Good day and welcome to the Ashford Hospitality Trust and Ashford Hospitality Prime Second Quarter 2014 Conference Call. Today’s call is being recorded. At this time, I turn the conference over to your host, Scott Eckstein. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, operator. Good day everyone and welcome to today’s conference call to review results for both Ashford Hospitality Trust and Ashford Hospitality Prime for the second quarter of 2014 and to update you on recent developments. On the call today will be Monty Bennett, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Douglas Kessler, President; Deric Eubanks, Chief Financial Officer and Jeremy Welter, Executive Vice President of Asset Management. The results as well as the notice of the accessibility of this conference call on a listen-only basis over the internet were distributed yesterday afternoon, press releases that are being covered by the financial media. At this time, let me remind you that certain statements and assumptions in this conference call contain are based upon forward-looking information and are being made pursuant to the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, uncertainties and known or unknown risks which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. These risk factors and were fully discussed in both companies’ filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The forward-looking statements included in this conference call are only made as of the date of this call, and the company does not obligate to publicly update or revise them. In addition, certain terms used in this call are non-GAAP financial measures, reconciliations of which are provided in the company’s earnings releases and accompanying tables or schedules which have been filed on Form 8-K with the SEC on August 7, 2014 and may also be accessed through both companies’ website at www.ahtreit.com and www.ahpreit.com. Each listener is encouraged to review those reconciliations provided in the earnings releases together with all other information provided in the releases. I will now turn the call over to Monty Bennett. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, and good morning. During the second quarter the performance of both Ashford Trust and Ashford Prime demonstrated our continued ability to capitalize on the positive lodging industry fundamentals we are currently seeing. We continue to focus on finding innovative ways to create near-term and long-term shareholder value for our two platforms. Our outlook for the hotel sector remains positive and we are confident that these initiatives are adding value for our shareholders. As a team, we at Ashford have employed a methodical analytically driven approach when making day-to-day business decisions and more complex strategic transactions. This remains true in both of our platforms. Our process has stood the test of time and this management team has achieved a 230% total return to our shareholders since Ashford Trust IPO in 2003 compared with the 147% return from our peers over the same time period. We have continued to outperform our peers in every yearly cumulative total shareholder return period since our IPO. While our Ashford Prime portfolio is still in the early stages of this development as an independent public company, we expect to continue to this record of success with that platform as well. An integral part of this methodology is our commitment to acting as shareholders in our companies. That is really not difficult for us because we are shareholders. Our insider ownership in Ashford Trust is 17% and following the spin-off and subsequent equity raise, our insider ownership is 13% in Ashford Prime. The net Fort Worth hotel REIT peer has 4% insider ownership. Over the years, collectively we have sold very little of our stock and made material cash purchases of shares. In fact, back in March by about $500,000 of Ashford Prime stock in the open market. The vast majority of our management team’s…

