Russia shrank its pipeline exports by close to 25 percent compared with a year earlier, according to the International Energy Agency. Europe’s reserves stand at just 30 percent, and Europeans are already paying exorbitant prices for energy.

The conflict is occurring when supplies of both oil and natural gas have been tight for months, driving up prices.

“There are serious concerns” that Moscow will tighten exports further and send prices higher, said Helima Croft, head of commodities at RBC Capital Markets, an investment bank.

Germany, Russia’s largest trading partner in Europe, gets 55 percent of its supply from Russia. Italy, the second-biggest trading partner, gets 41 percent. At a forum in Milan last week, the Russian ambassador Sergey Razov said President Vladimir V. Putin had told the Italian prime minister, Mario Draghi, that “if Italy needs more gas we are ready to supply it.”

Mr. Putin also made a point of saying that roughly 500 Italian businesses have operations in Russia and that bilateral investments are worth $8 billion.

Austria, Turkey and France are large consumers of Russian natural gas. In central and Eastern Europe, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are the biggest customers, the Russian energy giant Gazprom said.

250,000 barrels a day from Russia that move through Ukraine to Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. That amount is relatively small in a global market that consumes 100 million barrels a day, but its loss could create severe shortages in those countries.

dizzying spikes in prices for energy and food and could spook investors. The economic damage from supply disruptions and economic sanctions would be severe in some countries and industries and unnoticed in others.

The money that Russia makes from energy exports could also be reduced if shippers, wary of the growing complexity of transporting Russian crude and supplies, raise what they charge Moscow, Mr. Goldwyn said.

He added it was possible that the White House would ban imports of Russian crude to the United States. Such a move, experts said, would force American refiners to rely on other suppliers and Moscow to find other buyers for around 700,000 barrels a day. China would most likely be one, after the two countries pledged to “strongly support each other.”

Flows of L.N.G. from elsewhere, mostly the United States, have exceeded Russian gas volumes to Europe in recent weeks. Such measures would probably help Western European countries like Germany and Italy more than those in southern and Eastern Europe with fewer alternatives to Russian gas.

Even without a clear cutoff of fuel by Moscow or a disruption by war, there is a substantial risk that extraordinarily high gas and electricity prices will continue, squeezing hard-pressed consumers and, possibly, pushing more businesses to scale back their operations. In recent months, some energy-intensive businesses, including fertilizer makers, have announced closures because of high gas costs.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Service Properties Trust Announces Fourth Quarter 2021 Results

NEWTON, Mass.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Service Properties Trust (Nasdaq: SVC) today announced its financial results for the quarter ended December 31, 2021.

John Murray, President and Chief Executive Officer of SVC, made the following statement:

The fourth quarter marked a period of stability in the overall recovery for SVC’s hotel portfolio, as normal seasonality and the impact of the Omicron variant late in the quarter were offset by solid extended stay occupancy and continued leisure demand. SVC’s comparable RevPAR for the 2021 fourth quarter came in ahead of our expectations at 72.1% of the pre-COVID-19 comparable RevPAR for the 2019 fourth quarter. With weekly COVID-19 cases again on the decline, we expect to benefit from a rebound in business travel in the coming quarters, particularly at our full service hotels as urban centers re-open. Our net lease portfolio continues to provide steady cash flows driven by our diverse mix of tenants and industries.

We have either closed or are under contract for $430 million of our previously announced hotel sales at pricing that has been in line with our expectations. We expect these and the balance of the announced sales to close over the next few months. Approximately 72.1% of the sale hotels will be sold encumbered by Sonesta branding, maintaining Sonesta’s distribution and jump starting franchising of the Sonesta brands, which we believe will benefit SVC. With expected proceeds from our hotel sales of over $560 million, over $940 million of cash on our balance sheet and positive cash flow from our hotel portfolio before capital expenditures, we believe we have sufficient liquidity and financial flexibility to address our upcoming debt maturities, as well as an improved hotel portfolio that is well positioned to benefit SVC as lodging trends continue to rebound.”

 

Results for the Quarter Ended December 31, 2021:

 

 

Three Months Ended December 31,

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

($ in thousands, except per share data)

Net loss

$

(198,793

)

 

$

(137,740

)

Net loss per common share

$

(1.21

)

 

$

(0.84

)

Normalized FFO (1)

$

27,936

 

 

$

(22,474

)

Normalized FFO per common share (1)

$

0.17

 

 

$

(0.14

)

Adjusted EBITDAre (1)

$

118,997

 

 

$

64,953

 

(1) Additional information and reconciliations of net loss determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, to certain non-GAAP measures, including FFO, Normalized FFO, EBITDA, EBITDAre and Adjusted EBITDAre for the quarters ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 appear later in this press release.

 

Hotel Portfolio:

As of December 31, 2021, SVC’s 303 hotels were operated by subsidiaries of Sonesta Holdco Corporation, or Sonesta (261 hotels), Hyatt Hotels Corporation, or Hyatt (17 hotels), Radisson Hospitality, Inc., or Radisson (eight hotels), Marriott International, Inc., or Marriott (16 hotels), and InterContinental Hotels Group, plc, or IHG (one hotel).

 

 

 

Three Months Ended December 31,

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

Change

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

Change

 

 

($ in thousands, except hotel statistics)

Comparable Hotels

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of hotels

 

 

298

 

 

 

298

 

 

 

 

 

280

 

 

 

280

 

 

 

No. of rooms or suites

 

 

46,920

 

 

 

46,920

 

 

 

 

 

42,101

 

 

 

42,101

 

 

 

Occupancy

 

 

55.9

%

 

 

39.9

%

 

16.0 pts

 

 

54.2

%

 

 

44.1

%

 

10.1 pts

ADR

 

$

110.26

 

 

$

87.30

 

 

26.3

%

 

$

98.07

 

 

$

96.84

 

 

1.3

%

Hotel RevPAR

 

$

61.64

 

 

$

34.83

 

 

77.0

%

 

$

53.15

 

 

$

42.71

 

 

24.4

%

Hotel operating revenues (1)

 

$

303,507

 

 

$

166,843

 

 

81.9

%

 

$

884,460

 

 

$

726,757

 

 

21.7

%

Hotel operating expenses (1)

 

$

267,182

 

 

$

193,329

 

 

38.2

%

 

$

822,470

 

 

$

727,724

 

 

13.0

%

Hotel EBITDA (1)

 

$

36,325

 

 

$

(26,486

)

 

n/m

 

 

$

61,990

 

 

$

(967

)

 

n/m

 

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA (1)

 

$

36,325

 

 

$

(26,817

)

 

n/m

 

 

$

61,990

 

 

$

(1,298

)

 

n/m

 

Hotel EBITDA margin

 

 

12.0

%

 

 

(16.1

) %

 

n/m

 

 

 

7.0

%

 

 

(0.2

) %

 

n/m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Hotels (2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of hotels

 

 

303

 

 

 

310

 

 

(7

)

 

 

303

 

 

 

310

 

 

(7

)

No. of rooms or suites

 

 

48,346

 

 

 

49,014

 

 

(668

)

 

 

48,346

 

 

 

49,014

 

 

(668

)

Occupancy

 

 

55.2

%

 

 

39.8

%

 

15.4 pts

 

 

53.0

%

 

 

42.0

%

 

11.0 pts

ADR

 

$

112.30

 

 

$

87.53

 

 

28.3

%

 

$

105.36

 

 

$

100.77

 

 

4.6

%

Hotel RevPAR

 

$

61.99

 

 

$

34.84

 

 

77.9

%

 

$

55.84

 

 

$

42.32

 

 

31.9

%

Hotel operating revenues (1)

 

$

317,215

 

 

$

176,418

 

 

79.8

%

 

$

1,104,678

 

 

$

888,741

 

 

24.3

%

Hotel operating expenses (1)

 

$

288,825

 

 

$

206,521

 

 

39.9

%

 

$

1,033,463

 

 

$

943,064

 

 

9.6

%

Hotel EBITDA (1)

 

$

28,390

 

 

$

(30,103

)

 

n/m

 

 

$

71,215

 

 

$

(54,323

)

 

n/m

 

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA (1)

 

$

28,390

 

 

$

(26,141

)

 

n/m

 

 

$

71,215

 

 

$

(50,361

)

 

n/m

 

Hotel EBITDA margin

 

 

8.9

%

 

 

(3.1

) %

 

n/m

 

 

 

6.4

%

 

 

(5.7

) %

 

n/m

 

(1) Reconciliations of hotel operating revenues and hotel operating expenses used to determine Hotel EBITDA and Adjusted Hotel EBITDA from hotel operating revenues and hotel operating expenses determined in accordance with GAAP for the quarters ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 appear later in this press release.

