Caesars Acquisition Co - FORM 10-Q

Attached files

file	filename
EX-31.2 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 - Caesars Acquisition Co	cacq-ex312cfocertification.htm
EX-31.1 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 - Caesars Acquisition Co	cacq-ex311ceocertification.htm
EX-32.2 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 - Caesars Acquisition Co	cacq-ex322cfocertification.htm
EX-32.1 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 - Caesars Acquisition Co	cacq-ex321ceocertification.htm
EX-99.1 - FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF CAESARS GROWTH PARTNERS, LLC - Caesars Acquisition Co	cacq-ex991cgpllc3x09financ.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

_________________________

FORM 10-Q

_________________________

(Mark One)



x	QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2016



o	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from _________ to __________

Commission File No. 001-36207

_________________________

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

_________________________



Delaware		46-2672999
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

One Caesars Palace Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada		89109
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

(702) 407-6000

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

_________________________

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.



Large accelerated filer	o	Accelerated filer	x

Non-accelerated filer	o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company	o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.



Class	Outstanding at May 3, 2016
Class A Common Stock, $0.001 par value	137,367,364

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



		Page
	PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.	Unaudited Financial Statements
	Condensed Balance Sheets	3
	Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income	4
	Condensed Statements of Stockholders' Equity	5
	Condensed Statements of Cash Flows	6
	Notes to Condensed Financial Statements	7
Item 2.	Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	19
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	36
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	37

	PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	38
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	42
Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	75
Item 3.	Defaults Upon Senior Securities	75
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	75
Item 5.	Other Information	75
Item 6.	Exhibits	76

Signature		77

Caesars Acquisition Company and its subsidiaries have proprietary rights to a number of trademarks used in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q that are important to its business, including, without limitation, World Series of Poker ("WSOP"), Slotomania, House of Fun and Bingo Blitz. In addition, Caesars Entertainment Corporation, our joint venture partner in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC, and Caesars Entertainment Operating Company, Inc., and their respective subsidiaries, have proprietary rights to, among others, Caesars, Caesars Entertainment, Harrah's, Total Rewards, Horseshoe and Bally's. We have omitted the registered trademark (®) and trademark (™) symbols for such trademarks named in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Unaudited Financial Statements

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS

(UNAUDITED)

(In millions, except par value and share data)



	March 31, 2016		December 31, 2015
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	20.0	$	19.1
Receivable from related party	0.8		0.9
Prepayments and other current assets	19.2		21.5
Total current assets	40.0		41.5

Equity method investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	1,114.2		1,095.9
Total assets	$	1,154.2	$	1,137.4

Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
Accrued expenses	$	0.1	$	0.1
Total current liabilities	0.1		0.1
Deferred tax liabilities	76.7		69.9
Total liabilities	76.8		70.0

Commitments and contingencies (Note 7)

Stockholders' Equity
Common stock: $0.001 par value; 300,000,000 Class A shares and 900,000,000 Class B shares authorized at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015; 137,341,569 Class A shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015	0.1		0.1
Additional paid-in capital	1,017.0		1,016.2
Retained earnings	60.3		51.1
Total stockholders' equity	1,077.4		1,067.4
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$	1,154.2	$	1,137.4

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Financial Statements.

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(UNAUDITED)

(In millions, except per share data)



	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2016			2015
Revenues	$	—		$	—
Operating expenses	6.6			7.1
Loss from operations	(6.6		)	(7.1		)

Income from equity method investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	24.4			24.2
Income before provision for income taxes	17.8			17.1
Provision for income taxes	(8.6		)	(8.4		)
Net income	9.2			8.7
Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes	—			—
Comprehensive income	$	9.2		$	8.7

Earnings per share
Basic	$	0.07		$	0.06
Diluted	$	0.07		$	0.06
Weighted average common shares outstanding
Basic	137.3			136.4
Diluted	137.5			137.2

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Financial Statements.

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

(UNAUDITED)

(In millions)



	Class A Common Stock		Additional Paid-in Capital		Retained Earnings		Total Stockholders' Equity
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	0.1	$	1,003.9	$	19.1	$	1,023.1
Net income	—		—		8.7		8.7
Stock-based compensation	—		3.0		—		3.0
Balance at March 31, 2015	$	0.1	$	1,006.9	$	27.8	$	1,034.8

Balance at January 1, 2016	$	0.1	$	1,016.2	$	51.1	$	1,067.4
Net income	—		—		9.2		9.2
Stock-based compensation	—		0.8		—		0.8
Balance at March 31, 2016	$	0.1	$	1,017.0	$	60.3	$	1,077.4

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Financial Statements.

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(UNAUDITED)

(In millions)



	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2016			2015
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income	$	9.2		$	8.7
Adjustments to reconcile net income to cash flows provided by operating activities
Income from equity method investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	(24.4		)	(24.2		)
Distributions from equity method investee Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	6.2			4.5
Stock-based compensation	0.8			3.0
Deferred income taxes	6.8			6.1
Change in assets and liabilities:
Prepayments and other current assets	2.3			2.5
Accrued expenses	—			(0.6		)
Cash flows provided by operating activities	0.9			—
Cash flows provided by investing activities	—			—
Cash flows provided by financing activities	—			—
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	0.9			—
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	19.1			8.8
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	20.0		$	8.8

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Financial Statements.

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(UNAUDITED)

Note 1 — Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

Organization and Description of Business

Caesars Acquisition Company (the "Company," "CAC," "we," "our" and "us"), a Delaware corporation, was formed on February 25, 2013 to make an equity investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC ("CGP LLC"), a joint venture between CAC and subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment Corporation ("CEC" or "Caesars Entertainment"). CAC directly owns 100% of the voting membership units of CGP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and accounts for its ownership in CGP LLC using the hypothetical liquidation at book value ("HLBV") approach to the equity method of accounting (see Note 3 — Equity Method Investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC).

Proposed Merger of CAC with CEC

On December 21, 2014, the Company and CEC entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement"), pursuant to which, among other things, CAC will merge with and into CEC, with CEC as the surviving company (the "Proposed Merger").

Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, and subject to the overall restructuring of Caesars Entertainment Operating Company, Inc. ("CEOC"), regulatory approval and other closing conditions, upon consummation of the Proposed Merger, each share of class A common stock, par value $0.001 per share, of CAC issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Proposed Merger will be converted into, and become exchangeable for, that number of shares of CEC common stock, par value $0.01 per share, equal to 0.664 (the "Exchange Ratio"), provided that during the Adjustment Period (as described below), the Special Committee of CAC's Board of Directors (the "CAC Special Committee") and the Special Committee of CEC's Board of Directors (the "CEC Special Committee"), each composed solely of independent directors, will determine if there should be an adjustment to the Exchange Ratio and the amount of any such adjustment, taking into consideration all relevant facts and circumstances affecting the intrinsic value of CAC and CEC. The Adjustment Period is the 14 day period beginning on the later of (i) the date that the CEOC restructuring plan is confirmed and (ii) the date that both CAC and CEC confirm that their respective independent financial advisors have received all information as may be reasonably necessary or advisable in order to render a fairness opinion concerning the Exchange Ratio. If at the end of the Adjustment Period, the CAC Special Committee and the CEC Special Committee have not agreed to an adjustment to the Exchange Ratio, there will not be an adjustment to the Exchange Ratio. Within five business days following the end of the Adjustment Period, either CAC or CEC may terminate the Merger Agreement if (a) the CAC Special Committee and the CEC Special Committee cannot agree on an Exchange Ratio adjustment and a failure to terminate the Merger Agreement would be inconsistent with their respective directors' fiduciary duties or (b) the CAC Special Committee or the CEC Special Committee, as applicable, has not received an opinion of its respective financial advisor that the Exchange Ratio (as adjusted, if applicable) is fair, from a financial point of view to CAC and its public stockholders or CEC, as applicable. Under the Merger Agreement, either party may terminate the Merger Agreement if the merger has not been completed by the close of business on August 6, 2016.

Under the Merger Agreement, CEC has agreed to use reasonable best efforts to (i) cause the implementation of the restructuring of certain of CEC's subsidiaries as contemplated by that certain Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement, dated as of December 19, 2014, among CEOC, CEC, LeverageSource III (H Holdings), L.P., LeverageSource V, L.P. and each of the holders of first lien bond claims party thereto (the "Restructuring Support Agreement") and (ii) consult with CAC regarding certain additional actions in connection with the bankruptcy filing contemplated by the Restructuring Support Agreement if CEC determines, in its reasonable discretion, that such additional actions could reasonably be expected to be materially adverse to CAC.

Basis of Presentation

Our unaudited condensed financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") in the United States, which require the use of estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the amounts of expenses during the reporting periods. Management believes the accounting estimates are appropriate and reasonably stated. However, due to the inherent uncertainties in making these estimates, actual amounts could differ.

The results of operations for our interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that may be achieved for the 2016 fiscal year. The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements are prepared under the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") applicable for interim periods and, therefore, do not include all information and footnotes necessary for complete financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Accordingly, the accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company's audited financial statements presented in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Given the significance of the investment in CGP LLC to the financial position and results of operations of CAC, we have elected to include interim selected financial information of CGP LLC as an exhibit to this Quarterly Report. As CAC is the parent company to CGP LLC, a joint venture accounted for using the HLBV approach to the equity method of accounting, and as the interim selected financial information of CGP LLC are included as an exhibit to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, segment reporting is not required.

Note 2 — Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40), amending the existing requirements for disclosing information about an entity's ability to continue as a going concern. The new guidance will explicitly require management to assess an entity's ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosure in certain circumstances. The amendments in this guidance are effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. We are currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on our financial statements.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments - Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, which primarily affects the accounting for equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted for under the equity method, presentation of changes in the fair value of financial liabilities measured under the fair value option, and the presentation and disclosure requirements for financial instruments. The ASU also clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity's other deferred tax assets. The ASU is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those years. Entities can early adopt certain provision of ASU 2016-01. We are currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on our financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, which (1) requires that all income tax effects of awards be recognized in the income statement when the awards vest or are settled, (2) requires that companies present excess tax benefits as an operating activity on the statement of cash flows rather than as a financing activity, (3) allows employers to withhold up to the maximum statutory tax rates in the applicable jurisdictions without triggering liability accounting, (4) allows companies to make a policy election to either account for forfeitures as they occur or estimate forfeitures, and (5) includes nonpublic entity practical expedients. For public business entities, the amendments in this guidance are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted. We are currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on our financial statements.

Note 3 — Equity Method Investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC

CAC's earnings from CGP LLC using the HLBV form of the equity method of accounting for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 were equal to our preferred return of 10.5% of capital invested by CGP LLC. CAC also receives distributions from CGP LLC in accordance with the transaction agreement related to the formation of CGP LLC ("CGP Operating Agreement") for reimbursement of its expenses incurred. These distributions are recorded as reductions to the equity method investment in Caesars Growth Partners, LLC.

