96.76 59.87 62 254 80.20 46.88 58 261 95.10 53.10 56 58 262 100.36 56.12 56 263 99.42 61.51 62 264 82.41 48.17 58 CGR%9Yrs 2.5% 2.0% First5Yrs 2.4% 2.0%

Page 30 of 99 PROJECT REVPAR - DEVELOPMENT OF INDICES Within the above market REVPAR forecast, the expected performance of the proposed hotel is based on six factors. All six factors are independent and modify the market's projected REVPAR average to reflect the subject property's particular characteristics. First, what is the Base Value? It is the effect of the Brand, including specified product quality levels. Second, what is the effect of the brand's overall Age on its average performance? Third, what is the effect of the project's Size, or room-count, on results? Fourth, are there any Other adjustments needed to account for various factors, including under- or over-supply in the product's Segment in which the project will compete? Fifth, what is the effect of the normal Life Cycle patterns on the project (e.g. the effect of the project's Newness compared to older competition on its unstoppable way to obsolescence)? And sixth, what is the likely influence of the selected Site on results? 1. The Base Value factor sets property type/brand/product quality for our subject limited service hotel in this type of market at 1.49 (or 149%) of the market average REVPAR. This valuation is based on the actual average REVPAR performance of our sample pool of 1127 hotels from our 8 selected brands (see Exhibit V) currently operating in Texas (Exhibit IV). 13 These hotels produced an average REVPAR of $67.97 in the latest year, compared to the Exhibit IV market average REVPAR of $45.71, as follows: $67.97 / $45.71 = 1.49 This sample of limited service properties in Texas markets provides a solid and realistic basis for assigning the basic REVPAR performance that can be expected when operating such a hotel in the local market. 2. The second adjustment factor, Brand Aging, is set at 1.00 (100%), a neutral valuation because of the average age of our pool of hotel properties in the Exhibit IV market. These hotels were built on average in 2003, and are just past their peak performing stage in terms of the age of a typical hotel building. This factor adjusts for the effect of the average age of the existing hotels 13. Includes hotels in Metro areas, but excludes luxury segment.

Page 31 of 99 on the brand's current performance. 14 The brand age adjustment, or life-cycle adjustment, for other brands examined includes: BRAND AGING: TEXAS MARKETS Average Brand Aging Brand Opening Adjustment Candlewood 2007.95 TownePlace 2006.96 Hampton 2005.97 Comfort Suites 2005.97 Best Western 1998 1.09 La Quinta 1996 1.14 Motel 6 1985 1.36 3. The property Size factor - reflecting room count - calls for a neutral performance adjustment for this property (100% factor). The average hotel in our sample in the Exhibit IV market has 85 rooms, which would be optimal to develop as a brand average. The size factor assigns a premium if the property is smaller than average and a penalty to the property if it is larger than average. The size adjustment is necessary because demand is not affected by the number of rental rooms offered, as the individual consumer only needs one room: customers do not care whether a hotel offers 100, 125 or 150 rooms and their purchasing behavior will be the same regardless of how many rooms the property offers. Keeping a project conservatively sized assures a higher per-unit revenue yield, particularly in very competitive markets like the local area. The highly-positive effect on revenues and return on capital due to building small, and not 'over-sizing' projects is best explained by the following study, a study that can be replicated with any brand, in almost any situation. The net effect of building small is to run higher occupancy and rate, thereby increasing brand REVPAR by building a below-average number of rental units. 14. Point #5, below, adjusts for the physical life-cycle of the subject property, a different and additional consideration.

Page 32 of 99 A STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF HOTEL SIZE ON PERFORMANCE IN THE TEXAS HOTEL INDUSTRY THE CASE FOR DOWNSIZING NEW HOTELS 15 Source Strategies, Inc., has long contended that the number of rooms a developer offers in a new property is one of the key factors in determining a venture's relative success or failure. It is every bit as important to size a hotel project properly as it is to select the appropriate brand, and to have chosen to develop in a suitable market and location. For the purposes of this study, we analyzed two separate samplings of hotels. We first looked at Comfort Inns across Texas as a selected brand sampling; then we examined all branded hotels built during a set period of time for a wider sampling. 1) COMFORT INN - ANALYSIS OF SIZING AND ITS IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE In our initial analysis, we selected a group [55 properties] of Texas Comfort Inn branded properties ranging in size from 36 to 75 rooms. The following chart of performance statistics clearly illustrates the fact that on average, the smaller property will perform better, in terms of REVPAR and occupancy, than a larger property of the same brand: 12 Months Ending September 30, 1999 Rooms Occupancy Rate REVPAR 36-40 66.9 55.25 36.95 41-45 65.3 57.34 37.45 46-50 66.5 57.38 38.17 51-55 62.8 56.02 35.20 56-60 61.8 54.26 33.55 61-65 56.6 55.33 31.33 66-70 44.6 45.71 20.41 71-75 43.8 44.20 19.38 Combined: 52 63.2 55.46 35.03 Further, properties with lower room counts were clearly able to sustain a higher level of occupancy. Average occupancy ranged from 66.9% for properties of 36-40 rooms, downward to a much lower 43.8% average occupancy for properties in the 71-75 room size bracket. 15 Analyzed and compiled by Douglas W. Sutton and Bruce H. Walker.

Page 33 of 99 The above chart and graph clearly illustrate that developers often miss the mark, building more rooms than 'optimum'. 'Optimum' is defined as generating the highest return on invested capital, and is closely tied to occupancy and REVPAR. Analyzing the above data provides a measure of the effect of over-building. For the typical range of rooms for Comfort Inn projects occupancy dropped 23 points (a full 35%) from 67% to 44% as room counts escalated. The key question is, 'how to apply this principle to a given hotel project.' Naturally, each project would have to be judged on its individual merits, but looking at an 'average' project for a single brand and product is very revealing. BRANDED HOTELS - ANALYSIS OF SIZING AND ITS IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE In our second analysis, we looked at a sampling [91 properties] of Texas branded hotels of less than 135 rooms which were constructed from 1970-1975. For our analysis we examined performance results from the year 1985 when all subject hotels were 10 to 15 years old, to well into their aging life cycles. The following table of performance statistics from 1985 for branded properties throughout Texas clearly illustrates the downward curve, with a pronounced and methodical erosion of performance as room counts increased: # of Hotels Rooms Occupancy Rate REVPAR 2 00-44 70.0 37.88 26.50 3 45-59 73.9 36.13 26.71 7 60-74 66.8 31.10 20.77 14 75-89 62.7 31.65 19.86 29 90-104 60.9 32.42 19.75 16 105-119 57.8 26.25 15.18 20 120-134 55.5 29.35 16.28 Combined: 91 98 59.8 30.34 18.14

Page 34 of 99 The following graph provides a clear picture of descending performance as room counts increase. Average occupancy ranged from 70% for properties of 44 rooms or less, downward to a much lower 55.5% average occupancy for properties in the 120-134 size bracket, after peaking at 73.9% in the 45-59 size range. The data is clear: in almost every case small hotels outperform larger ones. Common sense explains this occurrence: a successful 100 room hotel will inevitably prompt the development of one or more new, small hotels of similar quality in the immediate area. In a competitive market environment, the smaller hotel has a distinct advantage and wins - almost every time. The fact remains that if one builds a smaller than average property for a given brand, results should be improved over the average for that brand, with the converse of this fact also true. 4. Fourth, the Segment or other adjustment factor is set at 100% (1.00), with no penalty or premium warranted for this project for Other Factors. 5. Fifth, the Aging Adjustment factor reflects the standard hotel life cycle: 92% (-8%) in Year I; 107% for Year II; 112% for Years III through V; followed by a 1.67% annual decline in the REVPAR index starting in Year VI. The aging factor mirrors extensive studies of hotel lifecycles conducted by Source Strategies, Inc.'s principal, Bruce Walker, when heading the Holiday Corporation's strategic planning department (1979-83). It also reflects recent research on the life cycles of 25,000 Texas hotel rooms, developed from 1980 through 1982, and then again in 1990 through 1992, with each group's performance versus the market tracked to the present (MarketShare newsletter, "The Hotel Life Cycle - It's Very Real" published September 1994).

Page 35 of 99 The aging factor also mirrors extensive studies of hotel life-cycles conducted by Source Strategies, Inc.'s principal, Bruce Walker, when heading the Holiday Corporation's strategic planning department (1979-83). It also reflects recent research on the life cycles of 25,000 Texas hotel rooms, developed from 1980 through 1982, and then again in 1990 through 1992, with each group's performance versus the market tracked to the present (MarketShare newsletter, "The Hotel Life Cycle - It's Very Real" published September 1994). 6. The last factor, Site, is set at.95 (95%), or just below average for the local market. The site is convenient to all area amenities, with good access and visibility. As we have used the other nearby hotels around the property for our analysis, it is our determination that the value of the subject s location is marginally lower or very similar to several other examined hotel sites in the area. With the evaluation of the current sites around this location, we have an easy analysis of the site potential. The site values for this property, as well as for nearby existing competitors have been developed by quantifying the influence site has had on their performance. Applying known adjustment factors to existing properties, except for a site factor, lets us solve for the site value itself. Source Strategies' site methodology 'backs into' the value of the site by matching actual performance against known factors, using the site factor as the 'plugged number.' The differences between the closest key competitors appear to be both explainable and reasonable. The site value is 'plugged' so that projected REVPAR versus market approaches the actual REVPAR over the past 12 months. Overall, current performance of nearby existing competition would indicate that a 95% site value for the subject Converse hotel would be a responsible estimate:

Page 36 of 99 DERIVATION OF LOCAL COMPETITION Best Super Hampton Holiday Comfort Comfort La Data in 2014 $ Western 8 Inn Express Suites Inn Quinta Base: Name & Quality 1.26 0.77 1.84 1.67 1.29 1.10 1.27 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.09 1.21 0.97 0.96 0.97 1.00 1.13 x Site Value Adjustment 1.19 1.13 1.01 1.04 0.84 0.77 0.93 x Size Adjustment 0.97 0.83 1.00 0.99 1.07 0.93 1.05 x Other Adjustments 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 1.08 0.74 1.00 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.10 = Performance Factor 188% 65% 180% 175% 121% 87% 154% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $81.10 $27.84 $77.62 $75.34 $51.99 $37.31 $66.38 Actual Yr End 2014 $81.31 $27.81 $78.00 $75.52 $52.01 $37.38 $66.49 Index (Proj. Vs Actual) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Units in Above Subject 67 119 85 84 57 88 81 Average Units 60 60 86 81 69 69 93 Size Adjustment (33%) -3-17 0-1 7-7 5 Year Built 2008 1985 2012 2007 2008 2009 2009 Combining all six factors that affect a hotel's REVPAR performance, we calculate that the proposed hotel's REVPAR will achieve 159% of the market average REVPAR in its peak Years III-V, declining slowly thereafter: SUBJECT HOTEL DERIVATION Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.49 1.49 1.49 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Site Value Adjustment.95.95.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 130% 151% 159% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $56.08 $65.22 $68.27

Page 37 of 99 COMBINING THE ABOVE MARKET REVPAR PROJECTION AND THE HOTEL'S REVPAR INDEX TO DEVELOP REVENUES, OCCUPANCY, AND RATE Using the projected Year III REVPAR index of 159%, the above process generates a theoretical REVPAR of $68.27 in latest year market dollars. This is the result of the Year III performance index of 159% (1.59) multiplied by the current market average REVPAR of $43.06. Therefore, if the property were open today and were in its third year of operation, it should theoretically be operating at the following level against 2014 market results: a $68.27 REVPAR computes to gross room revenues of approximately $2,118,077 ($68.27 times 85 units times 365 days). Please note that the actual effect on the market due to the introduction of this project and other new hotels is fully reflected in subsequent pro forma market projections and financials. In latest year's dollars (2014), this projection for the project's Year III revenue breaks down seasonally as follows: Quarter Fourth First Second Third Year III Room Revenues $461,855 $511,706 $542,900 $601,616 $2,118,077 % of Year 21.8% 24.2% 25.6% 28.4% 100 Seasonal Index 87 98 103 113 100 REVPAR$ $59.06 $66.89 $70.19 $76.93 $68.27 Source Strategies, Inc.'s projections of a reasonable rate and occupancy mix, a split of the subject hotel s REVPAR for occupancy and rate, in latest year dollars, would be as follows: Quarter Fourth First Second Third Year III ADR - $ $81.24 $90.27 $94.79 $99.30 $91.54 Occupancy % 72.7% 74.1% 74.0% 77.5% 74.6% REVPAR$ $59.06 $66.89 $70.19 $76.93 $68.27

Page 38 of 99 TESTS FOR REASONABILITY Comparisons made here support the reasonable nature of market and subject projections: 1. Individual property projections depend importantly on the projection of local market REVPAR - forecast to rise at a reasonable, conservative rate through 2024, starting at the current level. Over the next nine years market REVPAR is projected to rise 2% per year. REVPAR encompasses the net effects of room supply, room-night demand and prices. Over the next nine years, we are comfortable with the 2.7% real compound gain projected for the market, trailing the projected net supply growth of 3.8% annually. Prices were up 3.1% for the period. The resulting level of occupancy is 60% (equilibrium). 2. The derived Base Value of 1.49 (149%) for our brand pool (average) hotel in the Exhibit IV market is reasonable when compared to the Base Values of other hotels in these same markets. The hierarchy of REVPAR indices for various brands is shown below: REVPAR INDEX COMPARISON 16 Hampton Inn 184 Holiday Express 167 Fairfield Inn 154 Candlewood Suites 133 Comfort Suites 129 La Quinta 127 Best Western 126 Comfort Inn 110 Super 8 77 3. Developing actual adjustment factors for the existing properties - so that their projected REVPAR equals actual REVPAR - indicates why the REVPAR index projection has a high probability of being achieved. The REVPAR differences between the closest key competitors appear to be both explainable and reasonable, using the standard, Source Strategies' adjustment factor quantification. For each property, revenues are driven first by chain name affiliation and product type, and are further adjusted for size, segment, hotel age and site location. The REVPAR Index is 16. Unadjusted for physical aging of each brand.