(2) Results of all hotels as owned during the periods presented, including the results of hotels sold by SVC for the period owned by SVC.

 

Recent operating statistics for SVC’s hotels are as follows:

 

Comparable Hotels

 

 

 

298 Hotels, 46,919 rooms

 

2021 vs 2019

 

 

Occupancy

 

Average Daily Rate

 

RevPAR

 

Occupancy

 

Average Daily Rate

 

RevPAR

October

 

61.3 %

 

$114.35

 

$70.10

 

(16.6) pts

 

(13.3) %

 

(31.7) %

November

 

56.1 %

 

$107.95

 

$60.56

 

(13.4) pts

 

(12.2) %

 

(29.1) %

December

 

50.6 %

 

$107.95

 

$54.62

 

(9.1) pts

 

(6.0) %

 

(20.3) %

 
 

All Hotels

 

 

 

303 Hotels, 48,346 rooms

 

2021 vs 2019

 

 

Occupancy

 

Average Daily Rate

 

RevPAR

 

Occupancy

 

Average Daily Rate

 

RevPAR

October

 

60.5 %

 

$116.18

 

$70.29

 

(17.0) pts

 

(13.2) %

 

(32.3) %

November

 

55.4 %

 

$109.59

 

$60.71

 

(13.7) pts

 

(12.0) %

 

(29.5) %

December

 

50.1 %

 

$110.64

 

$55.43

 

(9.4) pts

 

(5.8) %

 

(20.7) %

 

For SVC’s 302 hotels owned as of February 24, 2022, January 2022 occupancy, ADR and RevPAR were 45.6%, $105.11 and $47.93, respectively.

Hotel Agreements:

As previously announced, on January 7, 2022, SVC and Sonesta amended and restated their management agreements effective January 1, 2022. The amendments to the agreements are substantially the same as those made earlier in 2021 to the agreements for SVC’s Hyatt and Radisson portfolios and the amendments made to SVC’s agreements with Sonesta in 2020 for certain Sonesta hotels. As of January 1, 2022, SVC owned 261 hotels managed by Sonesta and 67 of these hotels are expected to be sold, or the sale hotels. Among other things, the amendments to the agreements between SVC and Sonesta for 194 hotels, or the retained hotels, are as follows:

For the sale hotels, the term was extended to the earlier of December 31, 2022 or until the hotels are sold and the FF&E reserve funding requirement was removed. SVC’s owner’s priority return will be reduced by the current owner’s priority return for a sale hotel once sold. The total owner’s priority for all the sale hotels is $84.7 million.

Net Lease Retail Portfolio:

SVC’s net lease retail portfolio is summarized as follows:

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2021

Number of properties

 

788

Industries

 

21

Tenants

 

174

Brands

 

134

Square feet

 

13.5 million

Occupancy

 

98.1%

Weighted average lease term (by annual minimum rent)

 

10.2 years

Rent Coverage

 

2.58x

 

During the quarter ended December 31, 2021, SVC reduced its reserve for uncollectible revenues by $0.6 million for certain of its net lease tenants. During the quarter ended December 31, 2020, SVC recorded reserves for uncollectible revenues of $4.5 million for certain of its net lease tenants.

Recent Investment Activities:

During the quarter ended December 31, 2021, SVC sold one hotel with 93 keys for a sales price of $8.5 million, excluding closing costs, and six net lease properties with an aggregate of 52,596 rentable square feet for an aggregate sales price of $9.1 million, excluding closing costs. In January 2022, SVC sold 1 hotel with 295 keys for a sales price of $19.0 million, excluding closing costs.

SVC has entered into agreements to sell 45 Sonesta branded hotels (35 extended stay hotels with 4,185 keys, 9 select service hotels with 1,114 keys and one full service hotels with 381 keys) located in 21 states with an aggregate net carrying value of $352.5 million as of December 31, 2021 for an aggregate sales price of $402.4 million. SVC expects to enter agreements to sell 19 additional Sonesta branded hotels with 2,420 keys with an aggregate carrying value of $125.6 million as of December 31, 2021 for an aggregate sales price of $131.9 million. SVC expects these sales to be completed by the end of the second quarter of 2022. SVC continues to market two additional hotels with 272 keys for sale. SVC currently expects that approximately 72.1% of the sale hotels will be sold encumbered by Sonesta branding, maintaining Sonesta’s distribution and jump-starting franchising of the Sonesta brands, which SVC believes it will benefit from through its 34% ownership of Sonesta.

Capital expenditures made at certain of SVC’s properties for the quarter ended December 31, 2021 were $30.4 million.

Liquidity and Financing Activities:

As of December 31, 2021, SVC had $944.0 million of cash and cash equivalents.

SVC’s $1 billion revolving credit facility matures on July 15, 2022 and SVC is currently in discussions with its lenders regarding an extension of the maturity date of the facility and additional covenant waivers. There is no assurance SVC will come to terms with its lenders or that it will be granted such additional covenant relief.

Conference Call:

On February 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time, John Murray, Chief Executive Officer, Brian Donley, Chief Financial Officer, and Todd Hargreaves, Chief Investment Officer, will host a conference call to discuss SVC’s fourth quarter 2021 financial results. The conference call telephone number is (877) 329-3720. Participants calling from outside the United States and Canada should dial (412) 317-5434. No pass code is necessary to access the call from either number. Participants should dial in about 15 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the call. A replay of the conference call will be available through Friday, March 4, 2022. To access the replay, dial (412) 317-0088. The replay pass code is 8820658.

A live audio webcast of the conference call will also be available in a listen-only mode on SVC’s website, www.svcreit.com. Participants wanting to access the webcast should visit SVC’s website about five minutes before the call. The archived webcast will be available for replay on SVC’s website for about one week after the call. The transcription, recording and retransmission in any way of SVC’s fourth quarter conference call is strictly prohibited without the prior written consent of SVC.

Supplemental Data:

A copy of SVC’s Fourth Quarter 2021 Supplemental Operating and Financial Data is available for download at SVC’s website, www.svcreit.com. SVC’s website is not incorporated as part of this press release.

Service Properties Trust (Nasdaq: SVC) is a real estate investment trust, or REIT, with more than $12 billion invested in two asset categories: hotels and service-focused retail net lease properties. As of December 31, 2021, SVC owned 303 hotels with over 48,000 guest rooms throughout the United States and in Puerto Rico and Canada, the majority of which are extended stay and select service. As of December 31, 2021, SVC also owned 788 retail service-focused net lease properties totaling over 13 million square feet throughout United States. SVC is managed by The RMR Group (Nasdaq: RMR), an alternative asset management company with more than $33 billion in assets under management as of December 31, 2021 and more than 35 years of institutional experience in buying, selling, financing and operating commercial real estate. SVC is headquartered in Newton, MA. For more information, visit www.svcreit.com.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Certain Definitions:

SVC presents certain “non-GAAP financial measures” within the meaning of the applicable Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, rules, including funds from operations, or FFO, Normalized FFO, earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, Hotel EBITDA, Adjusted Hotel EBITDA, EBITDA for real estate, or EBITDAre, and Adjusted EBITDAre. These measures do not represent cash generated by operating activities in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered alternatives to net income (loss) as indicators of SVC’s operating performance or as measures of SVC’s liquidity. These measures should be considered in conjunction with net income (loss) as presented in SVC’s consolidated statements of income (loss). SVC considers these non-GAAP measures to be appropriate supplemental measures of operating performance for a REIT, along with net income (loss). SVC believes these measures provide useful information to investors because by excluding the effects of certain historical amounts, such as depreciation and amortization expense, they may facilitate a comparison of SVC’s operating performance between periods and with other REITs and, in the case of Hotel EBITDA, reflecting only those income and expense items that are generated and incurred at the hotel level may help both investors and management to understand the operations of SVC’s hotels.

