BHR Braemar Hotels and Resorts Inc

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.  )

Filed by the Registrant ☒
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ☐

Check the appropriate box:

April 1, 2020

Dear Stockholders of Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc.:

On behalf of the Board of Directors of Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc., I cordially invite you to attend the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders of the Company, which will be held at 9:00 a.m., Central Time, on Thursday, May 14, 2020, at 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75254.

During 2019, we have continued to execute on the Company’s strategy of investing in the luxury hotel sector and having the highest quality portfolio among all lodging REITs. This is evidenced by having the highest comparable RevPAR in the sector.

In January 2019, we entered into a $50 million strategic funding arrangement with our advisor, Ashford Inc., whereby Braemar receives 10% of the purchase price for all new qualifying hotel acquisitions. The program, known as the Enhanced Return Funding Program, is a funding contribution, rather than a co-investment, and therefore there is no direct cost to Braemar associated with this incremental capital. To put this program to immediate use, also in January of 2019 we acquired the Ritz-Carlton Lake Tahoe for approximately $103 million (exclusive of approximately $17 million for land and capital reserves), drawing down ERFP funding of approximately $10 million to help fund the purchase. This program should result in attractive incremental returns to Braemar with each new acquisition.

Additionally, during 2019, significant progress was made on our two major Autograph Collection by Marriott conversions. The Philadelphia property, known as The Notary Hotel, was completed in July 2019, while the San Francisco property, to be known as The Clancy, is expected to be finished by the end of 2020.

While we have accomplished a great deal over the last year, and are excited about our progress, as I write this today we are in the middle of turbulent and unprecedented times. The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is wreaking havoc in our industry and in our economy - people are losing jobs, businesses are shutting down, quarantines are being implemented.

It is in difficult moments like this that leadership and work ethic can turn obstacles to opportunities. I assure you that your management team and all of the associates at Ashford Inc. are doing everything in our power to protect value during the crisis and position the company for growth post-crisis. It is challenging, but we believe we will be up to the task.

We encourage you to read this proxy statement carefully and to vote your proxy as soon as possible so that your shares will be represented at the meeting.

Sincerely,

 

 

You may vote at the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders the shares of common stock of which you were a holder of record at the close of business on March 20, 2020.

By order of the Board of Directors,

 

Deric S. Eubanks
Chief Financial Officer

14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100
Dallas, Texas 75254
April 1, 2020

 

This summary highlights selected information contained in this proxy statement, but it does not contain all the information you should consider in determining how to vote your shares of our common stock at the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders of the Company. We urge you to read the entire proxy statement before you vote. This proxy statement or the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials was first made available to stockholders on or about April 1, 2020.

We are providing these proxy materials in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors of Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc. of proxies to be voted at our 2020 annual meeting of stockholders.

In this proxy statement:

Ashford Inc. and Ashford LLC together serve as our external advisor. In this proxy statement, we refer to Ashford Inc. and Ashford LLC collectively as our “advisor.”

We intend to hold the Annual Meeting in person. However, we are sensitive to concerns related to public health and travel that our stockholders may have and are monitoring the protocols that federal, state, and local governments may recommend or require in light of the evolving novel coronavirus (COVID-19) situation. As a result, we may impose additional procedures or limitations on meeting attendees (beyond those described herein) or may decide to hold the meeting in a different location or solely by means of remote communication (i.e., a virtual-only meeting). In the event we determine it is necessary or appropriate to take additional steps regarding how we conduct the Annual Meeting, we will announce this decision in advance, and details will be posted on our website and filed with the SEC.

Our Board embodies a broad and diverse set of experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills. Below is a brief summary of some of the attributes, skills and experience of our director nominees. For a more complete description of each director nominee’s qualifications, please see their biographies starting on page 7.

 

We are committed to the values of effective corporate governance and high ethical standards. Our Board believes that these values are conducive to the strong performance of the Company and creating long-term stockholder value. Our governance framework gives our independent directors the structure necessary to provide oversight, direction, advice and counsel to the management of the Company. This framework is described in more detail in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and codes of conduct, which can be found on our website at www.bhrreit.com by clicking the “INVESTOR” tab, then the “Corporate Governance” tab and then the “Governance Documents” link.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and the full Board believe a complementary mix of diverse qualifications, skills, attributes and experiences will best serve the Company and its stockholders. The summary of our directors’ qualifications, skills, attributes and experiences that appears below, and the related narrative for each director nominee appearing in the directors’ biographies above, notes some of the specific experience, qualifications, attributes and skills for each director that the Board considers important in determining that each nominee should serve on the Board in light of the Company’s business, structure and strategic direction. The absence of a checkmark for a particular skill does not mean the director in question is unable to contribute to the decision-making process in that area.

 

The Board is committed to corporate governance practices that promote the long-term interests of our stockholders. The Board regularly reviews developments in corporate governance and updates the Company’s corporate governance framework, including its corporate governance policies and guidelines, as it deems necessary and appropriate. Our policies and practices reflect corporate governance initiatives that comply with the listing requirements of the NYSE and the corporate governance requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. We maintain a corporate governance section on our website, which includes key information about our corporate governance initiatives including our Corporate Governance Guidelines, charters for the committees of the Board, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and our Code of Ethics for the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer. The corporate governance section can be found on our website at www.bhrreit.com by clicking the “INVESTOR” tab, then the “Corporate Governance” tab and then the “Governance Documents” link.

Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applies to each of our directors and officers (including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Strategy Officer, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary (or their respective successors)) and employees. The term “officers and employees” includes individuals who: (i) are employed directly by us, if any (we do not currently employ any employees); or (ii) are employed by our advisor or its subsidiaries and: (a) have been named one of our officers by our Board; or (b) have been designated as subject to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by the legal department of our advisor. Among other matters, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:

Any waiver of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for our executive officers or directors may be made only by the Board or one of the Board committees and will be promptly disclosed if and to the extent required by law or stock exchange regulations.

The Board regularly considers the optimal leadership structure for the Company and its stockholders. In making decisions related to our leadership structure, the Board considers many factors, including the specific needs of the Company in light of its current strategic initiatives and the best interests of stockholders.

Mr. Monty J. Bennett served as Chairman of the Board as well as our Chief Executive Officer from November 2013 until November 14, 2016, when the Board decided to separate those roles and appointed Mr. Richard J. Stockton to serve as our Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Monty J. Bennett has continued to serve as Chairman of the Board since that time.

To further minimize the potential for future conflicts of interest, our bylaws and our Corporate Governance Guidelines, as well as the NYSE rules applicable to its listed companies, require that the Board must maintain a majority of independent directors at all times, and our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that if the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, at least two-thirds of the directors must be independent. Currently, all of our directors other than Mr. Monty J. Bennett are independent directors. The Board must also comply with each of our conflict of interest policies discussed in “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions—Conflict of Interest Policies.” Our bylaw provisions, governance policies and conflicts of interest policies are designed to provide a strong and independent Board and ensure independent director input and control over matters involving potential conflicts of interest.

In 2019, the Board appointed Ms. Stefani D. Carter to serve as the lead independent director for a one-year term. Under our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Lead Director has the following duties and responsibilities:

The Board believes that our leadership structure provides a very well-functioning and effective balance between strong company leadership and appropriate safeguards and oversight by independent directors.

Subject to the advisory agreement entered into by the Company, Ashford Inc., Braemar Hospitality Limited Partnership, Braemar TRS Corporation and Ashford LLC, as amended from time to time (the “advisory agreement”), the business and affairs of the Company are managed by or under the direction of the Board in accordance with Maryland law. The Board provides direction to, and oversight of, management of the Company. In addition, the Board establishes the strategic direction of the Company and oversees the performance of the Company’s business, management and the employees of our advisor who provide services to the Company. Subject to the Board’s supervision, our advisor is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Company and to make available appropriate personnel with sufficient experience to serve as executive officers of the Company. The management of the Company is responsible for presenting business objectives, opportunities and/or strategic plans to our Board for review and approval and for implementing the Company’s strategic direction and the Board’s directives.

The Board recognizes the importance of ensuring that our overall business strategy is designed to create long-term value for our stockholders and maintains an active oversight role in formulating, planning and implementing the Company’s strategy. The Board regularly considers the progress of, and challenges to, the Company’s strategy and related risks throughout the year. At each regularly-scheduled Board meeting, the management and the Board discuss strategic and other significant business developments since the last meeting and the Board considers, recommends and approves changes in strategies for the Company.

Our full Board has ultimate responsibility for risk oversight, but the committees of our Board help oversee risk in areas over which they have responsibility. The Board does not view risk in isolation. Risks are considered in virtually every business decision and as part of the Company’s business strategy. The Board and the Board committees receive regular updates related to various risks for both our Company and our industry. Our Board has received regular updates from the management team on the evolving novel coronavirus (COVID-19) situation and is involved in strategy decisions related to the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) on our business. The Audit Committee regularly receives and discusses reports from members of management who are involved in the risk assessment and risk management functions of our Company. The Compensation Committee annually reviews the overall structure of our equity compensation programs to ensure that those programs do not encourage executives to take unnecessary or excessive risks.

The Board, acting through the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, has reviewed and concurred in a management succession plan, developed by our advisor in consultation with the Chairman, to ensure continuity in senior management. This plan, on which the Chief Executive Officer is to report from time to time, addresses:

The plan also includes an assessment of senior management experience, performance, skills and planned career paths.

In addition to ensuring the Board reflects an appropriate mix of experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee also focuses on director succession and tenure. For example, our bylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that individuals who would be 70 years of age at the time of their election may not serve on our Board unless the Board waives such limitation. Upon attaining age 70 while serving as a director of the Company and annually thereafter, an individual must tender a letter of proposed retirement from our Board effective at the expiration of such individual’s current term, and our Board may accept the retirement of the director or request such director to continue to serve as a director. Over the last two years, our Board has undergone significant refreshment, resulting in lower average tenure, younger average age and broadened diversity of background.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee recommends qualified candidates for Board membership based on the following criteria:

In connection with the merit-based selection of nominees for director, the Board has regard for the need to consider director candidates from different and diverse backgrounds, including sex, race, color, ethnicity, age and geography. Consideration will also be given to the Board’s desire for an overall balance of professional diversity, including background, experience, perspective, viewpoint, education and skills. In early 2018, our Board approved specific amendments to the “Selection of Directors” section of the Corporate Governance Guidelines to more specifically include diversity of sex, race, color, ethnicity, age and geography when considering director candidates. The Board, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, is responsible for selecting the director nominees for election by the stockholders and for appointing directors to the Board between annual meetings to fill vacancies, with primary emphasis on the criteria set forth above. The Board and the Nominating and Governance Committee assess the effectiveness of the Board’s diversity efforts as part of the annual Board evaluation process.

