Ashford Hospitality (AHT) Risk Analysis

The initial term of our advisory agreement with our advisor is 10 years from the effective date of the advisory agreement, subject to an extension by our advisor for up to 7 successive additional 10-year renewal terms thereafter. The board of directors will review our advisor's performance and fees annually and, following the 10-year initial term, may elect to renegotiate the amount of fees payable under the advisory agreement in certain circumstances. Additionally, if we undergo a change of control transaction, we will have the right to terminate the advisory agreement with the payment of the termination fee described below. If we terminate the advisory agreement without cause or upon a change of control, we will be required to pay our advisor a termination fee equal to: - (A) 1.1 multiplied by the greater of (i) 12 times the net earnings of our advisor for the 12 month period preceding the termination date of the advisory agreement; (ii) the earnings multiple (calculated as our advisor's total enterprise value on the trading day immediately preceding the day the termination notice is given to our advisor divided by our advisor's most recently reported adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization ("Adjusted EBITDA")) for our advisor's common stock for the 12 month period preceding the termination date of the advisory agreement multiplied by the net earnings of our advisor for the 12 month period preceding the termination date of the advisory agreement; or (iii) the simple average of the earnings multiples for each of the three fiscal years preceding the termination of the advisory agreement (calculated as our advisor's total enterprise value on the last trading day of each of the three preceding fiscal years divided by, in each case, our advisor's Adjusted EBITDA for the same periods), multiplied by the net earnings of our advisor for the 12 month period preceding the termination date of the advisory agreement; plus - (B) an additional amount such that the total net amount received by our advisor after the reduction by state and U.S. federal income taxes at an assumed combined rate of 40% on the sum of the amounts described in (A) and (B) shall equal the amount described in (A); provided, that, the minimum amount of any termination fee calculated as of any date of determination shall be the greater of (i) the fee that would have been payable had such termination fee been calculated as of December 31, 2025 and (ii) the fee calculated as of such date of determination. Any such termination fee will be payable on or before the termination date. Moreover, our advisor is entitled to set off, take and apply any of our money on deposit in any of our bank, brokerage or similar accounts (all of which are controlled by, and in the name of, our advisor) to amounts we owe to our advisor, including amounts we would owe to our advisor in respect of the termination fee, and in certain circumstances permits our advisor to escrow any money in such accounts into a termination fee escrow account (to which we would not have access) even prior to the time that the termination fee is payable. The termination fee makes it more difficult for us to terminate our advisory agreement. These provisions significantly increase the cost to us of terminating our advisory agreement, thereby limiting our ability to terminate our advisor without cause.

Our executive officers also serve as key employees and as officers of our advisor and Braemar, and will continue to do so. Furthermore, Mr. Monty J. Bennett, our chairman, is also the chief executive officer, chairman and a significant stockholder of our advisor and is the chairman of Braemar. Our advisory agreement requires our advisor to present investments that satisfy our investment guidelines to us before presenting them to Braemar or any future client of our advisor. Additionally, in the future our advisor may advise other clients, some of which may have investment guidelines substantially similar to ours. Some portfolio investment opportunities may include hotels that satisfy our investment objectives as well as hotels that satisfy the investment objectives of Braemar or other entities advised by our advisor. If the portfolio cannot be equitably divided, our advisor will necessarily have to make a determination as to which entity will be presented with the opportunity. In such a circumstance, our advisory agreement requires our advisor to allocate portfolio investment opportunities between us, Braemar or other entities advised by our advisor in a fair and equitable manner, consistent with our, Braemar's and such other entities' investment objectives. In making this determination, our advisor, using substantial discretion, will consider the investment strategy and guidelines of each entity with respect to acquisition of properties, portfolio concentrations, tax consequences, regulatory restrictions, liquidity requirements and other factors deemed appropriate. In making the allocation determination, our advisor has no obligation to make any such investment opportunity available to us. Further, our advisor and Braemar have agreed that any new investment opportunities that satisfy our investment guidelines will be presented to our board of directors; however, our board of directors will have only ten business days to make a determination with respect to such opportunity prior to it being available to Braemar. The above mentioned dual responsibilities may create conflicts of interest for our officers which could result in decisions or allocations of investments that may benefit one entity more than the other.