Our investee, CGP LLC, had the following financial results as of or for the periods indicated (see CGP LLC financial information in Exhibit 99.1):



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016			2015
Statements of Operations
Revenues
Interactive Entertainment	$	227.8		$	176.6
Casino Properties and Developments	415.8			389.9
Net revenues	643.6			566.5
Operating expenses
Interactive Entertainment - Direct	63.6			48.7
Casino Properties and Developments - Direct	194.2			191.5
Property, general, administrative and other	210.3			181.4
Write-downs, reserves, and project opening costs, net of recoveries	0.6			3.1
Management fees to related parties	12.3			13.5
Depreciation and amortization	46.7			41.1
Change in fair value of contingently issuable non-voting membership units	—			(117.5		)
Total operating expenses	527.7			361.8
Income from operations	115.9			204.7
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	(50.9		)	(48.2		)
Other expense, net	—			(1.0		)
Income from operations before provision for income taxes	65.0			155.5
Provision for income taxes	(28.1		)	(11.4		)
Net income	36.9			144.1
Less: net (income)/loss attributable to non-controlling interests	(3.5		)	0.1
Net income attributable to Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	$	33.4		$	144.2

Balance Sheet Data (at period end)	March 31, 2016			December 31, 2015
Current assets	$	1,119.6		$	1,062.1
Long-term assets	3,416.3			3,460.5
Current liabilities	359.3			378.8
Long-term liabilities	2,429.5			2,412.1
Redeemable non-controlling interests	0.5			0.5
Equity attributable to Caesars Growth Partners, LLC	1,707.2			1,691.0
Non-redeemable non-controlling interests	39.4			40.2

Note 4 — Stockholders' Equity and Earnings Per Share

Stockholders' Equity

Common Stock

As of both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, CAC had a total of 137,341,569 shares outstanding of Class A common stock and no shares of Class B common stock outstanding.

Call Right

Pursuant to the certificate of incorporation of CAC and the CGP Operating Agreement, after October 21, 2016, Caesars Entertainment and/or its subsidiaries will have the right, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to any transferee of all non-voting units of CGP LLC held by subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment, to acquire all or a portion of the voting units of CGP LLC (or, at the election of CAC, shares of CAC's Class A common stock) not otherwise owned by Caesars Entertainment and/or its subsidiaries at such time. The purchase consideration may be, at Caesars Entertainment's option, cash or shares of Caesars Entertainment's common stock valued at market value, net of customary market discount and expenses, provided that the cash portion will not exceed 50% of the total consideration in any exercise of the call right. The purchase price will be the greater of (i) the fair market value of the voting units of CGP LLC (or shares of CAC's Class A common stock) at such time based on an independent appraisal or (ii) the initial capital contribution in respect of such units plus a minimum 10.5% per annum return on such capital contribution, subject to a maximum return on such capital contribution of 25% per annum, taking into account prior distributions with respect to such units.

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

Accumulated other comprehensive income consists of net income, net of taxes. For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, no amounts were reclassified out of Accumulated other comprehensive income.

Investment in Notes from Related Party

CAC owns $137.5 million in aggregate principal amount of 6.50% senior notes previously issued by CEOC, maturing June 1, 2016, and $151.4 million in aggregate principal amount of 5.75% senior notes previously issued by CEOC, maturing October 1, 2017. Collectability is uncertain due to CEOC's bankruptcy filing. Both of these notes were included as a reduction of Additional paid-in capital in the March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 Condensed Balance Sheets and Condensed Statements of Stockholders' Equity along with interest receivable at the distribution date. These notes will be held at the distributed value with no subsequent adjustments such as fair value adjustments or interest receivable until such time as amounts are received by CAC.

Earnings Per Share

Basic earnings per share ("EPS") is calculated by dividing income, net of income taxes, by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period in which the net income was earned. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur from common shares issuable through stock-based compensation plans using the treasury stock method.

The following table summarizes the computations of Basic EPS and Diluted EPS (in millions, except per share data):



	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2016		2015
Net income	$	9.2	$	8.7

Shares used to compute EPS:
Weighted average common stock outstanding - basic	137.3		136.4
Dilutive potential common shares	0.2		0.8
Weighted average common stock outstanding - diluted	137.5		137.2

Earnings per share:
Basic	$	0.07	$	0.06
Diluted	$	0.07	$	0.06

There were 1.8 million and 0.2 million anti-dilutive shares excluded from the computation of diluted EPS for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Note 5 — Income Taxes

Total provision for income taxes is as follows:



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016		2015
Provision for income taxes	$	8.6	$	8.4

CAC classifies reserves for tax uncertainties separate from any related income tax payable or deferred income taxes. Reserve amounts relate to any potential income tax liabilities resulting from uncertain tax positions and potential interest or penalties associated with those liabilities. At March 31, 2016 and 2015, there were no such reserves.

Income taxes are recorded under the asset and liability method, whereby deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases, and attributable to operating income and tax credit carryforwards. CAC's equity-method investee, CGP LLC, is a partnership for income tax purposes so the deferred tax assets and liabilities recognized by CAC are also impacted by the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences at CGP LLC.

The effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2016 was 48.3%, which differed from the federal statutory tax rate of 35.0% due to a change in federal valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets related to the basis difference in the investment in notes from related party. The effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2015 was 49.1% which differed from the federal statutory tax rate of 35.0% due to a federal valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets related to the basis difference in the investment in notes from related party.

CAC files income tax returns with federal and state jurisdictions. The 2015, 2014 and 2013 tax years are open for examination for CAC's federal and state jurisdictions.

Note 6 — Fair Value Measurements

We do not have assets or liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis. In addition, we have not recognized any adjustments for asset and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015.

Note 7 — Litigation

From time to time, CAC or CGP LLC may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business.

Horseshoe Baltimore

Multiple lawsuits have been filed against CBAC Gaming, LLC ("CBAC Gaming") and CBAC Borrower, LLC ("CBAC Borrower"), the City of Baltimore, the Maryland Department of the Environment ("MDE") and other parties in relation to the location and the development of Horseshoe Baltimore. These cases allege violations of various environmental laws, violations of zoning laws and public nuisance, among other claims.

In November 2012, the MDE granted approval of the Maryland Joint Venture's amended response action plan ("RAP") under MDE's Voluntary Cleanup Program that named the Maryland Joint Venture, rather than the City of Baltimore, as the party that will implement the RAP and redevelop the location of Horseshoe Baltimore. On February 20, 2013, a group of local residents working with the non-profit Inner Harbor Stewardship Foundation (the "Foundation") filed a complaint in the Maryland Circuit Court challenging the legality of the MDE's approval of the amended RAP. In the case, known as Ruth Sherrill, et al. v. State of Maryland Department of the Environment, et al., the plaintiffs claimed that the amended RAP was approved without complying with the public notice and participation requirements of Maryland law. The plaintiffs sought additional public notice and participation, and to obtain an injunction on, among other things, any construction activities at the site pending the resolution of the case. On March 14, 2013, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction ("TRO"). The plaintiffs' appeal of the TRO ruling was dismissed. On April 22, 2013, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding a public nuisance claim to their original complaint. The defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' amended complaint and a hearing was held on June 14, 2013. The amended complaint was dismissed on November 6, 2013. The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on December 6, 2013 and oral argument occurred on October 3, 2014. The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the dismissal on February 16, 2016. The time for Appellants to petition the Maryland Court of Appeals for a writ of certiorari has now lapsed.

The plaintiffs issued a notice of intent to file a citizen suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 6972(a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This notice of intent indicated an intention to sue CBAC (a joint venture among Caesars Baltimore Investment Company, LLC, Rock Gaming Mothership LLC, CVPR Gaming Holdings, LLC, STRON-MD Limited Partnership and PRT Two, LLC), the City of Baltimore, Whiting-Turner, the general contractor for the construction of the Horseshoe Baltimore casino, and the Maryland Chemical Company, the former owner and operator of the site. The citizen suit was filed on September 19, 2013 but did not name Whiting-Turner. The defendants filed motions to dismiss on October 15, 2013 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim to which plaintiffs responded on November 1, 2013. The motions to dismiss were granted on July 16, 2014. An appeal was noted on August 13, 2014. Oral argument before the Fourth Circuit occurred on March 25, 2015. On July 1, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the motion to dismiss and remanded the matter back to the District Court. Discovery has now commenced.

The decision of the Board of Municipal Zoning Appeals to grant variances for the site for Horseshoe Baltimore was appealed by separate parties on the basis of alleged procedural irregularities. The appeals were dismissed for lack of standing on October 11, 2013 and no appeal of that decision was timely filed.

On August 1, 2013, ten individuals claiming to represent a class of similarly situated individuals filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Maryland against the Maryland Department of the Environment, the City of Baltimore, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, CBAC Gaming, Whiting-Turner Contracting Company and Urban Green Environmental, LLC. The 11 count complaint alleged that the RAP for the location of Horseshoe Baltimore is inadequate and approved without appropriate public participation. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, and claim violations of civil rights laws and the Clean Water Act, civil conspiracy, and a variety of torts. The plaintiffs also sought a temporary restraining order, which the District Court denied on August 9, 2013. The plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 15, 2013 and again on December 26, 2013, adding 44 new plaintiffs and naming MDE, the Secretary of MDE, the City of Baltimore, the Mayor of the City of Baltimore, the Baltimore Development Corporation, and CBAC Gaming and CBAC Borrower as defendants. The defendants filed motions to dismiss on January 27, 2014 and the plaintiffs filed their oppositions on February 28, 2014. The case was dismissed on May 16, 2014 and no appeal was filed.

From time to time, the City of Baltimore may be subject to legal proceedings asserting claims related to the site. CBAC and CGP LLC have not been named as parties to these proceedings.

Four residents of Baltimore City and County issued a notice of intent to file a citizen suit under 33 U.S.C. § 1365(b) of the Clean Water Act against the City of Baltimore as owner of the site for water pollution alleged to originate there. A lawsuit was filed on behalf of two of the residents on July 2, 2013. The City of Baltimore moved to dismiss the complaint on August 28, 2013. One of the plaintiffs withdrew from the case on October 10, 2013. The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland dismissed the case without prejudice on January 7, 2014 for lack of standing.

Two residents of Baltimore City filed suit on May 20, 2013 against the City of Baltimore, as owner of the site, alleging that the City of Baltimore was in violation of Maryland water pollution laws as a result of groundwater contamination alleged to be migrating from the site. The City of Baltimore was served with the complaint on June 12, 2013. An amended complaint was filed on July 19, 2013, which the City of Baltimore moved to dismiss on August 6, 2013. The plaintiffs dismissed the complaint without prejudice on September 12, 2013.