Please see the pages attached hereto for a more detailed statement of SVC’s operating results and financial condition and for an explanation of SVC’s calculation of FFO and Normalized FFO, EBITDA, Hotel EBITDA, Adjusted Hotel EBITDA, EBITDAre and Adjusted EBITDAre and a reconciliation of those amounts to amounts determined in accordance with GAAP.

Occupancy represents the total number of room nights sold divided by the total number of room nights available at a hotel or group of hotels. Occupancy is an important measure of the utilization rate and demand of SVC’s hotels.

Average Daily Rate, or ADR, represents rooms revenue divided by the total number of room nights sold in a given period. ADR provides useful insight on pricing at SVC’s hotels and is a measure widely used in the hotel industry.

Revenue per Available Room, or RevPAR, represents rooms revenue divided by the total number of room nights available to guests for a given period. RevPAR is an industry metric correlated to occupancy and ADR and helps measure revenue performance over comparable periods.

Hotel EBITDA and Adjusted Hotel EBITDA: Hotel EBITDA is calculated as hotel operating revenues less hotel operating expenses of all managed and leased hotels, prior to any adjustments required for presentation in SVC’s consolidated statements of income (loss) in accordance with GAAP. In calculating Adjusted EBITDAre, SVC adjusts for the items shown on page 12.

Hotel EBITDA Margin and Adjusted Hotel EBITDA Margin: Hotel EBITDA Margin is Hotel EBITDA as a percentage of hotel operating revenues. Adjusted Hotel EBITDA Margin is Adjusted Hotel EBITDA as a percentage of hotel operating expenses.

Comparable Hotels Data: SVC presents RevPAR, ADR, and occupancy for the periods presented on a comparable basis to facilitate comparisons between periods. SVC generally defines comparable hotels as those that were owned by it on December 31, 2021 and were open and operating for the entire periods being compared. For the three months ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, SVC’s comparable results excluded five hotels that had suspended operations during part of the periods presented. For the year ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, SVC’s comparable results excluded 23 hotels that had suspended operations during part of the periods presented.

Rent Coverage: SVC defines Rent Coverage as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and rent, or EBITDAR, divided by the annual minimum rent due to SVC weighted by the minimum rent of the property to total minimum rents of the net lease portfolio. EBITDAR amounts used to determine rent coverage are generally for the latest twelve-month period reported based on the most recent operating information, if any, furnished by the tenant. Operating statements furnished by the tenant often are unaudited and, in certain cases, may not have been prepared in accordance with GAAP and are not independently verified by SVC. Tenants that do not report operating information are excluded from the rent coverage calculations. In instances where SVC does not have financial information for the most recent quarter from its tenants, it has calculated an implied EBITDAR for the 2021 fourth quarter using industry benchmark data to reflect current operating trends. SVC believes using this industry benchmark data provides a reasonable estimate of recent operating results and rent coverage for those tenants.

 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(dollars in thousands, except share data)

(unaudited)

 

 

 

As of December 31,

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

Real estate properties:

 

 

 

 

Land

 

$

1,918,385

 

 

$

2,030,440

 

Buildings, improvements and equipment

 

 

8,307,248

 

 

 

9,131,832

 

Total real estate properties, gross

 

 

10,225,633

 

 

 

11,162,272

 

Accumulated depreciation

 

 

(3,281,659

)

 

 

(3,280,110

)

Total real estate properties, net

 

 

6,943,974

 

 

 

7,882,162

 

Acquired real estate leases and other intangibles, net

 

 

283,241

 

 

 

325,845

 

Assets held for sale

 

 

515,518

 

 

 

13,543

 

Cash and cash equivalents

 

 

944,043

 

 

 

73,332

 

Restricted cash

 

 

3,375

 

 

 

18,124

 

Due from related persons

 

 

48,168

 

 

 

55,530

 

Other assets, net

 

 

414,996

 

 

 

318,783

 

Total assets

 

$

9,153,315

 

 

$

8,687,319

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

 

 

 

 

Revolving credit facility

 

$

1,000,000

 

 

$

78,424

 

Senior unsecured notes, net

 

 

6,143,022

 

 

 

6,130,166

 

Accounts payable and other liabilities

 

 

433,448

 

 

 

345,373

 

Due to related persons

 

 

21,539

 

 

 

30,566

 

Total liabilities

 

 

7,598,009

 

 

 

6,584,529

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shareholders’ equity:

 

 

 

 

Common shares of beneficial interest, $.01 par value; 200,000,000 shares authorized; 165,092,333 and 164,823,833 shares issued and outstanding, respectively

 

 

1,651

 

 

 

1,648

 

Additional paid in capital

 

 

4,552,558

 

 

 

4,550,385

 

Cumulative other comprehensive income (loss)

 

 

779

 

 

 

(760

)

Cumulative net income available for common shareholders

 

 

2,635,660

 

 

 

3,180,263

 

Cumulative common distributions

 

 

(5,635,342

)

 

 

(5,628,746

)

Total shareholders’ equity

 

 

1,555,306

 

 

 

2,102,790

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

 

$

9,153,315

 

 

$

8,687,319

 

 
 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS)

(amounts in thousands, except per share data)

(unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended
December 31,

 

Year Ended

December 31,

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

Revenues:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating revenues (1)

 

$

317,215

 

 

$

174,520

 

 

$

1,104,678

 

 

$

875,098

 

Rental income (2)

 

 

104,160

 

 

 

95,523

 

 

 

390,902

 

 

 

390,156

 

Total revenues

 

 

421,375

 

 

 

270,043

 

 

 

1,495,580

 

 

 

1,265,254

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating expenses (1)(3)

 

 

286,968

 

 

 

189,898

 

 

 

1,010,737

 

 

 

682,804

 

Other operating expenses

 

 

3,900

 

 

 

4,179

 

 

 

15,658

 

 

 

15,208

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 

115,757

 

 

 

121,351

 

 

 

485,965

 

 

 

498,908

 

General and administrative

 

 

12,601

 

 

 

13,046

 

 

 

53,439

 

 

 

50,668

 

Transaction related costs (4)

 

 

35,830

 

 

 

15,100

 

 

 

64,764

 

 

 

15,100

 

Loss on asset impairment (5)

 

 

76,510

 

 

 

254

 

 

 

78,620

 

 

 

55,756

 

Total expenses

 

 

531,566

 

 

 

343,828

 

 

 

1,709,183

 

 

 

1,318,444

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gain on sale of real estate, net (6)

 

 

588

 

 

 

11,916

 

 

 

11,522

 

 

 

2,261

 

Unrealized gain on equity securities, net (7)

 

 

2,168

 

 

 

15,473

 

 

 

22,535

 

 

 

19,882

 

Gain on insurance settlement (8)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62,386

 

Interest income

 

 

177

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

664

 

 

 

284

 

Interest expense (including amortization of debt issuance costs and debt discounts and premiums of $5,913, $4,220, $21,036 and $14,870, respectively)

 

 

(92,494

)

 

 

(82,811

)

 

 

(365,721

)

 

 

(306,490

)

Loss on early extinguishment of debt (9)

 

 

 

 

 

(2,424

)

 

 

 

 

 

(9,394

)

Loss before income taxes and equity in losses of an investee

 

 

(199,752

)

 

 

(131,630

)

 

 

(544,603

)

 

 

(284,261

)

Income tax benefit (expense) (8)

 

 

1,950

 

 

 

(505

)

 

 

941

 

 

 

(17,211

)

Equity in losses of an investee (10)

 

 

(991

)

 

 

(5,605

)

 

 

(941

)

 

 

(9,910

)

Net loss

 

$

(198,793

)

 

$

(137,740

)

 

$

(544,603

)

 

$

(311,382

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding (basic and diluted)

 

 

164,667

 

 

 

164,498

 

 

 

164,566

 

 

 

164,422

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss per common share (basic and diluted)

 

$

(1.21

)

 

$

(0.84

)

 

$

(3.31

)

 

$

(1.89

)

 
See Notes  
 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

RECONCILIATIONS OF FUNDS FROM OPERATIONS, NORMALIZED FUNDS

FROM OPERATIONS

(amounts in thousands, except per share data)