Conflicts of interest in general and specifically relating to Ashford Inc. and its subsidiaries (including Ashford LLC, Remington Hospitality and Premier) may lead to management decisions that are not in the stockholders' best interest. The chairman of our board of directors, Mr. Monty J. Bennett, is the chairman, chief executive officer and a significant stockholder of Ashford Inc. and Mr. Archie Bennett, Jr., who is our chairman emeritus, is a significant stockholder of Ashford Inc. As of December 31, 2025, Remington Hospitality managed 50 of our 68 hotel properties and provides other services. Mr. Monty J. Bennett is chairman and chief executive officer of Ashford Inc. and, together with his father Mr. Archie Bennett, Jr., as of December 31, 2025, holds a controlling interest in Ashford Inc. As of December 31, 2025, the Bennetts owned approximately 809,937 shares of Ashford Inc. common stock, which represented an approximate 51.9% ownership interest in Ashford Inc., and owned 18,758,600 shares of Ashford Inc. Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, which, along with all unpaid accrued and accumulated dividends thereon, was convertible (at a conversion price of $117.50 per share) into an additional approximate 4,573,359 shares of Ashford Inc. common stock, which if converted as of December 31, 2025, would have increased the Bennetts' ownership interest in Ashford Inc. to 87.8%. The 18,758,600 shares of Series D Convertible Preferred Stock owned by Mr. Monty J. Bennett and Mr. Archie Bennett, Jr. include 360,000 shares owned by trusts. Additionally, Mr. Monty J. Bennett acquired the right to direct votes, effective March 25, 2025, and as of December 31, 2025 those rights represented approximately 551,000 common shares. Messrs. Archie Bennett, Jr. and Monty J. Bennett's ownership interests in, and Mr. Monty J. Bennett's management obligations to, Ashford Inc. present them with conflicts of interest in making management decisions related to the commercial arrangements between us and Ashford Inc. Mr. Monty J. Bennett's management obligations to Ashford Inc. (and his obligations to Braemar, where he also serves as chairman of the board of directors) reduce the time and effort he spends on us. Our board of directors has adopted a policy that requires all material approvals, actions or decisions to which we have the right to make under the master hotel management agreement with Remington Hospitality and the master project management agreement with Premier be approved by a majority or, in certain circumstances, all of our independent directors. However, given the authority and/or operational latitude provided to Remington Hospitality under the master hotel management agreement and to Premier under the master project management agreement, and Mr. Monty J. Bennett as the chairman and chief executive officer of Ashford Inc., could take actions or make decisions that are not in our stockholders' best interest or that are otherwise inconsistent with the obligations to us under the master hotel management agreement or master project management agreement. Holders of units in our operating partnership, including members of our management team, may suffer adverse tax consequences upon our sale of certain properties. Therefore, holders of units, either directly or indirectly, including Messrs. Archie Bennett, Jr. and Monty J. Bennett may have different objectives regarding the appropriate pricing and timing of a particular property's sale. These officers and directors of ours may influence us to sell, not sell, or refinance certain properties, even if such actions or inactions might be financially advantageous to our stockholders, or to enter into tax deferred exchanges with the proceeds of such sales when such a reinvestment might not otherwise be in our best interest. We are a party to a master hotel management agreement and a hotel management exclusivity agreement with Remington Hospitality and a master project management agreement and a project management exclusivity agreement with Premier, which describes the terms of Remington Hospitality's and Premier's, respectively, services to our hotels, as well as any future hotels we may acquire that may or may not be property managed by Remington Hospitality or project managed by Premier. The exclusivity agreements requires us to engage Remington Hospitality for hotel management and Premier for design and construction services, respectively, unless, in each case, our independent directors either: (i) unanimously vote to hire a different manager or developer; or (ii) by a majority vote, elect not to engage Remington Hospitality or Premier, as the case may be, because they have determined that special circumstances exist or that, based on Remington Hospitality's or Premier's prior performance, another manager or developer could perform the duties materially better. As significant owners of Ashford Inc., which would receive any development, management, and management termination fees payable by us under the management agreements, Mr. Monty J. Bennett, and to a lesser extent, Mr. Archie Bennett, Jr., in his role as chairman emeritus, may influence our decisions to sell, acquire, or develop hotels when it is not in the best interests of our stockholders to do so.