Page 39 of 99 then multiplied by the actual local area market average to generate dollar REVPAR. We also include the theoretical Year III performance of the subject hotel, as follows: Subject Best Super Hampton Holiday Comfort Comfort La Data in 2014 $ Yr III Western 8 Inn Express Suites Inn Quinta Base: Name & Quality 1.49 1.26 0.77 1.84 1.67 1.29 1.10 1.27 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.00 1.09 1.21 0.97 0.96 0.97 1.00 1.13 x Site Value Adjustment.95 1.19 1.13 1.01 1.04 0.84 0.77 0.93 x Size Adjustment 1.00 0.97 0.83 1.00 0.99 1.07 0.93 1.05 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 1.12 1.08 0.74 1.00 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.10 = Performance Factor 159% 188% 65% 180% 175% 121% 87% 154% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $68.27 $81.10 $27.84 $77.62 $75.34 $51.99 $37.31 $66.38 Actual Past Year n/a $81.31 $27.81 $78.00 $75.52 $52.01 $37.38 $66.49 Index (Proj. Vs. Actual n/a 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 4. The projected REVPAR performance of the Subject hotel versus the local market average reflects the fact that this hotel will be new and offer a high level of quality in a desired product type, but much of its competition in this market is higher end product:

Page 40 of 99 5. The graphically projected Occupancy performance of the subject hotel versus the local market average reflects the fact that this hotel will be above the overall market average because of its brand, its newness and its reasonable size:

Page 41 of 99 6. In the overall market, any new hotel will have an inordinate advantage over the old; the playing field here is not level as the lodging consumer almost always votes for 'new' versus old. The average hotel room in the local market is over 20 years old, over two-thirds through the life cycle of the typical hotel building, and past the peak performance of the first ten years. The typical hotel building becomes stylistically and structurally obsolete after 30+ years, though this life cycle is longer for high-rise/concrete structures, of which this market has several. Out of 1,939 total rooms in the local market, 799, or 41% were built after 2004 (10 years old or less) and 695, or 36% were opened before 1985 (at least 30 years old). There is typically a wide and dramatic gap between the performance of new and older properties, with a range of hotels in the area from very new, to very old and well past the peak performing years. Well established consumer research strongly indicates that to consumers 'new' means 'clean,' and 'old' means 'dirty', with cleanliness the number one consumer selection factor in lodging. Converse Area Properties Year # Open Rooms Hotel 2012 85 HAMPTON INN & SUITES FORUM 2009 81 LA QUINTA INN & SUITES 2009 118 FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES 2009 88 COMFORT INN & SUITES 2008 67 BEST WESTERN SAN ANTONIO 2008 57 COMFORT SUITES I-35N 2008 121 VALUE PLACE HOTEL 2007 84 HOLIDAY EXPRESS 2005 98 HAMPTON INN & SUITES 1996 61 DAYS INN WINDCREST 1996 61 BEST WESTERN ATRIUM INN FMR RA 1995 58 DAYS INN I-35 NORTH 1995 70 BEST WESTERN I35N GARDEN INN F 1986 136 LA QUINTA INN #640 1986 59 SUPER 8 FMR BHOST/SUPR8 1985 40 MOTEL 6 WINDCREST FMR RUBY INN 1985 119 SUPER 8 1984 100 KNIGHTS INN 1983 88 MI CASA I35N FMR ECONO 1977 74 QUALITY INN N FMR LA PALMERA/P 1973 113 DELTA INN FMR MOTEL 6 #134 1972 87 MIDTOWN I&S FMR RODEW/CLASSIC/ 1970 74 EXTEND A SUITES FMR HOJO/BW C

Page 42 of 99 PRO FORMA: Applying the project derivation factor (159% Years III-V) to the quarterly local market REVPAR forecast results in the following progression: PROJECT REVPAR PROJECTION Subject/ Year & Local Subject Market Index Quarter Market Hotel Qtr Year 164 41.14 53.48 130 171 46.59 60.57 130 172 49.36 64.17 130 173 53.34 69.34 130 130 174 41.77 63.07 151 181 47.30 71.43 151 182 49.88 75.31 151 183 54.67 82.55 151 151 184 42.81 68.07 159 191 48.49 77.09 159 192 50.88 80.89 159 193 55.77 88.67 159 159 194 43.67 69.43 159 201 49.46 78.64 159 202 51.90 82.51 159 203 56.88 90.44 159 159 204 44.54 70.83 159 211 50.45 80.21 159 212 52.94 84.17 159 213 58.02 92.26 159 159 214 45.44 71.04 156 221 51.46 80.46 156 222 54.00 84.42 156 223 59.19 92.54 156 156 224 46.35 71.25 154 231 52.49 80.70 154 232 55.08 84.68 154 233 60.37 92.81 154 154 234 47.28 71.47 151 241 53.54 80.94 151 242 56.18 84.93 151 243 61.58 93.09 151 151 244 48.23 71.68 149 251 54.62 81.18 149 252 57.31 85.19 149 253 62.82 93.37 149 149 254 49.19 71.90 146 261 55.71 81.43 146 262 58.89 86.07 146 263 64.55 94.34 146 146 264 50.54 72.64 144 271 57.24 82.27 144 272 60.51 86.96 144 CGR%9Yrs 1.9% 3.3% First5Yrs 2.0% 5.8%

Page 43 of 99 This REVPAR forecast is then extended to room revenues - multiplying REVPAR by the number of days in each quarter and by the number of rooms in the project - and to occupancy, estimated rate and to room-nights sold: RESULTING PROJECTION: SUBJECT CONVERSE HOTEL Resulting Aver. Room- Year & Room Annual % Daily nghts Annual Basis Quarter Revenues Basis Occ Rate Sold RMNTES Occ. Rate 164 $418,222 59.4 $90.00 4,647 171 $463,363 60.6 $100.00 4,634 172 $496,384 61.1 $105.00 4,727 173 $542,211 $1,920,180 63.0 $110.00 4,929 18,937 61.0% $101.40 174 $493,183 68.7 $91.80 5,372 181 $546,416 70.0 $102.00 5,357 182 $582,540 70.3 $107.10 5,439 183 $645,543 $2,267,683 73.6 $112.20 5,754 21,922 70.7% $103.44 184 $532,295 72.7 $93.64 5,685 191 $589,749 74.1 $104.04 5,668 192 $625,701 74.0 $109.24 5,728 193 $693,372 $2,441,117 77.5 $114.44 6,059 23,139 74.6% $105.50 194 $542,966 72.7 $95.51 5,685 201 $601,573 74.1 $106.12 5,669 202 $638,245 74.1 $111.43 5,728 203 $707,273 $2,490,057 77.5 $116.73 6,059 23,141 74.6% $107.61 204 $553,852 72.7 $97.42 5,685 211 $613,633 74.1 $108.24 5,669 212 $651,041 74.1 $113.66 5,728 213 $721,453 $2,539,979 77.5 $119.07 6,059 23,142 74.6% $109.76 214 $555,521 71.5 $99.37 5,591 221 $615,482 72.9 $110.41 5,575 222 $653,003 72.8 $115.93 5,633 223 $723,627 $2,547,633 76.2 $121.45 5,958 22,756 73.3% $111.95 224 $557,195 70.3 $101.35 5,497 231 $617,337 71.7 $112.62 5,482 232 $654,971 71.6 $118.25 5,539 233 $725,807 $2,555,310 74.9 $123.88 5,859 22,377 72.1% $114.19 234 $558,874 69.1 $103.38 5,406 241 $619,197 70.5 $114.87 5,390 242 $656,945 70.4 $120.61 5,447 243 $727,995 $2,563,011 73.7 $126.36 5,761 22,005 70.9% $116.48 244 $560,558 68.0 $105.45 5,316 251 $621,063 69.3 $117.17 5,301 252 $658,924 69.2 $123.02 5,356 253 $730,189 $2,570,735 72.4 $128.88 5,666 21,638 69.7% $118.81 254 $562,248 66.8 $107.56 5,227 261 $622,935 68.1 $119.51 5,212 262 $665,738 68.6 $125.48 5,305 263 $737,739 $2,588,660 71.8 $131.46 5,612 21,357 68.8% $121.21 264 $568,062 66.2 $109.71 5,178 271 $629,377 67.5 $121.90 5,163 272 $672,622 67.9 $127.99 5,255 273 $745,368 $2,615,428 71.1 $134.09 5,559 21,155 68.2% $123.63 274 $573,936 65.6 $111.90 5,129 281 $635,885 66.9 $124.34 5,114 282 $679,578 67.3 $130.55 5,205 CGR%9Yr 3.3% 1.4% 1.9% 1.4% First5Y 5.8% 3.7% 2.0% 3.7%

Page 44 of 99 OPERATING COSTS 17 Profitability and returns reflect the above revenue projections and the following other critical assumptions: operating costs per occupied room approximate Limited Service hotels of similar size, rate, and occupancy and include appropriate fixed, semi-fixed and variable costs (Smith Travel Research's 2013 Host Almanac for year 2012 data, and Source Strategies, Inc.). Estimates of operating costs take into account the lower costs of the West South Central United States, which had an average Per Occupied Room Cost of $42.08 (including 5% royalties) in 2012 in Limited Service hotels - versus a national average of $49.05 - or 85.8% of the U.S. average. The following cost comparisons have all been adjusted to reflect this 14.2% lower-cost environment that may be expected in operating a hotel in the West South Central Region. Rooms only Operating Costs per Occupied Room (before Fixed Charges) are estimated at $47.93 for Year I ($907,704 divided by 18,937 roomnights sold); $48.19 for Year II ($1,056,496 divided by $21,922), and $49.07 for Year III ($1,135,445 divided by 23,139). These numbers compare to industry-wide data as follows: a) $36.18 in the Host Almanac for Suburban hotels in 2012 (average rate of $79.59), adjusted to Southwest. This POR cost translates to $39.53 when inflated to Year 2015 dollars. b) $47.60 in the Host Almanac for Upper-Midscale hotels in 2012 (average rate of $101.66), adjusted to Southwest. This POR cost translates to $52.01 when inflated to Year 2015 dollars c) $37.07 in the Host Almanac for Interstate hotels in 2012 (average rate of $79.30), adjusted to Southwest. This POR cost translates to $40.50 when inflated to Year 2015 dollars. d) $53.87 in the Host Almanac for Upscale hotels in 2012 (average rate of $119.76) adjusted to Southwest. This translates to $58.86, when inflated to Year 2015 dollars. e) $78.51 in the Host Almanac for Upper Upscale hotels in 2012 (average rate of $157.78) adjusted to Southwest. This translates to $85.79, when inflated to Year 2015 dollars. 17. The calculation of the statistic of Operating Costs Per Occupied Room (before fixed/capital costs are deducted) is typically the important cost to examine carefully because it is highly stable and predictable, regardless of occupancy and rate. Looking at costs on a percentage basis can be highly misleading because of the high variability in average room revenues.

Page 45 of 99 - Versus room revenues: a necessary marketing expense of 7% in Year I and thereafter. Marketing includes reservation and advertising fees, sales expense, local advertising and the always important outdoor billboards. An annual royalty fee of 5.5%, and no management fee was applied in these numbers. - A reserve for renovations is taken and subtracted from projected cash flows annually; such renovation reserves amount to $1,275,923 in the first ten years ($15,011 per unit). Reserves insure that future revenue streams continue by maintaining product quality at high, excellent levels as required by the franchisor. Reserves are based on an extensive 2001 study, CapEx, by the International Society of Hospitality Consultants. The study shows that required reserves average 5.5% over a 20 year period. - Total capital of $7,925,000 is allocated for the development of the project. The estimated total turnkey cost (excluding land) of $85,000 per unit for development is reasonable for a hotel of this size and quality, in our experience. Land has been valued at $700,000. Should capital needs vary, then returns would change proportionately. The estimates of necessary capital include: Total Investment Land Cost $ 700,000 Improvements $ 7,225,000 @ $85,000 per key 18 Total Investment $ 7,925,000 18. Developer estimates of land cost and acreage size.

Page 46 of 99 open October 1, 2015 Converse Limited Service Hotel Land Value: $700,000 # Rooms: 85 Investment per room excluding land: $85,000 QUARTER: Fourth First Second Third Year Rmnites Sold 4,647 4,634 4,727 4,929 18,937 Rmnites Avail 7,820 7,650 7,735 7,820 31,025 Occupancy % 59.4% 60.6% 61.1% 63.0% 61.0% Avg Rate $90.00 $99.99 $105.01 $110.00 $101.40 REVPAR $53.48 $60.57 $64.17 $69.34 $61.89 % Revenues Room Revenues $418,222 $463,363 $496,384 $542,211 1,920,180 95.7% Other Revenue 18,820 20,851 22,337 24,399 86,408 4.3% Total Sales $437,042 $484,214 $518,721 $566,610 $2,006,588 100.0% Operating Expense Administration 27,591 27,591 27,591 27,591 110,362 5.5% Housekeeping 18,588 18,536 18,908 19,716 75,748 3.8% Laundry 6,971 6,951 7,091 7,394 28,406 1.4% Front Desk 20,912 20,853 21,272 22,181 85,217 4.2% Miscellaneous 10,926 12,105 12,968 14,165 50,165 2.5% Taxes/Benefits 11,898 12,045 12,296 12,746 48,986 2.4% Total Payroll 96,885 98,081 100,125 103,792 398,883 19.9% -Room Expense Linen & Laundry 6,971 6,951 7,091 7,394 28,406 1.4% Comp. F & B 13,941 13,902 14,181 14,787 56,811 2.8% Total Room 20,912 20,853 21,272 22,181 85,217 4.2% -Other Expense Phone Lines 5,918 5,918 5,918 5,918 23,671 1.2% Elec/Utility 20,912 20,853 21,272 22,181 85,217 4.2% Maint. & Repair 8,741 9,684 10,374 11,332 40,132 2.0% Total Other 35,570 36,455 37,564 39,431 149,020 7.4% -Gen & Admin Marketing & Adver 29,276 32,435 34,747 37,955 134,413 6.7% Franchise Fee 23,002 25,485 27,301 29,822 105,610 5.3% Credit Card 7,528 8,341 8,935 9,760 34,563 1.7% Tot Admin & Gen 59,806 66,261 70,983 77,536 274,586 13.7% -Total Op Expense 213,172 221,650 229,943 242,939 907,704 45.2% Income Bef Fixed 223,870 262,564 288,779 323,671 1,098,884 54.8% -Fixed Charges Insurance 17,558 17,558 17,558 17,558 70,231 3.5% Property Tax 19,667 21,790 23,342 25,497 90,296 4.5% Deprec SL 39 Yrs. 46,314 46,314 46,314 46,314 185,256 9.2% Tot Capital Expen 83,539 85,661 87,214 89,369 345,783 17.2% Net Income Before 140,331 176,903 201,564 234,302 753,100 37.5% Tax & Financing Depreciat. AddBac 46,314 46,314 46,314 46,314 185,256 9.2% Renovation Reserv (21,852) (24,211) (25,936) (28,331) (100,329) -5.0% Cash Flow Before 164,793 199,006 221,942 252,285 838,027 41.8% Tax & Financing