Thanks Monty. For the second quarter of 2014, Ashford Trust reported AFFO per diluted share of $0.39 compared with $0.55 a year ago. It’s important to note that the second quarter of 2013 included the operations of the Ashford Prime hotels. Ashford Prime reported AFFO per diluted share of $0.45 compared with $0.44 a year ago. For the second quarter, we reported adjusted EBITDA of $96.4 million for Ashford Trust and $25.9 million for Ashford Prime. This adjusted EBITDA result for Ashford Prime reflected a 35% increase over the prior year. At quarter’s end, Ashford Trust had total assets of $3.6 billion including the Highland portfolio which is not consolidated. It had $1.8 billion of mortgage debt and continuing operations and $2.6 billion overall including Highland. The total combined debt for Ashford Trust currently has a blended average interest rate of 5.57% and has currently 54% fixed rate and 46% floating rate, all of which have interest rate caps in place. Including the market value of Ashford Trust OP units of Ashford Prime, and it’s pro rata share of the networking capital of the Highland portfolio, Ashford Trust ended the quarter with net working capital of $467 million. Ashford Prime at quarter’s end had total assets of $1.3 billion it had $767 million of mortgage debt and continuing operations which had a blended average interest rate of 4.99% and is currently 55% fixed rate and 45% floating rate, all of which have interest rate caps in place. At quarter’s end, the Ashford Trust portfolio consisted of 114 hotels with 22,667 net rooms and the Ashford Prime portfolio consisted of 10 hotels with 3,472 net rooms. Ashford Trust share count currently stands at 110.9 million fully diluted shares outstanding which is comprised of 90.9 million common shares and 20 million OP units, while Ashford Prime share count currently stands at 34.5 million fully diluted shares outstanding which is comprised of 25.4 million common shares and 9.1 million OP units. I’d also like to point out that Ashford Trust recorded a $10.8 million accrual for a litigation judgment in the second quarter. This judgment relates to a tenant dispute from 2008 at one of its hotels, where Ashford Trust believes the tenant had violated various lease provisions of a lease agreement and was therefore into fall. The tenant counterclaim had been asserted multiple claims including that it had been wrongfully evicted. The litigation proceeded to a jury trial in June of 2014 and the jury awarded the tenant total claims of $10.8 million. We strongly disagree with this verdict and are in the process of appealing it. In the results for the second quarter we have adjusted for this accrual for purposes of calculating adjusted EBITDA and AFFO. I’d now like to turn it over to Jeremy to discuss our asset management accomplishments for the quarter.

Thank you, Deric. RevPAR at the 10 properties in the Ashford Prime portfolio increased 4.6% in the second quarter of 2014 as difficult market conditions in Washington DC, Chicago and Philadelphia weighed on our results. However that 4.6% portfolio RevPAR growth translated into a significant increase in market share versus the same period last year, which illustrates the high quality nature of the Ashford Prime portfolio. Half of the Ashford Prime properties experienced double-digit RevPAR growth in the quarter. Strength in the West Coast markets continued through the second quarter where Ashford Prime’s four properties produced a combined RevPAR growth of 11.9%. I’d also like to point out that we are pleased with the strong start to the third quarter with a year-over-year increase in RevPAR of 11.4% in July for the Ashford Prime portfolio, among these properties, is Hilton La Jolla, which grew RevPAR by 17.5% in the quarter. This asset continues to excel since the completion of a stunning renovation of the property in the second quarter of 2013 yielding a significant return on our capital expenditures. San Francisco and Seattle continue to be strong markets for Ashford Prime where our three properties produced a combined RevPAR growth of 10.4% for the quarter. Another source of growth this quarter came from the Renaissance Tampa property which increased RevPAR by 13.4% due to multiple citywide events. It’s been five months since Ashford Prime closed on the Sofitel Chicago acquisition in the heart of downtown Chicago. Our team has spent much time with property identifying opportunities to improve asset performance. Since the acquisition, we’ve already identified and implemented cost cuts that we believe will result in approximately $700,000 in annualized cost savings. While the Chicago market has had a difficult last couple of quarters, we’re still very excited about the…

Thank you, Jeremy. Since the end of the first quarter Ashford Trust has continued to strengthen its capital structure by capitalizing on attractive market conditions to strategically manage our debt maturities while generating excess proceeds, also our cash position and also raising equity for two acquisitions. During the quarter, Ashford Trust completed a follow-on public offering of 8,350,000 shares of common stock at a price of $10.70 per share and used the proceeds from the offering to acquire the Ashton Hotel and the Fremont Marriott Silicon Valley. As a reminder, during the downturn, we purchased over 75 million shares of Ashford Trust common stock in the open market at an average price of around $3 per share. So, reissuing those shares at a price of $10.70 resulted in significant value creation for Ashford Trust shareholders. Turning to financing activity during the quarter, Ashford Trust refinanced the $5 million loan secured by the Courtyard Manchester with a new $6.9 million loan. The new loan has a 10-year term with a fixed interest rate of 4.99% and 30 year amortization. Ashford Trust owns this hotel and a joint venture with Interstate Hotels and Resorts, where Ashford Trust owns 85% and Interstate owns 15%. The excess proceeds after transaction cost for distributor partners on a pro rata basis. Additionally, Ashford Trust recently announced a successful refinancing of three mortgage loans with a combined outstanding balance of approximately $325 million. The three previous mortgage loans that were refinanced include the $135 million JPMorgan floater loan, the $101 million UBS 1 loan, and the $89 million Merrill Lynch 3 loan. The new loans totaled $469 million and include a $301 million loan with a two-year initial term and three one-year extension options that bears interest at a floating rate of LIBOR plus 4.35%, a $63…