CAC and CGP LLC believe that the claims and demands described above against CBAC Borrower and CBAC Gaming are without merit and intend to defend themselves vigorously. At the present time, CAC and CGP LLC believe it is not probable that a material loss will result from the outcome of these matters. CAC and CGP LLC cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of these matters or of the range of reasonably possible losses should these matters ultimately be resolved against CAC and CGP LLC, due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation and, in some cases, the stage of the related litigation. Although CAC and CGP LLC believe that they have adequate defenses to these claims, an adverse judgment could result in additional costs or injunctions.

CAC-CEC Proposed Merger

On December 30, 2014, Nicholas Koskie, on behalf of himself and, he alleges, all others similarly situated, filed a lawsuit (the "Nevada Lawsuit") in the Clark County District Court in the State of Nevada against CAC, CEC and members of the CAC board of directors Marc Beilinson, Philip Erlanger, Dhiren Fonseca, Don Kornstein, Karl Peterson, Marc Rowan, and David Sambur (the individual defendants collectively, the "CAC Directors"). The Nevada Lawsuit alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty against the CAC Directors and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against CAC and CEC. It seeks (1) a declaration that the claim for breach of fiduciary duty is a proper class action claim; (2) to order the CAC Directors to fulfill their fiduciary duties to CAC in connection with the Proposed Merger, specifically by announcing their intention to (a) cooperate with bona fide interested parties proposing alternative transactions, (b) ensure that no conflicts exist between the CAC Directors' personal interests and their fiduciary duties to maximize shareholder value in the Proposed Merger, or resolve all such conflicts in favor of the latter, and (c) act independently to protect the interests of the shareholders; (3) to order the CAC Directors to account for all damages suffered or to be suffered by the plaintiff and the putative class as a result of the Proposed Merger; and (4) to award the plaintiff for his costs and attorneys' fees. It is unclear whether the Nevada Lawsuit also seeks to enjoin the Proposed Merger. CAC and the CAC Directors believe this lawsuit is without merit and will defend themselves vigorously. The deadline to respond to the Nevada Lawsuit has been indefinitely extended by agreement of the parties.

On April 20, 2015, CAC received a demand for production of CAC's books and records pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law on behalf of a purported stockholder. The alleged purpose of the demand is to investigate potential misconduct and breaches of fiduciary duties by CAC's directors and explore certain remedial measures in connection with the Proposed Merger. After exchanging correspondence with purported shareholder's counsel, CAC began and is currently engaged in producing documents as required by Section 220.

We cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of these matters or of the range of reasonably possible losses should these matters ultimately be resolved against us due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation and the stage of the related litigation.

CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes

was filed by CEC and other defendants in September 2014, and the motion was argued in December 2014. During the pendency of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, the action has been automatically stayed with respect to CEOC. The motion to dismiss with respect to CEC was denied on March 18, 2015. In a Verified Supplemental Complaint filed on August 3, 2015, the plaintiff stated that due to CEOC's bankruptcy filing, the continuation of all claims was stayed pursuant to the bankruptcy except for Claims II, III, and X. These are claims against CEC only, for breach of contract in respect of the release of the parent guarantee formerly applicable to the Notes, for declaratory relief in respect of the release of this guarantee, and for violations of the Trust Indenture Act in respect of the release of this guarantee. CEC has informed us that fact discovery in the case is substantially complete. No trial date has been set.

On September 3, 2014, holders of approximately $21 million of CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes due 2016 and 2017 filed suit in federal district court in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against CEC and CEOC, claiming broadly that an August 12, 2014 Note Purchase and Support Agreement between CEC and CEOC (on the one hand) and certain other holders of the CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes (on the other hand) impaired their own rights under the Senior Unsecured Notes. The lawsuit seeks both declaratory and monetary relief. On October 2, 2014, other holders of CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes due 2016 purporting to represent a class of all holders of these notes from August 11, 2014 to the present filed a substantially similar suit in the same court, against the same defendants, relating to the same transactions. Both lawsuits (the "Senior Unsecured Lawsuits") were assigned to the same judge. The claims against CEOC have been automatically stayed during its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. The court denied a motion to dismiss the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits with respect to CEC. The parties have completed fact discovery with respect to both plaintiffs' claims against CEC. On October 23, 2015, plaintiffs in the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits moved for partial summary judgment, and on December 29, 2015, those motions were denied. On December 4, 2015, plaintiff in the action brought on behalf of holders of CEOC's 6.50% Senior Unsecured Notes moved for class certification and briefing has been completed. The judge presiding over these cases recently retired, and a new judge has been appointed to preside over these lawsuits. That judge has set a new summary judgment briefing schedule for May and June of 2016 and has indicated his intention to rule on these summary judgment motions on or before July 22, 2016. Trial of remaining issues would take place beginning August 22, 2016. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to these lawsuits.

On November 25, 2014, UMB Bank ("UMB"), as successor indenture trustee for CEOC's 8.50% senior secured notes due 2020, filed a verified complaint (the "Delaware First Lien Lawsuit") in Delaware Chancery Court against CEC, CEOC, CERP, CAC, CGP LLC, CES, and against an individual, and past and present members of the CEC and CEOC Boards of Directors, Gary Loveman, Jeffrey Benjamin, David Bonderman, Kelvin Davis, Eric Press, Marc Rowan, David Sambur, Eric Hession, Donald Colvin, Fred Kleisner, Lynn Swann, Chris Williams, Jeffrey Housenbold, Michael Cohen, Ronen Stauber, and Steven Winograd, alleging generally that defendants have improperly stripped CEOC of prized assets, have wrongfully affected a release of a CEC parental guarantee of CEOC debt and have committed other wrongs. Among other things, UMB has asked the court to appoint a receiver over CEOC. In addition, the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit pleads claims for fraudulent conveyances/transfers, insider preferences, illegal dividends, declaratory judgment (for breach of contract as regards to the parent guarantee and also as to certain covenants in the bond indenture), tortious interference with contract, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, usurpation of corporate opportunities, and unjust enrichment, and seeks monetary and equitable as well as declaratory relief. CAC and CGP LLC believe this lawsuit is without merit and will defend themselves vigorously. All of the defendants have moved to dismiss the lawsuit, and that motion has been fully briefed. In addition, this lawsuit has been automatically stayed with respect to CEOC during the Chapter 11 process and, pursuant to the (a) Fifth Amended and Restated Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement dated October 7, 2015, with certain holders of claims in respect of claims under CEOC's first lien notes (the "First Lien Bond RSA") and (b) Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement dated August 21, 2015, with certain holders of claims in respect of claims under CEOC's first lien credit agreement (the "First Lien Bank RSA" and, together with the First Lien Bond RSA, the "RSAs"), has been subject to a consensual stay for all. The consensual stay will expire upon the termination of the First Lien Bond RSAs.

On February 13, 2015, Caesars Entertainment received a Demand For Payment of Guaranteed Obligations (the "February 13 Notice") from Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, in its capacity as successor Trustee for CEOC's 10.00% Second-Priority Notes. The February 13 Notice alleges that CEOC's commencement of its voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case constituted an event of default under the indenture governing the 10.00% Second-Priority Notes; that all amounts due and owing on the 10.00% Second-Priority Notes therefore immediately became payable; and that Caesars Entertainment is responsible for paying CEOC's obligations on the 10.00% Second-Priority Notes, including CEOC's obligation to timely pay all principal, interest, and any premium due on these notes, as a result of a parent guarantee provision contained in the indenture governing the notes that the February 13 Notice alleges is still binding. The February 13 Notice accordingly demands that Caesars Entertainment immediately pay Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, cash in an amount of not less than $3.7 billion, plus accrued and unpaid interest (including without limitation the $184 million interest payment due December 15, 2014 that CEOC elected not to pay) and accrued and unpaid attorneys' fees and other expenses. The February 13 Notice also alleges that the interest, fees and expenses continue to accrue. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to this demand.

Senior Secured Notes due 2018 (the "12.75% Second-Priority Notes"). The February 18 Notice alleges that CEOC's commencement of its voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case constituted an event of default under the indenture governing the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes; that all amounts due and owing on the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes therefore immediately became payable; and that CEC is responsible for paying CEOC's obligations on the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes, including CEOC's obligation to timely pay all principal, interest and any premium due on these notes, as a result of a parent guarantee provision contained in the indenture governing the notes that the February 18 Notice alleges is still binding. The February 18 Notice therefore demands that CEC immediately pay BOKF cash in an amount of not less than $750 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest, accrued and unpaid attorneys' fees, and other expenses. The February 18 Notice also alleges that the interest, fees and expenses continue to accrue. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to this demand.

On March 3, 2015, BOKF filed a lawsuit (the "New York Second Lien Lawsuit") against CEC in federal district court in Manhattan, in its capacity as successor trustee for CEOC's 12.75% Second-Priority Notes. On June 15, 2015, UMB filed a lawsuit (the "New York First Lien Lawsuit") against CEC, also in federal district court in Manhattan, in its capacity as successor trustee for CEOC's 11.25% Senior Secured Notes due 2017, 8.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2020, and 9.00% Senior Secured Notes due 2020. Plaintiffs in these actions allege that CEOC's filing of its voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case constitutes an event of default under the indenture governing these notes, causing all principal and interest to become immediately due and payable, and that CEC is obligated to make those payments pursuant to a parent guarantee provision in the indentures governing these notes that plaintiffs allege are still binding. Both plaintiffs bring claims for violation of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, breach of contract, breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing and for declaratory relief and BOKF brings an additional claim for intentional interference with contractual relations. The cases were assigned to the same judge presiding over the other Parent Guarantee Lawsuits, as defined below. CEC filed its answer to the BOKF complaint on March 25, 2015, and to the UMB complaint on August 10, 2015. On June 25, 2015, and June 26, 2015, BOKF and UMB, respectively, moved for partial summary judgment, specifically on their claims alleging a violation of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, seeking both declaratory relief and damages. On August 27, 2015, those motions were denied. The court, on its own motion, certified its order with respect to the interpretation of the Trust Indenture Act for interlocutory appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and on December 22, 2015, the appellate court denied CEC's motion for leave to appeal. On November 20, 2015, BOKF and UMB again moved for partial summary judgment. Those motions likewise were denied. The judge presiding over these cases recently retired, and a new judge has been appointed to preside over these lawsuits. That judge has set a new summary judgment briefing schedule for May and June of 2016 and has indicated his intention to rule on these summary judgment motions on or before July 22, 2016. Trial of remaining issues would take place beginning August 22, 2016. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to these lawsuits.