We, as the general partner of our operating partnership, have fiduciary duties to the other limited partners in our operating partnership, the discharge of which may conflict with the interests of our stockholders. The limited partners of our operating partnership have agreed that, in the event of a conflict in the fiduciary duties owed by us to our stockholders and, in our capacity as general partner of our operating partnership, to such limited partners, we are under no obligation to give priority to the interests of such limited partners. In addition, those persons holding common units will have the right to vote on certain amendments to the operating partnership agreement (which require approval by a majority in interest of the limited partners, including us) and individually to approve certain amendments that would adversely affect their rights. These voting rights may be exercised in a manner that conflicts with the interests of our stockholders. For example, we are unable to modify the rights of limited partners to receive distributions as set forth in the operating partnership agreement in a manner that adversely affects their rights without their consent, even though such modification might be in the best interest of our stockholders. In addition, conflicts may arise when the interests of our stockholders and the limited partners of our operating partnership diverge, particularly in circumstances in which there may be an adverse tax consequence to the limited partners. Tax consequences to holders of common units upon a sale or refinancing of our properties may cause the interests of the key employees of our advisor (who are also our executive officers and have ownership interests in our operating partnership) to differ from our stockholders.

In order to avoid any actual or perceived conflicts of interest with our directors or officers or our advisor's employees, we adopted a policy regarding conflicts of interest to address specifically some of the conflicts relating to our activities. Although under this policy the approval of a majority of our disinterested directors is required to approve any transaction, agreement or relationship in which any of our directors or officers or our advisor or it has an interest, there is no assurance that this policy will be adequate to address all of the conflicts that may arise or will resolve such conflicts in a manner that is favorable to us.

We may invest in securities for which there is no liquid market or which may be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or otherwise be less liquid than publicly traded securities generally. The relative illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell these investments when desired. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we had previously recorded these investments. Our investments may occasionally be subject to contractual or legal restrictions on resale or will be otherwise illiquid due to the fact that there is no established trading market for such securities, or such trading market is thinly traded. The relative illiquidity of such investments may make it difficult for us to dispose of them at a favorable price, and, as a result, we may suffer losses.

We may acquire a hotel property in its "as is" condition on a "where is" basis and "with all faults," without any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use or purpose. In addition, purchase agreements may contain only limited warranties, representations and indemnifications that will only survive for a limited period after the closing, or provide a cap on the amount of damages we can recover. The purchase of properties with limited warranties increases the risk that we may lose some or all our invested capital in the property as well as the loss of income from that property.

Our charter provides that our board of directors may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if it determines that it is no longer in our best interest to continue to qualify as a REIT. If we cease to qualify as a REIT, we would become subject to U.S. federal and state and local income taxes on our taxable income and would no longer be required to distribute most of our taxable income to our stockholders, which may have adverse consequences on the total stockholder return received by our stockholders.

Our charter contains 9.8% ownership limits. For the purpose of preserving our REIT qualification, our charter prohibits direct or constructive ownership by any person of more than (i) 9.8% of the lesser of the total number or value (whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of our common stock or (ii) 9.8% of the total number or value (whichever is more restrictive) of the outstanding shares of any class or series of our preferred stock or any other stock of our company, unless our board of directors grants a waiver. Our charter's constructive ownership rules are complex and may cause stock owned actually or constructively by a group of related individuals and/or entities to be deemed to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of less than 9.8% of any class or series of our stock by an individual or entity could nevertheless cause that individual or entity to own constructively in excess of 9.8% of a class or series of outstanding stock, and thus be subject to our charter's ownership limit. Any attempt to own or transfer shares of our stock in excess of the ownership limit without the consent of our board of directors will be void and could result in the shares being automatically transferred to a charitable trust.

Our charter authorizes our board of directors to issue common stock or preferred stock in one or more classes and to establish the preferences and rights of any class of common stock or preferred stock issued. These actions can be taken without obtaining stockholder approval. Our issuance of additional classes of common stock or preferred stock could substantially dilute the interests of the holders of our common stock. Such issuances could also have the effect of delaying or preventing someone from taking control of us, even if our stockholders' deemed a change of control to be in their best interests. As discussed above, on December 15, 2025, we created a new series of Series N Preferred Stock. Pursuant to the Rights Agreement, we declared a dividend of one Right for each outstanding share of common stock, with each Right initially representing the right to purchase from the Company one one-thousandth of a share of Series N Preferred Stock at a price of $20.00 per one one-thousandth of a share of Series N Preferred Stock, subject to adjustment. If the Rights become exercisable, our common stock may be diluted, though only the interests of the Acquiring Person would be diluted.