(Operator Instructions). We’ll take our first question from Andrew Didora with Bank of America. Andrew Didora – Bank of America: Hi, good morning everyone. Monty, maybe the first one, I just wanted to touch upon the margins at Ashford Trust. Up just 56 basis points on a very good RevPAR number, I was looking at the data you guys disclosed in your Press Release. And it looks like it was incentive fees and some new franchise fees even to some of the upside. Just looking back at historical performance, it seems like 1Q had some similar headwinds but grew margins over 125 basis points. I guess, back half of the year do you think this variability will continue? And then maybe, can you give us a sense of your, of what we should think of in terms of margin growth in sort of a mid-single-digit RevPAR environment?

Sure, this margin growth is lower than what we’ve typically achieved. Those in terms of management fees in Trust we primarily paid to our affiliates Remington and that was because of some really strong performance. In terms of management fees to Remington, our caps though, they’re capped at 1% of gross revenues. So there is certainly a limitation to how many of those fees are paid in the five-property based upon hitting the budget or not. As far as what the future holds, we don’t get guidance on that but we could offline work with you and help to calculate about how much, many fees were paid so far. And therefore you can now at least have much more on the maximum side could be paid as part of that incentive. Those franchise fee headwinds was a result of us converting some properties to franchises in the, in May approximately May of 2013 some Marriott managed. Now overall the cost structure of those assets came down even with the franchise fees, but the franchise fees do show up as a variance. And that will go away going forward because of – because we’ve lapped that information. Andrew Didora – Bank of America: Got it. Okay, okay, that makes sense. And then, kind of a similar question at Prime and I’m sorry you might’ve mentioned this briefly in your prepared remarks but I just wanted to ask you about San Francisco and Seattle both had RevPAR growth over 12% yet negative margins. What is the driving force here and how long you expect this kind of margin underperformance to continue?

Sure. The brand incentive fees hit us pretty good in the Prime portfolio. And while some of that is due, a lot of that is due just to improving performance, a lot of it has to do with how we booked them last year. We weren’t as aggressive in booking the incentive fees in the first and second quarter of last year. And therefore the big more aggressive booking than this year, really hit our markets starting in the third quarter and fourth quarter, the booking methodology will be same. And so, we don’t anticipate the incentive fee impact margins to be nearly significant going forward. Andrew Didora – Bank of America: Got it, that’ s helpful. And finally, I mean, this is for Doug. Obviously, competition for high quality hotels in top markets continues to be high. A lot of your peers, this earnings season, have mentioned on their calls that they are losing out on deals and usually your peers with certainly a little bit of lower cost of capital than you. At what point in the cycle do you kind of make the decision that you may look to sell part of the Prime portfolio or the entire portfolio if you decide you really can’t grow it accretively?

We’ll been selling assets, we’ve got two assets for sale right now on the Trust portfolio, maybe three assets for shale in the trust portfolio. So, we’re constantly winning at our portfolio. So, we look at it all the time. As far as looking at it in a more larger forms, as we rephrase the question – our re-price answer in that. Now we’re committed to strong returns in both of these platforms. And we will purpose whatever strategies it takes in order to get those strong returns. Now that involves selling a good number of assets and then that’s what we’re going to do. And we’re going to be looking at that continuously. So I don’t know if you’re able to just reach a point on it. We do think that we’ve got a good bit of running room left again this cycle. And so, there is no reason to do anything too dramatic right now.