On March 11, 2015, CEOC filed an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy court requesting that the Parent Guarantee Lawsuits be enjoined against all defendants through plan confirmation; in subsequent submissions, CEOC stated that it sought a temporary stay of those lawsuits until 60 days after the issuance of a final report by the Bankruptcy Examiner. CEOC argued that contemporaneous prosecution of related claims against CEC would impair the bankruptcy court's jurisdiction over the Debtors' reorganization by threatening the Debtors' ability to recover estate property for the benefit of all creditors, diminishing the prospects of a successful reorganization, and depleting property of the estate. On July 22, 2015, the bankruptcy court denied CEOC's request, and on October 6, 2015, this denial was affirmed by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On December 23, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit vacated the denial of CEOC's request to enjoin the Parent Guarantee Lawsuits and remanded the case for further proceedings. On February 26, 2016, the bankruptcy court granted CEOC's motion for a temporary stay with respect to the New York Second Lien Lawsuit and the New York First Lien Lawsuit that had been scheduled to begin on March 14, 2016. The stay will remain in effect until May 9, 2016, unless extended. Certain defendants in these adversary proceedings have sought rehearing en banc by the court of appeals. None of the rulings on CEOC's request to enjoin the Parent Guarantee Lawsuits addresses the merits of those actions.

On October 20, 2015, Wilmington Trust, National Association ("Wilmington Trust"), filed a lawsuit (the "New York Senior Notes Lawsuit" and, together with the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit, the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits, the New York Second Lien Lawsuit, and the New York First Lien Lawsuit, the "Parent Guarantee Lawsuits") against CEC in federal district court in Manhattan in its capacity as successor indenture trustee for CEOC's 10.75% Senior Notes due 2016 (the "10.75% Senior Notes"). Plaintiff alleges that CEC is obligated to make payment of amounts due on the 10.75% Senior Notes pursuant to a parent guarantee provision in the indenture governing those notes that plaintiff alleges is still in effect. Plaintiff raises claims for violations of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, breach of contract, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, and for declaratory judgment, and seeks monetary and declaratory relief. CEC filed its answer to the complaint on November 23, 2015. As with the other parent guaranty lawsuits taking place in Manhattan, the judge presiding over these cases recently retired, and a new judge has been appointed to preside over these lawsuits. That judge has set a new summary judgment briefing schedule for May and June of 2016 and has indicated his intention to rule on these summary judgment motions on or before July 22, 2016. Trial of remaining issues would take place beginning August 22, 2016. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to these lawsuits.

In accordance with the terms of the applicable indentures and as previously disclosed, Caesars Entertainment believes that it is not subject to the above-described guarantees. As a result, Caesars Entertainment believes the demands for payment are without merit. The claims against CEOC have been stayed due to the Chapter 11 process and, except as described above, the actions against CEC have been allowed to continue.

CAC and CGP LLC believe that the claims and demands described above against CAC and CGP LLC in the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit and Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit are without merit and intend to defend themselves vigorously. For the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit and Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, at the present time, CAC and CGP LLC believe it is not probable that a material loss will result from the outcome of these matters. However, given the uncertainty of litigation, CAC and CGP LLC cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of these matters or of the range of reasonably possible losses should the matters ultimately be resolved against them. Should these matters ultimately be resolved through litigation outside of the financial restructuring of CEOC, which CAC and CGP LLC believe these matters would likely be long and protracted, and were a court to find in favor of the claimants in the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit or the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, such determination could have a material adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC's business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Report of Bankruptcy Examiner

The Bankruptcy Court previously engaged an independent examiner to investigate possible claims CEOC might have against CEC, CAC, CGP LLC, other entities and certain individuals. On March 15, 2016, the examiner released his report in redacted form (to the public) and in unredacted form (to certain entities and individuals). CAC, CGP LLC and Caesars Interactive Entertainment, Inc. ("CIE") do not have access to the unredacted report, and accordingly the description below is based on the redacted publicly-available report. The examiner is working with numerous parties to release an unredacted report, which will be made available after confidentiality issues are resolved.

The examiner's report identifies a variety of potential claims against CAC, CGP LLC, CIE, other entities and certain individuals related to a number of transactions dating back to 2009. Most of the examiner's findings are based on his view that CEOC was "insolvent" at the time of the applicable transactions. The examiner's report includes his conclusions on the relative strength of these possible claims, many of which are described above in this note. The examiner calculates an estimated range of potential damages for these potential claims as against all parties from $3.6 billion to $5.1 billion. The examiner calculates an estimated range of potential damages for potential claims against CAC, CGP LLC and CIE from $1.7 billion to $2.29 billion, ignoring potential duplication of recovery from other defendants. Neither calculation takes into account probability of success, likelihood of collection, or the time or cost of litigation.

Although this report was prepared at the request of the Bankruptcy Court, none of the findings are legally binding on the Bankruptcy Court or any party. CAC, CGP LLC and CIE contest many of the examiner's findings, including his finding that CEOC did not receive fair value for assets transferred, any suggestion that certain of the potential claims against CAC, CGP LLC and CIE have merit, and his calculation of potential damages. CAC, CGP LLC and its subsidiaries believe that each of the disputed transactions involving them provided substantial value to CEOC that was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset (s) transferred, and that they at all times acted in good faith.

In April 2016, CAC and various other constituents began mediation with Joseph Farnan, the former chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, seeking to reach a resolution of various issues including the potential claims of the CEOC bankruptcy estate and other issues regarding a plan of reorganization of CEOC. The mediation is ongoing, with further sessions scheduled over the next few weeks.

National Retirement Fund

In January 2015, a majority of the Trustees of the National Retirement Fund ("NRF"), a multi-employer defined benefit pension plan, voted to expel CEC and its participating subsidiaries, the CEC Group, from the plan. Neither CAC, CGP LLC nor any of their subsidiaries are part of the CEC Group. NRF claims that CEOC's bankruptcy presents an "actuarial risk" to the plan because, depending on the outcome of the bankruptcy proceeding, CEC might no longer be liable to the plan for any partial or complete withdrawal liability. NRF has advised the CEC Group that its expulsion has triggered withdrawal liability with a present value of approximately $360 million, payable in 80 quarterly payments of about $6 million.

Prior to NRF's vote, the CEC Group reiterated its commitment to remain in the plan and not seek rejection of any collective bargaining agreements in which the obligation to contribute to NRF exists. It is completely current with respect to pension contributions. The CEC Group is pursuing several litigation strategies to challenge NRF's action.

CEC believes that its legal arguments against the actions undertaken by NRF are strong and will pursue them vigorously. Because legal proceedings with respect to this matter are at the preliminary stages, CEC cannot currently provide assurance as to the ultimate outcome of the matters at issue.

Other Matters

In recent years, governmental authorities have been increasingly focused on anti-money laundering ("AML") policies and procedures, with a particular focus on the gaming industry. In October 2013, CEOC's subsidiary, Desert Palace, Inc. (the owner of and referred to herein as Caesars Palace), received a letter from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the United States Department of the Treasury ("FinCEN"), stating that FinCEN was investigating Caesars Palace for alleged violations of the Bank Secrecy Act to determine whether it is appropriate to assess a civil penalty and/or take additional enforcement action against Caesars Palace. Caesars Palace responded to FinCEN's letter in January 2014. Additionally, CEC was informed in October 2013 that a federal grand jury investigation regarding anti-money laundering practices of CEC and its subsidiaries had been initiated. CEC and Caesars Palace have been cooperating with FinCEN, the Department of Justice and the Nevada Gaming Control Board (the "GCB") on this matter. On September 8, 2015, FinCEN announced a settlement pursuant to which Caesars Palace agreed to an $8 million civil penalty for its violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, which penalty shall be treated as a general unsecured claim in Caesars Palace's bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, Caesars Palace agreed to conduct periodic external audits and independent testing of its AML compliance program, report to FinCEN on mandated improvements, adopt a rigorous training regime, and engage in a "look-back" for suspicious transactions. The terms of the FinCEN settlement were approved by the bankruptcy court on October 19, 2015.

CEOC and the GCB reached a settlement on the same facts as above, wherein CEC agreed to pay $1.5 million and provide to the GCB the same information that is reported to FinCEN and to resubmit its updated AML policies. On September 17, 2015, the settlement agreement was approved by the Nevada Gaming Commission. CEOC continues to cooperate with the Department of Justice in its investigation of this matter.

The Company is party to ordinary and routine litigation incidental to our business. We do not expect the outcome of any such litigation to have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, as we do not believe it is reasonably possible that we will incur material losses as a result of such litigation.

Note 8 — Stock-based Compensation

Restricted Stock Units

There were no restricted stock unit ("RSU") awards granted, vested or forfeited during the three months ended March 31, 2016. As of March 31, 2016, there were 525,997 RSUs outstanding.

As of March 31, 2016, there was approximately $3.4 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to RSUs granted under the Performance Incentive Plan (the "PIP Plan"), which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average remaining period of 1.7 years using the straight-line method.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, total compensation expense recorded in earnings for RSUs granted under the PIP Plan was $0.4 million and $1.6 million, respectively, included in Operating expenses in the Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

RSUs granted to non-employees are equity-classified awards and are remeasured at fair value at the end of each reporting period.

Stock Options

There were no stock options granted, exercised or canceled during the three months ended March 31, 2016. The following is a summary of CAC's stock options:



	Options	Weighted Average Exercise Price		Fair Value⁽¹⁾		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (years)	Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)
Outstanding at January 1, 2016	1,420,000	$	9.51	$	4.99	8.9	$	—
Outstanding at March 31, 2016	1,420,000	9.51		4.99		8.6	—
Vested and expected to vest at March 31, 2016	1,420,000	9.51		4.99		8.6	—
Exercisable at March 31, 2016	337,500	9.84		6.10		8.7	—

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	Represents the weighted-average grant date fair value per option.

There were no stock option fair value measurements during the three months ended March 31, 2016. Stock options granted to employees are equity classified and measured at fair value at the date of grant. Valuation assumptions for stock options used in the Black-Scholes model to estimate fair value during the three months ended March 31, 2015 were:



	Three Months Ended March 31, 2015
Expected volatility	46.8%
Weighted-average volatility	46.8%
Expected dividend yield	—%
Expected term (in years)	9.7
Risk-free interest rate	2.1%

As of March 31, 2016, there was approximately $0.8 million of total unrecognized compensation expense related to CAC's stock granted under the PIP Plan, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 0.7 years.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, total compensation expense recorded in earnings for stock options was approximately $0.4 million and $1.4 million, respectively, included in Operating expenses in the Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Note 9 — Supplemental Cash Flow Information

Significant non-cash transactions for the three months ended March 31, 2016 included (1) $24.4 million in income from our equity method investment in CGP LLC and (2) $5.3 million of fees and expenses paid directly by CGP LLC that were incurred by CAC and also accounted for as a non-cash distribution from CGP LLC. Significant non-cash transactions for the three months ended March 31, 2015 included (1) $24.2 million in income from our equity method investment in CGP LLC and (2) $4.5 million fees and expenses paid directly by CGP LLC that were incurred by CAC and also accounted for as a non-cash distribution from CGP LLC.

