Impairment Charges

Our hotels are comprised of operations and cash flows that can clearly be distinguished, operationally and for financial reporting purposes, from the remainder of our operations. Accordingly, we consider our hotels to be components for purposes of determining impairment charges and reporting discontinued operations.

We test for impairment whenever changes in circumstances indicate a hotel’s carrying value may not be recoverable. We conduct the test using undiscounted cash flows for the shorter of the hotel’s estimated hold period or its remaining useful life. When testing for recoverability of hotels held for investment, we use projected cash flows over its expected hold period. Those hotels held for investment that fail the impairment test are written down to their then current estimated fair value, before any selling expense, and we continue to depreciate the hotels over their remaining useful lives.


5.	Impairment Charges— (continued)

As part of our long-term strategic plan to enhance stockholder value and achieve or exceed targeted returns on invested capital, we sell and acquire hotels to improve our overall portfolio quality, enhance diversification and improve growth rates. In that regard, we regularly review each hotel in our portfolio in terms of projected performances, future capital expenditure requirements and market dynamics and concentration risk. Based on this analysis, we developed a plan to sell our interests in certain hotels (some of which are owned by unconsolidated joint ventures) that no longer meet our investment criteria. As a consequence, we shortened our estimated hold periods for these hotels, and we tested the consolidated hotels for impairment when they were approved as non-strategic hotels. When the hotels owned by unconsolidated joint ventures are designated by those ventures as non-strategic, the joint ventures will test for impairment based on the reduced estimated hold periods.

In 2013, we recorded a $28.8 million impairment charge ($24.4 million related to two hotels included in continuing operations and $4.4 million related to two hotels included in discontinued operations).

The $4.4 million impairment charge was primarily based on third-party offers to purchase (a Level 2 input under authoritative guidance for fair value measurements) at prices below our previously estimated fair market values for those properties. These are hotels we had identified as sale candidates in prior years, reducing their estimated hold period at that time.

The $24.4 million impairment charge related to two hotels identified as no longer meeting our investment criteria, thereby significantly reducing their respective estimated hold periods, resulting in impairments on both hotels. Impairment charges related to these two hotels were determined using Level 3 inputs, as follows:


•	with respect to one hotel, we used a discounted cash flow analysis with an estimated stabilized growth rate of 3.0%, a discounted cash flow term of five years, a terminal capitalization rate of 8.0%, and a discount rate of 10.0%; and


•	with respect to the other hotel, we used information based on EBITDA multiples ranging from 10 to 12 times.

In 2012, we recorded a $1.3 million impairment charge related to one hotel included in discontinued operations. The impairment charge related to this hotel was based on a third-party offer to purchase (a Level 2 input under authoritative guidance for fair value measurements) at a price below our previously estimated fair market value.

We may record additional impairment charges if operating results of individual hotels are materially different from our forecasts, the economy and lodging industry weakens, or we shorten our contemplated holding period for additional hotels.