(unaudited)

 

 

Three Months Ended
December 31,

 

Year Ended

December 31,

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

Calculation of FFO and Normalized FFO: (11)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss

$

(198,793

)

 

$

(137,740

)

 

$

(544,603

)

 

$

(311,382

)

Add (Less): Depreciation and amortization

 

115,757

 

 

 

121,351

 

 

 

485,965

 

 

 

498,908

 

Loss on asset impairment (5)

 

76,510

 

 

 

254

 

 

 

78,620

 

 

 

55,756

 

Gain on sale of real estate, net (6)

 

(588

)

 

 

(11,916

)

 

 

(11,522

)

 

 

(2,261

)

Unrealized gain on equity securities, net (7)

 

(2,168

)

 

 

(15,473

)

 

 

(22,535

)

 

 

(19,882

)

Adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of FFO attributable to an investee (10)

 

737

 

 

 

400

 

 

 

2,605

 

 

 

(61

)

FFO

 

(8,545

)

 

 

(43,124

)

 

 

(11,470

)

 

 

221,078

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Add (Less): Transaction related costs (4)

 

35,830

 

 

 

15,100

 

 

 

64,764

 

 

 

15,100

 

Loss contingency (13)

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

 

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

Gain on insurance settlement, net of tax (8)

 

 

 

 

(1,800

)

 

 

 

 

 

(48,536

)

Loss on early extinguishment of debt (9)

 

 

 

 

2,424

 

 

 

 

 

 

9,394

 

Adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of Normalized FFO attributable to an investee (10)

 

651

 

 

 

964

 

 

 

2,270

 

 

 

964

 

Normalized FFO

$

27,936

 

 

$

(22,474

)

 

$

55,564

 

 

$

201,962

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding (basic and diluted)

 

164,667

 

 

 

164,498

 

 

 

164,566

 

 

 

164,422

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic and diluted per common share amounts:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss per share

$

(1.21

)

 

$

(0.84

)

 

$

(3.31

)

 

$

(1.89

)

FFO

$

(0.05

)

 

$

(0.26

)

 

$

(0.07

)

 

$

1.34

 

Normalized FFO

$

0.17

 

 

$

(0.14

)

 

$

0.34

 

 

$

1.23

 

Distributions declared per share

$

0.01

 

 

$

0.01

 

 

$

0.04

 

 

$

0.57

 

 
See Notes  
 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

RECONCILIATIONS OF EBITDA, EBITDAre AND ADJUSTED EBITDAre

(amounts in thousands, except per share data)

(unaudited)

 

 

Three Months Ended
December 31,

 

Year Ended

December 31,

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

Calculation of EBITDA, EBITDAre and Adjusted EBITDAre:(12)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss

$

(198,793

)

 

$

(137,740

)

 

$

(544,603

)

 

$

(311,382

)

Add (Less): Interest expense

 

92,494

 

 

 

82,811

 

 

 

365,721

 

 

 

306,490

 

Income tax (benefit) expense (8)

 

(1,950

)

 

 

505

 

 

 

(941

)

 

 

17,211

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

115,757

 

 

 

121,351

 

 

 

485,965

 

 

 

498,908

 

EBITDA

 

7,508

 

 

 

66,927

 

 

 

306,142

 

 

 

511,227

 

Add (Less): Loss on asset impairment (5)

 

76,510

 

 

 

254

 

 

 

78,620

 

 

 

55,756

 

Gain on sale of real estate, net (6)

 

(588

)

 

 

(11,916

)

 

 

(11,522

)

 

 

(2,261

)

Adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of EBITDAre attributable to an investee (10)

 

781

 

 

 

 

 

 

2,904

 

 

 

 

EBITDAre

 

84,211

 

 

 

55,265

 

 

 

376,144

 

 

 

564,722

 

Add (Less): Transaction related costs (4)

 

35,830

 

 

 

15,100

 

 

 

64,764

 

 

 

15,100

 

Unrealized gain on equity securities, net (7)

 

(2,168

)

 

 

(15,473

)

 

 

(22,535

)

 

 

(19,882

)

Gain on insurance settlement (8)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(62,386

)

Loss on early extinguishment of debt (9)

 

 

 

 

2,424

 

 

 

 

 

 

9,394

 

Adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of Adjusted EBITDAre attributable to an investee (10)

 

651

 

 

 

2,755

 

 

 

2,270

 

 

 

1,751

 

General and administrative expense paid in common shares (14)

 

473

 

 

 

920

 

 

 

2,963

 

 

 

3,206

 

Loss contingency (13)

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

 

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

Adjusted EBITDAre

$

118,997

 

 

$

64,953

 

 

$

423,606

 

 

$

515,867

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes  
 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

CALCULATION AND RECONCILIATION OF HOTEL EBITDA AND ADJUSTED HOTEL EBITDA

Comparable Hotels

(amounts in thousands)

(unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended
December 31,

 

Year Ended

December 31,

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

Number of hotels

 

298

 

 

 

298

 

 

 

280

 

 

 

280

 

Room revenues

$

263,312

 

 

$

150,226

 

 

$

812,506

 

 

$

656,990

 

Food and beverage revenues

 

28,700

 

 

 

7,707

 

 

 

44,517

 

 

 

41,787

 

Other revenues

 

11,495

 

 

 

8,910

 

 

 

27,437

 

 

 

27,980

 

Hotel operating revenues – comparable hotels

 

303,507

 

 

 

166,843

 

 

 

884,460

 

 

 

726,757

 

Rooms expenses

 

85,800

 

 

 

56,857

 

 

 

267,010

 

 

 

223,641

 

Food and beverage expenses

 

23,458

 

 

 

9,598

 

 

 

38,393

 

 

 

43,535

 

Other direct and indirect expenses

 

119,706

 

 

 

96,576

 

 

 

385,088

 

 

 

350,702

 

Management fees

 

12,139

 

 

 

2,131

 

 

 

34,590

 

 

 

5,580

 

Real estate taxes, insurance and other

 

24,843

 

 

 

27,777

 

 

 

93,343

 

 

 

94,088

 

FF&E reserves (15)

 

1,236

 

 

 

390

 

 

 

4,046

 

 

 

10,178

 

Hotel operating expenses – comparable hotels

 

267,182

 

 

 

193,329

 

 

 

822,470

 

 

 

727,724

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel EBITDA – comparable hotels

$

36,325

 

 

$

(26,486

)

 

$

61,990

 

 

$

(967

)

Loss contingency (13)

 

 

 

 

(331

)

 

 

 

 

 

(331

)

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA

$

36,325

 

 

$

(26,817

)

 

$

61,990

 

 

$

(1,298

)

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA Margin

 

12.0

%

 

 

(16.1

) %

 

 

7.0

%

 

 

(0.2

) %

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating revenues (GAAP) (1)

$

317,215

 

 

$

174,520

 

 

$

1,104,678

 

 

$

875,098

 

Add (Less):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating revenues from leased hotels

 

 

 

 

1,898

 

 

 

 

 

 

13,643

 

Hotel operating revenues from non-comparable hotels

 

(13,708

)

 

 

(9,575

)

 

 

(220,218

)

 

 

(161,984

)

Hotel operating revenues – comparable hotels

$

303,507

 

 

$

166,843

 

 

$

884,460

 

 

$

726,757

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating expenses (GAAP) (1)

$

286,968

 

 

$

189,898

 

 

$

1,010,737

 

 

$

682,804

 

Add (Less):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating expenses from non-comparable hotels

 

(21,643

)

 

 

(13,192

)

 

 

(210,993

)

 

 

(215,340

)

Reduction for security deposit and guaranty fundings, net (3)

 

 

 

 

13,387

 

 

 

15,696

 

 

 

235,522

 

Hotel operating expenses of leased hotels

 

 

 

 

2,225

 

 

 

 

 

 

11,074

 

FF&E reserves from managed hotel operations (15)

 

1,236

 

 

 

390

 

 

 

4,546

 

 

 

11,594

 

Other (16)

 

621

 

 

 

621

 

 

 

2,484

 

 

 

2,070

 

Hotel operating expenses – comparable hotels

$

267,182

 

 