CAC's expenses incurred in the normal course of business are expected to be paid by CGP LLC on behalf of CAC in accordance with the CGP Operating Agreement.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, CGP LLC did not make tax payments on behalf of CAC, which would normally be accounted for as distributions from CGP LLC to CAC.

There was no interest expense incurred or cash paid for interest for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015.

Note 10 — Related Party Transactions

Management Services Agreement with CES

CES provides (a) certain corporate services and back office support, including payroll, accounting, risk management, tax, finance, recordkeeping, financial statement preparation and audit support, legal, treasury functions, regulatory compliance, insurance, information systems, office space and corporate, and other centralized services, (b) certain advisory and business management services, including developing business strategies, executing financing transactions and structuring acquisitions and joint ventures and (c) other services from time to time to CAC. In connection with the CGP Operating Agreement, CGP LLC pays for these services on behalf of CAC. CAC accounts for these amounts as non-cash distributions from CGP LLC, thereby reducing CAC's investment in CGP LLC.

Share-based Payments to Non-employees of CAC or CGP LLC

On April 9, 2014, the Board of Directors (the "Board") approved the CAC Equity-Based Compensation Plan for CEC Employees (the "Equity Plan"). Under the Equity Plan, CEC is authorized to grant stock options, stock appreciation rights, stock bonuses, restricted stock, performance stock, stock units, phantom stock, dividend equivalents, cash awards, rights to purchase or acquire shares or similar securities in the form of or with a value related to our Common Stock to officers, employees, directors, individual consultants and advisers of CEC and its subsidiaries. The Equity Plan will terminate on April 9, 2024. Subject to adjustments in connection with certain changes in capitalization, the maximum value of the shares of our Common Stock that may be delivered pursuant to awards under the Equity Plan is $25.0 million. Expense associated with the Equity Plan is recorded as management fee expense by CGP LLC, totaling $0.7 million and $2.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Stock-based Compensation Granted to Related Party

In December 2014, CAC granted RSU awards and options to a related-party consultant under the PIP Plan. During the three-month period ended March 31, 2015, the service period for these grants was accelerated to end in July 2015. The vesting

period remained unchanged. During the three months ended March 31, 2015, $2.1 million expense was recognized related to these grants. As the service period ended on July 2015, there was no expense recognized for these grants during the three months ended March 31, 2016.

In May 2014, CAC granted RSUs to an employee. During the three month period ended March 31, 2016, employment terminated and the individual became a related-party consultant. The vesting period and service period remained unchanged. Expense recognized for the RSU grants during the three month period ended March 31, 2016 was immaterial.

Investment in Notes from Related Party

CAC owns $137.5 million in aggregate principal amount of the 6.50% notes previously issued by CEOC ("CEOC Notes"), maturing June 1, 2016, and $151.4 million in aggregate principal amount of the 5.75% CEOC Notes, maturing October 1, 2017. Collectability is uncertain due to CEOC's bankruptcy filing. These notes are included as a component of Additional paid-in capital in our Condensed Balance Sheets and Condensed Statements of Stockholders' Equity along with interest receivable at the distribution date. These notes will be held at the distributed value with no subsequent fair value adjustments or recognition of interest income until such time as amounts are received by CAC. The fair value of the distribution of these notes from CGP LLC reduces the deployed capital upon which CAC is entitled to earn a minimum guaranteed return prospectively from the August 6, 2014 distribution date.

Note 11 — Subsequent Events

Because significant recent developments and subsequent events related to our equity method investee could be impactful to our financial performance, we have elected to include disclosure of such items herein.

Contingently Issuable Non-voting Membership Units

Pursuant to the terms of the transaction agreement related to the formation of CGP LLC, CGP LLC was obligated to issue additional non-voting membership units to Caesars Entertainment to the extent that the earnings from a specified portion of CIE's social and mobile games business exceeded a predetermined threshold amount in 2015. In April 2016, CGP LLC issued approximately 31.9 million Class B non-voting units pursuant to the terms of the October 21, 2013 transactions. As a result, CAC's economic ownership of CGP LLC decreased to approximately 38.8% in April 2016 from approximately 42.6% at March 31, 2016.

Purchase of Caesars Interactive Entertainment, Inc. Common Stock

In April 2016, CIE repurchased shares of its outstanding common stock for a total net consideration of $13.5 million.

Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis of the financial position and operating results of Caesars Acquisition Company (the "Company," "CAC," "we," "our" and "us") and Caesars Growth Partners, LLC ("CGP LLC") for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 should be read in conjunction with Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations presented in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Basis of Presentation and Discussion

CAC's primary asset is its membership interest in CGP LLC, a variable interest entity of which Caesars Entertainment Corporation ("CEC" or "Caesars Entertainment") is the primary beneficiary. CAC accounts for its investment in CGP LLC using a balance sheet approach to the equity method of accounting, referred to as hypothetical liquidation at book value ("HLBV") accounting.

As our investment in CGP LLC is considered to be significant, CGP LLC's annual financial statements are required to be included as an exhibit to each CAC Annual Report on Form 10-K in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X. Given the significance of this investment to the financial position and results of operations of CAC, we have elected to include selected financial information of CGP LLC in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. As we believe that the comparative information for CAC's investment in CGP LLC is material to investors in CAC, we also have presented information for CGP LLC in this management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations.

Proposed Merger of CAC with CEC

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

Operating Results

Income from Equity Method Investment

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, CAC recognized $24.4 million and $24.2 million, respectively, of income before tax from its equity method investment in CGP LLC, which equals the amount of income that CAC was entitled to under its minimum guaranteed return.

Operating Expenses

In addition to its income from equity method investment, CAC incurs direct expenses which are primarily related to professional services fees, payroll and related expenses as well as general liability insurance, licenses and fees. For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, CAC incurred direct expenses of $6.6 million and $7.1 million, respectively.

Provision for Income Taxes

The provision for income taxes for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $8.6 million and $8.4 million, respectively. The provision for income taxes for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 differed from the expected benefit for income taxes at the federal tax rate of 35.0% applied to CAC's pre-tax income primarily due to a federal valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets related to the basis difference in the investment in notes from related party.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Capital Spending

CAC has not incurred, nor is it expected to incur, capital expenditures in the normal course of business or to pursue acquisition opportunities other than through CGP LLC.

Capital Resources

CAC's primary source of funds is distributions from CGP LLC. To the extent that CAC requires additional funds, CAC may borrow funds or issue additional equity. However, as CAC does not have operations of its own, it is expected that CAC will not have a significant need for additional liquidity.

CAC's expenses incurred in the normal course of business, including income tax obligations, are paid by CGP LLC on behalf of CAC pursuant to the amended and restated limited liability company agreement of CGP LLC (the "CGP Operating Agreement"). These transactions are accounted for as distributions from CGP LLC to CAC.

Liquidity

Following October 21, 2018 and until April 21, 2022, our Board of Directors (the "Board") will have the right to cause a liquidation of CGP LLC, including the sale or winding up of CGP LLC, or other monetization of all of its assets and the distribution of the proceeds remaining after satisfaction of all liabilities of CGP LLC to the holders of CGP LLC's units according to the terms of the CGP Operating Agreement. On April 21, 2022 (unless otherwise agreed by Caesars Entertainment and CAC), if our Board has not previously exercised its liquidation right, the CGP Operating Agreement provides that CGP LLC shall, and our Board shall cause CGP LLC to, effect a liquidation.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

CAC did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements at March 31, 2016 or December 31, 2015.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

The information regarding recent accounting pronouncements is included in Note 2 — Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements to the CAC financial statements in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

CAESARS GROWTH PARTNERS, LLC

Overview

For financial reporting purposes, CGP LLC has two operating units: (1) Caesars Interactive Entertainment, Inc. ("Caesars Interactive," "Interactive Entertainment" or "CIE") and (2) Casino Properties and Developments. CGP LLC's

Interactive Entertainment operating unit consists of CIE, which is comprised of three distinct but complementary businesses: social and mobile games, World Series of Poker ("WSOP") and regulated online real money gaming. CGP LLC's Casino Properties and Developments operating unit consists of Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino ("Planet Hollywood"), Harrah's New Orleans, The LINQ Hotel & Casino, Bally's Las Vegas, The Cromwell and CGP LLC's interest in the Maryland Joint Venture.

Operating Results of CGP LLC



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016		2015		Change
Interactive entertainment net revenues	$	227.8	$	176.6	$	51.2
Casino properties and developments net revenues	415.8		389.9		25.9
Total net revenues	643.6		566.5		77.1
Income from operations	115.9		204.7		(88.8		)
Net income	36.9		144.1		(107.2		)
Adjusted EBITDA ⁽¹⁾	194.6		148.0		46.6

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	See Reconciliations of Net Income/(Loss) to Adjusted Earnings before Interest Income/Expense, Income Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization ("EBITDA").

Net revenues for the first quarter of 2016 were $643.6 million as compared to $566.5 million for the respective period in 2015, which was an increase of $77.1 million, or 13.6%. The increase in revenue for CIE was primarily driven by strong organic growth in the social and mobile games operating unit due to the continued focus on conversion and monetization. The increase in revenues for Casino Properties and Developments was primarily due to the availability of rooms and increased room rates as a result of renovations at The LINQ Hotel & Casino which was substantially completed and available to guests in early May 2015 and an increase in entertainment revenues at Planet Hollywood offset by lower revenues at Harrah's New Orleans as a result of the April 2015 smoking ban.

Income from operations for the first quarter of 2016 was $115.9 million as compared to $204.7 million for the same period in 2015, which was a decrease of $88.8 million, or 43.4%. The decrease in income from operations was primarily driven by the change in the fair value of contingently issuable non-voting membership units recognized in the prior year with no change in the fair value of contingently issuable non-voting membership units recognized subsequent to December 31, 2015 offset by the income impact of increased revenues. Excluding the impact of the change in fair value of contingently issuable non-voting membership units, income from operations increased by $28.7 million primarily due to the year over year growth in CIE and Horseshoe Baltimore as well as the availability of rooms and increased room rates as a result of renovations at The LINQ Hotel & Casino.

Adjusted EBITDA for the first quarter of 2016 was $194.6 million as compared to $148.0 million for the same period in 2015, which is an increase of $46.6 million, or 31.5%, driven primarily by the income impact of increased revenues at CIE and The LINQ Hotel & Casino.

Business Unit Operating Results

Interactive Entertainment



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016		2015		Change
Net revenues	$	227.8	$	176.6	$	51.2
Income from operations	53.4		40.6		12.8
Net income	24.8		27.3		(2.5		)
Adjusted EBITDA⁽¹⁾	89.3		62.6		26.7

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	See Reconciliations of Net Income/(Loss) to Adjusted EBITDA.