But we want these platforms to perform well.

And we’re committed to, maybe sure that happens one way or the other, whether it’s selling assets or any other moves that we might consider. Trust has been I believe the number one performer of all of our REIT peers so far this year. But Prime has not done as well but we really look at Prime’s growth starting from we raise capital in prime, which is at $16.50. Looking at it’s a starting price of when I was spun-out as many opportunities and so few shares were traded. But we remain significant capital at $16.50. We had a good run-up these past couple of months but are pulled back here a little bit. But we’re very excited about the platform and think that it’s going to do very well.

Andrew, if I could just add a couple of points. Obviously, some groups are selling assets because it’s a strategic shift. But we have clearly with the benefit of our multiple platforms is that we created those shifts already and the cost of capital with respect to the opportunities or better align. Also, we’re sitting on a fair amount of capital within both platforms. So the idea of selling assets just to raise capital to redeploy the time that it’s fairly competitive doesn’t stick strategically well with our CEDAR. We don’t think that’s in the best interest of the shareholders. I think some industry experts are forecasting that the peak transaction period won’t even be until sometime in 2018. So, our view is that there is plenty of room to run in the cycle and that we – in many cases we would be leaving cash on the table of selling into what we view that would still be an investor wide strong RevPAR performance and increased liquidity for hotel transactions. So, from that standpoint we view that our current strategy, certainly make sense. Andrew Didora – Bank of America: All right. That’s great color guys, appreciate it.

Thank you. We move on to your next question from Ryan Meliker with MLV & Company: Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Hi guys, I guess one quick follow-up to what Andrew just asked with regards to incentive management fees at AHT. Obviously, it had an impact on margins this quarter. Can you tell us how close you are to bumping up against that 1% max at Remington? Should we expect incentive fees to be elevated and have this type of impact over the next few quarters if RevPAR continues to hold up at the current pace?

We’ll have to work on that calculation offline, we don’t have it right here with us, Ryan about how much of that potential has been booked already as far as the Remington incentive fees. Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Okay. Can you tell us whether we should expect if RevPAR continues at the current pace across the Trust portfolio, whether we should see similar 50 basis point impact to property margins going forward?

That depends on that calculation that I just referenced to. So, we’d have to sit down. But overall, all the – I don’t know other areas and all areas of trust are finally in good shape. So, it’s just that incentive fee that we’ll have to take a closer look at to see how much it might impact over the next few quarters. But again, since we don’t give guidance we’ll tell you how much we spent I hope so far, what the potential is and then you can make your estimate about how you think that would pack margins going forward. Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Okay, that make sense. Obviously when incentive fees are being booked it’s because the properties are doing better than expected. So that’s usually a positive. Second question I have is I was wondering if you would give me a little color on the Chicago Sofitel Water Tower? When you announced the deal back in February you indicated that it was a trailing 6% cap rate and a forward 6.8% cap rate, implying that cash flows were actually growing over NTM basis. But as we look at year-to-date EBIT property EBIT is down 17%, down 10% in the second quarter Is this, it doesn’t sound like this is what you were underwriting initially given you’re expecting cash flows to be NOI to be growing. What’s missing or is this what you were expecting and are we going to see a pretty sharp up-tick over the next couple of quarters?

We do expect the back half of the year to be smaller out in the first half of the year both just in general and because of the conventional calendar so that’s happening. When we under-wrote this property, we knew that we can mention calendar, what’s going to be weak in the first part of the year and this property’s own bookings. And so that’s not new, what was new was that winter that just absolutely towards up, up there both us and the market. And I think we have lost some shares at that property. During that period of time but that was a difference, was that winter. And I have to sit down and really look at the numbers and maybe the convention calendar was a little weaker than we expected. I’m not sure here all panned, but it was primarily new to that brutal winter and the fact that we expect that the games to be more back-loaded than front-loaded.