$

193,329

 

 

$

822,470

 

 

$

727,724

 

 
See Notes  
 

SERVICE PROPERTIES TRUST

CALCULATION AND RECONCILIATION OF HOTEL EBITDA AND ADJUSTED HOTEL EBITDA

All Hotels

(amounts in thousands)

(unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended
December 31,

 

Year Ended
December 31,

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

2021

 

 

 

2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Room revenues

$

272,458

 

 

$

159,022

 

 

$

972,411

 

 

$

773,572

 

Food and beverage revenues

 

31,503

 

 

 

7,911

 

 

 

84,430

 

 

 

66,830

 

Other revenues

 

13,254

 

 

 

9,485

 

 

 

47,837

 

 

 

48,339

 

Hotel operating revenues

 

317,215

 

 

 

176,418

 

 

 

1,104,678

 

 

 

888,741

 

Rooms expenses

 

90,705

 

 

 

59,784

 

 

 

321,228

 

 

 

270,828

 

Food and beverage expenses

 

26,768

 

 

 

9,928

 

 

 

72,884

 

 

 

75,718

 

Other direct and indirect expenses

 

126,208

 

 

 

97,328

 

 

 

458,586

 

 

 

422,819

 

Management fees

 

11,869

 

 

 

2,436

 

 

 

40,478

 

 

 

8,050

 

Real estate taxes, insurance and other

 

32,039

 

 

 

36,655

 

 

 

135,741

 

 

 

154,375

 

FF&E reserves (15)

 

1,236

 

 

 

390

 

 

 

4,546

 

 

 

11,274

 

Hotel operating expenses

 

288,825

 

 

 

206,521

 

 

 

1,033,463

 

 

 

943,064

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel EBITDA

$

28,390

 

 

$

(30,103

)

 

$

71,215

 

 

$

(54,323

)

Loss contingency (13)

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

 

 

 

 

 

3,962

 

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA

$

28,390

 

 

$

(26,141

)

 

$

71,215

 

 

$

(50,361

)

Adjusted Hotel EBITDA Margin

 

8.9

%

 

 

(14.8

) %

 

 

6.4

%

 

 

(5.7

) %

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating revenues (GAAP) (1)

$

317,215

 

 

$

174,520

 

 

$

1,104,678

 

 

$

875,098

 

Add: hotel revenues of leased hotels (1)

 

 

 

 

1,898

 

 

 

 

 

 

13,643

 

Hotel operating revenues

$

317,215

 

 

$

176,418

 

 

$

1,104,678

 

 

$

888,741

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hotel operating expenses (GAAP) (1)

$

286,968

 

 

$

189,898

 

 

$

1,010,737

 

 

$

682,804

 

Add (Less):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reduction for security deposit and guaranty fundings, net (3)

 

 

 

 

13,387

 

 

 

15,696

 

 

 

235,522

 

Hotel operating expenses of leased hotels

 

 

 

 

2,225

 

 

 

 

 

 

11,074

 

FF&E reserves from managed hotels operations (15)

 

1,236

 

 

 

390

 

 

 

4,546

 

 

 

11,594

 

Other (16)

 

621

 

 

 

621

 

 

 

2,484

 

 

 

2,070

 

Hotel operating expenses

$

288,825

 

 

$

206,521

 

 

$

1,033,463

 

 

$

943,064

 

 
See Notes  
  1. As of December 31, 2021, SVC owned 303 hotels. SVC’s consolidated statements of income (loss) include hotel operating revenues and expenses of managed hotels and rental income from leased hotels.
  2. SVC increased  rental income by $466 and reduced rental income by $416 for the three months ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, and reduced rental income by $2,621 and $714 for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, to record scheduled rent changes under certain of SVC’s leases, the deferred rent obligations under SVC’s leases with TA and the estimated future payments to SVC under its leases with TA for the cost of removing underground storage tanks on a straight-line basis.
  3. When managers of SVC’s hotels are required to fund the shortfalls of minimum returns under the terms of SVC’s management agreements or their guarantees, SVC reflects such fundings (including security deposit applications) in its consolidated statements of income (loss) as a reduction of hotel operating expenses. The net reduction to hotel operating expenses was $13,387 for the three months ended December 31, 2020 and $15,697 and $235,522 for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. There was no net reduction to hotel operating expenses during the three months ended December 31, 2021.
  4. Transaction related costs for the three months ended December 31, 2021 of $35,830 primarily consists of working capital advances SVC previously funded under its agreements with Marriott and IHG as a result of the amounts no longer expected to be recoverable. Transaction related costs for the year ended December 31, 2021 include $38,446 of working capital advances SVC previously funded under its agreements with Marriott, IHG and Hyatt as a result of the amounts no longer expected to be recoverable, $19,920 of hotel manager transition related costs resulting from the rebranding of 94 hotels during the period, and $6,398 of legal costs related to SVC’s arbitration proceeding with Marriott. Transaction costs for the three months and year ended December 31, 2020 primarily consisted of transition related costs resulting from the rebranding of 115 hotels previously managed by IHG, Marriott and Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. to Sonesta.
  5. SVC recorded a $76,510 loss on asset impairment during the three months ended December 31, 2021 to reduce the carrying value of 35 hotel properties and 21 net lease properties to their estimated fair value less costs to sell and a $254 loss on asset impairment during the three months ended December 31, 2020, to reduce the carrying value of five net lease properties to their estimated fair value less costs to sell. SVC recorded a $78,620 loss on asset impairment during the year ended December 31, 2021 to reduce the carrying value of 35 hotels and 26 net lease properties to their estimated fair value less costs to sell and a $55,756 loss on asset impairment during the year ended December 31, 2020 to reduce the carrying value of 18 hotel properties and 13 net lease properties to their estimated fair value less costs to sell.
  6. SVC recorded a $588 net gain on sale of real estate during the three months ended December 31, 2021 in connection with the sale of one hotel and six net lease properties and recorded a $11,916 net gain on sale of real estate during the three months ended December 31, 2020 in connection with the sale of 18 hotels and six net lease properties. SVC recorded a $11,522 net gain on sale of real estate during the year ended December 31, 2021 in connection with the sale of seven hotels and eleven net lease properties and recorded a net gain on sale of real estate of $2,261 during the year ended December 31, 2020 in connection with the sale of 18 hotels and 21 net lease properties.
  7. Unrealized gain on equity securities, net represents the adjustment required to adjust the carrying value of SVC’s investment in shares of TA common stock to its fair value.
  8. SVC recorded a $62,386 gain on insurance settlement during the year ended December 31, 2020 for insurance proceeds received for its then leased hotel in San Juan, PR related to Hurricane Maria. Under GAAP, SVC was required to increase the building basis of this hotel for the amount of the insurance proceeds. SVC also recorded a $13,850 deferred tax liability as a result of the book value to tax basis difference related to this accounting during the year ended December 31, 2020.
  9. SVC recorded a loss on extinguishment of debt of $2,424 and $9,394 during the three months and year ended December 31, 2020, respectively, relating to its repayment of its $400 million term loan and certain unsecured senior notes.
  10. Represents SVC’s proportionate share from its equity investment in Sonesta.
  11. SVC calculates FFO and Normalized FFO as shown above. FFO is calculated on the basis defined by The National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, or Nareit, which is net income (loss), calculated in accordance with GAAP, excluding any gain or loss on sale of properties and loss on impairment of real estate assets, if any, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, less any unrealized gains and losses on equity securities, as well as adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of FFO attributable to an investee and certain other adjustments currently not applicable to SVC. In calculating Normalized FFO, SVC adjusts for the items shown above. FFO and Normalized FFO are among the factors considered by SVC’s Board of Trustees when determining the amount of distributions to its shareholders. Other factors include, but are not limited to, requirements to satisfy SVC’s REIT distribution requirements, limitations in its credit agreement and public debt covenants, the availability to SVC of debt and equity capital, SVC’s distribution rate as a percentage of the trading price of its common shares, or dividend yield, and to the dividend yield of other REITs, SVC’s expectation of its future capital requirements and operating performance and SVC’s expected needs for and availability of cash to pay its obligations. Other real estate companies and REITs may calculate FFO and Normalized FFO differently than SVC does.
  12. SVC calculates EBITDA, EBITDAre, and Adjusted EBITDAre as shown above. EBITDAre is calculated on the basis defined by Nareit which is EBITDA, excluding gains and losses on the sale of real estate, loss on impairment of real estate assets, if any, and adjustments to reflect SVC’s share of EBITDAre attributable to an investee. In calculating Adjusted EBITDAre, SVC adjusts for the items shown above. Other real estate companies and REITs may calculate EBITDA, EBITDAre and Adjusted EBITDAre differently than SVC does.
  13. Hotel operating expenses for the three months ended December 31, 2020 includes a $3,962 loss contingency related to a litigation matter relating to certain of SVC’s hotels.
  14. Amounts represent the equity compensation for SVC’s Trustees, officers and certain other employees of SVC’s manager.
  15. Various percentages of total sales at certain of SVC’s hotels are escrowed as reserves for future renovations or refurbishments, or FF&E reserve escrows. SVC owns all the FF&E reserve escrows for its hotels.
  16. SVC is amortizing a liability it recorded for the fair value of its initial investment in Sonesta as a reduction to hotel operating expenses in its consolidated statements of income (loss). SVC reduced hotel operating expenses by $621 for each of the three months ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, and $2,483 and $2,070 for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, for this liability.