Provisions in the partnership agreement of our operating partnership may delay or make more difficult unsolicited acquisitions of us or changes in our control. These provisions could discourage third parties from making proposals involving an unsolicited acquisition of us or change of our control, although some stockholders might consider such proposals, if made, desirable. These provisions include, among others: - redemption rights of qualifying parties;- transfer restrictions on our common units;- the ability of the general partner in some cases to amend the partnership agreement without the consent of the limited partners; and - the right of the limited partners to consent to transfers of the general partnership interest and mergers under specified circumstances.

Provisions contained in our charter and the Maryland General Corporation Law (the "MGCL") may have effects that delay, defer, or prevent a takeover attempt, which may prevent stockholders from receiving a "control premium" for their shares. For example, these provisions may defer or prevent tender offers for our common stock or purchases of large blocks of our common stock, thereby limiting the opportunities for our stockholders to receive a premium for their common stock over then-prevailing market prices. These provisions include the following: - The ownership limit in our charter limits related investors, including, among other things, any voting group, from acquiring over 9.8% of our common stock or any class of our preferred stock without our permission. - Our charter authorizes our board of directors to issue common stock or preferred stock in one or more classes and to establish the preferences and rights of any class of common stock or preferred stock issued. These actions can be taken without soliciting stockholder approval. Our common stock and preferred stock issuances could have the effect of delaying or preventing someone from taking control of us, even if a change in control were in our stockholders' best interests. Maryland statutory law provides that an act of a director relating to or affecting an acquisition or a potential acquisition of control of a corporation may not be subject to a higher duty or greater scrutiny than is applied to any other act of a director or determination not to act. Hence, directors of a Maryland corporation by statute are not required to act in certain takeover situations under the same standards of care and are not subject to the same standards of review, as apply in Delaware and other corporate jurisdictions.

Certain provisions of the MGCL may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us under circumstances that otherwise could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our common stock or a "control premium" for their shares or inhibit a transaction that might otherwise be viewed as being in the best interest of our stockholders. These provisions include: - "business combination" provisions that, subject to limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between us and an "interested stockholder" (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our shares or an affiliate thereof) for five years after the most recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, and thereafter impose special stockholder voting requirements on these business combinations, unless certain fair price requirements set forth in the MGCL are satisfied; and - "control share" provisions that provide that "control shares" of our company (defined as outstanding shares which, when aggregated with other shares controlled by the stockholder, entitle the stockholder to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a "control share acquisition" (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of ownership or control of outstanding "control shares") have no voting rights except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares. In addition, Subtitle 8 of Title 3 of the MGCL permits a Maryland corporation with a class of equity securities registered under the Exchange Act and at least three independent directors to elect to be subject, notwithstanding any contrary provision in the charter or bylaws, to any or all of the following five provisions: a classified board; a two-thirds stockholder vote requirement for removal of a director; a requirement that the number of directors be fixed only by vote of the directors; a requirement that a vacancy on the board of directors be filled only by the remaining directors and for the remainder of the full term of the class of directors in which the vacancy occurred; and a requirement that the holders of at least a majority of all votes entitled to be cast request a special meeting of stockholders. Our charter opts out of the business combination/moratorium provisions and control share provisions of the MGCL and prevents us from making any elections under Subtitle 8 of the MGCL. Because these provisions are contained in our charter, they cannot be amended unless the board of directors recommends the amendment and the stockholders approve the amendment. Any such amendment would require the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the outstanding voting power of our common stock.

We strongly urge you to consult your own tax advisor concerning the effects of federal, state, and local income tax law on an investment in our securities because of the complex nature of the tax rules applicable to REITs and their stockholders.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of securities, or the availability of securities for future sales, on the market price of our outstanding securities. Sales of substantial amounts of common stock, or the perception that these sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices for our securities. We also may issue from time to time additional shares of our securities or units of our operating partnership in connection with the acquisition of properties and we may grant additional demand or piggyback registration rights in connection with these issuances. Sales of substantial amounts of our securities or the perception that such sales could occur may adversely affect the prevailing market price for our securities or may impair our ability to raise capital through a sale of additional debt or equity securities.