Yes, Ryan, this is Jeremy. I’ll just add a little bit. In the second half of the year, there is two more, citywide in Chicago. So the group outlook definitely it’s more favorable to the city. And one of the things that I mentioned in the call is we have cut decent amount of cost at the hotel already that will help offset some of the revenue drops. Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Were those cost cuts implemented after the end of the second quarter?

They were towards the latter part of the second quarter. Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Okay, great.

It’s a process of working with the brand and the management team on-site. Ryan Meliker – MLV & Company: Great. That’s all from me. Thanks.

Next question will come from Robin Farley with UBS. Robin Farley – UBS: Hi, thanks. Just circling back to the incentive fee question again. I wonder if you could quantify for us, what percentage of your properties are incentive fee payers, were incentive fee payers in Q2 versus the prior year, just to get a sense of the number of properties that are reaching those thresholds?

That’s hard to give you here right off the top here so let’s just give you that offline. All of the Remington properties are subject to incentive fees but they’re capped at 1% of gross revenues based upon exceeding budgeted levels, budgeted GOP levels. The non-Remington managed – the property managed – the brand managed properties, most of them have incentive fees as part of their management contracts, not all of them. And those are based upon certain own priority levels that we’ll just have to spend a little time with you all offline in order to help you with that. Robin Farley – UBS: I’m trying to get a sense, I guess, of whether even if the Remington Properties are capped, do the non-Remington Properties start to kick in here with RevPAR growing. So, even though the Remington Properties may be capped that you have similar issues at your other owned properties?

Yes, a lot of the ones that has the bigger shares of splits so to speak about owner’s priority have already kicked in and specifically for the Prime portfolio side of the – about approximately half of the assets are currently plain incentive fees. There just happen to be a little bit higher incentive fees than some of the other non-Remington hotels we have in the Trust portfolio. Robin Farley – UBS: Thank you.

Jordan Sandler with KeyBanc Capital Markets has our next question. Austin Wurschmidt – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Hi guys, its Austin Wurschmidt here with Jordan. Doug, I just have one question related to your comment about on the Trust portfolio about having to remain very strategic on the acquisitions side. I was just curious if you could provide a little color as to what you were referring to?

I think we’re just strategic with respect to both platforms, nothing specific in that comment. I think the opportunities in the market today are broad-based, single assets portfolio opportunities as well. And I think we’re just being strategic at both platforms looking at mining the market for situations that fit either platform.

To add to that a little bit is that when we look at opportunities, we share that our – the way we measure accretion is a five-year total shareholder return based upon raising capital and deploying it in that asset we’re looking at on a leverage neutral basis versus not doing anything. And are the total shareholder return based upon stock price and dividends, higher or lower to our shareholders. And that is a very strict discipline that we stick to and by our returns are so much higher than our peers. And so, we get some questions about are we going to sell some of the Right-of-First-Offer properties from Trust to Prime or we can do this to that. And the answer not to be feud about it but the answer truly is we will conduct some of those transactions when it’s accretive to both platforms. And at that time we’ll bring it to both the Trust Boards and the Prime Boards that it’s in their best interest to do so as it would be if it’s accretive to both platforms. And so, when we’re strategic in our pursuits, everything has to pass through that filter. And that’s a discipline we will continue to keep. Austin Wurschmidt – KeyBanc Capital Markets: So then just looking at the opportunities both on a one-off versus portfolio basis, are you seeing more accretive opportunities on the larger portfolios or more where you can go in and mine some of the one-offs?