Warning Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and other securities laws. Whenever SVC uses words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,” “will,” “may” and negatives or derivatives of these or similar expressions, SVC is making forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon SVC’s present intent, beliefs or expectations, but forward-looking statements are not guaranteed to occur and may not occur. Actual results may differ materially from those contained in or implied by SVC’s forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond SVC’s control. For example:

The information contained in SVC’s filings with the SEC, including under the caption “Risk Factors” in SVC’s periodic reports, or incorporated therein, identifies other important factors that could cause differences from SVC’s forward-looking statements. SVC’s filings with the SEC are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

You should not place undue reliance upon forward-looking statements.

Except as required by law, SVC does not intend to update or change any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Federal Reserve Not Likely to Change Course After Ukraine Invasion

Federal Reserve officials are turning a wary eye to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, though several have signaled in recent days that geopolitical tensions are unlikely to keep them from pulling back their support for the U.S. economy at a time when the job market is booming and prices are climbing rapidly.

Stock indexes are swooning and the price of key commodities — including oil and gas — have risen sharply and could continue to rise as Russia, a major producer, responds to American and European sanctions.

That makes the invasion a complicated risk for the Fed: On one hand, its fallout is likely to further push up price inflation, which is already running at its fastest pace in 40 years. On the other, it could weigh on growth if stock prices continue to plummet and nervous consumers in Europe and the United States pull back from spending.

The magnitude of the potential economic hit is far from certain, and for now, central bank officials have signaled that they will remain on track to raise interest rates from near-zero in a series of increases starting next month, a policy path that will make borrowing money more expensive and cool down the economy.

invasion could disrupt the post-Cold War world order and warned that the jump in energy prices and fallout from sanctions “will complicate the ability of central banks on both sides of the Atlantic to engineer a soft landing from the pandemic inflation surge.”

Economists have been warning that a “soft landing” — in which central banks guide the economy onto a sustainable path without causing a recession — might be difficult to achieve at a time when prices have taken off and monetary policies across much of Europe and North America may need to readjust substantially.

“The shock of war adds to the enormous challenges facing central banks worldwide,” Isabel Schnabel, an executive board member at the European Central Bank, said during a Bank of England event on Thursday. She added that policymakers are monitoring the situation in Ukraine “very closely.”

Inflation is high around much of the world, and though it is slightly less pronounced in Europe, and E.C.B. policymakers are reacting more slowly to it than some of their global counterparts, recent high readings there have prompted some officials to edge toward policy changes.

dizzying spikes in prices for energy and food and could spook investors. The economic damage from supply disruptions and economic sanctions would be severe in some countries and industries and unnoticed in others.

“The current situation is different from past episodes when geopolitical events led the Fed to delay tightening or ease because inflation risk has created a stronger and more urgent reason for the Fed to tighten today,” researchers at Goldman Sachs wrote in an analysis note.

Plus, with wages rising and consumers increasingly expecting high inflation in the coming years, the fact that the conflict has the potential to further elevate prices could strike the central bank as problematic.

“Further increases in commodity prices might be more worrisome than usual,” they wrote.

Some economists warned that the Russian invasion in some ways echoed the inflationary episode of the 1970s: Back then, price increases were already rapid, and a sharp oil price increase pushed inflation up further and made it stick around. The Arab oil embargo of 1973-74 and the Iranian revolution of 1979 both contributed to an oil supply shortage.

“There is something eerily reminiscent of the 1970s and the surge in energy prices associated with Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine,” Diane Swonk, chief economist at Grant Thornton, wrote on Twitter Thursday. “It couldn’t happen at a worse time as it is pouring fuel over an already kindled fire of inflation.”

Economists have released varying estimates of how much an oil price shock could bolster inflation in the coming months.

If oil increases to $120 per barrel by the end of February, past the $95 mark it hovered around last week, inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index could climb close to 9 percent in the next couple of months, instead of a projected peak of a little below 8 percent, said Alan Detmeister, an economist at UBS who formerly led the prices and wages section at the Fed.

The Goldman researchers said that as a rule of thumb, a $10 per barrel increase in the price of oil would increase headline inflation in the United States by about a fifth of a percentage point, and lowers gross domestic product growth by just under 0.1 percentage point.

“The growth hit could be somewhat larger if geopolitical risk tightens financial conditions materially and increases uncertainty for businesses,” they wrote.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

What the Conflict in Ukraine Means for the U.S. Economy

Russia’s threatened invasion of Ukraine could have economic repercussions globally and in the United States, ramping up uncertainty, roiling commodity markets and potentially pushing up inflation as gas and food prices rise around the world.

Russia is a major producer of oil and natural gas, and the brewing geopolitical conflict has sent prices of both sharply higher in recent weeks. It is also the world’s largest wheat exporter, and is a major food supplier to Europe.

The United States imports relatively little directly from Russia, but a commodities crunch caused by a conflict could have knock-on effects that at least temporarily drive up prices for raw materials and finished goods when much of the world, including the United States, is experiencing rapid inflation.

Global unrest could also spook American consumers, prompting them to cut back on spending and other economic activity. If the slowdown were to become severe, it could make it harder for the Federal Reserve, which is planning to raise interest rates in March, to decide how quickly and how aggressively to increase borrowing costs. Central bankers noted in minutes from their most recent meeting that geopolitical risks “could cause increases in global energy prices or exacerbate global supply shortages,” but also that they were a risk to the outlook for growth.

contending with quickly rising prices, businesses are trying to navigate roiled supply chains and people report feeling pessimistic about their financial outlooks despite strong economic growth.

“The level of economic uncertainty is going to rise, which is going to be negative for households and firms,” said Maurice Obstfeld, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, noting that the effect would be felt most acutely in Europe and to a lesser degree in the United States.

A major and immediate economic implication of a showdown in Eastern Europe ties back to oil and gas. Russia produces 10 million barrels of oil a day, roughly 10 percent of global demand, and is Europe’s largest supplier of natural gas, which is used to fuel power plants and provide heat to homes and businesses.

The United States imports comparatively little Russian oil, but energy commodity markets are global, meaning a change in prices in one part of the world influences how much people pay for energy elsewhere.

It is unclear how much a conflict would push up prices, but energy markets have already been jittery — and fuel prices have risen sharply — on the prospect of an invasion.

loss of purchasing power over time, meaning your dollar will not go as far tomorrow as it did today. It is typically expressed as the annual change in prices for everyday goods and services such as food, furniture, apparel, transportation and toys.

If a conflict drives global uncertainty and causes investors to pour money into dollars, pushing up the value of the currency, it could actually make United States imports cheaper.

Other trade risks loom. Unrest at the nexus of Europe and Asia could pose risk for supply chains that have been roiled by the pandemic.

Phil Levy, the chief economist at Flexport, said that Russia and Ukraine were far less linked into global supply chains than a country like China, but that conflict in the area could disrupt flights from Asia to Europe. That could pose a challenge for industries that move products by air, like electronics, fast fashion and even automakers, he said at an event at the National Press Foundation on Feb. 9.