Our bylaws permit stockholders to nominate candidates for election as directors of the Company at an annual meeting of stockholders. Stockholders wishing to nominate director candidates can do so by providing a written notice to the Corporate Secretary, Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc., 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75254. Stockholder nomination notices and the accompanying certificate, as described below, must be received by

the Corporate Secretary not earlier than February 13, 2021 and not later than 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, on March 15, 2021 for the nominated individuals to be considered for candidacy at the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders. Such nomination notices must include all information regarding the proposed nominee that would be required to be disclosed in connection with the solicitation of proxies for the election of the proposed nominee as a director in an election contest pursuant to the SEC’s proxy rules under the Exchange Act, as well as certain other information regarding the proposed nominee, the stockholder nominating such proposed nominee and certain persons associated with such stockholder, and must be accompanied by a certificate of the nominating stockholder as to certain matters, all as prescribed in the Company’s bylaws. A detailed description of the information required to be included in such notice and the accompanying certificate is included in the Company’s bylaws. You may contact the Corporate Secretary at the address above to obtain a copy of the relevant bylaw provisions regarding the requirements for making stockholder nominations. Failure of the notice and certificate to comply fully with the requirements of the Company’s bylaws in such regard will result in the stockholder nomination being invalid and the election of the proposed nominee as a director of the Company not being voted on at the pertinent annual meeting of stockholders.

Since August 3, 2016, our bylaws have provided that if a holder or a group of up to 20 holders having held at least 3% of the Company’s common stock outstanding as of the most recent date for which such amount has been given in any filing by the Company with the SEC prior to the submission of the nomination notice, as described below, continuously for a period of at least three consecutive years immediately preceding the submission of the nomination notice may nominate an individual for election at any annual meeting of stockholders in accordance with such bylaw provision and the Company will include such nominated individual in the Company’s proxy statement for that annual meeting and on the Company’s form of proxy and the ballot for that annual meeting as a nominee for election as a director of the Company at an annual meeting. The Company will not, however, be required to include in its proxy statement or on its proxy card or a ballot more stockholder nominees under this provision of the bylaws than the greater of (i) two nominees and (ii) that number of nominees equaling 20% of the total number of directors of the Company on the last day of which a nomination notice under such provision may be submitted to the Company (rounded down to the nearest whole number). Our bylaws set forth procedures for choosing among stockholder nominees if the number of stockholder nominees validly nominated under such provision of the bylaws exceeds the maximum number of nominees as described above. The nomination notices nominating stockholder nominees must contain all information regarding the proposed nominee that would be required to be disclosed in connection with the solicitation of proxies for the election of the proposed nominee as a director in an election contest pursuant to the SEC’s proxy rules under the Exchange Act, as well as certain other information regarding the proposed nominee, the stockholder or stockholders nominating such proposed nominee and certain persons associated with such persons and contain certain representations and warranties of such stockholder or stockholders in a nominating group, all as set forth in the Company’s bylaws, and be accompanied by written agreements of the nominating stockholder or stockholders and the stockholder nominee containing provisions as prescribed by the Company’s bylaws. The Company’s bylaws describe in detail the information required to be included, and the representations and warranties to be made, in such nomination notice and the provisions to be contained in the accompanying agreements. In addition, a stockholder or the stockholders in a group proposing to nominate an individual to stand for election pursuant to this bylaw provision must file a Schedule 14N with the SEC in accordance with the SEC’s proxy rules. Stockholder nomination notices and the accompanying agreements must be received by the Corporate Secretary, Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc., 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75254, not earlier than December 2, 2020 and not later than 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, on January 1, 2021 for the nominated individuals to be eligible for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement and on its proxy card and the ballot for the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders. You may contact the Corporate Secretary at the address above to obtain a copy of the relevant bylaw provisions regarding the requirements for making stockholder nominations. Failure of a nomination notice and the accompanying agreements to comply fully, or of a relevant party to otherwise comply fully, with the applicable requirements of the Company’s bylaws will result in the stockholder nomination being invalid and the proposed nominee not being eligible for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement and on its proxy card and the ballot for the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders.

Stockholders and other interested parties who wish to contact any of our directors either individually or as a group may do so by writing to them c/o the Corporate Secretary, Braemar Hotels & Resorts Inc., 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75254. Stockholders’ and other interested parties’ letters are reviewed by Company personnel based on criteria established and maintained by our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, which includes filtering out improper or irrelevant topics such as solicitations.

The Board and senior management conduct a comprehensive orientation process for new directors to become familiar with our vision, strategic direction, core values including ethics, financial matters, corporate governance policies and practices and other key policies and practices through a review of background material and meetings with senior management. The Board also recognizes the importance of continuing education for directors and is committed to providing education opportunities in order to improve both the Board’s and its committees’ performance. Senior management will assist in identifying and advising our directors about opportunities for continuing education, including conferences provided by independent third parties.

Upon attaining the age of 70 and annually thereafter, as well as when a director’s principal occupation or business association changes substantially from the position he or she held when originally invited to join the Board, a director will tender a letter of proposed retirement or resignation, as applicable, from the Board to the chair of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will review the director’s continuation on the Board, and recommend to the Board whether, in light of all the circumstances, the Board should accept such proposed resignation or request that the director continue to serve.

Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines, we maintain a policy that prohibits our directors and executive officers from holding Company securities in a margin account or pledging Company securities as collateral for a loan. Our policy also prohibits our directors and executive officers from engaging in speculation with respect to Company securities, and specifically prohibits our executives from engaging in any short-term, speculative securities transactions involving Company securities and engaging in hedging transactions.

Our business is managed through the oversight and direction of the Board. Members of the Board are kept informed of our business through discussions with the Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, Lead Director and other officers, by reviewing materials provided to them and by participating in meetings of the Board and its committees.