It will evolve to down a couple one-off. So here two to four, that’s been on the smaller individual assets. But I don’t know if that’s necessarily a rule. I think that’s just how we pack and go up there and grab a few assets. To answer it another way is that I think in the future there very well maybe individual asset transactions and our portfolio. I don’t think that you should assume that it should be one or the other. Austin Wurschmidt – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Thanks for the detail there. And then, just Jeremy, you mentioned some renovation disruption in the second quarter. I’m just curious what the expectation is going forward and do you expect that to provide a little bit of a tailwind in the second half of the year? And then similarly, just can you just provide an update on where you guys are in the process of implementing the revenue management initiatives?

Okay. Well, I’m going to take the first part on the renovation. So if you look at the Trust disclosure that we put out in terms of the upcoming renovation schedule, we have about seven hotels I think or so in the third quarter of less renovations and about five in the fourth quarter. So, on a year-over-year basis, the second half has significantly less renovation activity than what we had in 2013. As for Prime, there is really not a lot of renovation going on in that portfolio. So, that looks pretty good, especially in the fourth quarter. And then, what was the second question, I’m sorry? Austin Wurschmidt – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Just, where you guys are in the process of implementing the revenue management initiatives. I mean, are there still initiatives underway? Do you anticipate some additional tailwinds? We see now RevPAR sort of accelerate into the first half from the back half of last year, and I’m just curious if we should expect that continue as additional initiatives are put in place?

We think that – we know that there is further initiatives that some that have just been put in place and some that have not even been put in place yet. And those initiatives will continue to be put in place through the end of the year and even the first part of next year and then we should be getting some of the benefits from those. So, we were optimistic about our revenue performance. Austin Wurschmidt – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Great. That’s all I’ve got. Thanks guys.

Our next question will come from Chris Woronka with Deutsche Bank. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Hi, good morning guys. I realize you don’t give guidance, but I want to ask about the SG&A more so, on the Trust side. And I see you added $1.2 million of spin-off costs back. Was there anything else unusual that was kind running through SG&A, or what kind of impact, what are some of the things that impacted the timing on that if you can?

Sure, hi Chris, it’s Deric. The other thing that I pointed out that was in the Trust G&A was the compensation adjustment related to the modified employment terms. There was nothing else that was in there that we adjusted for. But other than that there is nothing really in the transaction cost like you mentioned, there is nothing else that I would point out as, different than what we typically have. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Okay. I mean, is there, on the stock based comp, is there typically a lot of fluctuation kind of quarter to quarter?

No, not necessarily. The adjustment that I mentioned the compensation adjustment, part of that was in stock comp and then part of that was in the G&A. So, the movement in that – in the stock comp amount was partly related to that adjustment. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Okay, got you. And then on the Ashton acquisition, I’m guessing it maybe a little bit too small for that to end up in Prime, but is Fremont something that could potentially end up there either of those?

This is Monty. No, the Fort Worth assets is not only small but it’s Fort Worth and that’s not in keeping with our prime strategy. And as far as the Fremont asset, it is – it’s not in the gateway markets, it’s – and it’s also has RevPAR that’s too low. So no, you shouldn’t expect it goes to never go to Prime. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Okay, got you. And then just on the – you mentioned two limited-service hotels that were unencumbered with the latest refinancings. Could we read into that that those are sale candidates, is there kind of a direct correlation that we see there?

Yes, yes, we’re marketing those for sale of the Homewood Suites Mobile and it’s in Hampton and it’s The Hampton Inn in Terre Haute. Those are two assets that are being marketed for sale. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Okay, great. Just more from me. Just as you think about, we see the two platforms and is there a way to creatively, could you buy, could you use more leverage on the Trust side to compete with some of the buyers for these assets and then flip them over to Prime? Is there an avenue to do that?

Yes, there is an avenue to do that. And that’s one of the creative approaches that we’re looking at the Doug, looking at very detailed to see. We want to take advantage of these platforms to help themselves and help the sister platforms as long as it’s neutral or helpful for the first platform. We’re never going to do something with the benefit of one if it’s at the expense of the other. But if there is an opportunity to help each other then that’s what’s going to happen.