“Air has been a means of getting around supply chain problems,” Mr. Levy said. “If your factory was going to shut because you don’t have a key part, you might fly in that key part.”

Some companies may not yet realize their true exposure to a potential crisis.

Victor Meyer, the chief operating officer of Supply Wisdom, which helps companies analyze their supply chains for risk, said that some companies were surprised by the extent of their exposure to the region during the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014, when it annexed Crimea.

Mr. Meyer noted that if he were a chief security officer of a company with ties to Ukraine, “I would militate rather strongly to unwind my exposure.”

There could also be other indirect effects on the economy, including rattling consumer confidence.

Households are sitting on cash stockpiles and probably could afford higher prices at the pump, but climbing energy costs are likely to make them unhappy at a moment when prices overall are already climbing and economic sentiment has swooned.

“The hit would be easily absorbed, but it would make consumers even more miserable, and we have to assume that a war in Europe would depress confidence directly too,” Ian Shepherdson at Pantheon Macroeconomics wrote in a Feb. 15 note.

Another risk to American economic activity may be underrated, Mr. Obstfeld said: The threat of cyberattack. Russia could respond to sanctions from the United States with digital retaliation, roiling digital life at a time when the internet has become central to economic existence.

“The Russians are the best in the world at this,” he said. “And we don’t know the extent to which they have burrowed into our systems.”

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Intercontinental Exchange Announces Strategic Investment in tZERO Group, Inc.

NEW YORK & ATLANTA–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (NYSE:ICE), a leading operator of global exchanges and clearing houses and provider of mortgage technology, data and listings services, announced today that it is making a strategic investment in tZERO, a leader in blockchain innovation and liquidity for digital assets. In connection with ICE’s investment in tZERO, David Goone, a longtime member of ICE’s management team and currently ICE’s Chief Strategy Officer, will join tZERO as its next Chief Executive Officer and will serve on tZERO’s Board of Directors.

Goone, who joined ICE in 2001, will continue to serve ICE and its Chairman and CEO, Jeff Sprecher, in a consulting capacity.

“David Goone was present at many of ICE’s milestone moments and deals over two decades, a key player on our management team as we built our world-class trading, clearing and data infrastructure and product line, and has been a steward of our problem-solving culture,” said Jeff Sprecher, Founder, Chairman and CEO of Intercontinental Exchange. “David’s leadership and his mastery of trading, data, and clearing technology will be a big asset as tZERO begins its next chapter leading the growth and adoption of next-generation market infrastructure.”

During his tenure at ICE, Goone developed and managed many of the company’s product lines and oversaw ICE Benchmark Administration, which has administered LIBOR and the global gold and silver fixings. He has served on many of ICE’s subsidiary exchange boards and represents ICE on several industry boards, including the Depository Trust Clearing Corporation (DTCC), Options Clearing Corporation (OCC), and the National Futures Association (NFA). Goone also served as Vice Chairman of CETIP S.A. until its merger with B3 exchange in Brazil.

tZERO, through a wholly owned subsidiary, operates an SEC-regulated alternative trading system (ATS) and broker-dealer in the digital asset space, and is a technology firm with the goal of democratizing access to capital markets. tZERO brings together issuers and financial firms seeking a transparent, automated, digitally enabled marketplace and investors seeking access to unique private assets, public equities, cryptocurrencies, and other digital assets, including non-fungible tokens (NFTs).

Terms of ICE’s investment in tZERO, which will make ICE a significant minority shareholder in tZERO, are not being disclosed, and the financial impact of the transaction will not be material to ICE or impact ICE’s capital return plans. Other participants in tZERO’s fundraising round include Overstock.com, Inc. (NASDAQ: OSTK), an original investor in tZERO, and Medici Ventures, L.P., a blockchain-focused fund whose general partner is an entity affiliated with Pelion Venture Partners, among others.

About Intercontinental Exchange

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (NYSE: ICE) is a Fortune 500 company that designs, builds and operates digital networks to connect people to opportunity. We provide financial technology and data services across major asset classes that offer our customers access to mission-critical workflow tools that increase transparency and operational efficiencies. We operate exchanges, including the New York Stock Exchange, and clearing houses that help people invest, raise capital and manage risk across multiple asset classes. Our comprehensive fixed income data services and execution capabilities provide information, analytics and platforms that help our customers capitalize on opportunities and operate more efficiently. At ICE Mortgage Technology, we are transforming and digitizing the U.S. residential mortgage process, from consumer engagement through loan registration. Together, we transform, streamline and automate industries to connect our customers to opportunity.

Trademarks of ICE and/or its affiliates include Intercontinental Exchange, ICE, ICE block design, NYSE and New York Stock Exchange. Information regarding additional trademarks and intellectual property rights of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and/or its affiliates is located here. Key Information Documents for certain products covered by the EU Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products Regulation can be accessed on the relevant exchange website under the heading “Key Information Documents (KIDS).”

Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 — Statements in this press release regarding ICE’s business that are not historical facts are “forward-looking statements” that involve risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of additional risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see ICE’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, including, but not limited to, the risk factors in ICE’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, as filed with the SEC on February 3, 2022.

Source: Intercontinental Exchange

ICE-CORP

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

What’s at Stake for the Global Economy as Conflict Looms in Ukraine

After getting battered by the pandemic, supply chain chokeholds and leaps in prices, the global economy is poised to be sent on yet another unpredictable course by an armed clash on Europe’s border.

Even before the Kremlin ordered Russian troops into separatist territories of Ukraine on Monday, the tension had taken a toll. The promise of punishing sanctions in return by President Biden and the potential for Russian retaliation had already pushed down stock returns and driven up gas prices.

An outright attack by Russian troops could cause dizzying spikes in energy and food prices, fuel inflation fears and spook investors, a combination that threatens investment and growth in economies around the world.

However harsh the effects, the immediate impact will be nowhere near as devastating as the sudden economic shutdowns first caused by the coronavirus in 2020. Russia is a transcontinental behemoth with 146 million people and a huge nuclear arsenal, as well as a key supplier of the oil, gas and raw materials that keep the world’s factories running. But unlike China, which is a manufacturing powerhouse and intimately woven into intricate supply chains, Russia is a minor player in the global economy.

spikes in heating and gas bills, which are already soaring. Natural gas reserves are at less than a third of capacity, with weeks of cold weather ahead, and European leaders have already accused Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, of reducing supplies to gain a political edge.

United Nations report. Russia is the world’s largest supplier of wheat, and together with Ukraine, accounts for nearly a quarter of total global exports. For some countries, the dependence is much greater. That flow of grain makes up more than 70 percent of Egypt and Turkey’s total wheat imports.

This will put further strain on Turkey, which is already in the middle of an economic crisis and struggling with inflation that is running close to 50 percent, with skyrocketing food, fuel and electricity prices.

And as usual, the burden falls heaviest on the most vulnerable. “Poorer people spend a higher share of incomes on food and heating,” said Ian Goldin, a professor of globalization and development at Oxford University.

Ukraine, long known as the “breadbasket of Europe,” actually sends more than 40 percent of its wheat and corn exports to the Middle East or Africa, where there are worries that further food shortages and price increases could stoke social unrest.

Lebanon, for example, which is experiencing one of the most devastating economic crises in more than a century, gets more than half of its wheat from Ukraine, which is also the world’s largest exporter of seed oils like sunflower and rapeseed.

On Monday, the White House responded to Mr. Putin’s decision to recognize the independence of two Russian-backed territories in the country’s east by saying it would begin imposing limited sanctions on the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics. Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said Mr. Biden would soon issue an executive order prohibiting investment, trade and financing with people in those regions.

range of scenarios from mild to severe. The fallout on working-class families and Wall Street traders depends on how an invasion plays out: whether Russian troops stay near the border or attack the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv; whether the fighting lasts for days or months; what kind of Western sanctions are imposed; and whether Mr. Putin responds by withholding critical gas supplies from Europe or launching insidious cyberattacks.

“Think about it rolling out in stages,” said Julia Friedlander, director of the economic statecraft initiative at the Atlantic Council. “This is likely to play out as a slow motion drama.”