The Board has retained Ashford Inc. and Ashford LLC to manage our operations and asset manage our portfolio of hotels, subject to the Board’s oversight and supervision and the terms and conditions of the advisory agreement. Because of the conflicts of interest created by the relationships among us, Ashford Trust, Ashford Inc. and any other related party, and each of their respective affiliates, many of the responsibilities of the Board have been delegated to our independent directors, as discussed below and under “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions—Conflict of Interest Policies.”

During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Board held eight regular meetings and held two executive sessions of our non-management directors. The non-management directors must hold at least two regularly scheduled meetings per year without management present. All of our incumbent directors standing for re-election attended, in person or by telephone, at least 75% of all meetings of the Board and committees on which such director served, held during the period for which such person was a director or was a member of such committees, as applicable, in 2019.

The Board determines the independence of our directors in accordance with our Corporate Governance Guidelines and Section 303A.02 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, which requires an affirmative determination by our Board that the director has no material relationship with us that would impair his or her independence. In addition, Section 303A.02(b) of the NYSE Listed Company Manual sets forth certain tests that, if any of them is met by a director automatically disqualifies that director from being independent from management of our Company. Moreover, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that if any director receives, during any 12-month period within the last three years, more than $120,000 per year in direct compensation from the Company, exclusive of director and committee fees, he or she will not be considered independent. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines also provide that at all times that the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, at least two-thirds of the members of the Board should consist of independent directors. The full text of our Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines can be found on our website at www.bhrreit.com by clicking the “INVESTOR” tab, then the “Corporate Governance” tab and then the “Governance Documents” link.

Following deliberations, the Board has affirmatively determined that, with the exception of Mr. Monty J. Bennett, our Chairman, each nominee for election as a director of the Company is independent of Braemar and its management and has been such during his or her term as a director commencing with the annual meeting of stockholders of the Company held on July 31, 2019 under the standards set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and the NYSE Listed Company Manual, and our Board has been since that date and is comprised of a majority of independent directors, as required by Section 303A.01 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual. Any reference to an independent director herein means such director satisfies both the standards set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and the NYSE independence tests.

In addition, each current member of our Audit Committee and our Compensation Committee has been determined by the Board to be independent and to have been independent at all pertinent times under the heightened independence standards applicable to members of audit committees of board of directors and to members of compensation committees of board of directors of companies with equity securities listed for trading on the NYSE and under the rules of the SEC under the Exchange Act and that each nominee for election as a director of the Company at the Annual Meeting is independent under those standards.

In making the independence determinations with respect to our current directors, the Board examined all relationships between each of our directors or their affiliates and Braemar or its affiliates. The Board determined that none of these transactions impaired the independence of the directors involved.

Historically, the standing committees of the Board have been the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In 2016, the Board added the Related Party Transactions Committee as a standing committee of the Board. Each of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and

the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is governed by a written charter that has been approved by the Board. A copy of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee charters can be found on our website at www.bhrreit.com by clicking the “INVESTOR” tab, then the “Corporate Governance” tab and then the “Governance Documents” link. The committee members of each active committee and a description of the principal responsibilities of each such committee follows:

Each of Mr. McWilliams, Mr. Fearn and Mr. Vaziri qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined by the applicable rules and regulations of the Exchange Act. All of the members of our Audit Committee on and after January 1, 2019 are “financially literate” under the NYSE listing standards.

The Compensation Committee has the authority to retain and terminate any compensation consultant to assist it in the evaluation of officer compensation, or to delegate its duties and responsibilities to one or more subcommittees as it deems appropriate. In 2019, the Compensation Committee retained Gressle & McGinley LLC (“Gressle & McGinley”) as its independent compensation consultant. Gressle & McGinley provided competitive market data to support the Compensation Committee’s decisions on the value of equity to be awarded to our named executive officers. Gressle & McGinley has not performed any other services for the Company and performed its services only on behalf of, and at the direction of, the Compensation Committee. Our Compensation Committee reviewed the independence of Gressle & McGinley in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards regarding compensation consultant independence and has affirmatively concluded that Gressle & McGinley is independent from management of the Company and has no conflicts of interest relating to its engagement by our Compensation Committee.

chairman). New directors are expected to achieve compliance with this requirement within three years from the date of election or appointment. Each director is permitted to sell vested shares received in connection with any awards granted under any of the Company’s equity plans only if, upon doing so, such director will continue to meet his or her required stock ownership level. As of December 31, 2019, none of our directors had achieved this guideline as a result of the decline in our stock price caused by recent events, including the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).

The following table summarizes the compensation paid by us to our non-employee directors for their services as a director for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019:

During 2019, Mmes. Carter and Evans and Messrs. Fearn and Rinaldi served on our Compensation Committee. Each of those persons was or is an independent director throughout the period for which they served or have served on our Compensation Committee during 2019 and thereafter. None of these directors was, is or has ever been an officer or employee of our Company. None of our executive officers serves, or during 2019 served, as (i) a member of a Compensation Committee (or Board committee performing equivalent functions) of any entity, one of whose executive officers served as a director on our Board or as a member of our Compensation Committee, or (ii) a director of another entity, one of whose executive officers served or serves on our Compensation Committee. No member of our Compensation Committee has or had in 2019 any relationship with the Company requiring disclosure as a related party transaction under “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions.”

In accordance with our Corporate Governance Guidelines, directors of the Company are expected to attend the annual meeting of stockholders in person, by telephone or video conference. All persons who were directors at our 2019 annual meeting of stockholders attended our 2019 annual meeting.

The following is a discussion and analysis of the equity compensation program adopted for our named executive officers, which include our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and the three other most highly compensated executive officers appearing in the Summary Compensation Table. Also included below is a discussion of the equity awarded to our named executive officers in 2020 with respect to 2019 performance. This discussion should be read together with the compensation tables and related disclosures set forth elsewhere in this proxy statement.