Interactive Entertainment net revenues increased by $51.2 million, or 29.0%, in the first quarter of 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015, resulting primarily from strong organic growth in CIE's social and mobile games due to the continued focus on conversion and monetization. Income from operations increased by $12.8 million, or 31.5%, in the first quarter of 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015, primarily driven by the income impact of increased revenues, partially offset by increases in stock-based compensation and sales and marketing expenses. Adjusted EBITDA increased by $26.7 million, or

42.7%, in the first quarter of 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015, driven by the income impact of increased revenues and reduced marketing expenses for real money online gaming.

Performance Metrics - Social and Mobile Games

CIE measures the performance of its social and mobile games business by using key financial metrics including revenue and Adjusted EBITDA, and key operating metrics including Daily Active Users, Monthly Active Users, Monthly Unique Users, Average Revenue per User and Monthly Unique Payers. CIE's operating metrics help CIE understand and measure the engagement levels of its players, the size of its audience and its reach.

Key Financial Metrics

The table below shows the results of CIE's business based upon the financial metrics for the periods presented.



	For the Three Months Ended
(In millions)	Mar. 31, 2016		Dec. 31, 2015		Sept. 30, 2015		Jun. 30, 2015		Mar. 31, 2015
Revenues
Social and mobile games	$	218.2	$	198.8	$	183.5	$	175.4	$	167.6
WSOP and online real money gaming	9.6		10.4		11.0		10.8		9.0
Total	$	227.8	$	209.2	$	194.5	$	186.2	$	176.6
Adjusted EBITDA⁽¹⁾	$	89.3	$	77.9	$	72.7	$	69.5	$	62.6

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	See Reconciliations of Net Income/(Loss) to Adjusted EBITDA.

The table below shows the revenue generated from CIE's social and mobile games business by geographic region for the periods listed and assumes that deferred revenues are spread proportionately across all geographies.



	For the Three Months Ended
(In millions)	Mar. 31, 2016		Dec. 31, 2015		Sept. 30, 2015		Jun. 30, 2015		Mar. 31, 2015
North America	$	164.8	$	148.0	$	132.7	$	126.9	$	119.1
South America	1.5		1.5		1.5		1.4		1.1
Europe	21.7		16.8		15.6		15.3		14.8
Asia/Pacific	29.4		31.7		32.2		30.9		31.8
Africa and Rest of the World	0.8		0.8		1.5		0.9		0.8
Social and mobile games revenue	$	218.2	$	198.8	$	183.5	$	175.4	$	167.6

Key Operating Metrics

The following operating metrics help CIE to understand and measure the engagement levels of its players, the size of its audience and its reach.

Daily Active Users. CIE defines Daily Active Users ("DAU") as the number of individuals who played one of its games during a particular day on a particular platform. Under this metric, an individual who plays two different games on the same day is counted as two DAU. Similarly, an individual who plays the same game on two different platforms (e.g., web and mobile) or on two different social networks on the same day would be counted as two DAU. Average DAU for a particular period is the average of the DAU for each day during that period. CIE uses DAU as a measure of audience engagement.

Monthly Active Users. CIE defines Monthly Active Users ("MAU") as the number of individuals who played a particular game in the 30-day period ending with the measurement date on a particular platform. Under this metric, an individual who plays two different games in the same 30-day period is counted as two MAU. Similarly, an individual who plays the same game on two different platforms (e.g., web and mobile) or on two different social networks in a 30-day period would be counted as two MAU. Average MAU for a particular period is the average of the MAU at each month-end during that period. CIE uses MAU as a measure of total game audience size.

Monthly Unique Users. CIE defines Monthly Unique Users ("MUU") as the number of unique individuals who played any of its games on a particular platform in the 30-day period ending with the measurement date. An individual who plays more than one of CIE's games in a given 30-day period would be counted as a single MUU. However, because CIE cannot always distinguish unique individuals playing across multiple platforms, an individual who plays any of its games on two different platforms (e.g., web and mobile) in a given 30-day period may be counted as two MUU in the event that CIE does not have data that allows it to identify and separate the player. Because many of CIE's players play more than one game in a given 30-day period, MUU are always lower than MAU in any given time period. Average MUU for a particular period is the average of the MUU at each month-end during that period. CIE tracks MUU as a measure of total audience reach across its network of games.

Monthly Unique Payers. CIE defines Monthly Unique Payers ("MUP") as the number of unique individuals who purchased virtual currency in any of its games on a particular platform in the 30-day period ending with the measurement date. An individual who makes multiple purchases of virtual currency on more than one of CIE's games on a particular platform in a given 30-day period would be counted as a single MUP. However, because CIE cannot always distinguish unique individuals purchasing virtual currency across multiple platforms, an individual who makes a purchase of virtual currency on any of CIE's games on two different platforms (e.g., web and mobile) in a given 30-day period may be counted as two MUP in the event that CIE does not have data that allows it to identify and separate the paying user. Average MUP for a particular period is the average of the MUP at each month-end during that period. CIE uses MUP as a measure of monetization across all of its players through the sale of virtual goods.

Average Revenue per User. CIE defines Average Revenue per User ("ARPU") as (i) the total revenue in a given period, (ii) divided by the number of days in that period, (iii) divided by the average DAU during the period. CIE believes that ARPU provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating its results in the same manner as the Company's management and Board of Directors. CIE uses ARPU as a measure of overall monetization across all of its players through the sale of virtual goods.

The table below shows the results of CIE's social and mobile games business, using the operating metrics described above, for the periods indicated. User statistics are presented in thousands of users and ARPU is presented in dollars.



	For the Three Months Ended
	Mar. 31, 2016		Dec. 31, 2015		Sept. 30, 2015		Jun. 30, 2015		Mar. 31, 2015
Average Daily Active Users ⁽¹⁾	6,758		6,351		6,144		6,132		6,061
Average Monthly Active Users ⁽¹⁾	22,262		19,783		19,324		19,177		19,044
Average Monthly Unique Users ⁽¹⁾	20,539		18,960		18,657		17,918		17,803
Average Monthly Unique Payers ⁽¹⁾	922		858		860		796		762
Average Revenue Per User	$	0.35	$	0.34	$	0.33	$	0.31	$	0.31

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	CIE systems cannot always distinguish unique individuals playing games in multiple sessions in the same day or in a 30-day period ending with the measurement date, playing the same game across multiple platforms, or playing different titles offered by CIE. Thus, users who play multiple titles on multiple platforms may be counted as more than one user within the respective operating metrics.

Consistent with the social and mobile games business model, only a small portion of CIE's social and mobile games players pay for virtual goods. For the three months ended March 31, 2016, CIE had approximately 922 thousand average MUP, or 4.5% of the total number of average MUU on the social and mobile platforms during this period, who purchased virtual goods. There were approximately 762 thousand average MUP, or 4.3% of the total number of average MUU on the social and mobile platforms, who purchased virtual goods for the three months ended March 31, 2015. The opportunity for social interactions and player generated promotion increases as the overall number of players increase. As such, CIE believes that maintaining and growing its total number of players, irrespective of whether they purchase virtual goods, is important to the success of its business. The sale of virtual goods, however, constitutes the primary source of revenue for CIE's social and mobile games business. The degree to which game players choose to pay for virtual goods in the games is driven by CIE's ability to create content that enhances the game-play experience. CIE's revenue and overall financial performance are affected by the number of players and the effectiveness of its monetization of players through the sale of virtual goods.

CIE's user metrics are impacted by several factors that cause them to fluctuate on a quarterly basis. Growth in the performance metrics is largely attributable to strong organic growth from CIE's games on both mobile and social platforms. Future growth in audience and engagement will depend on CIE's ability to retain current players, attract new players and expand into new markets and distribution platforms.

Casino Properties and Developments



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016		2015		Change
Net revenues	$	415.8	$	389.9	$	25.9
Income from operations	63.9		50.5		13.4
Net income	13.0		3.4		9.6
Adjusted EBITDA⁽¹⁾	106.7		89.3		17.4

____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	See Reconciliations of Net Income/(Loss) to Adjusted EBITDA.

Performance of the Casino Properties and Developments operating unit is measured in part through tracking of trips by rated customers, which means a customer whose gaming activity is tracked through Caesars Entertainment's Total Rewards

system, referred to as "trips," and spend per rated customer trip, referred to as "spend per trip." A trip is created by a Total Rewards card holder engaging in one or more of the following activities while at our property: (1) hotel stay, (2) gaming activity or (3) a comp redemption, which means the receipt of a complimentary item given out by the casino. Lodgers are guests registered with the Total Rewards program who stay at our property and non-lodgers are guests registered with the Total Rewards program not staying at the property. Customer spend means the cumulative rated theoretical spend (which is the amount of money expected to be retained by the casino based upon the mathematics underlying the particular game as a fraction of the amount of money wagered by the customer) across all game types for a specific customer. The average combined gross hold is the percentage of the amount wagered across all game types (including table games and slot machines) that the casino retained.

Casino Properties and Developments revenues were impacted primarily by the following:


•	Increases in all categories of revenues during the first quarter of 2016 when compared to the first quarter of 2015 for The LINQ Hotel & Casino, which was substantially completed and available to guests in early May 2015;


•	Decreases in visitation and gaming revenues as a result of the April 2015 smoking ban in New Orleans; and


•	Continued enhancement of entertainment options at Planet Hollywood positively impacted other revenues.

Net revenues for the first quarter of 2016 increased by $25.9 million, or 6.6%, when compared to the same period in 2015. Total trips decreased approximately 5.3% during the first quarter of 2016 when compared to the same period in 2015. Gross casino hold saw a positive variance of 11.8% for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 from 11.6% for the quarter ended March 31, 2015.

Cash average daily room rates for the first quarter of 2016 increased to approximately $136, or 7.1%, when compared to approximately $127 for the same period in 2015. Average daily occupancy was 93.7% and 91.6% for the first quarter of 2016 and 2015, respectively. Revenue per available room for the first quarter of 2016 and 2015 was $125 and $115, respectively, or an increase of 8.7%.

Income from operations for the first quarter of 2016 increased by $13.4 million, or 26.5%, when compared to the same period in 2015 and Adjusted EBITDA increased by $17.4 million, or 19.5%, when compared to the same period in 2015 primarily driven by the income impact of increased revenues at The LINQ Hotel & Casino.

Incentives are often provided for customers to stay and play at our properties. Incentives are provided to customers based on a number of factors such as marketing plans, competitive factors, economic conditions, and regulations. These incentives come in a variety of different forms including free and discounted products, gaming credits, food and beverage credits, hotel room credits, and other forms. The retail value of accommodations, food and beverage, and other services furnished to casino guests is included in gross revenue and then deducted as promotional allowances. Hence, net revenues as discussed above include all promotional allowances. CGP LLC believes its allocation of promotional allowances to be within industry standards and appropriate for its brands and competitive environment.