As became clear from the pandemic, minor interruptions in one region can generate major disruptions far away. Isolated shortages and price surges— whether of gas, wheat, aluminum or nickel — can snowball in a world still struggling to recover from the pandemic.

“You have to look at the backdrop against which this is coming,” said Gregory Daco, chief economist for EY-Parthenon. “There is high inflation, strained supply chains and uncertainty about what central banks are going to do and how insistent price rises are.”

at 7.5 percent in January, and is expected to start raising interest rates next month. Higher energy prices set off by a conflict in Europe may be transitory but they could feed worries about a wage-price spiral.

“We could see a new burst of inflation,” said Christopher Miller, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and an assistant professor at Tufts University.

Also fueling inflation fears are possible shortages of essential metals like palladium, aluminum and nickel, creating another disruption to global supply chains already suffering from the pandemic, trucker blockades in Canada and shortages of semiconductors.

The price of palladium, for example, used in automotive exhaust systems, mobile phones and even dental fillings, has soared in recent weeks because of fears that Russia, the world’s largest exporter of the metal, could be cut off from global markets. The price of nickel, used to make steel and electric car batteries, has also been jumping.

It’s too early to gauge the precise impact of an armed conflict, said Lars Stenqvist, the chief technology officer of Volvo, the Swedish truck maker. But he added, “It is a very, very serious thing.”

“We have a number of scenarios on the table and we are following the developments of the situation day by day,” Mr. Stenqvist said Monday.

The West has taken steps to blunt the impact on Europe if Mr. Putin decides to retaliate. The United States has ramped up delivery of liquefied natural gas and asked other suppliers like Qatar to do the same.

negotiations to revive a deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program. Iran, which is estimated to have as many as 80 million barrels of oil in storage, has been locked out of much of the world’s markets since 2018, when President Donald J. Trump withdrew from the nuclear accord and reimposed sanctions.

Some of the sanctions against Russia that the Biden administration is considering, such as cutting off access to the system of international payments known as SWIFT or blocking companies from selling anything to Russia that contains American-made components, would hurt anyone who does business with Russia. But across the board, the United States is much less vulnerable than the European Union, which is Russia’s largest trading partner.

Americans, as Mr. Biden has already warned, are likely to see higher gasoline prices. But because the United States is itself a large producer of natural gas, those price increases are not nearly as steep and as broad as elsewhere. And Europe has many more links to Russia and engages in more financial transactions — including paying for the Russian gas.

Oil companies like Shell and Total have joint ventures in Russia, while BP boasts that it “is one of the biggest foreign investors in Russia,” with ties to the Russian oil company Rosneft. Airbus, the European aviation giant, gets titanium from Russia. And European banks, particularly those in Germany, France and Italy, have lent billions of dollars to Russian borrowers.

“Severe sanctions that hurt Russia painfully and comprehensively have potential to do huge damage to European customers,” said Adam Tooze, director of the European Institute at Columbia University.

Depending on what happens, the most significant effects on the global economy may manifest themselves only over the long run.

economic ties to China. The two nations recently negotiated a 30-year contract for Russia to supply gas to China through a new pipeline.

“Russia is likely to pivot all energy and commodity exports to China,” said Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics.

The crisis is also contributing to a reassessment of the global economy’s structure and concerns about self-sufficiency. The pandemic has already highlighted the downsides of far-flung supply chains that rely on lean production.

Now Europe’s dependence on Russian gas is spurring discussions about expanding energy sources, which could further sideline Russia’s presence in the global economy.

“In the longer term, it’s going to push Europe to diversify,” said Jeffrey Schott, a senior fellow working on international trade policy at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. As for Russia, the real cost “would be corrosive over time and really making it much more difficult to do business with Russian entities and deterring investment.”

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

The Cleaver-Brooks Company, Inc. Issues Fiscal Year 2022 Third Quarter Results and Announces Investor Conference Call

THOMASVILLE, Ga.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The Cleaver-Brooks Company, Inc. (the “Company”) announced today that it has posted its quarterly report for the fiscal 2022 third quarter ended January 2, 2022 on the Company’s secure investor website. The quarterly report is being furnished pursuant to the Indentures governing the Company’s 7.875% Senior Secured Notes due 2023 (the “7.875% Notes”) to holders of the 7.875% Notes, certain equity investors, qualified prospective investors in the 7.875% Notes, and certain broker-dealers and securities analysts.

The Company also announced that it will host an investor conference call to discuss third quarter 2022 financial results on Friday, February 18, 2022 at 11:00 a.m., Eastern Time. Access to the investor conference call will be limited to holders of the 7.875% Notes, certain equity investors, qualified prospective investors in the 7.875% Notes and certain broker-dealers and securities analysts. The Company has posted specific instructions on how to access the investor conference call on its secure investor website.

If you are a holder of the 7.875% Notes, a qualified prospective investor in the 7.875% Notes, or a qualified broker-dealer or securities analyst who would like to access the secure investor website, but have not yet been certified by the Company, please click on the “Investor Relations” link on our website at cleaver-brooks.com for information on how to become certified.

About Cleaver-Brooks

Cleaver-Brooks provides boiler rooms solutions to customers in a wide range of industries and end markets around the world. The Company’s main products include firetube packaged boilers, industrial watertube boilers, modular boilers, commercial watertube packaged boilers, waste heat recovery systems, burners, boiler room accessories and the aftermarket parts and service associated with these products. For more information, access the Cleaver-Brooks website at cleaver-brooks.com.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Jeff Zucker Resigns From CNN After Relationship With Top Executive

Jeff Zucker resigned on Wednesday as the president of CNN and the chairman of WarnerMedia’s news and sports division, writing in a memo that he had failed to disclose to the company a romantic relationship with another senior executive at CNN.

Mr. Zucker, 56, is among the most powerful leaders in the American media and television industries. The abrupt end of his nine-year tenure immediately throws into flux the direction of CNN and its parent company, WarnerMedia, which is expected to be acquired later this year by Discovery Inc. in one of the nation’s largest media mergers.

In a memo to colleagues that was obtained by The New York Times, Mr. Zucker wrote that his relationship came up during a network investigation into the conduct of Chris Cuomo, the CNN anchor who was fired in December over his involvement in the political affairs of his brother, former Governor Andrew M. Cuomo of New York.

“As part of the investigation into Chris Cuomo’s tenure at CNN, I was asked about a consensual relationship with my closest colleague, someone I have worked with for more than 20 years,” Mr. Zucker wrote. “I acknowledged the relationship evolved in recent years. I was required to disclose it when it began but I didn’t. I was wrong.”

CNN+, a subscription streaming service that is set to begin this spring.

“Together, we had nine great years,” Mr. Zucker wrote in his memo on Wednesday. “I certainly wish my tenure here had ended differently. But it was an amazing run. And I loved every minute.”

Katie Robertson contributed reporting.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Despite Labor Shortages, Workers See Few Gains in Economic Security

“Companies are doing all they can not to bake in any gains that are difficult to claw back,” Dr. Schneider said. “Workers’ labor market power is so far not yielding durable dividends.”

The changes that make work lower paying, less stable and generally more precarious date back to the 1960s and ’70s, when the labor market evolved in two key ways. First, companies began pushing more work outside the firm — relying increasingly on contractors, temps and franchisees, a practice known as “fissuring.”

Second, many businesses that continued to employ workers directly began hiring them to part-time positions, rather than full-time roles, particularly in the retail and hospitality industries.

According to the scholars Chris Tilly of the University of California, Los Angeles, and Françoise Carré of the University of Massachusetts Boston, the initial impetus for the shift to part-time work was the mass entry of women into the work force, including many who preferred part-time positions so they could be home when children returned from school.

Before long, however, employers saw an advantage in hiring part-timers and deliberately added more. “A light bulb went on one day,” Dr. Tilly said. “‘If we’re expanding part-time schedules, we don’t have to offer benefits, we can offer a lower wage rate.’”

By the late 1980s, employers had begun using scheduling software to forecast customer demand and staffed accordingly. Having a large portion of part-time workers, who could be given more hours when stores got busy and fewer hours when business slowed, helped enable this practice, known as just-in-time scheduling.

But the arrangement subjected workers to fluctuating schedules and unreliable hours, disrupting their personal lives, their sleep, even their children’s brain development.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<