As for our 2019 highlights, at year-end, our hotel portfolio consisted of 13 hotels containing 3,487 net rooms across six states, Washington, D.C., and the U.S. Virgin Islands. We believe our geographic diversity, combined with the fact that in 2019 no major market represented more than approximately 11% of our comparable hotel EBITDA, provides economic balance and reduces risk. Turning to our financial performance for 2019, comparable RevPAR for our hotels increased 1.0% to $233.45, driven by a 3.1% increase in rate partially offset by a 2.0% decrease in occupancy. We also seek to increase our RevPAR penetration index and we believe the benefits of our 2019 expenditures of $136.3 million in capital refreshes at the hotels will help us meet this goal. We had net income of $1.2 million for 2019, our Adjusted EBITDAre for 2019 totaled $121.5 million, and, while we had a net loss per share of $0.32 in 2019, our AFFO per share was $1.41. We believe our performance, as reflected by such RevPAR, Adjusted EBITDAre and AFFO per share performance in 2019, emphasizes the quality of our portfolio as well as the strength of our asset management capabilities. See Annex A to this proxy statement for more information about our Adjusted EBITDAre and AFFO per share.

We are externally advised by Ashford Inc. pursuant to an advisory agreement. Ashford Inc., through its operating company Ashford LLC is responsible for implementing our investment strategies and managing our operations. Our advisor manages the day-to-day operations of our Company and our affiliates in exchange for an advisory fee, the terms of which are described under “Our Relationship and Agreements with Ashford Inc. and its Subsidiaries.” As a consequence of this management arrangement and although the Company has executive officers, it does not have any employees. Each of the Company’s executive officers is, however, an employee of our advisor and is compensated by our advisor in his capacity as such. During all of 2017, 2018, and 2019, the cash compensation received by our executive officers was paid to those persons by Ashford Inc. in their capacity as employees of our advisor. However, our executive officers (as well as other employees of our advisor) continue to be eligible to receive equity awards under our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan and we grant equity compensation to our executive officers under our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan as described below. We do not, however, provide any other compensation or employee benefit plans for our executive officers.

The objectives of our equity compensation program are to: (i) motivate our executive officers to achieve the Company’s business and strategic objectives; (ii) align the interests of key leadership with the long-term interests of the Company’s stockholders; and (iii) provide rewards and incentives, without excessive risk taking, in order to attract, retain, and motivate our executive officers to perform in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

Our compensation philosophy is to make all equity compensation decisions following the end of our fiscal year based on the performance of the prior year and over the longer term. Our primary business objective of maximizing total stockholder return (“TSR”) through growth from internal asset performance and dynamic portfolio management strategies demands a long-term focus. As a result, we believe that the equity compensation we pay to our executive officers should be reflective of the overall performance of our Company on both a short-term and a long-term basis. The equity compensation we offer should reward the successes of the recent past, as well as motivate the executives to maximize the creation of long-term stockholder value in a competitive environment. Most of our management team have been working together for over 15 years, and the Company believes that the synergies among the management team, along with their cumulative knowledge and breadth of experience, have been key factors in the Company’s growth since its inception.

The equity compensation we pay to our executive officers is administered under the direction of our Compensation Committee. In its role as the administrator of our equity compensation program, our Compensation Committee recommends the equity compensation to be paid to our named executive officers with respect to a year to the Board, taking into consideration the recommendations of our Chairman and our independent compensation consultant, with the members of the Board ultimately approving all executive compensation decisions. A full description of the Compensation Committee’s roles and responsibilities can be found in its charter which is posted to our website at www.bhrreit.com under the “INVESTOR” tab, by navigating to the “Corporate Governance” link, then to the “Governance Documents” link.

Our Compensation Committee has the authority to retain independent advisors to assist the committee in fulfilling its responsibilities. The committee has retained Gressle & McGinley as its independent compensation consultant. Gressle & McGinley has not performed any services other than executive and director compensation services for the Company, and has performed its services only on behalf of, and at the direction of, the Compensation Committee. Our Compensation Committee has reviewed the independence of Gressle & McGinley in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards regarding compensation consultant independence and has affirmatively concluded that Gressle & McGinley is independent from the Company and has no conflicts of interest relating to its engagement by our Compensation Committee.

Our Compensation Committee regularly meets in executive sessions without management or other directors present. Executives generally are not present during Compensation Committee meetings. However, our Chairman and certain of our executive officers and employees of our advisor do attend all or part of certain Compensation Committee meetings. Our Chairman, considering certain performance factors as set by the Board each year, annually reviews the equity compensation for each named executive officer and our advisor’s (and its subsidiaries’) employees as a group and makes recommendations to our Compensation Committee regarding the equity compensation we should grant to our named executive officers and our advisor’s (and its subsidiaries’) employees as a group. Final equity compensation decisions for our executive officers are ultimately made in the sole discretion of, and with the approval of, the members of the Board based on the recommendations of the Compensation Committee.

Our Compensation Committee believes that the integrity of corporate governance is reinforced by linking our executive officers’ long-term interests to the interests of our stockholders through our equity compensation program. We believe that our equity compensation program provides appropriate performance-based incentives to attract and retain leadership talent, to align officer and stockholder interests, and to continue to drive our long-term track record of superior returns to stockholders.