Our board of directors has overall authority to oversee our operations and determine our major corporate policies. This authority includes significant flexibility. For example, our board of directors can do the following: - amend or revise at any time our dividend policy with respect to our common stock or preferred stock (including by eliminating, failing to declare, or significantly reducing dividends on these securities);- terminate our advisor under certain conditions pursuant to the advisory agreement, subject to the payment of a termination fee;- amend or revise at any time and from time to time our investment, financing, borrowing and dividend policies and our policies with respect to all other activities, including growth, debt, capitalization and operations, subject to the limitations and restrictions provided in our advisory agreement and mutual exclusivity agreement;- amend our policies with respect to conflicts of interest provided that such changes are consistent with applicable legal requirements;- subject to the terms of our charter, prevent the ownership, transfer and/or accumulation of shares in order to protect our status as a REIT or for any other reason deemed to be in the best interests of us and our stockholders;- issue additional shares without obtaining stockholder approval, which could dilute the ownership of our then-current stockholders;- subject to the terms of any outstanding classes or series of preferred stock, classify or reclassify any unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of such classified or reclassified shares, without obtaining stockholder approval;- employ and compensate affiliates (subject to disinterested director approval);- direct our resources toward investments that do not ultimately appreciate over time; and - determine that it is not in our best interests to attempt to qualify, or to continue to qualify, as a REIT. Any of these actions could increase our operating expenses, impact our ability to make distributions or reduce the value of our assets without giving stockholders the right to vote.

Our board of directors determines our major policies, including policies and guidelines relating to our acquisitions, leverage, financing, growth, operations and distributions to stockholders. Our board of directors may amend or revise these and other policies and guidelines from time to time without the vote or consent of our stockholders, subject to certain limitations and restrictions provided in our advisory agreement. Accordingly, our stockholders will have limited control over changes in our policies and those changes could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, the market price of our stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Maryland law provides that a director or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, our charter eliminates our directors' and officers' liability to us and our stockholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment to have been material to the cause of action. Our charter requires us to indemnify our directors and officers and to advance expenses prior to the final disposition of a proceeding to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law for liability actually incurred in connection with any proceeding to which they may be made, or threatened to be made, a party, except to the extent that the act or omission of the director or officer was material to the matter giving rise to the proceeding and was either committed in bad faith or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty, the director or officer actually received an improper personal benefit in money, property or services, or, in the case of any criminal proceeding, the director or officer had reasonable cause to believe that the act or omission was unlawful. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law. In addition, we are generally obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers.

Our charter authorizes the issuance of up to 395,000,000 shares of common stock and 55,000,000 shares of preferred stock. As of March 18, 2026, we had 6,476,491 shares of our common stock issued and outstanding, 1,111,127 shares of our Series D Cumulative Preferred Stock, 1,037,044 shares of our Series F Cumulative Preferred Stock, 1,470,948 shares of our Series G Cumulative Preferred Stock, 1,037,956 shares of our Series H Cumulative Preferred Stock, and 1,034,303 shares of our Series I Cumulative Preferred Stock, 7,684,201 shares of our Series J Redeemable Preferred Stock, 731,102 shares of our Series K Redeemable Preferred Stock, 238,191 shares of our Series L Redeemable Preferred Stock and 550,888 shares of our Series M Redeemable Preferred Stock. Additionally, on December 15, 2025, we declared a dividend of one Right for each outstanding share of common stock, each Right initially representing the right to purchase one one-thousandth of a share of Series N Preferred Stock, and we designated 300,000 shares of Series N Preferred Stock for issuance pursuant to the Rights Agreement. Accordingly, we may issue up to an additional 388,523,509 shares of common stock and 40,104,240 shares of preferred stock. Future issuances of common stock or preferred stock could decrease the relative voting power of our common stock or preferred stock and may cause substantial dilution in the ownership percentage of our then-existing holders of common or preferred stock. Further, if the Rights become exercisable, our common stock may be diluted, though only the interests of the Acquiring Person would be diluted. Future issuances may have the effect of reducing investors' relative voting power and/or diluting the net tangible book value of the shares held by our stockholders, and might have an adverse effect on any trading market for our securities. Our board of directors may designate the rights, terms and preferences of our authorized but unissued common shares or preferred shares at its discretion, including conversion and voting preferences without stockholder approval.