Other Factors Affecting Net Income



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016			2015			Change
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	$	(50.9	)	$	(48.2	)	$	(2.7	)
Other expense, net	—			(1.0		)	1.0
Provision for income taxes	(28.1		)	(11.4		)	(16.7		)
Net (income)/loss attributable to non-controlling interests	(3.5		)	0.1			(3.6		)

Interest Expense, Net of Interest Capitalized

The debt agreements described in the following table are further defined in Liquidity and Capital Resources. The table below summarizes CGP LLC's Interest expense, net of interest capitalized as it relates to these agreements:



	Three Months Ended March 31,
(In millions)	2016			2015			Change
CGPH Term Loan, Revolving Credit Facility, and 2022 Notes	$	(36.9	)	$	(36.1	)	$	(0.8	)
Cromwell Credit Facility	(5.2		)	(5.4		)	0.2
Baltimore Credit and FF&E Facilities	(7.5		)	(7.5		)	—
Other interest (expense)/income, net of interest capitalized	(1.3		)	0.8			(2.1		)
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	$	(50.9	)	$	(48.2	)	$	(2.7	)

Provision for Income Taxes

The provision for income taxes for CGP LLC represents the income taxes from its subsidiary, CIE, which is taxed as a corporation for federal, state and foreign income tax purposes. The provision for income taxes for CGP LLC for the three months ended March 31, 2016 differs from the expected federal tax rate of 35.0% primarily due to CGP LLC income not taxed at the CGP LLC entity level offset by the tax impacts of nondeductible expenses of CIE and the recognition of a deferred tax liability on the unremitted earnings for CIE's Pacific Interactive UK subsidiary. The provision for income taxes for CGP LLC for the three months ended March 31, 2015 differs from the expected federal tax rate of 35.0% primarily due to CGP LLC income not taxed at the CGP LLC entity level.

Net (Income)/Loss Attributable to Non-controlling Interests

CGP LLC's non-controlling interest reflects the non-controlling interest associated with consolidating CIE and the Maryland Joint Venture into CGP LLC. For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, net income of $3.8 million and $4.5 million, respectively, was attributable to non-controlling interests in Caesars Interactive. Net loss of $0.3 million and $4.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, was attributable to non-controlling interests in the Maryland Joint Venture.

Reconciliations of Net Income/(Loss) to Adjusted EBITDA

CGP LLC uses Adjusted EBITDA as a supplemental measure of its financial performance. EBITDA is comprised of net income before (i) interest expense, net of capitalized interest, (ii) interest income, (iii) provision for income taxes, and (iv) depreciation and amortization expense. Adjusted EBITDA is comprised of EBITDA, further adjusted for certain items that CGP LLC does not consider indicative of its ongoing operating performance.

The financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") in the United States. Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure that is reconciled to its most comparable GAAP measure below. Adjusted EBITDA is included because management believes that Adjusted EBITDA provides investors with additional information that allows a better understanding of the results of operational activities separate from the financial impact of capital investment decisions made for the long-term benefit of CGP LLC. Because not all companies use identical calculations, the presentation of CGP LLC's EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures of other companies.



	For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2016
(In millions)	Interactive Entertainment		Casino Properties and Developments		Other⁽¹⁾			Total
Net income/(loss)	$	24.8	$	13.0	$	(0.9	)	$	36.9
Provision for income taxes	28.1		—		—			28.1
Income/(loss) before income taxes	52.9		13.0		(0.9		)	65.0
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	0.5		50.9		(0.5		)	50.9
Depreciation and amortization	7.5		39.2		—			46.7
EBITDA	60.9		103.1		(1.4		)	162.6
Write-downs, reserves and project opening costs, net of recoveries⁽²⁾	—		0.6		—			0.6
Stock-based compensation⁽³⁾	28.0		1.3		—			29.3
Other⁽⁵⁾	0.4		1.7		—			2.1
Adjusted EBITDA	$	89.3	$	106.7	$	(1.4	)	$	194.6



	For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2015
(In millions)	Interactive Entertainment		Casino Properties and Developments		Other⁽¹⁾			Total
Net income	$	27.3	$	3.4	$	113.4		$	144.1
Provision for income taxes	11.4		—		—			11.4
Income before income taxes	38.7		3.4		113.4			155.5
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	1.9		47.1		(0.8		)	48.2
Depreciation and amortization	7.8		33.3		—			41.1
EBITDA	48.4		83.8		112.6			244.8
Other expense, net	—		—		1.0			1.0
Write-downs, reserves and project opening costs, net of recoveries⁽²⁾	—		3.1		—			3.1
Change in fair value of contingently issuable non-voting membership units⁽⁴⁾	—		—		(117.5		)	(117.5		)
Stock-based compensation⁽³⁾	13.1		0.9		—			14.0
Other⁽⁵⁾	1.1		1.5		—			2.6
Adjusted EBITDA	$	62.6	$	89.3	$	(3.9	)	$	148.0



	Interactive Entertainment
	Three Months Ended
(In millions)	December 31, 2015		September 30, 2015			June 30, 2015
Net income	$	35.5	$	25.7		$	39.2
Provision for income taxes	16.0		20.7			13.8
Income before income taxes	51.5		46.4			53.0
Interest expense, net of interest capitalized	0.9		1.1			1.3
Depreciation and amortization	7.2		7.0			7.8
EBITDA	59.6		54.5			62.1
Other income/(expense), net	0.1		(5.0		)	—
Write-downs, reserves and project opening costs, net of recoveries	0.1		—			—
Stock-based compensation⁽³⁾	17.2		22.6			6.6
Other⁽⁵⁾	0.9		0.6			0.8
Adjusted EBITDA	$	77.9	$	72.7		$	69.5

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	Includes the CGP parent company and intercompany eliminations.


⁽²⁾	Amounts primarily represent development costs related to the construction of The Cromwell and Horseshoe Baltimore, and the renovation of The LINQ Hotel & Casino.


⁽³⁾	Amounts represent stock-based compensation expense related to stock options, restricted stock and restricted stock units.


⁽⁴⁾	Amounts represent the change in fair value of contingently issuable membership units associated with the CIE earn-out calculation related to the transactions establishing CGP LLC.


⁽⁵⁾	Amounts represent other add-backs and deductions to arrive at Adjusted EBITDA but not separately identified, such as acquisition and integration costs and lobbying expenses.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Capital Spending

CGP LLC incurs capital expenditures in the normal course of business, performs ongoing refurbishment and maintenance at its existing casino entertainment facilities, and periodically expands and enhances the information technology infrastructure required to operate its social and mobile games in order to maintain their quality standards. Cash used for capital expenditures in the normal course of business is typically made available from cash flows generated by operating activities while cash used for development projects is typically funded from specific project financing and additional debt offerings. CGP LLC may also pursue acquisition opportunities for additional businesses or social or mobile games that meet its strategic and return on investment criteria.

CGP LLC's capital spending and maintenance, if they go forward, could require significant capital commitments and, if completed, may result in significant additional revenues. The commitment of capital, the timing of completion, and the commencement of operations of development projects are contingent upon, among other things, negotiation of final agreements and receipt of requisite approvals from the applicable political and regulatory bodies. Excluding amounts spent for the purchases of businesses, CGP LLC's cash used for capital spending was $19.3 million and $63.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

The majority of capital spending in the first quarter of 2016 related to infrastructure related spend at CIE and property renovations at Planet Hollywood. The majority of the 2015 capital spending related to the renovation of The LINQ Hotel & Casino. The LINQ Hotel & Casino began opening a portion of the Phase II renovations in March 2015 and it was substantially completed in early May 2015. For the three months ended March 31, 2015, capital expenditures net of related payables for The LINQ Hotel & Casino were $29.9 million.

Liquidity

CGP LLC and its subsidiaries' primary sources of liquidity include currently available cash and cash equivalents, cash flows generated from its operations and borrowings under the $150.0 million Caesars Growth Properties Holdings, LLC ("CGPH") revolving credit agreement ("Revolving Credit Facility") which is intended to satisfy CGPH's short-term liquidity needs. CGP LLC's cash and cash equivalents, excluding restricted cash, totaled $950.5 million and $901.7 million as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. Of total cash and cash equivalents, Caesars Interactive had $83.2 million and $99.1 million in foreign subsidiaries at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. Caesars Interactive may use the cash in its subsidiaries outside the U.S. to repay debt payable to related parties, fund operations at these subsidiaries, pursue international acquisitions, or repatriate the cash to the United States.

Payments of short-term debt obligations and other commitments are expected to be made from operating cash flows. Long-term obligations are expected to be paid through operating cash flows, refinancing of existing debt or the issuance of new debt, or, if necessary, additional investments from its equity holders. CGP LLC's operating cash inflows are used for operating expenses, debt service costs, repurchase of equity from CIE's management shareholders, working capital needs and capital expenditures in the normal course of business. CGP LLC's ability to refinance debt will depend upon numerous factors such as market conditions, CGP LLC's financial performance, and the limitations applicable to such transactions under CGP LLC's and its subsidiaries' financing documents. Additionally, CGP LLC's ability to fund operations, pay debt obligations, and fund planned capital expenditures depends, in part, upon economic and other factors that are beyond CGP LLC's control, and disruptions in capital markets and restrictive covenants related to CGP LLC's existing debt could impact CGP LLC's ability to fund liquidity needs, pay indebtedness and secure additional funds through financing activities.

CGP LLC's restricted cash totaled $12.3 million and $12.5 million as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. Restricted cash and cash equivalents include amounts restricted under the terms of the Baltimore Credit Facility and the Cromwell Credit Facility, as defined below. The classification of restricted cash between current and long-term is dependent upon the intended use of each particular reserve.

CGPH and Caesars Growth Properties Finance, Inc. ("Finance" and each, an "Issuer" and together, the "Issuers") issued $675.0 million aggregate principal amount of 9.375% second-priority senior secured notes due 2022 (the "2022 Notes") pursuant to an indenture dated as of April 17, 2014, among the Issuers and US Bank National Association, as trustee (the "Indenture"). On May 8, 2014, CGPH closed on $1.175 billion of term loans (the "CGPH Term Loan") pursuant to a credit agreement. CGPH filed a registration statement on Form S-4 (the "Registration Statement") on March 30, 2015 and amendments to such Registration Statement on May 18, 2015 and May 29, 2015 to initiate an offer to exchange the 2022 Notes and certain related guarantees in a private offering for a like aggregate amount of CGPH's registered 9.375% Second-Priority Senior Secured Notes due 2022 and certain related guarantees (collectively referred to as the "Exchange Notes"). The Registration Statement was declared effective on June 26, 2015 (the "Effective Date"). The exchange offer was consummated on July 28, 2015. See Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Notes below.