The following policies support our position:

Pursuant to our advisory agreement, we pay Ashford Inc. an advisory fee. In turn, Ashford Inc. uses a portion of the proceeds of such advisory fee to pay the cash compensation it pays its personnel. We do not specifically reimburse Ashford Inc. for any executive officer compensation or benefits costs. The following is a summary of the advisory fees we paid to Ashford Inc. in 2019 and the total 2019 compensation paid to our named executive officers:

We are externally advised by our advisor, which determines and pays our executive officers’ salaries, bonuses, and other benefits. However, our Compensation Committee, together with the members of the Board, may grant equity awards to our executive officers and employees and other agents or affiliates of our advisor and its subsidiaries pursuant to our stock incentive plan.

The primary objectives of our equity compensation program are to: (i) motivate our executive officers to achieve the Company’s business and strategic objectives; (ii) align the interests of key leadership with the long-term interests of the Company’s stockholders; and (iii) provide rewards and incentives, without excessive risk taking, in order to attract, retain, and motivate our executive officers to perform in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

We strive to follow best practices in structuring our compensation program. Our equity compensation plan includes objective performance metrics tied to the Company’s business goals and stockholder returns. The Compensation Committee sets specific vesting requirements for the performance-vesting annual equity awards based on TSR relative to our peers. These features reflect the Company’s pay for performance philosophy and are aimed at aligning our executives’ pay with stockholders. Our performance-based awards measure achievement over a three-year performance period; however, beginning with annual equity awards granted in 2020, one-third of each performance-vesting award will be eligible to vest based on performance over the first year of the three-year performance period.

At our 2020 annual meeting of stockholders, we will hold our first stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation (“Say-on-Pay Vote”). Our Compensation Committee will take into consideration the results of the Say-on-Pay Vote, as well as any feedback from our investors, in making future decisions regarding our executive compensation program.

During 2019, our Company delivered strong operating performance, with management achieving or exceeding five of the five business objectives set by our Board for the year. The Compensation Committee took the Company’s operating performance in 2019 into consideration in making decisions to grant equity in March 2020.

The Compensation Committee believes that our named executive officers should have an ongoing stake in the long-term success of our business, and our equity compensation program is intended to align our executives’ interests with those of our stockholders, as well as to reward our executive officers for their performance on the Company’s behalf. Under our equity program, the Compensation Committee determines the size of potential equity awards by officer based on a review of market pay levels, taking into consideration the size of our Company against our peers. The Compensation Committee also considers the most recent burn rate benchmarks published by ISS for the real estate Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS).

For purposes of the below, the discussion of our 2019 performance relates to the equity grants made to our named executive officers in March 2020. However, the SEC’s rules require disclosure in the tables that follow this Compensation Discussion and Analysis of the equity awards that were granted to our named executive officers in 2019.

For our March 2020 equity awards based on 2019 performance, the size of the potential equity awards for our named executive officers was determined in part based on historical compensation levels in the hospitality REIT sector. Please refer to “—Review of Market Data for Peer Companies” below for further discussion of this analysis. Also, the Compensation Committee considered the recommendations of the Chairman in setting the equity awards for each individual named executive officer.

One-half of the value of the annual equity awards is granted in a form that is eligible to vest based on the Company’s relative TSR. The other half of the potential award is eligible to vest based on continued service in three equal installments on each anniversary of the grant date. Named executive officers may elect to receive their service-based equity awards in the form of LTIP units of Braemar OP (which are described in further detail below under “—LTIP

Units”) or restricted common stock, and their performance-based equity awards in the form of performance stock units (“PSUs”) or performance LTIP units (“performance LTIPs”), as described in further detail below. Upon vesting and reaching economic parity with the common units, LTIP units are convertible into common units at the option of the recipient. Common units are redeemable for cash or, at our option, convertible into shares of our common stock at a 1:1 conversion ratio.

PSUs and performance LTIPs each may vest from 0% to 200% of target based on achievement of a specified relative TSR, as applicable. The PSUs and performance LTIPs granted in 2019 and 2020 are eligible to vest based on the Company’s relative TSR over a three-year performance period, as more fully described below, subject to forfeiture. However, commencing with the PSUs and performance LTIPs granted in fiscal 2020, each grantee has an opportunity to vest in one-third of the target award (the “First-Year Target”) after the first year of the three-year performance period, based on the Company’s relative TSR achievement over the first year. Between 0% and 200% of the First-Year Target is eligible to vest based on such performance over the first year, and any PSUs and performance LTIPs that so vest will reduce the number of any PSUs and performance LTIPs that would otherwise vest at the end of the three-year performance period (but not below zero). If the number of PSUs and performance LTIPs that vest after the first year of the performance period is greater than the number that would vest based on performance over the three-year performance period, no additional PSUs or performance LTIPs will vest at the end of the three-year period (and any PSUs or performance LTIPs that vested after the first year of the performance period will not be deemed forfeited).

We generally use a three-year performance period in order to tie incentive compensation to long-term results. However, commencing with PSU and performance LTIP awards in fiscal 2020, the Compensation Committee believed it was appropriate to include an additional vesting opportunity after the first year of the three-year performance period following a thorough review of the Company’s equity program. As noted above, the size of the equity awards granted to our named executive officers in a given year is based on performance in the preceding fiscal year. Prior to fiscal 2020, PSUs and performance LTIPs vested based on our relative TSR achieved at the end of a three-year performance period; however, the historical volatility in our stock price meant that a significant, but short-lived, increase or decrease in our stock price at the end of the performance period could result in a significantly inflated or depressed number of PSUs or performance LTIPs vesting, which was inconsistent with our performance over the totality of the three-year period. The Compensation Committee believes that the prior approach did not adequately link our named executive officers’ performance and the interests of our stockholders; instead, the Compensation Committee believes that allowing an additional vesting opportunity for a portion of the PSUs and performance LTIPs (commencing with awards made in fiscal 2020) will better align named executive officer performance with stockholder interests by providing an opportunity to vest in awards based on both performance over a shorter period of time (the first year of the three-year performance period) and performance over the full three-year period.