Page 47 of 99 Converse Limited Service Hotel Compound # Rooms: 85 Growth Year 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yr 2-10 Rmnites Sold 21,922 23,139 23,141 23,142 22,756 22,377 22,005 21,638 21,357 1.3% Rmnites Avail 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 0.0% Occupancy % 70.7% 74.6% 74.6% 74.6% 73.3% 72.1% 70.9% 69.7% 68.8% 1.3% Avg Rate* $103.44 $105.50 $107.60 $109.76 $111.95 $114.19 $116.47 $118.81 $121.21 2.0% REVPAR $73.09 $78.68 $80.26 $81.87 $82.12 $82.36 $82.61 $82.86 $83.44 3.4% RoomRevenues 2,267,683 2,441,117 2,490,057 2,539,979 2,547,633 2,555,310 2,563,011 2,570,735 2,588,660 3.4% Other 95,243 102,527 104,582 106,679 107,001 107,323 107,646 107,971 108,724 2.6% Total Revenues 2,362,926 2,543,644 2,594,639 2,646,658 2,654,634 2,662,633 2,670,657 2,678,706 2,697,384 3.3% Operating Expense - Payroll Administration 113,397 116,516 119,720 123,012 126,395 129,871 133,442 137,112 140,883 2.8% Housekeeping 90,099 97,717 100,412 103,178 104,247 105,330 106,428 107,531 109,053 4.1% Laundry 33,787 36,644 37,655 38,692 39,093 39,499 39,910 40,324 40,895 4.1% Front Desk 101,362 109,931 112,964 116,076 117,278 118,496 119,731 120,972 122,684 4.1% Miscellaneous 59,669 64,714 66,499 68,331 69,039 69,756 70,482 71,213 72,221 4.1% Taxes/Benefits 55,764 59,573 61,215 62,900 63,847 64,813 65,799 66,801 68,003 3.7% Total Payroll 454,079 485,094 498,465 512,189 519,899 527,765 535,793 543,952 553,739 3.7% -Room Expense Linen & Laundry 33,787 36,644 37,655 38,692 39,093 39,499 39,910 40,324 40,895 4.1% Comp. F & B 67,575 73,287 75,309 77,384 78,186 78,998 79,821 80,648 81,790 4.1% Total Room 101,362 109,931 112,964 116,076 117,278 118,496 119,731 120,972 122,684 4.1% -Other Expense Phone Lines 28,156 30,536 31,379 32,243 32,577 32,916 33,259 33,603 34,079 4.1% Electric 101,362 109,931 112,964 116,076 117,278 118,496 119,731 120,972 122,684 4.1% Repairs & Maint 47,259 50,873 51,893 52,933 53,093 53,253 53,413 53,574 53,948 3.3% Total Other 176,776 191,340 196,236 201,252 202,948 204,665 206,403 208,149 210,711 3.9% -Gen & Admin Marketing & Adv 158,738 170,878 174,304 177,799 178,334 178,872 179,411 179,951 181,206 3.4% Franchise Fee 124,723 134,261 136,953 139,699 140,120 140,542 140,966 141,390 142,376 3.4% Credit Card 40,818 43,940 44,821 45,720 45,857 45,996 46,134 46,273 46,596 3.4% Total G & A 324,279 349,080 356,078 363,217 364,312 365,409 366,511 367,615 370,178 3.4% -TotOperExp. 1,056,496 1,135,445 1,163,743 1,192,733 1,204,437 1,216,336 1,228,437 1,240,689 1,257,312 3.7% Income Bef Fixe1,306,430 1,408,199 1,430,897 1,453,925 1,450,196 1,446,297 1,442,220 1,438,017 1,440,071 3.1%

Page 48 of 99 Converse Limited Service Hotel Compound # Rooms: 85 Growth Year 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yr 2-10 Rmnites Sold 21,922 23,139 23,141 23,142 22,756 22,377 22,005 21,638 21,357 1.3% Rmnites Avail 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 31,025 0.0% Occupancy % 70.7% 74.6% 74.6% 74.6% 73.3% 72.1% 70.9% 69.7% 68.8% 1.3% Avg Rate* $103.44 $105.50 $107.60 $109.76 $111.95 $114.19 $116.47 $118.81 $121.21 2.0% REVPAR $73.09 $78.68 $80.26 $81.87 $82.12 $82.36 $82.61 $82.86 $83.44 3.4% RoomRevenues 2,267,683 2,441,117 2,490,057 2,539,979 2,547,633 2,555,310 2,563,011 2,570,735 2,588,660 3.4% Other 95,243 102,527 104,582 106,679 107,001 107,323 107,646 107,971 108,724 2.6% Total Revenues 2,362,926 2,543,644 2,594,639 2,646,658 2,654,634 2,662,633 2,670,657 2,678,706 2,697,384 3.3% Income Bef Fixe1,306,430 1,408,199 1,430,897 1,453,925 1,450,196 1,446,297 1,442,220 1,438,017 1,440,071 3.1% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Fixed Charges Insurance 70,888 76,309 77,839 79,400 79,639 79,879 80,120 80,361 80,922 1.6% Property Tax 94,517 101,746 103,786 105,866 106,185 106,505 106,826 107,148 107,895 2.0% Depr. SL 39 Yrs 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 0.0% Total Fixed Ch. 350,661 363,311 366,881 370,522 371,081 371,641 372,202 372,766 374,073 0.9% Income Before 955,769 1,044,887 1,064,015 1,083,402 1,079,115 1,074,656 1,070,018 1,065,251 1,065,998 3.9% Tax & Financing Depr. AddBack 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 185,256 0.0% RenovReserve (118,146) (127,182) (129,732) (132,333) (132,732) (133,132) (133,533) (133,935) (134,869) 3.3% Cash Before 1,022,879 1,102,962 1,119,540 1,136,326 1,131,640 1,126,781 1,121,741 1,116,573 1,116,385 3.2% Tax & Financing

OPINION July 30, 2015 This report is based on independent opinion, surveys and research from sources considered reliable. No representation is made as to accuracy or completeness and no contingent liability of any kind can be accepted. The study projections are based upon average operating results for a selected pool of 8 prominent hotel brands (see Exhibit V) including required amenities, and spending the appropriate operating funds necessary to generate projected revenues, most especially budgeted funds for aforementioned amenities and for marketing, including a listing in the American Automobile Association Texas Tourbook. It is our opinion that this report fairly and conservatively represents the room revenues, profitability and return on investment performance that can be achieved by developing and operating an 85 unit prominently branded Limited Service hotel at the aforementioned location in Converse, Texas. Please contact us with any questions at (210) 734-3434. Respectfully submitted, Douglas W. Sutton, Executive Vice President Bruce H. Walker, President PO Box 120055 134 Laurel Heights, San Antonio, TX 78212 210-734-3434 Fax 210-735-7970 www.sourcestrategies.org

EXHIBITS: I San Antonio Metro; Local Converse Area Hotel Market, Aggregated Basis II Local Market History: By Segment and Brand, Past Five Years, Annual Basis III Individual Hotel/Motel Histories Local Market IV Texas excluding High Priced Segments V Selected Brands for Potential Development / Aggregate Sample VI The Case For Downsizing Hotels VII Start-up Performance of New Hotels VIII CAPEX Study of Capital Expenditures IX Preparer Qualifications and Client List X Source Strategies Database Methodology XI Hotel Brand Report Newsletter (separate file)

EXHIBIT I HOTEL MARKET: SAN ANTONIO METRO # Rnights $ Rooms Hotels # sold 1 Revenues % $ $ YRQ Motels Rooms (000s) (000 s) OCC2 Rate3 RPAR4 --- ------ ------ ------- ---------- ---- ----- ----- 051 360 33,293 1,869.9 160,388 62.4 85.77 53.53 052 382 34,054 2,115.3 207,406 68.3 98.05 66.93 053 385 34,752 2,107.9 195,250 65.9 92.63 61.07 054 375 34,028 1,779.7 164,241 56.8 92.29 52.46 *TOTAL 2005 7,872.8 727,285 63.4 92.38 58.54 061 373 34,220 2,011.8 191,180 65.3 95.03 62.08 062 396 34,744 2,060.0 222,836 65.2 108.17 70.48 063 403 35,715 2,181.3 219,530 66.4 100.64 66.81 064 389 34,691 1,786.9 180,748 56.0 101.15 56.63 *TOTAL 2006 8,040.1 814,294 63.2 101.28 64.02 071 388 35,045 2,045.9 207,915 64.9 101.63 65.92 072 407 35,647 2,050.0 230,200 63.2 112.29 70.96 073 412 36,696 2,169.9 225,743 64.3 104.03 66.87 074 396 35,961 1,819.3 186,811 55.0 102.69 56.47 *TOTAL 2007 8,085.0 850,669 61.8 105.22 65.02 081 398 36,306 2,090.5 222,980 64.0 106.66 68.24 082 425 38,186 2,226.0 256,637 64.1 115.29 73.85 083 430 39,045 2,279.3 249,717 63.5 109.56 69.52 084 406 38,381 1,816.0 200,451 51.4 110.38 56.77 *TOTAL 2008 8,411.8 929,786 60.7 110.53 67.06 091 407 38,950 1,994.6 189,268 56.9 94.89 53.99 092 428 39,884 2,149.2 207,102 59.2 96.36 57.06 093 434 41,207 2,264.4 213,797 59.7 94.42 56.40 094 405 40,374 1,788.6 171,482 48.2 95.87 46.17 *TOTAL 2009 8,196.8 781,649 56.0 95.36 53.39 101 410 41,593 2,197.6 203,167 58.7 92.45 54.27 102 447 43,058 2,392.8 234,428 61.1 97.97 59.83 103 455 44,646 2,558.2 247,615 62.3 96.79 60.28 104 415 43,177 1,949.4 194,939 49.1 100.00 49.07 *TOTAL 2010 9,098.1 880,149 57.8 96.74 55.91 111 418 43,533 2,341.9 224,302 59.8 95.78 57.25 112 449 44,213 2,537.4 248,804 63.1 98.05 61.84 113 456 45,609 2,703.9 265,396 64.4 98.15 63.25 114 423 44,039 2,112.7 210,159 52.1 99.47 51.87 *TOTAL 2011 9,696.0 948,661 59.9 97.84 58.60 121 428 44,291 2,513.9 241,144 63.1 95.92 60.49 122 458 45,118 2,756.2 276,358 67.1 100.27 67.31 123 461 46,217 2,783.3 277,994 65.5 99.88 65.38 124 430 44,717 2,216.3 224,112 53.9 101.12 54.48 *TOTAL 2012 10,269.7 1,019,609 62.4 99.28 61.95

HOTEL MARKET: SAN ANTONIO METRO # Rnights $ Rooms Hotels # sold 1 Revenues % $ $ YRQ Motels Rooms (000s) (000 s) OCC2 Rate3 RPAR4 --- ------ ------ ------- ---------- ---- ----- ----- 131 438 45,151 2,648.7 266,819 65.2 100.73 65.66 132 467 45,846 2,769.4 293,733 66.4 106.06 70.41 133 466 45,917 2,730.4 276,958 64.6 101.43 65.56 134 437 45,149 2,271.0 237,367 54.7 104.52 57.15 *TOTAL 2013 10,419.6 1,074,877 62.7 103.16 64.70 141 443 45,543 2,653.5 274,325 64.7 103.38 66.93 142 463 45,871 2,837.4 306,095 68.0 107.88 73.33 143 469 46,106 2,898.8 308,142 68.3 106.30 72.65 144 441 45,282 2,396.9 254,571 57.5 106.21 61.11 *TOTAL 2014 10,786.5 1,143,133 64.7 105.98 68.53 151 447 45,478 2,742.0 296,581 67.0 108.16 72.46 *TOTAL 2015 YTD 2,742.0 296,581 67.0 108.16 72.46 *TOTAL 93,618.5 9,466,694 61.4 101.12 62.07 1. Roomnights sold (derived from est. rate and actual room revenues) 2. Occupancy: nights sold divided by nights available for sale(x 100) 3. Average price for each roomnight sold;from Directories and surveys 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # RNIGHTS $ ROOMS Hotels # SOLD 1 REVENUES % $ $ YRQ Motels ROOMS (000S) (000 S) OCC2 Rate3 RPAR4 --- ------ ------ ------- ---------- ---- ----- ----- 051 15 1,164 76.4 3,222 72.9 42.20 30.76 052 15 1,164 62.2 3,085 58.7 49.61 29.12 053 15 1,164 70.0 3,716 65.4 53.09 34.70 054 16 1,193 57.2 2,775 52.1 48.50 25.28 *TOTAL 2005 265.7 12,798 62.2 48.16 29.94 061 16 1,261 66.1 3,364 58.2 50.91 29.64 062 16 1,261 68.7 4,296 59.9 62.50 37.44 063 16 1,261 75.1 4,510 64.7 60.05 38.88 064 16 1,261 53.1 2,970 45.7 55.97 25.60 *TOTAL 2006 263.0 15,139 57.1 57.57 32.89 071 16 1,261 62.6 3,433 55.1 54.87 30.25 072 17 1,331 69.4 4,396 57.3 63.33 36.29 073 17 1,342 78.9 4,972 63.9 63.05 40.27 074 18 1,365 70.7 4,000 56.3 56.54 31.85 *TOTAL 2007 281.6 16,800 58.2 59.67 34.74 081 20 1,492 73.4 4,393 54.7 59.83 32.72 082 20 1,492 77.3 5,019 56.9 64.92 36.97 083 19 1,467 84.5 5,659 62.6 66.96 41.93 084 18 1,508 60.4 3,608 43.5 59.76 26.01 *TOTAL 2008 295.6 18,680 54.4 63.18 34.35 091 20 1,677 78.6 4,201 52.0 53.48 27.83 092 20 1,727 83.9 4,644 53.4 55.37 29.55 093 20 1,727 95.6 5,429 60.2 56.78 34.17 094 20 1,682 70.6 3,872 45.6 54.82 25.02 *TOTAL 2009 328.6 18,145 52.9 55.21 29.19 101 20 1,743 88.2 4,606 56.2 52.23 29.36 102 21 1,831 95.6 5,322 57.4 55.69 31.94 103 22 1,905 109.4 6,193 62.4 56.59 35.33 104 22 1,905 73.0 4,104 41.6 56.25 23.42 *TOTAL 2010 366.1 20,225 54.3 55.24 30.01 111 22 1,905 92.7 4,843 54.1 52.25 28.25 112 22 1,880 103.0 5,707 60.2 55.43 33.36 113 22 1,880 111.7 6,815 64.6 61.04 39.40 114 22 1,880 81.9 4,910 47.3 59.98 28.39 *TOTAL 2011 389.2 22,275 56.5 57.24 32.36 121 22 1,877 101.6 5,939 60.2 58.45 35.16 122 23 1,962 117.6 7,101 65.9 60.40 39.77 123 23 1,960 122.1 7,708 67.7 63.15 42.75 124 23 1,960 93.2 5,878 51.7 63.05 32.59 *TOTAL 2012 434.5 26,626 61.4 61.29 37.60

LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # RNIGHTS $ ROOMS Hotels # SOLD 1 REVENUES % $ $ YRQ Motels ROOMS (000S) (000 S) OCC2 Rate3 RPAR4 --- ------ ------ ------- ---------- ---- ----- ----- 131 23 1,930 106.8 6,438 61.5 60.26 37.06 132 23 1,929 113.8 7,187 64.9 63.13 40.94 133 23 1,939 119.8 7,731 67.1 64.54 43.34 134 23 1,939 93.9 5,929 52.6 63.17 33.24 *TOTAL 2013 434.3 27,285 61.5 62.82 38.65 141 23 1,939 109.1 6,655 62.5 60.98 38.13 142 23 1,939 122.0 7,731 69.1 63.39 43.81 143 23 1,939 127.6 8,527 71.5 66.84 47.80 144 23 1,939 103.8 6,743 58.2 64.97 37.80 *TOTAL 2014 462.5 29,656 65.3 64.13 41.90 151 23 1,939 118.6 7,472 68.0 63.00 42.81 *TOTAL 2015 YTD 118.6 7,472 68.0 63.00 42.81 *TOTAL 3,639.7 215,100 58.7 59.10 34.72 1. Roomnights sold (derived from est. rate and actual room revenues) 2. Occupancy: nights sold divided by nights available for sale(x 100) 3. Average price for each roomnight sold;from Directories and surveys 4. $ Revenue per available room per day (room sales per day)

EXHIBIT II PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2015 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 2.9 14 3.0 1,082 3.6 67.6 76.91 52.01 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.2 28 5.9 1,594 5.2 76.5 57.10 43.68 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.1 42 8.9 2,676 8.8 73.3 63.73 46.70 BEST WEST 3.2 10.2 49 10.4 3,931 12.9 67.9 80.07 54.39 COMFO INN 1.1 4.5 21 4.5 1,200 3.9 65.9 56.72 37.38 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.1 29 6.2 2,887 9.5 68.1 98.43 67.04 HAMPTON 2.2 9.4 48 10.1 5,098 16.7 71.3 106.99 76.33 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.3 21 4.5 2,315 7.6 69.3 108.97 75.52 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.2 52 11.1 4,078 13.4 66.2 77.81 51.49 TOT LTD SVE 10.9 45.8 221 46.8 19,510 64.0 68.2 88.32 60.19 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.2 32 6.8 1,437 4.7 72.8 44.69 32.53 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.2 32 6.8 1,437 4.7 72.8 44.69 32.53 DAYS INN 2.1 6.1 27 5.7 1,253 4.1 62.1 46.42 28.84 QUALITY 1.1 3.8 16 3.4 753 2.5 59.3 46.98 27.87 SUPER 8 2.2 9.2 44 9.3 2,065 6.8 67.3 47.25 31.78 TOT BUDGET 5.4 19.1 87 18.4 4,070 13.4 64.0 46.94 30.06 TOT CHAINS 18 1.5 79.3 382 80.9 27,693 90.9 68.0 72.54 49.36 TOT INDEP 5.4 20.7 90 19.1 2,779 9.1 61.4 30.84 18.94 TOT MARKET 23 1.9 100.0 472 100.0 30,473 100 66.7 64.58 43.06 * All figures annualized. Includes taxed and est non-tax room revenues.

PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2014 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 2.9 13 3.0 968 3.5 62.0 75.07 46.54 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.2 24 5.6 1,527 5.6 67.1 62.33 41.83 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.1 37 8.6 2,495 9.1 65.3 66.73 43.54 BEST WEST 2.1 7.1 32 7.4 2,801 10.2 64.7 86.57 56.01 COMFO INN 1.1 4.5 19 4.4 1,113 4.0 59.3 58.46 34.65 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.1 27 6.2 2,471 9.0 63.3 90.61 57.36 HAMPTON 2.2 9.5 45 10.4 4,429 16.1 68.1 97.43 66.30 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.3 19 4.4 2,022 7.4 62.0 106.41 65.96 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.2 52 11.9 4,033 14.7 65.7 77.55 50.92 TOT LTD SVE 9.8 42.7 195 44.7 16,868 61.3 64.6 86.45 55.88 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.2 31 7.2 1,351 4.9 71.3 42.93 30.60 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.2 31 7.2 1,351 4.9 71.3 42.93 30.60 DAYS INN 2.1 6.1 24 5.4 1,104 4.0 54.5 46.67 25.42 QUALITY 1.1 3.8 14 3.2 647 2.4 52.0 46.02 23.95 SUPER 8 2.2 9.2 38 8.8 1,714 6.2 59.1 44.63 26.38 TOT BUDGET 5.4 19.2 76 17.4 3,465 12.6 56.2 45.52 25.59 TOT CHAINS 17 1.5 76.2 340 77.9 24,180 87.9 63.1 71.09 44.88 TOT INDEP 6.5 23.8 96 22.1 3,321 12.1 57.4 34.44 19.76 TOT MARKET 23 1.9 100.0 437 100.0 27,501 100 61.8 62.99 38.91 * All figures annualized. Includes taxed and est non-tax room revenues.

PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2013 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 2.9 13 2.9 937 3.5 60.9 74.02 45.04 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.1 25 5.7 1,315 4.8 68.0 52.67 35.84 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.1 38 8.6 2,252 8.3 65.4 59.85 39.17 BEST WEST 2.1 7.0 33 7.6 2,696 9.9 67.0 80.49 53.92 COMFO INN 1.1 4.5 20 4.5 1,245 4.6 61.7 62.83 38.76 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.0 30 6.8 2,799 10.3 69.1 93.99 64.99 HAMPTON 2.2 9.4 42 9.5 4,143 15.3 62.6 99.12 62.02 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.3 21 4.7 2,214 8.2 67.7 106.58 72.20 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.1 50 11.4 3,768 13.9 63.3 75.18 47.57 TOT LTD SVE 9.8 42.3 196 44.5 16,864 62.2 64.9 86.14 55.87 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.2 35 7.9 1,320 4.9 78.3 38.19 29.89 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.2 35 7.9 1,320 4.9 78.3 38.19 29.89 DAYS INN 2.1 6.1 28 6.3 1,289 4.8 63.7 46.59 29.67 MOTEL 6 1.1 5.8 21 4.8 630 2.3 51.2 29.81 15.26 QUALITY 1.1 3.8 12 2.8 547 2.0 44.8 45.22 20.25 SUPER 8 2.2 9.1 39 9.0 1,770 6.5 60.6 44.97 27.24 TOT BUDGET 6.5 24.8 100 22.8 4,235 15.6 56.7 42.25 23.97 TOT CHAINS 18 1.6 81.4 368 83.8 24,671 91.0 63.5 67.01 42.52 TOT INDEP 5.4 18.6 71 16.2 2,454 9.0 53.8 34.35 18.49 TOT MARKET 23 2.0 100.0 440 100.0 27,125 100 61.7 61.70 38.05 * All figures annualized. Includes taxed and est non-tax rooms revenues.

PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2012 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 3.0 14 3.6 1,011 4.3 68.2 71.31 48.61 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.4 23 5.7 1,096 4.7 60.7 48.48 29.44 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.5 37 9.2 2,108 9.0 63.4 57.28 36.31 BEST WEST 2.1 7.3 33 8.2 2,303 9.9 65.3 70.48 46.06 COMFO INN 1.1 4.7 18 4.6 1,122 4.8 56.7 61.58 34.92 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.3 30 7.5 2,462 10.5 69.1 82.72 57.17 HAMPTON 1.1 5.2 24 6.0 2,182 9.3 66.9 91.13 61.01 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.5 20 5.1 2,241 9.6 66.4 110.12 73.10 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.5 49 12.4 3,708 15.9 62.1 75.42 46.82 TOT LTD SVE 8.7 39.5 174 43.7 14,019 60.0 64.3 80.51 51.76 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.4 31 7.7 1,139 4.9 69.1 37.32 25.78 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.4 31 7.7 1,139 4.9 69.1 37.32 25.78 DAYS INN 2.1 6.3 23 5.8 1,017 4.4 53.5 43.72 23.41 MOTEL 6 1.1 6.0 25 6.4 817 3.5 61.8 32.08 19.81 QUALITY 1.1 3.9 11 2.7 460 2.0 39.1 43.62 17.04 SUPER 8 2.2 9.5 36 9.1 1,605 6.9 55.7 44.32 24.71 TOT BUDGET 6.5 25.8 95 24.0 3,899 16.7 54.1 40.83 22.07 TOT CHAINS 17 1.5 80.1 337 84.6 21,165 90.6 61.3 62.82 38.50 TOT INDEP 5.4 19.9 61 15.4 2,206 9.4 44.9 36.10 16.19 TOT MARKET 22 1.9 100.0 398 100.0 23,371 100 58.0 58.71 34.07 * All figures annualized. Included taxed and est non-tax rooms revenues.

PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2011 LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS COMFO STE 1.1 3.0 12 3.3 788 3.9 59.0 64.19 37.87 HAWTHORN 1.1 5.4 20 5.4 950 4.6 53.9 47.36 25.52 TOT MIN STE 2.2 8.4 32 8.7 1,738 8.5 55.7 53.75 29.95 BEST WEST 2.1 7.3 28 7.5 1,749 8.5 55.8 62.72 34.98 COMFO INN 1.1 4.7 15 4.0 946 4.6 46.2 63.72 29.45 FAIRFIELD 1.1 6.3 26 7.0 1,771 8.7 60.7 67.81 41.13 HAMPTON 1.1 5.2 24 6.4 2,135 10.4 65.9 90.56 59.69 HOLID EXP 1.1 4.5 22 5.9 2,189 10.7 70.9 100.74 71.39 LA QUINTA 2.2 11.5 48 13.0 3,302 16.1 60.8 68.61 41.69 TOT LTD SVE 8.7 39.3 162 43.8 12,092 59.1 59.9 74.51 44.65 VALUE PLC 1.1 6.4 31 8.3 889 4.3 69.7 28.88 20.14 TOT EXT STA 1.1 6.4 31 8.3 889 4.3 69.7 28.88 20.14 DAYS INN 2.1 6.3 23 6.2 1,018 5.0 52.7 44.47 23.43 MOTEL 6 1.1 6.0 26 7.0 850 4.2 63.0 32.70 20.62 QUALITY 1.1 2.9 7 1.8 332 1.6 33.6 48.83 16.38 RODEWAY 1.1 4.8 13 3.5 353 1.7 39.0 27.56 10.76 SUPER 8 2.2 9.4 36 9.6 1,529 7.5 54.9 42.83 23.53 TOT BUDGET 7.6 29.4 104 28.1 4,082 19.9 51.4 39.18 20.13 TOT CHAINS 18 1.6 83.6 330 88.9 18,802 91.9 57.2 57.04 32.65 TOT INDEP 4.3 16.4 41 11.1 1,660 8.1 36.3 40.50 14.72 TOT MARKET 22 1.9 100.0 371 100.0 20,462 100 53.8 55.21 29.72 * All figures annualized. Included taxed and est non-tax rooms revenues.

EXHIBIT III LODGING MARKET: SELECTED ZIP CODES AROUND CONVERSE, TEXAS E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ CONVERSE 8669 INTERSTATE 78109 BEST WESTERN SAN ANTONIO 08 1.200 101 67 BWEST 256,872 278,682 1.085 64.89 71 46.22 102 67 BWEST 299,162 316,561 1.058 72.50 72 51.92 103 67 BWEST 325,543 328,243 1.008 72.50 73 53.25 104 67 BWEST 289,091 293,640 1.016 77.76 61 47.64 111 67 BWEST 336,377 353,073 1.050 80.03 73 58.55 112 67 BWEST 371,745 385,438 1.037 88.55 71 63.22 113 67 BWEST 421,139 432,085 1.026 95.58 73 70.10 114 67 BWEST 364,008 379,421 1.042 96.66 64 61.55 121 67 BWEST 394,715 413,063 1.046 88.73 77 68.50 122 67 BWEST 419,126 444,678 1.061 97.01 75 72.93 123 67 BWEST 447,186 486,678 1.088 107.08 74 78.95 124 67 BWEST 395,432 440,841 1.115 108.97 66 71.52 131 67 BWEST 428,922 495,031 1.154 106.49 77 82.09 132 67 BWEST 418,872 504,865 1.205 108.83 76 82.81 133 67 BWEST 396,882 521,791 1.315 108.43 78 84.65 134 67 BWEST 348,143 477,187 1.371 111.19 70 77.42 141 67 BWEST 380,409 516,494 1.358 116.47 74 85.65 142 67 BWEST 394,670 489,437 1.240 114.84 70 80.28 143 67 BWEST 450,129 549,890 1.222 118.84 75 89.21 144 67 BWEST 423,664 499,831 1.180 123.12 66 81.09 151 67 BWEST 440,796 450,191 1.021 115.55 65 74.66 LIVE OAK 13101 E LOOP 16 78233 HAWTHORN SUITES 84 1.500 101 102 HAWTH 130,981 219,958 1.679 49.70 48 23.96 102 102 HAWTH 87,674 160,651 1.832 44.74 39 17.31 103 102 HAWTH 204,432 298,576 1.461 47.54 67 31.82 104 102 HAWTH 137,143 222,650 1.623 48.97 48 23.73 111 102 HAWTH 112,223 268,326 2.391 47.50 62 29.23 112 102 HAWTH 142,549 321,849 2.258 50.10 69 34.67 113 102 HAWTH 131,957 356,543 2.702 49.60 77 37.99 114 102 HAWTH 73,307 216,075 2.948 48.54 47 23.03 121 102 HAWTH 68,896 201,761 2.928 44.37 50 21.98 122 102 HAWTH 161,209 285,216 1.769 44.59 69 30.73 123 100 HAWTH 194,301 391,110 2.013 56.27 76 42.51 124 100 HAWTH 164,794 291,291 1.768 55.55 57 31.66 131 100 HAWTH 183,956 346,953 1.886 54.45 71 38.55 132 100 HAWTH 294,862 445,520 1.511 61.72 79 48.96 133 100 HAWTH 337,759 460,892 1.365 65.85 76 50.10 134 100 HAWTH 202,208 273,187 1.351 60.39 49 29.69 141 100 HAWTH 140,001 347,375 2.481 60.33 64 38.60 142 100 HAWTH 5,391 436,077.000 55.63 86 47.92 143 100 HAWTH 8,693 446,841.000 62.53 78 48.57 144 100 HAWTH 167,787 328,335 1.957 51.80 69 35.69 151 100 HAWTH 330,875 382,903 1.157 58.02 73 42.54