So, considering what’s going on the market-place were higher leveraged transactions are taking place in order to be price competitive you have to have a little higher leverage. It may make sense to in some formal fashion, warehouse them in Trust, purchase them in Trust, we would help them. It’s been an appropriate time. I’m having to move over to Prime but we would have spent some time on that because we want to make sure that the Trust shareholders, if we did that get a fear shake. And get compensated for playing that role. And so, as we’re evaluating platform towards looking at any and all different kinds of waste in order to create value. We’re also more open than before over on the Trust side to get into some joint ventures and do a little more creative type things, now at least upon the prime platform out. So, hopefully we can apply our creativity to this market that we believe both in values and RevPARs is going to continue to improve for the foreseeable future in order to take advantage of those facts to the benefit of our shareholders. Chris Woronka – Deutsche Bank: Okay, very good thanks.

Nikhi Bhalla with FDR markets has – capital markets, I have a next question. Weston Bloomer – FBR Capital Markets: Hi, this is Weston Bloomer asking on behalf of Nikhil. Most my questions have already been answered but I was wondering if you could give an update on your stance on share buybacks especially given age, piece, share discount to NAV at this point. Is that something you are considering or is it too early in the portfolio’s lifecycle? Any update on that would be great. Thank you.

Sure. That’s not something we’re considering now for Prime, it is early in the Life Cycle of Prime. It is trading we believe at a material discount to net asset value to private market values. But we also have a desire to grow the platform. And grow it by buying back shares. So we are patient with that for now and have no intention on buying back stock. And I think that generally what you’re going to see from us is not buying back stock, hardly at all during in either platform during these four robust times in the industry. It’s just generally a better use of capital to go out and buy assets. Well, where you’ll see us buying back shares if we do it, it will be during a downturn, almost exclusively all these never-say-never but that’s generally what you’re going to see. So, I’d be hard crushed to say that you’ll see us buying back shares and Prime or trust. As the confidence boost of the marketplace someone out there personally bought some shares in Prime and although not material as Prime, no, it’s immaterial number at all to me personally. So, we’re going to keep getting on the road with potential investors for Prime and keep us telling this story. And we’ve been getting some great feedback from investors. And we’re going to keep up those efforts to educate the market on Prime. Something that I think is very important is not only is that Prime structure more highly aligned with the management than all the other internally managed assets. But in a way it’s one of the most, purest ways that one can invest in a real-estate platform and that we’re investing straight in the assets. And we don’t have a management team that maybe embarking on other initiatives. So, we think it’s a great structure and a great platform. And we think over time the returns will prove that out. Weston Bloomer – FBR Capital Markets: Okay, perfect. Thanks for the color. That’s all I had.

(Operator Instructions). We’ll move on to Patrick Scholes with SunTrust Research. Patrick Scholes – SunTrust Research: Hi, good morning. Just a quick question here for you. Curious as to your appetite for taking on lengthy turnaround projects given where you think we are at this juncture of the cycle? Thanks.

Sure. We’ll take on some turnaround projects. We think that we’ve got multiple years left in the cycle. So unless it’s a new development which we typically don’t like to get involved in, a turnaround where you spend a year, year and half in repositioning and then getting the benefit of the run-up, we still think we have plenty of time for that. So, we’re definitely not counting those out at all in these platforms. Patrick Scholes – SunTrust Research: Okay. Thank you.

That is all the questions we have at this time. I turn the conference back over to management for any additional or closing remarks.

Thank you all for your participation today. And we look forward to speaking to you again on our next call.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the Ashford Hospitality Trust and Ashford Hospitality Prime’s second quarter 2014 conference call. If you’d like to listen to a replay of today’s conference, please dial 888-203-1112 or 719-457-0820 with access number 7335033 followed by the pound sign. Thank you for your participation in today’s conference. You may now disconnect.