The actual number of shares of our common stock or common units of Braemar OP to be issued upon vesting of the PSUs or performance LTIPs can range from 0% to 200% of the target number, based on continued service through the vesting date and achievement of a specified relative total stockholder return over the applicable performance period, as set forth in the following chart:

Vesting is interpolated for performance between the levels set forth in the table above. Dividends, or distributions in the case of units, accrue on unvested shares/units and are paid in the form of additional shares/units on the actual number of shares/units that vest.

The selected peer group used in the performance ranking based on relative stockholder return for the applicable performance period consists of: Chatham Lodging Trust, DiamondRock Hospitality Company, Hersha Hospitality Trust, Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., Park Hotels and Resorts, Inc., Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, RLJ Lodging Trust, Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc., Service Properties Trust, Summit Hotel Properties, Inc., Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc., and Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc. This group was the same group referenced for relative TSR purposes with respect to 2018 awards granted in 2019; however, Chesapeake Lodging Trust merged with Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. in September 2019, and as a result is no longer included in the peer group.

As described above, equity awards were awarded to the named executive officers in March 2020 based on 2019 performance. 2019 performance was evaluated based on five business objectives established by the Board. Certain of the business objectives changed relative to last year’s objectives and certain of the targets were adjusted for the business objectives that did not change, in each case, to reflect the cyclicality of the industry in which we operate, changes in market conditions and the broader economy, and to further align the interests of the named executive officers with the interests of the stockholders.

The following table summarizes the five business objectives set by the Board for 2019, along with the actual results:

Based on its review of 2019 performance, the Compensation Committee determined that the Company achieved five of the five business objectives resulting in the equity awards to our named executive officers described below.

Based on consideration of Company performance during 2019 and 2018, the Compensation Committee made service-based and performance-based equity grants in March 2020 and February 2019, respectively, to our named executive officers as follows (in number of shares awarded):

A summary of the components of the March 2020 equity awards to our named executive officers is as follows:

The LTIP units are a special class of partnership units in Braemar OP called “long-term incentive partnership units.” Grants of LTIP units are designed to offer executives the same long-term incentive as restricted stock, while allowing them more favorable income tax treatment. Each LTIP unit awarded is deemed equivalent to an award of one share of common stock reserved under our stock incentive plan, reducing availability for other equity awards, because LTIP units are convertible into common units of Braemar OP, which may themselves be converted into shares of our common stock based on a conversion ratio of 1:1. As a result, an LTIP unit granted may result in an issuance of one share of our common stock. LTIP units, whether vested or not, receive the same quarterly per unit distributions as common units of our operating partnership, which typically equal per share dividends on our common stock, if any. This treatment with respect to quarterly distributions is analogous to the treatment of time-vested restricted stock. (Note that distributions on performance LTIPs accrue on unvested units and are paid in the form of additional common units of our operating partnership on the actual number of LTIP units that vest.) The key difference between LTIP units and restricted stock is that at the time of award, LTIP units do not have full economic parity with common units but can achieve such parity over time. Upon the occurrence of certain corporate events, which are not performance-related events, the capital accounts of our operating partnership may be adjusted, allowing for the LTIP units to achieve parity with the common units over time. If such parity is reached, vested LTIP units become convertible into an equal number of common units. Until and unless such parity is reached, the value that an executive will realize for a given number of vested LTIP units is less than the value of an equal number of shares of our common stock.

Subject to satisfaction of the applicable performance- or service-vesting requirements for the LTIP units or performance LTIPs, the LTIP units will achieve parity with the common units upon the sale or deemed sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the partnership at a time when the Company’s stock is trading at some level in excess of the price it was trading at on the date of the LTIP issuance. More specifically, LTIP units will achieve full economic parity with common units in connection with (i) the actual sale of all or substantially all of the assets of Braemar OP or (ii) the hypothetical sale of such assets, which results from a capital account revaluation, as defined in the partnership agreement, for Braemar OP. A capital account revaluation generally occurs whenever there is an issuance of additional partnership interests or the redemption of a partnership interest. If a sale, or deemed sale as a result of a capital account revaluation, occurs at a time when Braemar OP’s assets have sufficiently appreciated, the LTIP units will achieve full economic parity with the common units. However, in the absence of sufficient appreciation in the value of the assets of Braemar OP at the time a sale or deemed sale occurs, full economic parity would not be reached. Until and unless such economic parity is reached, the value that an executive will realize for vested LTIP units will be less than the value of an equal number of shares of our common stock.

As of March 13, 2020, all except for 219,603 of the LTIP units issued to our named executive officers prior to 2019 have reached economic parity with the common units and have been converted to common units, and none of the LTIP units issued to our named executive officers during 2019 have achieved such parity. None of the LTIP units issued during 2020 have reached such parity.

Equity compensation grants for our named executive officers are determined based on a number of factors, including a periodic review of the compensation levels in the marketplace for similar positions. In 2019, the Compensation Committee, with the assistance of Gressle & McGinley, our independent compensation consultant, undertook such a review of competitive compensation compared to market, with a particular emphasis on market level of equity compensation.

Competitive pay data is used for reference only to gauge the marketplace for executive compensation in our industry. The Compensation Committee does not establish a specific target percentile of market for our executives and generally seeks to provide the compensation levels needed to retain our exceptional executive team and reward appropriately for performance.