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ LIVE OAK 12822 I-35 NORT 78233 LA QUINTA INN #640 86 1.085 101 136 LAQUN 305,199 433,381 1.420 59.13 60 35.41 102 136 LAQUN 353,215 512,545 1.451 62.27 67 41.41 103 136 LAQUN 411,226 504,511 1.227 61.34 66 40.32 104 136 LAQUN 252,026 277,962 1.103 59.26 37 22.22 111 136 LAQUN 313,948 354,703 1.130 54.57 53 28.98 112 136 LAQUN 371,352 419,879 1.131 58.10 58 33.93 113 136 LAQUN 473,899 520,900 1.099 63.85 65 41.63 114 136 LAQUN 304,827 318,262 1.044 59.79 43 25.44 121 136 LAQUN 393,645 432,309 1.098 55.79 63 35.32 122 136 LAQUN 442,442 486,795 1.100 59.08 67 39.33 123 136 LAQUN 482,458 539,049 1.117 59.84 72 43.08 124 136 LAQUN 348,838 362,590 1.039 61.74 47 28.98 131 136 LAQUN 413,512 445,667 1.078 59.94 61 36.41 132 136 LAQUN 449,575 491,256 1.093 62.79 63 39.69 133 136 LAQUN 532,049 546,403 1.027 63.94 68 43.67 134 136 LAQUN 440,906 453,337 1.028 63.10 57 36.23 141 136 LAQUN 470,925 502,549 1.067 63.04 65 41.06 142 136 LAQUN 513,866 561,331 1.092 64.42 70 45.36 143 136 LAQUN 572,460 589,964 1.031 66.52 71 47.15 144 136 LAQUN 408,319 440,463 1.079 60.63 58 35.20 151 136 LAQUN 474,898 519,599 1.094 62.08 68 42.45 13578 N I-35 78233 VALUE PLACE HOTEL 08 4.250 101 121 VALUP 78,763 232,111 2.947 27.23 78 21.31 102 121 VALUP 86,108 234,384 2.722 29.50 72 21.29 103 121 VALUP 70,638 227,524 3.221 29.04 70 20.44 104 121 VALUP 62,101 174,331 2.807 27.05 58 15.66 111 121 VALUP 65,197 253,222 3.884 29.54 79 23.25 112 121 VALUP 81,987 306,734 3.741 38.56 72 27.86 113 121 VALUP 75,546 301,919 3.996 38.17 71 27.12 114 121 VALUP 49,070 231,449 4.717 37.01 56 20.79 121 121 VALUP 97,213 298,622 3.072 35.55 77 27.42 122 121 VALUP 85,540 318,059 3.718 35.73 81 28.89 123 121 VALUP 113,882 343,579 3.017 38.59 80 30.86 124 121 VALUP 95,805 326,314 3.406 38.98 75 29.31 131 121 VALUP 76,171 332,354 4.363 39.58 77 30.52 132 121 VALUP 110,460 334,499 3.028 43.47 70 30.38 133 121 VALUP 105,930 369,376 3.487 45.31 73 33.18 134 121 VALUP 95,287 306,343 3.215 40.31 68 27.52 141 121 VALUP 94,384 341,184 3.615 42.47 74 31.33 142 121 VALUP 97,033 309,414 3.189 40.67 69 28.10 143 121 VALUP 110,125 378,921 3.441 46.06 74 34.04 144 121 VALUP 67,240 344,699 5.126 45.65 68 30.96 151 121 VALUP 95,000 403,750.000 1 46.06 80 37.08 SAN ANTONIO 11939 IH 35 NOR 78233 BEST WESTERN I35N GARDEN I 95 1.045 101 70 BWEST 124,022 133,375 1.075 40.28 53 21.17 102 70 BWEST 107,309 109,254 1.018 38.82 44 17.15

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 11939 IH 35 NOR 78233 BEST WESTERN I35N GARDEN I 95 1.045 103 70 BWEST 178,046 185,163 1.040 43.80 66 28.75 104 70 BWEST 62,532 64,408 1.030 45.11 22 10.00 111 70 BWEST 93,311 98,714 1.058 42.20 37 15.67 112 70 BWEST 137,877 141,002 1.023 41.86 53 22.14 113 70 BWEST 208,794 212,169 1.016 47.08 70 32.95 114 70 BWEST 150,349 169,478 1.127 47.09 56 26.32 121 70 BWEST 167,319 170,424 1.019 45.44 60 27.05 122 70 BWEST 218,771 224,169 1.025 51.80 68 35.19 123 70 BWEST 235,493 246,090.000 54.28 70 38.21 124 70 BWEST 163,363 164,103 1.005 52.14 49 25.48 131 70 BWEST 191,868 194,656 1.015 53.00 58 30.90 132 70 BWEST 198,178 204,379 1.031 55.13 58 32.08 133 70 BWEST 230,878 241,538 1.046 57.94 65 37.51 134 70 BWEST 140,913 147,254.000 53.88 42 22.87 141 70 BWEST 179,000 187,055.000 52.45 57 29.69 142 70 BWEST 235,912 246,528.000 55.73 69 38.70 143 70 BWEST 262,697 274,518.000 59.73 71 42.63 144 70 BWEST 164,462 171,863.000 52.14 51 26.69 151 70 BWEST 235,215 245,800.000 55.64 70 39.02 11526 N IH 35 78233 COMFORT SUITES I-35N 08 1.030 101 57 COMFS 182,833 204,876 1.121 60.19 66 39.94 102 57 COMFS 177,164 191,146 1.079 60.35 61 36.85 103 57 COMFS 208,109 219,734 1.056 63.48 66 41.90 104 57 COMFS 138,663 146,633 1.057 66.44 42 27.96 111 57 COMFS 207,764 230,430 1.109 66.93 67 44.92 112 57 COMFS 229,808 239,888 1.044 67.98 68 46.25 113 57 COMFS 244,387 265,020 1.084 72.84 69 50.54 114 57 COMFS 218,986 228,189 1.042 69.03 63 43.51 121 57 COMFS 257,664 278,202 1.080 74.96 72 54.23 122 57 COMFS 256,543 267,877 1.044 75.33 69 51.64 123 57 COMFS 251,429 272,742 1.085 76.22 68 52.01 124 57 COMFS 175,723 185,083 1.053 72.82 48 35.29 131 57 COMFS 195,446 211,426 1.082 70.80 58 41.21 132 57 COMFS 244,794 266,399 1.088 76.57 67 51.36 133 57 COMFS 258,199 274,550 1.063 77.78 67 52.36 134 57 COMFS 182,354 191,139 1.048 72.58 50 36.45 141 57 COMFS 221,892 236,239 1.065 72.51 64 46.05 142 57 COMFS 248,074 263,122 1.061 73.88 69 50.73 143 57 COMFS 259,957 270,599 1.041 75.88 68 51.60 144 57 COMFS 260,704 267,534 1.026 78.61 65 51.02 151 57 COMFS 273,883 280,736 1.025 79.32 69 54.72 11202 N INTERST 78233 DAYS INN I-35 NORTH 95 1.150 101 58 DAYS 126,883 145,915.000 47.64 59 27.95 102 58 DAYS 127,061 146,120.000 48.36 57 27.68 103 58 DAYS 181,155 208,328.000 53.99 72 39.04

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 11202 N INTERST 78233 DAYS INN I-35 NORTH 95 1.150 104 58 DAYS 103,745 119,307.000 50.04 45 22.36 111 58 DAYS 125,002 143,752.000 48.54 57 27.54 112 58 DAYS 141,055 162,213.000 48.86 63 30.73 113 58 DAYS 171,709 197,465.000 53.32 69 37.01 114 58 DAYS 92,062 105,871.000 48.57 41 19.84 121 58 DAYS 127,783 146,950.000 46.33 61 28.15 122 58 DAYS 221,843 255,119.000 52.79 92 48.34 123 58 DAYS 231,934 266,724.000 58.36 86 49.99 124 58 DAYS 126,075 144,986.000 52.22 52 27.17 131 58 DAYS 155,048 178,305.000 51.50 66 34.16 132 58 DAYS 178,683 205,485.000 52.58 74 38.93 133 58 DAYS 187,909 216,095.000 57.99 70 40.50 134 58 DAYS 141,279 162,471.000 54.95 55 30.45 141 58 DAYS 157,478 181,100.000 54.90 63 34.69 142 58 DAYS 180,928 208,067.000 53.77 73 39.42 143 58 DAYS 219,042 251,898.000 62.57 75 47.21 144 58 DAYS 160,723 184,831.000 57.57 60 34.64 151 58 DAYS 163,205 187,686.000 58.09 62 35.96 9401 IH 35 NORT 78233 DAYS INN WINDCREST 96 1.200 101 61 DAYS 88,235 105,882.000 39.26 49 19.29 102 61 DAYS 79,614 95,537.000 38.82 44 17.21 103 61 DAYS 114,899 137,879.000 38.82 63 24.57 104 61 DAYS 48,934 58,721.000 36.58 29 10.46 111 61 DAYS 89,993 107,992.000 35.48 55 19.67 112 61 DAYS 85,537 95,179 1.113 35.20 49 17.15 113 61 DAYS 115,212 116,626 1.012 39.10 53 20.78 114 61 DAYS 74,769 87,222 1.167 37.30 42 15.54 121 61 DAYS 104,676 105,272 1.006 36.78 52 19.18 122 61 DAYS 110,090 132,108.000 36.96 64 23.80 123 61 DAYS 116,561 139,873.000 36.81 68 24.92 124 61 DAYS 62,672 65,434 1.044 38.17 31 11.66 131 61 DAYS 88,380 106,056.000 36.20 53 19.32 132 61 DAYS 85,353 102,424.000 35.94 51 18.45 133 61 DAYS 93,228 103,358 1.109 35.29 52 18.42 134 61 DAYS 53,842 59,364 1.103 34.44 31 10.58 141 61 DAYS 58,884 73,731 1.252 32.51 41 13.43 142 61 DAYS 91,072 97,684 1.073 32.67 54 17.60 143 61 DAYS 106,446 121,640 1.143 33.17 65 21.67 144 61 DAYS 67,228 79,406 1.181 33.33 42 14.15 151 61 DAYS 96,595 121,463 1.257 33.63 66 22.12 9503 N INTERSTA 78233 DELTA INN FMR MOTEL 6 #134 73 1.400 101 113 MTL 6 184,808 190,714 1.032 30.36 62 18.75 102 113 MTL 6 222,358 229,979 1.034 31.37 71 22.36 103 113 MTL 6 245,597 253,044 1.030 33.68 72 24.34 104 113 MTL 6 168,030 168,200 1.001 33.47 48 16.18

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 9503 N INTERSTA 78233 DELTA INN FMR MOTEL 6 #134 73 1.400 111 113 MTL 6 197,015 199,065 1.010 32.47 60 19.57 112 113 MTL 6 215,984 221,287 1.025 32.41 66 21.52 113 113 MTL 6 220,443 226,515 1.028 32.09 68 21.79 114 113 MTL 6 160,881 161,957 1.007 32.28 48 15.58 121 113 MTL 6 204,819 207,198 1.012 31.55 65 20.37 122 113 MTL 6 193,511 195,992 1.013 31.71 60 19.06 123 113 129,176 145,446 1.126 28.88 48 13.99 124 113 121,365 135,677 1.118 29.95 44 13.05 131 113 142,300 152,473 1.071 28.36 53 14.99 132 113 145,700 157,700 1.082 27.93 55 15.34 133 113 148,619 159,187 1.071 27.25 56 15.31 134 113 113,691 149,525 1.315 27.22 53 14.38 141 113 117,915 159,702 1.354 27.49 57 15.70 142 113 128,733 163,695 1.272 26.79 59 15.92 143 113 151,514 193,079 1.274 29.05 64 18.57 144 113 107,698 160,109 1.487 28.02 55 15.40 151 113 139,670 191,641 1.372 28.27 67 18.84 9735 N INTERSTA 78233 EXTEND A SUITES FMR HOJO/ 70 5.500 101 120 35,878 126,114 3.515 43.52 27 11.68 102 120 50,544 129,668 2.565 42.16 28 11.87 103 120 72,421 139,814 1.931 42.16 30 12.66 104 120 45,000 85,000 1.889 44.45 17 7.70 111 120 48,765 125,754 2.579 37.35 31 11.64 112 95 54,856 128,395 2.341 29.76 50 14.85 113 95 58,594 179,915 3.071 42.13 49 20.59 114 95 38,314 160,144 4.180 41.01 45 18.32 121 95 47,252 206,634 4.373 39.45 61 24.17 122 95 35,226 232,500 6.600 39.64 68 26.89 123 95 47,480 217,954 4.590 38.49 65 24.94 124 95 22,735 165,619 7.285 37.94 50 18.95 131 65 38,536 139,102 3.610 37.56 63 23.78 132 64 58,711 173,897 2.962 42.13 71 29.86 133 74 46,899 203,715 4.344 41.71 72 29.92 134 74 25,576 177,943 6.957 39.49 66 26.14 141 74 43,909 148,766 3.388 37.75 59 22.34 142 74 42,546 200,907 4.722 39.70 75 29.83 143 74 29,017 196,532 6.773 39.70 73 28.87 144 74 29,458 180,170 6.116 41.13 64 26.46 151 74 36,899 190,705 5.168 41.50 69 28.63 11591 N INTERST 78233 MI CASA I35N FMR ECONO 83 1.440 102 88 70,259 91,146 1.297 31.33 36 11.38 103 88 84,860 100,322 1.182 30.87 40 12.39 104 88 47,918 59,266 1.237 28.39 26 7.32 111 88 67,298 75,928 1.128 26.67 36 9.59 112 88 72,635 94,011 1.294 28.34 41 11.74

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 11591 N INTERST 78233 MI CASA I35N FMR ECONO 83 1.440 113 88 65,102 78,779 1.210 25.28 38 9.73 114 88 48,981 68,920 1.407 27.16 31 8.51 121 88 60,697 71,639 1.180 26.78 34 9.05 122 88 97,354 121,353 1.247 27.72 55 15.15 123 88 101,810 134,258 1.319 27.61 60 16.58 124 88 71,643 108,755 1.518 26.56 51 13.43 131 88 74,906 114,158 1.524 25.74 56 14.41 132 88 78,599 115,744 1.473 26.28 55 14.45 133 88 91,601 129,163 1.410 26.02 61 15.95 134 88 65,317 112,253 1.719 25.66 54 13.87 141 88 77,546 114,411 1.475 25.63 56 14.45 142 88 73,177 132,214 1.807 25.66 64 16.51 143 88 93,292 132,627 1.422 25.66 64 16.38 144 88 60,562 95,442 1.576 25.55 46 11.79 151 88 92,263 123,928 1.343 26.49 59 15.65 9603 N INTERSTA 78233 MIDTOWN I&S FMR RODEW/CLAS 72 1.270 101 90 RODEW 97,175 98,862.000 28.14 43 12.21 102 90 RODEW 94,084 95,300.000 28.56 41 11.64 103 90 RODEW 121,385 122,432 1.008 28.56 52 14.79 104 90 RODEW 48,321 49,499 1.024 26.78 22 5.98 111 90 78,708 86,071 1.094 25.70 41 10.63 112 90 65,836 93,212 1.416 25.49 45 11.38 113 90 82,566 98,825 1.197 25.59 47 11.94 114 90 39,262 59,231 1.509 25.13 28 7.15 121 87 62,384 91,351 1.464 24.19 48 11.67 122 87 74,951 91,866 1.226 24.31 48 11.60 123 87 100,514 112,073 1.115 26.20 53 14.00 124 87 66,886 89,357 1.336 25.10 44 11.16 131 87 88,160 111,249 1.262 24.85 57 14.21 132 87 96,402 112,015 1.162 25.37 56 14.15 133 87 108,985 121,039 1.111 26.50 57 15.12 134 87 59,447 71,696 1.206 26.15 34 8.96 141 87 91,685 100,175 1.093 26.12 49 12.79 142 87 94,343 105,486 1.118 25.25 53 13.32 143 87 128,089 147,208 1.149 27.77 66 18.39 144 87 59,225 77,214 1.304 25.97 37 9.65 151 87 109,439 139,365 1.273 26.20 68 17.80 9903 N INTERSTA 78233 MOTEL 6 WINDCREST FMR RUBY 85 1.020 101 40 74,531 80,898 1.085 35.58 63 22.47 102 40 59,821 68,271 1.141 35.08 53 18.76 103 40 70,881 71,251 1.005 35.08 55 19.36 104 40 50,541 51,237 1.014 35.62 39 13.92 111 40 64,465 65,754.000 34.55 53 18.27 112 40 69,031 72,953 1.057 34.72 58 20.04 113 40 78,739 85,291 1.083 35.16 66 23.18

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 9903 N INTERSTA 78233 MOTEL 6 WINDCREST FMR RUBY 85 1.020 114 40 53,866 56,880 1.056 34.91 44 15.46 121 40 64,978 68,907 1.060 34.03 56 19.14 122 40 76,838 82,335 1.072 34.20 66 22.62 123 40 87,207 89,615 1.028 36.06 68 24.35 124 40 57,465 60,573 1.054 35.32 47 16.46 131 40 70,127 78,624 1.121 34.97 62 21.84 132 40 70,659 79,339 1.123 35.70 61 21.80 133 40 73,129 86,457 1.182 36.13 65 23.49 134 40 55,598 63,354 1.140 33.98 51 17.22 141 40 63,776 72,038 1.130 33.95 59 20.01 142 40 66,531 72,856 1.095 34.12 59 20.02 143 40 82,684 83,388 1.009 34.12 66 22.66 144 40 72,073 76,078 1.056 34.21 60 20.67 151 40 MTL 6 115,777 116,679 1.008 44.95 72 32.41 10815 N INTERST 78233 QUALITY INN N FMR LA PALME 77 1.120 103 74 QUALY 126,870 145,485 1.147 55.00 39 21.37 104 74 QUALY 64,242 73,135 1.138 46.35 23 10.74 111 74 QUALY 89,511 113,546 1.269 43.99 39 17.05 112 74 QUALY 89,622 116,143 1.296 43.64 40 17.25 113 74 QUALY 106,283 144,815 1.363 45.08 47 21.27 114 74 QUALY 64,638 77,167 1.194 41.07 28 11.33 121 74 QUALY 104,806 122,102 1.165 43.59 42 18.33 122 74 QUALY 128,254 147,736.000 46.55 47 21.94 123 74 QUALY 133,825 163,556 1.222 46.36 52 24.02 124 74 QUALY 80,352 95,035 1.183 43.93 32 13.96 131 74 QUALY 114,991 140,596 1.223 43.49 49 21.11 132 74 QUALY 111,371 136,036 1.221 47.47 43 20.20 133 74 QUALY 122,362 153,653 1.256 47.00 48 22.57 134 74 QUALY 102,145 113,127 1.108 45.12 37 16.62 141 74 QUALY 217,980 244,138.000 1 45.07 81 36.66 142 74 QUALY 155,727 222,754 1.430 46.80 71 33.08 143 74 QUALY 215,535 231,611 1.075 49.50 69 34.02 144 74 QUALY 115,592 131,458 1.137 45.07 43 19.31 151 74 QUALY 150,983 166,963 1.106 45.48 55 25.07 11027 N INTERST 78233 SUPER 8 FMR BHOST/SUPR8 86 1.025 101 59 SUPR8 155,805 157,876 1.013 49.68 60 29.73 102 59 SUPR8 158,765 160,405 1.010 51.46 58 29.88 103 59 SUPR8 183,885 186,765 1.016 55.30 62 34.41 104 59 SUPR8 126,805 129,676 1.023 54.07 44 23.89 111 59 SUPR8 143,187 144,177 1.007 51.96 52 27.15 112 59 SUPR8 179,905 185,939 1.034 54.56 63 34.63 113 59 SUPR8 202,310 209,029 1.033 55.99 69 38.51 114 59 SUPR8 141,756 147,808 1.043 55.19 49 27.23 121 59 SUPR8 157,928 166,213 1.052 53.82 58 31.30 122 59 SUPR8 187,059 191,382 1.023 55.27 64 35.65

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SAN ANTONIO 11027 N INTERST 78233 SUPER 8 FMR BHOST/SUPR8 86 1.025 123 59 SUPR8 214,309 220,055 1.027 58.34 69 40.54 124 59 SUPR8 174,395 180,336 1.034 57.39 58 33.22 131 59 SUPR8 184,533 191,918 1.040 56.02 65 36.14 132 59 SUPR8 208,698 213,037 1.021 59.24 67 39.68 133 59 SUPR8 213,733 219,076.000 58.65 69 40.36 134 59 SUPR8 161,852 163,202 1.008 56.04 54 30.07 141 59 SUPR8 199,896 201,849 1.010 55.98 68 38.01 142 59 SUPR8 221,540 227,408 1.026 58.79 72 42.36 143 59 SUPR8 225,005 230,330 1.024 61.59 69 42.43 144 59 SUPR8 175,260 182,671 1.042 58.63 57 33.65 151 59 SUPR8 213,357 216,470 1.015 59.16 69 40.77 SCHERTZ 17401 IH 35 N 78154 BEST WESTERN ATRIUM INN FM 96 1.050 101 61 138,385 149,283 1.079 53.97 50 27.19 102 61 141,928 151,705 1.069 54.78 50 27.33 103 61 187,631 201,075 1.072 57.64 62 35.83 104 61 104,916 118,424 1.129 54.11 39 21.10 111 61 118,893 125,222 1.053 50.93 45 22.81 112 61 161,023 170,706 1.060 55.09 56 30.75 113 61 188,835 197,108 1.044 74.34 47 35.12 114 61 99,356 106,849 1.075 55.54 34 19.04 121 61 111,169 116,653 1.049 51.80 41 21.25 122 61 129,044 132,702 1.028 55.27 43 23.91 123 61 161,696 163,805 1.013 55.05 53 29.19 124 61 73,172 76,831.000 57.09 24 13.69 131 61 124,609 130,839.000 54.54 44 23.83 132 61 174,619 183,350.000 56.71 58 33.03 133 61 234,495 246,220.000 60.89 72 43.87 134 61 BWEST 155,181 162,940.000 58.45 50 29.03 141 61 BWEST 210,093 220,598.000 58.39 69 40.18 142 61 BWEST 242,094 254,199.000 61.90 74 45.79 143 61 BWEST 288,050 302,453.000 68.50 79 53.89 144 61 BWEST 202,594 212,724.000 63.71 59 37.91 151 61 BWEST 222,205 233,315.000 63.79 67 42.50 5008 CORRIDOR L 78154 FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES 09 1.055 101 118 FAIRF 293,502 310,303 1.057 61.70 47 29.22 102 118 FAIRF 364,373 439,768 1.207 66.00 62 40.95 103 118 FAIRF 463,953 516,945 1.114 69.59 68 47.62 104 118 FAIRF 345,867 432,474 1.250 71.68 56 39.84 111 118 FAIRF 327,167 382,224 1.168 63.71 56 35.99 112 118 FAIRF 488,800 552,280 1.130 70.94 72 51.43 113 118 FAIRF 607,542 709,710 1.168 86.63 75 65.37 114 118 FAIRF 436,357 511,321 1.172 83.32 57 47.10 121 118 FAIRF 595,933 689,118.000 90.00 72 64.89 122 118 FAIRF 644,682 717,476.000 90.00 74 66.82 123 118 FAIRF 687,401 780,176 1.135 94.62 76 71.87

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SCHERTZ 5008 CORRIDOR L 78154 FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES 09 1.055 124 118 FAIRF 632,656 680,416 1.075 99.16 63 62.68 131 118 FAIRF 592,813 620,915 1.047 92.62 63 58.47 132 118 FAIRF 629,129 657,748 1.045 91.40 67 61.25 133 118 FAIRF 672,502 705,380 1.049 92.47 70 64.98 134 118 FAIRF 511,778 542,520 1.060 92.77 54 49.97 141 118 FAIRF 552,367 564,897 1.023 85.67 62 53.19 142 118 FAIRF 726,976 788,459 1.085 97.15 76 73.43 143 118 FAIRF 778,208 832,928 1.070 104.50 73 76.73 144 118 FAIRF 583,269 631,000 1.082 97.90 59 58.12 151 118 FAIRF 616,695 634,970 1.030 93.33 64 59.79 17702 IH 35 N 78154 HAMPTON INN & SUITES 05 1.100 101 98 HAMPT 422,014 476,613 1.129 81.91 66 54.04 102 98 HAMPT 531,128 585,047 1.102 94.94 69 65.60 103 98 HAMPT 571,434 628,458 1.100 94.94 73 69.70 104 98 HAMPT 413,909 460,168 1.112 90.17 57 51.04 111 98 HAMPT 425,326 461,379 1.085 81.06 65 52.31 112 98 HAMPT 488,327 525,433 1.076 85.87 69 58.92 113 98 HAMPT 580,755 618,219 1.065 93.62 73 68.57 114 98 HAMPT 444,002 483,188 1.088 91.98 58 53.59 121 98 HAMPT 535,156 555,636.000 93.00 68 63.00 122 98 HAMPT 552,360 558,885.000 93.00 67 62.67 123 98 HAMPT 589,737 647,800 1.098 100.60 71 71.85 124 98 HAMPT 482,465 503,525 1.044 99.14 56 55.85 131 98 HAMPT 533,844 571,957 1.071 95.57 68 64.85 132 98 HAMPT 597,489 628,995 1.053 99.62 71 70.53 133 98 HAMPT 665,295 681,870 1.025 103.47 73 75.63 134 98 HAMPT 523,601 541,182 1.034 105.08 57 60.02 141 98 HAMPT 499,102 522,650 1.047 94.49 63 59.26 142 98 HAMPT 662,659 706,183 1.066 108.04 73 79.19 143 98 HAMPT 694,872 752,885 1.083 111.54 75 83.51 144 98 HAMPT 539,254 585,626 1.086 106.23 61 64.95 151 98 HAMPT 563,595 634,156 1.125 103.15 70 71.90 17650 FOUR OAKS 78154 LA QUINTA INN & SUITES 09 1.073 101 81 LAQUN 223,734 334,822 1.497 71.58 64 45.93 102 81 LAQUN 301,078 472,817 1.570 80.14 80 64.15 103 81 LAQUN 324,759 518,670 1.597 85.30 82 69.60 104 81 LAQUN 210,862 303,911 1.441 80.85 50 40.78 111 81 LAQUN 232,232 357,142 1.538 75.18 65 48.99 112 81 LAQUN 357,889 450,150 1.258 83.90 73 61.07 113 81 LAQUN 433,083 561,569 1.297 100.49 75 75.36 114 81 LAQUN 399,879 462,444 1.156 98.61 63 62.06 121 81 LAQUN 406,930 542,612 1.333 106.99 70 74.43 122 81 LAQUN 425,869 530,783 1.246 99.49 72 72.01 123 81 LAQUN 396,327 543,479 1.371 102.18 71 72.93 124 81 LAQUN 342,869 430,797 1.256 101.81 57 57.81

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SCHERTZ 17650 FOUR OAKS 78154 LA QUINTA INN & SUITES 09 1.073 131 81 LAQUN 341,417 428,637 1.255 91.58 64 58.80 132 81 LAQUN 468,557 499,095 1.065 98.61 69 67.71 133 81 LAQUN 528,088 569,746 1.079 104.55 73 76.46 134 81 LAQUN 422,543 468,718 1.109 97.21 65 62.90 141 81 LAQUN 469,249 502,370 1.071 97.41 71 68.91 142 81 LAQUN 499,907 537,777 1.076 102.01 72 72.96 143 81 LAQUN 552,310 590,149 1.069 108.51 73 79.19 144 81 LAQUN 398,872 409,426 1.026 102.06 54 54.94 151 81 LAQUN 400,000 429,200.000 1 95.92 61 58.88 SELMA 15771 INTERSTAT 78154 COMFORT INN & SUITES 09 1.025 101 88 COMFO 223,402 225,360 1.009 72.33 39 28.45 102 88 COMFO 245,594 261,859 1.066 68.82 48 32.70 103 88 COMFO 277,771 290,975 1.048 65.94 54 35.94 104 88 COMFO 177,753 181,252 1.020 60.29 37 22.39 111 88 COMFO 199,888 211,876 1.060 58.48 46 26.75 112 88 COMFO 243,976 258,143 1.058 60.00 54 32.24 113 88 COMFO 350,050 355,718 1.016 61.88 71 43.94 114 88 COMFO 203,723 229,025 1.124 63.24 45 28.29 121 88 COMFO 270,730 278,827 1.030 61.36 57 35.21 122 88 COMFO 330,432 350,867 1.062 61.66 71 43.81 123 88 COMFO 356,695 367,522 1.030 65.40 69 45.40 124 88 COMFO 239,973 250,362 1.043 62.22 50 30.92 131 88 COMFO 258,629 276,089 1.068 61.60 57 34.86 132 88 COMFO 284,550 297,667 1.046 61.26 61 37.17 133 88 COMFO 307,434 313,280 1.019 59.66 65 38.70 134 88 COMFO 219,348 225,159 1.026 55.95 50 27.81 141 88 COMFO 267,109 276,861 1.037 56.44 62 34.96 142 88 COMFO 294,412 301,596 1.024 56.72 66 37.66 143 88 COMFO 317,236 322,573 1.017 57.52 69 39.84 144 88 COMFO 262,662 270,142 1.028 54.41 61 33.37 151 88 COMFO 296,789 306,184 1.032 58.03 67 38.66 14655 INTERSTAT 78154 HAMPTON INN & SUITES FORUM 12 1.140 122 85 HAMPT 457,294 480,267 1.050 120.64 51 62.09 123 85 HAMPT 446,517 492,285 1.103 110.20 57 62.95 124 85 HAMPT 404,911 423,563 1.046 90.74 60 54.16 131 85 HAMPT 448,112 464,516 1.037 89.83 68 60.72 132 85 HAMPT 465,490 506,747 1.089 89.37 73 65.51 133 85 HAMPT 516,876 546,660 1.058 96.59 72 69.91 134 85 HAMPT 460,678 481,679 1.046 94.94 65 61.60 141 85 HAMPT 476,864 518,752 1.088 94.85 71 67.81 142 85 HAMPT 509,733 591,098 1.160 98.04 78 76.42 143 85 HAMPT 532,045 615,758 1.157 106.77 74 78.74 144 85 HAMPT 508,438 590,472 1.161 110.61 68 75.51 151 85 HAMPT 550,947 622,098 1.129 111.61 73 81.32