The specific peers used to assess competitive pay include other hospitality REITs with similar assets. The hospitality REITs included in our assessment of competitive pay include: Chatham Lodging Trust, Chesapeake Lodging Trust, DiamondRock Hospitality Company, Hersha Hospitality Trust, Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., Park Hotels and Resorts, Inc., Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, RLJ Lodging Trust, Summit Hotel Properties, Inc., Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc., and Xenia Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Note that Chesapeake Lodging Trust merged with Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. in September 2019, and as a result will not be included in the above group going forward.

The Compensation Committee also assessed the pay practices of these hospitality REITs in evaluating 2020 equity grant decisions for 2019 performance.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide ownership guidelines for our executive officers. The guidelines state that the Chief Executive Officer should hold an amount of our common stock or other equity equivalent having a market value in excess of six times his annual base salary paid by our advisor, our President (if not also the Chief Executive Officer) should hold an amount of our common stock or other equity equivalent having a market value in excess of four times his annual base salary paid by our advisor, and each other executive officer should hold common stock or other equity equivalent having a market value in excess of three times his annual base salary paid by our advisor. The guidelines provide that ownership of common units or LTIP units in our operating partnership constitute “common stock” for purposes of compliance with the guideline based on a conversion ratio of 1:1.

Executive officers are expected to achieve compliance within three years of being appointed. As of December 31, 2019, all of our named executive officers, other than Messrs. Hays, Welter and Eubanks (who have fallen below achievement of the guideline as a result of the decline in our stock price caused by recent events, including the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19)), satisfied our stock ownership guidelines. Each executive officer is permitted to sell vested shares received in connection with any equity awards if he or she has met the required ownership level and will continue to do so after such sale. The 2013 Equity Incentive Plan contains an ownership requirement that mirrors these guidelines, and requires each executive officer to retain at least 50% of the after-tax shares received in connection with any awards granted under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan until such time that he or she has met the required ownership level.

As a group, our named executive officers have demonstrated a commitment to the Company through long tenure and significant equity ownership levels that, as a multiple of salary paid to them by our advisor, are well in excess of market best practices.

Our directors and executive officers are prohibited from hedging or pledging our common stock (or units of Braemar OP).

Under the Company’s clawback policy, if the Company is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to the material noncompliance of the Company with any financial reporting requirements, then the Compensation Committee, or, in the discretion of the Board, any other committee or body of the Board consisting only of independent directors, may require any Section 16 reporting officer, as well as any other officer holding the title of senior vice president or a more senior title whose job description includes the function of accounting or financial reporting (each, a “covered officer”), during the three-year period preceding the publication of the restated financial statement to reimburse the Company for any annual cash bonus and long-term equity incentive compensation earned during the prior three-year period in such amounts that the independent director committee determines to be in excess of the amount that such covered officer would have received had such compensation been calculated based on the financial results reported in the restated financial statement.

The independent director committee may take into account any factors it deems reasonable, necessary, and in the best interests of the Company to remedy any misconduct and prevent its recurrence. In determining whether to seek recoupment of any previously paid excess compensation and how much to recoup from each covered officer, the independent director committee must consider the accountability of the applicable covered officer, any conclusion by the independent director committee whether a covered officer engaged in wrongdoing, committed grossly negligent acts, omissions or engaged in willful misconduct, as well as any failure of the covered officer to report another person’s grossly negligent acts, omissions, or willful misconduct. In addition, if a covered officer engaged in intentional misconduct or violation of Company policy that contributed to the award or payment of any annual cash bonus or long-term equity incentive compensation to him or her that is greater than would have been paid or awarded in the absence of the misconduct or violation, the independent director committee may take other remedial and recovery action permitted by applicable law, as determined by such committee.

Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC has proposed additional rules regarding the clawback of equity awards in certain circumstances. If the proposed rules or other rules are finally adopted by the SEC, the Company intends to modify its recoupment policies accordingly.

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, generally precludes a publicly held corporation from a federal income tax deduction for a taxable year for compensation in excess of $1 million paid to its “covered employees,” which generally include its chief executive officer, chief financial officer, its next three most highly compensated executive officers, and any individual who is (or was) a “covered employee” for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2016.

Our Company is structured such that compensation is not paid and deducted by the corporation, but at the Braemar OP level. The IRS previously issued a private letter ruling holding that Section 162(m) does not apply to compensation paid to employees of a REIT’s operating partnership. Prior to December 20, 2019, and consistent with that ruling, we had taken a position that compensation expense paid and incurred at the Braemar OP level is not subject to the Section 162(m) limit. However, as a result of proposed regulations under Section 162(m) promulgated by the IRS on December 20, 2019, Section 162(m)’s deduction limitation may apply to our distributive share of Braemar OP’s deduction for compensation paid to covered employees. The deductibility of compensation is only one of a multitude of factors that we consider in establishing compensation, and we and our Compensation Committee believe that it is important to retain flexibility to award compensation to our employees that appropriately incentivizes their retention, encourages performance, and aligns with our stockholders’ interests, even if the deductibility of that compensation is limited (whether under Section 162(m) or otherwise). We also consider the accounting impact of all compensation paid to our executives, and equity awards are given special consideration pursuant to FASB ASC Topic 718.

The Compensation Committee has overall responsibility for overseeing the risks relating to our compensation policies and practices. The Compensation Committee uses its independent compensation consultant, Gressle & McGinley, to independently consider and analyze the extent, if any, to which our compensation policies and practices might create risks for the Company, as well as policies and practices that could mitigate any such risks. After conducting this review in 2019, the Compensation Committee has determined that none of our compensation policies and practices create any risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our Company.

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the compensation discussion and analysis disclosure with the Company’s management, and based on this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee has recommended to the Board that the compensation discussion and analysis be included in this proxy statement.