E 3 YR AVG CITY ADDR ZIP S EST 4 OP ADJ 1 ---- ---- --- T AVG. % -- ----- # TAXABLE GROSS ADJ 1 DAILY OCC $ 5 YRQ RMS BRAND REVENUE REVENUE FACTOR 2 RATE EST REVPAR --- ---- ----- ------- -------- ------ - ----- --- ------ SELMA 15408 INTERSTAT 78154 HOLIDAY EXPRESS 07 1.050 101 84 HIEXP 401,142 489,516 1.220 89.46 72 64.75 102 84 HIEXP 467,259 636,688 1.363 103.90 80 83.29 103 84 HIEXP 481,155 622,459 1.294 103.73 78 80.55 104 84 HIEXP 333,860 438,914 1.315 98.40 58 56.80 111 84 HIEXP 410,039 490,624 1.197 95.45 68 64.90 112 84 HIEXP 451,158 545,260 1.209 104.61 68 71.33 113 84 HIEXP 615,677 662,331 1.076 121.28 71 85.71 114 84 HIEXP 449,429 473,564 1.054 107.60 57 61.28 121 84 HIEXP 525,721 559,941 1.065 106.08 70 74.07 122 84 HIEXP 554,627 599,061 1.080 108.61 72 78.37 123 84 HIEXP 538,390 626,474 1.164 113.06 72 81.07 124 84 HIEXP 446,859 488,165 1.092 106.35 59 63.17 131 84 HIEXP 482,216 499,872 1.037 97.56 68 66.12 132 84 HIEXP 549,096 573,582 1.045 106.76 70 75.04 133 84 HIEXP 549,132 570,507 1.039 109.89 67 73.82 134 84 HIEXP 429,025 440,833 1.028 109.30 52 57.04 141 84 HIEXP 418,263 437,261 1.045 99.20 58 57.84 142 84 HIEXP 544,368 586,395 1.077 103.72 74 76.71 143 84 HIEXP 628,819 657,791 1.046 116.00 73 85.12 144 84 HIEXP 505,984 534,254 1.056 113.96 61 69.13 151 84 HIEXP 511,540 536,985 1.050 102.51 69 71.03 UNIVERSAL CI 200 PALISADES D 78148 SUPER 8 FMR COMFORT INN 85 1.060 101 119 SUPR8 199,111 211,058.000 34.60 57 19.71 102 119 SUPR8 219,899 233,093.000 34.19 63 21.52 103 119 SUPR8 268,820 284,949.000 40.64 64 26.03 104 119 SUPR8 184,581 195,656.000 38.79 46 17.87 111 119 SUPR8 183,036 194,018.000 37.63 48 18.12 112 119 SUPR8 208,002 220,482.000 37.33 55 20.36 113 119 SUPR8 268,495 284,605.000 39.93 65 26.00 114 119 SUPR8 165,828 175,778.000 39.38 41 16.06 121 119 SUPR8 203,367 215,569.000 37.05 54 20.13 122 119 SUPR8 239,647 254,026.000 36.23 65 23.46 123 119 SUPR8 299,843 317,834.000 40.07 72 29.03 124 119 SUPR8 196,106 207,872.000 40.52 47 18.99 131 119 SUPR8 194,712 206,395.000 37.64 51 19.27 132 119 SUPR8 280,684 297,525.000 39.45 70 27.47 133 119 SUPR8 274,140 290,588.000 39.06 68 26.54 134 119 SUPR8 136,311 144,490.000 35.44 37 13.20 141 119 SUPR8 173,985 184,424.000 33.51 51 17.22 142 119 SUPR8 215,298 228,216.000 35.69 59 21.07 143 119 SUPR8 335,547 353,821 1.054 42.59 76 32.32 144 119 SUPR8 272,297 289,010 1.061 41.78 63 26.40 151 119 SUPR8 323,741 336,817 1.040 43.72 72 31.45

ENDNOTES: --------- 1. Factor used to adjust taxable to gross revenues. Area factor used if property data not available. Taxable equals 89% of gross Statewide. 2. A number or a 'Y' indicates quarter's revenues were estimated. 3. Estimated Average Daily Rate (e.g. 60-85% of 'rack single'); 4. Occupancy derived from calculated roomnights sold (gross room revenues divided by Average Daily Rate), divided by roomnights available. 5. Total REVenues Per Available Room per day, or 'REVPAR'; Prepared from State Comptroller, chain directories and private records. Includes all quarterly reports exceeding $18,000 (otherwise omitted).

EXHIBIT IV PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2015 LODGING MARKET: TEXAS EXCLUDING HIGHER PRICED SEGMENTS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- CHAINS CAMBRIA 0.0.0 8.0 723.0 60.6 93.23 56.47 CANDLWOOD 62 5.8 2.3 1,534 2.5 129,243 3.1 71.9 84.25 60.61 COMFO STE 115 8.0 3.1 1,963 3.3 171,299 4.1 67.6 87.25 58.95 HAWTHORN 18 1.7.7 428.7 33,034.8 67.0 77.24 51.74 HOME2STES 5.5.2 139.2 17,216.4 72.3 123.96 89.68 SPRNGHILL 36 4.2 1.7 1,111 1.8 128,431 3.0 72.6 115.57 83.92 TOWNPLACE 31 3.2 1.3 840 1.4 91,542 2.2 71.1 108.92 77.42 OTHER MIN 14 1.1.4 272.5 22,167.5 66.6 81.39 54.18 TOT MIN STE 284 24.7 9.8 6,296 10.5 593,655 14.1 69.9 94.30 65.94 BEST WEST 230 13.8 5.5 3,298 5.5 290,155 6.9 65.4 87.99 57.57 CNTRY INN 21 1.5.6 378.6 32,900.8 67.9 87.09 59.14 COMFO INN 73 5.0 2.0 1,184 2.0 91,669 2.2 64.9 77.39 50.22 DRURY INN 17 2.8 1.1 738 1.2 76,297 1.8 71.3 103.37 73.68 FAIRFIELD 63 5.4 2.2 1,392 2.3 139,449 3.3 70.1 100.21 70.25 HAMPTON 167 14.3 5.6 3,654 6.1 439,079 10.4 70.2 120.18 84.33 HOLID EXP 223 17.9 7.1 4,495 7.5 499,472 11.8 68.7 111.11 76.30 LA QUINTA 224 21.0 8.3 5,181 8.6 444,712 10.5 67.5 85.83 57.93 SLEEP INN 36 2.4.9 561.9 43,484 1.0 64.8 77.47 50.23 WINGATE 16 1.5.6 359.6 27,805.7 67.3 77.37 52.08 TOT LTD SVE1,070 85.7 33.9 21,240 35.3 2,085,023 49.4 67.9 98.16 66.68 BUDG STES 11 4.0 1.6 1,031 1.7 42,830 1.0 70.7 41.53 29.37 EXT AMERI 49 5.4 2.1 1,403 2.3 82,194 1.9 71.7 58.59 41.98 HOMESTEAD 9 1.2.5 304.5 17,288.4 70.6 56.91 40.21 INTOWN ST 30 3.9 1.5 1,012 1.7 41,547 1.0 71.8 41.07 29.48 STUDIO 6 34 3.7 1.4 940 1.6 43,399 1.0 70.4 46.17 32.49 VALUE PLC 38 4.5 1.8 1,183 2.0 51,369 1.2 71.7 43.41 31.12 OTHER EXT 34 3.8 1.5 963 1.6 43,607 1.0 70.3 45.27 31.80 TOT EXT STA 205 26.3 10.4 6,836 11.4 322,235 7.6 71.1 47.14 33.52 BAYMONT 37 3.0 1.2 706 1.2 44,577 1.1 64.0 63.13 40.40 BST VALUE 104 6.3 2.5 1,402 2.3 58,913 1.4 60.6 42.02 25.48 DAYS INN 146 9.4 3.7 2,092 3.5 115,782 2.7 60.7 55.36 33.63 ECONOLODG 51 2.9 1.1 613 1.0 28,447.7 58.5 46.37 27.12 HO JO 19 1.3.5 291.5 14,626.3 61.2 50.22 30.75 MICROTEL 31 2.1.8 509.8 37,404.9 67.2 73.45 49.32 MOTEL 6 144 13.0 5.1 3,198 5.3 152,508 3.6 67.5 47.69 32.19 QUALITY 79 6.3 2.5 1,398 2.3 89,942 2.1 61.0 64.35 39.26 RAMADA 28 2.5 1.0 553.9 32,085.8 59.8 58.02 34.70 RED ROOF 28 3.3 1.3 810 1.3 42,988 1.0 66.4 53.08 35.26 RODEWAY 23 1.4.6 291.5 13,613.3 56.6 46.84 26.53 SUPER 8 160 9.6 3.8 2,172 3.6 123,422 2.9 62.1 56.82 35.28 TRAVELODG 24 1.9.8 396.7 19,466.5 55.9 49.22 27.49 OTHER BUD 93 5.8 2.3 1,243 2.1 58,903 1.4 59.1 47.39 28.01 TOT BUDGET 967 68.9 27.2 15,673 26.0 832,678 19.7 62.4 53.13 33.13

PERIOD: TWELVE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2015 LODGING MARKET: TEXAS EXCLUDING HIGHER PRICED SEGMENTS # * EST. $ EST. #* RMS % RNS % AMT. % EST. $ $ BRAND HTL 000S RMS 000S RNS 000S AMT %OCC RATE RPAR ----- --- ---- ---- ------ ---- -------- ---- ---- ----- ---- TOT CHAINS 2,526205.5 81.3 50,045 83.1 3,833,590 90.8 66.7 76.60 51.10 TOT INDEP 883 47.4 18.7 10,184 16.9 386,477 9.2 58.9 37.95 22.35 TOT MARKET 3,409252.9 100.0 60,229 100.0 4,220,068 100 65.2 70.07 45.71 * All figures annualized. Includes taxed and est non-tax room revenues.

Exhibit V The following 8 brands were selected as likely development options for the Converse hotel project. All are very prominent brands which are appropriate fits for the market and a prospective nearby/adjacent city conference facility. There is no guarantee that all of these brands will be available to a potential developer due to a variety of factors, but on average, they provide a very good representation of how a prominent limited service hotel will perform in the market. We used aggregate performance numbers for this study. Once a brand is selected for development, there will be factors which will vary from this study. Optimum room counts, development cost, cost to operate, REVPAR performance, and other factors may vary to a modest degree. This aggregate view provides a good baseline with an expected return that would be similar for any of the selected brands. Derivations for the sample brands follow the chart, and show basic REVPAR performance (last year basis) that can be expected for each, with an optimum room count specified. AVERAGE----------------------- NAME HOTELS REVPAR OPEN ROOMS CANDLEWOOD SUITES 65 $60.61 2007 94 LA QUINTA INN 229 $57.93 1996 93 TOWNEPLACE SUITES 32 $77.42 2006 105 FAIRFIELD INN 63 $70.25 2001 86 BEST WESTERN 230 $57.57 1998 60 HAMPTON INN 168 $84.33 2005 86 HOLIDAY EXPRESS 227 $76.30 2006 81 COMFORT SUITES 113 $58.95 2005 69 AGGREGATE 1127 $67.97 2003 85 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Aggregate Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.49 1.49 1.49 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 130% 151% 159% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $56.08 $65.22 $68.27 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Candlewood -94 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.33 1.33 1.33 x Brand Age Adjustment 0.94 0.94 0.94 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 109% 127% 133% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $47.05 $54.72 $57.28 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- La Quinta - 93 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.27 1.27 1.27 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.13 1.13 1.13 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 125% 146% 153% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $54.01 $62.82 $65.75 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TownePlace - 105 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.69 1.69 1.69 x Brand Age Adjustment 0.96 0.96 0.96 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 142% 165% 173% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $61.06 $71.01 $74.33 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Fairfield - 86 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.54 1.54 1.54 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.04 1.04 1.04 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 140% 163% 170% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $60.28 $70.10 $73.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Best Western - 60 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.26 1.26 1.26 x Brand Age Adjustment 1.09 1.09 1.09 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 120% 140% 146% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $51.69 $60.11 $62.92 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hampton - 86 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.84 1.84 1.84 x Brand Age Adjustment 0.97 0.97 0.97 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 156% 181% 190% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $67.17 $78.12 $81.77 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Holiday Express - 81 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.67 1.67 1.67 x Brand Age Adjustment 0.96 0.96 0.96 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 140% 163% 171% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $60.34 $70.17 $73.45 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comfort Suites - 69 rms Data in 2014 $ Year I Year II Year III Base: Name & Quality 1.67 1.67 1.67 x Brand Age Adjustment 0.96 0.96 0.96 x Site Value Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0.95 x Size Adjustment 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Other Adjustments 1.00 1.00 1.00 x Newness Adjustment 0.92 1.07 1.12 = Performance Factor 140% 163% 171% x Market REVPAR $43.06 $43.06 $43.06 = Projected Performance $60.34 $70.17 $73.45

EXHIBIT VI A STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF HOTEL SIZE ON PERFORMANCE IN THE TEXAS HOTEL INDUSTRY THE CASE FOR DOWNSIZING NEW HOTELS 11/30/99 By Douglas W. Sutton and Bruce H. Walker Source Strategies has long contended that the number of rooms a developer offers in a new property is one of the key factors in determining a venture's relative success or failure. It is every bit as important to size a hotel project properly as it is to select the appropriate brand, and to develop in a suitable market and location. We have previously conducted extensive studies of the lodging market that support our hotel sizing contention, and we have taken this opportunity to re-examine the issue using our extensive database of hotel and motel performance for the State of Texas. Before delving into the numbers that define the role of room count in a hotel's performance, we should first highlight the basic industry theory of 'rightsizing' a property. The premise offered by many inexperienced developers is "If I can make a profit constructing a 50 room hotel in a given market, it would be twice as profitable to develop 100 rooms." In virtually all cases nothing could be farther from the truth. At some point adding rooms to a project reaches a point of diminishing returns, and the investment in the additional rooms cannot be economically justified. To illustrate this point, mentally divide our hypothetical 100 room project into two 50 room hotels. The initial 50 rooms may perform very well, with occupancies over 70% and a very strong rate structure. However, the second 50 rooms are only utilized when there is overflow from the first hotel because its rooms are 100% occupied. Effectively, the second 50 rooms may only attain an occupancy of 30% or less. This low level of occupancy may prompt the general manager to lower rates to bolster occupancy, but this is a losing battle. Ultimately, overbuilding causes REVPAR erosion in the property, and in the market as a whole. Today's developers and lenders would not seriously consider involvement in a 50 room project operating at this low level, but often times they accomplish the same end by pushing for more rooms in a project than the market can effectively support. If we now mentally put these two 50 room properties back together (one operating at 70%, the other at 30% occupancy), what we end up with is an oversized 100 room hotel that is running a mediocre 50% occupancy.

Over-sizing a hotel makes it difficult, if not impossible, to be competitive in a marketplace. There are a finite number of room-nights sold to be divided among existing hotels in the market, and developing a more conservatively sized property helps insure that a profitable level of those room-nights can be captured. Building a hotel is not the 'Field of Dreams'... If you build it - they won't come... With the exception of destination resorts and some unique convention hotels, people do not go someplace because there is a hotel. Rather, they stay in a hotel because they want to be near someplace. Builders who construct too many rooms usually put themselves in unenviable financial situations. Many hotels which we see put up for sale were developed with far too many rooms. The owners, having had difficulty getting a return on their investment, are often trying to get out from under a bad investment. There are even drastic cases of properties bulldozing entire wings to provide additional parking, because those extra rooms are a financial burden, remaining unsold the vast majority of the time. Now that we've outlined the basic economic benefits of 'building small', let's look into hotel performance numbers and see if they support this development principle. We analyzed two separate hotel samplings: First we will look at Comfort Inns across Texas as a selected brand sampling. Then we will look at all branded hotels built during a given period of time for a more diverse sampling. COMFORT INN - ANALYSIS OF SIZING AND ITS IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE In our initial analysis, we selected a sampling of Texas Comfort Inn branded properties ranging in size from 36 to 75 rooms; they are all 'Limited Service' hotels. We excluded those properties located in exclusive, higher priced markets, since they would naturally support larger room counts while maintaining strong performance levels and would distort the findings. The resulting sample included 55 Comfort Inn hotels located across Texas. The following chart of performance statistics from the latest year on file (12 months ending September 30, 1999) clearly illustrates the consistent curve, showing marked declines in performance as room count increases. This decline was exhibited in all three measures shown, Occupancy, Average Daily Rate, and REVPAR:

Year Ending 6/30/99 Results Average # of Daily Units Occupancy Rate REVPAR 36-40 66.9 55.25 36.95 41-45 65.3 57.34 37.45 46-50 66.5 57.38 38.17 51-55 62.8 56.02 35.20 56-60 61.8 54.26 33.55 61-65 56.6 55.33 31.33 66-70 44.6 45.71 20.41 71-75 43.8 44.20 19.38 Combined: 52 63.2 55.46 35.03 Looking only at occupancy, the following graph gives a clear depiction of the notable negative impact of larger room counts on a hotel's ability to maintain an acceptable level of room-nights sold. Properties with lower room counts were clearly able to sustain a higher level of occupancy. Average occupancy ranged from 66.9% for properties of 36-40 rooms, downward to a much lower 43.8% average occupancy for properties in the 71-75 room size bracket. When looking at REVPAR, the following graph follows a very similar performance curve, ranging from an average REVPAR of $36.95 for properties of 36-40 units, downward to a mediocre $19.38 average REVPAR for properties in the 71-35 unit size bracket. Note that the downward slide in both graphs did not begin until room counts exceeded 35 units. Prior to that, a mild upward trend is experienced. This appears to indicate that, on average, 50 rooms is the 'optimum' size for a Comfort Inn in Texas markets (excluding high priced areas). Of course, this is an average number for this type of market. Each project must be examined on an individual basis to determine the proper size to develop within its given market.

The above chart and graphs clearly illustrates that Developers often missed the mark, building more rooms than 'optimum.' 'Optimum' is defined as generating the highest return on invested capital, and is closely tied to occupancy and REVPAR generation. Analyzing the above data provides a measure of the effect of over building. For the typical range of rooms for Comfort Inn projects (40-75 rooms) outside of higher priced areas, the occupancy dropped 23.1 points (a full 35%) from 66.9% to 43.8% as room counts escalated. With a 35 room increase in rooms from the 36-40 room size bracket to the 71-75 room size bracket, a resulting 35% drop in occupancy is experienced. The key question, is how to apply this principle to a given hotel project. Naturally, each project would have to be judged on its individual merits, but looking at an 'average' project for a single brand and product is very revealing. All are Comfort Inns. All are very similar products in similar market environments, leaving size as the major variable in performance. In our sampling, the average project is 65 rooms in size. At this size, the average occupancy is 62.8%. If we built 36% fewer rooms (42 rooms) our average occupancy would rise a moderate 6.5% to 66.9%. Conversely, if we built 36% more than average, (71 rooms) our average occupancy plummets by 42.5% to 43.8%. Clearly there are some basic economic principles at work. Comfort Inns are conservatively-sized. Building smaller than the average of 65 rooms yields slightly higher occupancies, but the ability to charge ever higher rates as size decreases is marginal. As rates rise, some consumers perceive lost value and will stay at another property. On the other side of the coin, properties built larger than the average 65 rooms suffer serious occupancy declines. At some point the need for additional rooms that was envisioned by the optimistic

developer is simply not there, and the extra rooms only serve to depress the overall performance of the property. BRANDED HOTELS - ANALYSIS OF SIZING AND ITS IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE In our second analysis, we selected a sampling of all Texas branded hotels constructed from 1970-1975; 91 properties across Texas, predominantly 'Full Service'. Our sampling was limited to hotels of less than 135 rooms. We once again excluded those properties located in exclusive, higher priced markets. For our analysis we examined performance results from the year 1985 when all subject hotels were 10 to 15 years old, well into their aging life cycles. The following chart of performance statistics from 1985 for branded properties throughout Texas clearly illustrates the downward curve, with definite erosion in performance measures as room count increases: 1985 Performance Results Average # of # of Daily Hotels Units Occupancy Rate REVPAR 2 00-44 70.0 37.88 26.50 3 45-59 73.9 36.13 26.71 7 60-74 66.8 31.10 20.77 14 75-89 62.7 31.65 19.86 29 90-104 60.9 32.42 19.75 16 105-119 57.8 26.25 15.18 20 120-134 55.5 29.35 16.28 Combined: 91 98 59.8 30.34 18.14 With occupancy declines being the strongest indicator of the negative impact of building too large, the following graph provides a clear picture of the descending performance slide as room counts increase. Once again, properties with lower room counts were more insulated from market competition and were therefore able to be more competitive in both favorable and depressed market environments. Average occupancy ranged from 70% for properties of 58 rooms or less, downward to a much lower 55.5% average occupancy for properties in the 120-134 room size bracket, after peaking at 73.9% in the 45-59 size range.

As with the Comfort Inn analysis, the above data provides a measure of the effect of over building. However, since a number of varying brands are considered in this sample, the typical range in size of these projects ranges from about 40 to 135. This is a wider range than the Comfort sampling, since many of the brands in this sample typically have larger room counts than a Comfort Inn. This is partially due to some brands' ability to support higher room counts, and partially due to the tendency to overbuild in the early 1970s, when all hotels in this sample were constructed. While the 65 room average for our Comfort Inn sample is reasonably close to optimum sizing for that brand, the 98 room average for this analysis appears to be oversized. In our assessment, the optimum average number of rooms for this sampling would have been 60 to 41 rooms, depending upon brand. In 1985, this roomcount supported occupancies near 70%, with an average REVPAR of almost $27. Compare this to the average capacity of 98 rooms attaining a much lower average occupancy of 60.9% and REVPAR below $20. Clearly this lower level of performance can be attributed to over-sizing projects in the early 1970s. Looking at our average (oversized) roomcount of 98 rooms, increasing the size by 30% (135 rooms) would cause occupancy to slide 10% from 60.9% to 55.5%. On the other hand, making the average project smaller (58 rooms, or 75% smaller) would improve occupancy to 73.9%, or a healthy 21% increase. For the sake of comparison, let us assume that the average property was more appropriately sized at about 58 rooms. If the project size were increased to 135 rooms, the largest range in our sample, occupancy would suffer a significant 33% decline from optimum levels.

Of course this assumes that locational differences are not significant. We believe this is true; the large sample and clear correlation between size and performance support this conclusion. SUMMARY The data is clear. In most cases, small hotels outperform large hotels, with the exception of higher-priced markets where competitive barriers to entry exist (e.g. lack of land, excessive land cost, building restrictions, etc.). Common sense explains this occurrence: a successful 100 room hotel will inevitably prompt the development of one or more new, small hotels of similar quality in the immediate area. In a competitive market environment, the smaller hotel has a distinct advantage and wins - almost every time.

EXHIBIT VII START-UP PERFORMANCE OF NEW HOTELS AND MOTELS A new study by Source Strategies, Inc., utilizing all new chain hotels opened in Texas between 1990 and 1994, shows that new hotels and motels provide their peak performance in Years III through V, when they typically reach 112% of their 20- year average REVPAR performance level. In other words, the newness of a property is an advantage on the order of a 12% premium in Years III through V - versus the average REVPAR that would otherwise be expected for that property over a twenty-year period. That's because the consumer almost always picks new over old because, to them, 'new' means 'clean' and 'new' means 'value.' Perhaps this is not news to many, but it is highly important to those who forecast the performance of new properties. Here's what the graph looks like for the first twelve years for new properties opened in the moderately-good and improving markets of the 1990's. The years after peak are projected based on two major previous studies: one by Limited Service in the early 1980's and the second last year by Source Strategies, Inc. Year I at 92% of the 20 Year Average, Year II at 107%

The study found that a property could expect a REVPAR at Year I of 92% of the twenty-year average for a project. In Year II, this would move to 107% and to 112% in Years' III through V. For example, if over the twenty-year span of the project, we expect a hypothetical new hotel to generate 105% of the market average REVPAR, this means that in Year I it would generate 97% of market (105% times 92%), and in Year II 112% (105% times Year II's 107%), and then peak at 118% for Years III-V. Study Method The underlying design for this study was to determine what effect a property's age had on its REVPAR during the first five years of operation. From two other studies, we know that properties will decline at 1.67% per year, versus the market average, over long periods of time. The second study sample consisted of all new Texas development in the early 1980's, a time of major under-supply. Consequently, the first few years performance of this group of hotels and motels was probably be overstated - versus the current, more-normal times. The current study confirmed that belief. The current study's design was to develop the REVPAR index for every new chain property (each new property's REVPAR, divided by the REVPAR of all nearby hotels and motels). Then all the resulting indices were averaged. This process was done for each year of development, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994, in order to obtain data for "Year I," "Year II" and so on. These were averaged as well to obtain an over-all, average Year I result. This process produced the graph curve shown above, and is reflective of the particular mix of chain properties, a mix which produced REVPAR slightly above the market average. To eliminate the effect of a specific mix of chains, the scale was moved down slightly, so that the application of the year-by-year REVPAR indices to any project would result in averaging 100 of the first twenty years of the project.

REVPAR OF ALL NEW CHAIN HOTELS OPENED 1990-1994 INCLUDES THEIR LOCAL MARKET AVERAGES (SAME ZIP-CODES) Opened 1990 Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI 9 Chain hotels 41.97 49.45 54.76 54.17 59.45 66.16 Local Market Average 35.38 37.40 39.72 39.71 43.31 48.87 Index New Chain/Market 119 132 138 136 137 135 (Peak) Opened 1991 Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI 8 Chain hotels 32.06 37.95 41.49 44.18 46.26 Local Market Average 29.96 31.26 32.36 33.04 33.70 est Index New Chain/Market 107 121 128 134 137 135 (Peak) Above assumes Year VI index decline of 1.67% Opened 1992 Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI 7 Chain hotels 25.07 36.53 39.76 41.74 Local Market Average 30.60 33.62 34.36 37.49 est est Index New Chain/Market 82 109 116 111 111 109 (Peak) Above assumes Year V is "flat" and Year VI index declines by 1.67% Opened 1993 Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI 16 Chain hotels 24.51 29.15 33.19 Local Market Average 30.70 31.88 35.27 est est est Index New Chain/Market 80 91 94 94 93 91 (Peak) (Peak) Above assumes Year III and IV are Peak, and Year V and Year VI index declines by 1.67% annually Opened 1994 Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI 29 Chain hotels 30.40 35.97 Local Market Average 38.68 41.29 est est est est Index New Chain/Market 79 87 90 89 87 86 Above assumes Year III and Year IV Peak equals Year II plus 4%, as above, and Year V and Year VI index declines by 1.67% annually Peak COMBINED INDICES Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Year VI Average of Raw Data 93 108 113 113 113 111 Adjusted 100 over 20 years 92 107 112 112 112 110 After Year V, Declines Average 1.67% Per Annum In the sixth year and thereafter, the twenty-year average REVPAR index is diminished at a rate of 1.67% per annum in order to reflect aging and the normal life-cycle of a hotel. This pattern of declining performance with property aging is based on major studies of economic life-cycle patterns, studies which were conducted on a census

of all 25,000 Texas rooms built between 1980 and 1982 (study published in September 1994 issues of MarketShare and the October 1994 issue of Hotel & Motel Management). These Source Strategies studies confirm a similar, major study conducted in 1982 at the Holiday corporation on 160 company-owned and companyoperated hotels.

EXHIBIT VIII CapEx: A STUDY OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES IN THE US HOTEL INDUSTRY THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF HOSPITALITY CONSULTANTS' 2000 "CAPEX STUDY, A STUDY OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES IN THE US HOTEL INDUSTRY" AS IT APPLIES TO LIMITED SERVICE PROPERTIES: The objective of our historical analysis in CapEx 2000 was to determine what has been spent in the past to maintain a hotel in good, competitive condition. Hotel owners and management companies were contacted to provide data for the study. Definition of CapEx "Capital Expenditure" is defined as: investments of cash or the creation of liability to acquire or improve an asset, e.g., land, buildings, building additions, site improvements, machinery, equipment; Comparatively, the "reserve for replacement" for a hotel asset has been narrowly defined as the funds set aside for the periodic replacement of furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E). The reserve was not contemplated to fund the replacement of major building components, such as roofs, elevators, and chillers. For this study the term has been defined as: the cost of replacing worn out FF&E, as well as the cost of; - updating design and decor - curing functional and economic obsolescence... - complying with franchisors' brand requirements - technology improvements - product change to meet market demands - adhering to government regulatory requirements - replacing all short and long lived building components due to wear and tear Although many equity investors frequently argue against the necessity of a reserve, particularly if the investor does not plan to hold the property for greater than five years, the requirement for and amount of reserves are typically contractual issues between ownership, lender, manager, and/or franchisor/franchisee. Significant Findings of CapEx 2000 The average amount spent per year by limited-service hotels in the survey was determined to be 5.5% of total revenue for the time period covered by CapEx 2000 (1988-1998). As these limited-service hotels have matured, CapEx has increased, underscoring one of our principal findings that CapEx requirements increase as a hotel ages. CapEx Spending is highly dependent upon a hotel's point in its life cycle. The following chart shows the range of CapEx spending (as a percentage of

total revenues) over a 25-year time period; the table following the chart identifies the specific ranges of CapEx spending as a% of total revenues by year. Percentage Range of CapEx Spending by Year Year Range Minimum Range Maximum 1 1.65% 4.51% 2 1.72% 3.29% 3 1.48% 3.15% 4 1.31% 3.64% 5 3.21% 6.23% 6 4.80% 6.77% 7 4.15% 5.85% 8 3.60% 5.23% 9 4.83% 7.01% 10 8.43% 11.94% 11 4.66% 6.55% 12 5.42% 9.36% 13 4.66% 9.93% 14 4.66% 7.82% 15 3.35% 5.72% 16 5.12% 12.40% 17 5.10% 10.50% 18 2.51% 9.72% 19 2.93% 8.10% 20 2.37% 8.68% 21 2.37% 6.99% 22 3.20% 6.84% 23 5.07% 16.98% 24 3.45% 12.88% 25 5.05% 10.24% As the data indicates, CapEx spending increases over time for all (U.S.) hotels, with large differences in both the level of CapEx spending and timing across different hotels. The data illustrates that, over time, the minimum and maximum levels of CapEx spending generally widens as a hotel increases in age.

For limited-service hotels, the first major increase in spending occurs in the sixth year, which likely represents the replacement of soft goods. The first major spike occurs in year 10, which is likely to be the result of a rooms and corridors renovation. Smaller spikes in CapEx spending occur in the following years, with the next major spending spike occurring in year 17, which is likely building and some mechanical renovation and replacement. The following series of tables illustrates limited-service CapEx spending levels in various demographic categories: CapEx 2000- Limited Service Hotels by Location Average Capex/Total CapEx per Location Age Revenue Room per Year All Properties 12.0 yrs 5.5% $1,111 Airport 9.8 yrs 5.4% $1,268 Urban 15.2 yrs 4.3% $ 820 Small City/Hwy 9.2 yrs 5.1% $ 773 Suburban 10.5 yrs 5.7% $1,172