As of March 31, 2016, CGPH had $1,124.0 million, $660.8 million, and $15.0 million in book value of indebtedness outstanding for the CGPH Term Loan, 2022 Notes and Revolving Credit Facility, respectively. At December 31, 2015, the book value of indebtedness outstanding for the CGPH Term Loan, 2022 Notes and Revolving Credit Facility was $1,125.7 million, $660.3 million, and $45.0 million, respectively. Net CGPH repayments under the Revolving Credit Facility during the first quarter of 2016 were $30.0 million. As of March 31, 2016, the assets of Harrah's New Orleans, Bally's Las Vegas, Planet Hollywood and The LINQ Hotel & Casino were pledged as collateral for certain of CGPH's outstanding debt securities.

In November 2012, Corner Investment Propco, LLC ("PropCo"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Cromwell entered into a $185.0 million, seven-year senior secured credit facility bearing interest at the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate ("LIBOR") plus 9.75% with a LIBOR floor of 1.25% (the "Cromwell Credit Facility") to fund the renovation of The Cromwell into a boutique lifestyle hotel. As of March 31, 2016, the assets of The Cromwell were pledged as collateral for the Cromwell Credit Facility.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, CGP LLC had $2,365.8 million and $2,402.3 million face value of indebtedness outstanding, including capital lease indebtedness. Cash paid for interest for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $31.6 million and $32.5 million, respectively.

CGP LLC believes that its cash and cash equivalents balance and its cash flows from operations will be sufficient to meet its normal operating and debt service requirements during the next 12 months and the foreseeable future and to fund capital expenditures expected to be incurred in the normal course of business.

Capital Resources

The following table presents CGP LLC's outstanding third-party debt as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.



	Final Maturity	Interest Rates at March 31, 2016	Face Value at March 31, 2016			Book Value at
(Dollars in millions)	Final Maturity	Interest Rates at March 31, 2016	Face Value at March 31, 2016			March 31, 2016			December 31, 2015
Secured debt
Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Revolving Credit Facility⁽¹⁾	2019	variable	$	15.0		$	15.0		$	45.0
Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Term Loan	2021	6.25%	1,154.4			1,124.0			1,125.7
Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Notes	2022	9.375%	675.0			660.8			660.3
Horseshoe Baltimore Credit and FF&E Facilities	2019 - 2020	8.25% - 8.75%	325.2			313.4			315.0
Cromwell Credit Facility	2019	11.00%	174.5			169.4			169.2
Capital lease obligations	2016 - 2017	various	0.9			0.9			1.2
Other financing obligations	2018	8.00%	4.7			3.9			3.8
Unsecured debt
Special Improvement District Bonds	2037	5.30%	13.7			13.7			14.1
Other financing obligations	2016	various	2.4			2.4			3.0
Total debt			2,365.8			2,303.5			2,337.3
Current portion of total debt			(38.5		)	(38.5		)	(69.7		)
Long-term debt			$	2,327.3		$	2,265.0		$	2,267.6

_____________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	Variable interest rate calculated as LIBOR plus 5.25%.

Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Senior Secured Credit Facility

On May 8, 2014, CGPH closed on the $1.175 billion term loan pursuant to a First Lien Credit Agreement among Caesars Growth Properties Parent, LLC ("Parent"), the Borrower, the lenders party thereto, Credit Suisse AG, Cayman Islands Branch, as Administrative Agent (the "Administrative Agent"), and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., UBS Securities LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Macquarie Capital (USA) Inc. and Nomura Securities International, Inc., as Co-Lead Arrangers and Bookrunners (the "Credit Agreement"). CGPH used $476.9 million of the net proceeds from the CGPH Term Loan to repay all amounts outstanding under the Planet Hollywood Loan Agreement and recognized $23.8 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt. The proceeds were also used to fund CGPH's May 2014 acquisitions.

The Credit Agreement also provides for a $150.0 million revolving credit agreement which was undrawn at the closing of the CGPH Term Loan. As of March 31, 2016, $15.0 million of borrowings were outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility and $0.1 million was committed to outstanding letters of credit. Borrowings under the Revolving Credit Facility are each subject to separate note agreements executed based on the provisions of the Credit Agreement, and each note has a contractual maturity of less than one year. The Revolving Credit Facility has a contractual maturity of greater than one year and CGPH has the ability to repay the outstanding principal balances beyond the next 12 months. Amounts borrowed under the Revolving Credit Facility are intended to satisfy short-term liquidity needs and are classified in Current portion of long-term debt in the Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets included in Exhibit 99.1.

Borrowings under the CGPH Term Loan bear interest at a rate equal to, at the Borrower's option, either (a) LIBOR determined by reference to the costs of funds for Eurodollar deposits for the interest period relevant to such borrowing, adjusted for certain additional costs, subject to a floor of 1.00% in the case of term loans or (b) a base rate determined by reference to the highest of (i) the federal funds rate plus 0.50%, (ii) the prime rate as determined by the Administrative Agent under the Credit Agreement and (iii) the one-month adjusted LIBOR rate plus 1.00%, in each case plus an applicable margin. Such applicable margin shall be 5.25% per annum for LIBOR loans and 4.25% per annum for base rate loans, subject to step downs with respect to the revolving loans based on CGPH's senior secured leverage ratio. In addition, on a quarterly basis, CGPH is required to pay each lender under the Revolving Credit Facility a commitment fee in respect of any unused commitments under the Revolving Credit Facility, which is subject to a leverage based pricing grid. CGPH is also required to pay customary agency fees as well as letter of credit participation fees computed at a rate per annum equal to the applicable margin for LIBOR borrowings on the dollar equivalent of the daily stated amount of outstanding letters of credit, plus such letter of credit issuer's customary documentary and processing fees and charges and a fronting fee in an amount equal to 0.125% of the daily stated amount of such letter of credit.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the book value of the CGPH Term Loan was presented net of the unamortized discount of $25.9 million and $27.0 million, respectively, and net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $4.5 million and $4.7 million, respectively. The effective interest rate was 6.86% as of both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

The CGPH Term Loan is guaranteed by the Parent and the material, domestic wholly-owned subsidiaries of CGPH (subject to exceptions), and is secured by a pledge of the equity interest of CGPH directly held by the Parent and substantially all of the existing and future property and assets of CGPH and the subsidiary guarantors (subject to exceptions).

The CGPH Term Loan includes negative covenants, subject to certain exceptions, restricting or limiting CGPH's ability and the ability of its restricted subsidiaries to, among other things: (i) incur additional debt or issue certain preferred shares; (ii) pay dividends on or make distributions in respect of their capital stock or make other restricted payments; (iii) make certain investments; (iv) sell certain assets; (v) create liens on certain assets to secure debt; (vi) consolidate, merge, sell, or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of their assets; (vii) enter into certain transactions with their affiliates and (viii) designate their subsidiaries as unrestricted subsidiaries. The CGPH Term Loan also contains customary affirmative covenants and customary events of default, subject to customary or agreed-upon exceptions, baskets and thresholds (including equity cure provisions).

The CGPH Term Loan requires that CGPH maintains a senior secured leverage ratio ("SSLR") of no more than 6.00 to 1.00, which is the ratio of first lien senior secured net debt to EBITDA, adjusted as defined. As of March 31, 2016, CGPH's SSLR was 2.99 to 1.00.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the assets of Harrah's New Orleans, Bally's Las Vegas, Planet Hollywood and The LINQ Hotel & Casino were pledged as collateral for the CGPH Term Loan.

Caesars Growth Properties Holdings Notes

CGPH and Caesars Growth Properties Finance, Inc. issued $675.0 million aggregate principal amount of 9.375% second-priority senior secured notes due 2022 pursuant to an indenture dated as of April 17, 2014, among the Issuers and US Bank National Association, as trustee. The Issuers deposited the gross proceeds of the offering of the notes, together with additional amounts necessary to redeem the notes, if applicable, into a segregated escrow account until the escrow conditions were satisfied on May 20, 2014.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the book value of the 2022 Notes was presented net of the unamortized discount of $12.5 million and $12.9 million, respectively, and net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $1.7 million and $1.8 million, respectively. The effective interest rate was 9.84% as of both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

The 2022 Notes are secured by substantially all of the existing and future property and assets of CGPH and the subsidiary guarantors (subject to exceptions).

The 2022 Notes include negative covenants, subject to certain exceptions, restricting or limiting CGPH's ability and the ability of its restricted subsidiaries to, among other things: (i) incur additional debt or issue certain preferred shares; (ii) pay dividends on or make distributions in respect of their capital stock or make other restricted payments; (iii) make certain investments; (iv) sell certain assets; (v) create liens on certain assets to secure debt; (vi) consolidate, merge, sell, or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of their assets; (vii) enter into certain transactions with their affiliates and (viii) designate their subsidiaries as unrestricted subsidiaries. The 2022 Notes also contain customary affirmative covenants and customary events of default, subject to customary or agreed-upon exceptions, baskets and thresholds (including equity cure provisions).

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the assets of Harrah's New Orleans, Bally's Las Vegas, Planet Hollywood and The LINQ Hotel & Casino were pledged as collateral for the 2022 Notes.

Registration Rights Agreement. CGPH filed the Registration Statement on March 30, 2015 and amendments to such Registration Statement on May 18, 2015 and May 29, 2015 to initiate an offer to exchange the 2022 Notes and certain related guarantees in a private offering for a like aggregate amount of CGPH's registered 9.375% Second-Priority Senior Secured Notes due 2022 and certain related guarantees. The Registration Statement was declared effective on June 26, 2015. The exchange offer was consummated on July 28, 2015.

Intercreditor Agreement and Collateral Agreements

On May 20, 2014, intercreditor and collateral agreements were entered into which establish the subordination of the liens securing the 2022 Notes to the liens securing first priority lien obligations and secures the payment and performance when due of all of the obligations under the 2022 Notes and the $1.325 billion senior secured credit facilities (the "Senior Secured Credit Facilities"), which consist of the CGPH Term Loan and the Revolving Credit Facility, the related guarantees and the security documents. Subject to the terms of the security documents, CGPH and the subsidiary guarantors have the right to remain in possession and retain exclusive control of the collateral securing the 2022 Notes and the Senior Secured Credit Facilities (other than certain assets and obligations), to freely operate the collateral and to collect, invest and dispose of any income therefrom.

Horseshoe Baltimore Credit and FF&E Facilities

CBAC, a joint venture among Caesars Baltimore Investment Company, LLC, Rock Gaming Mothership LLC, CVPR Gaming Holdings, LLC, STRON-MD Limited Partnership and PRT Two, LLC, entered into a credit agreement (the "Baltimore Credit Facility") in July 2013 in order to finance the acquisition of land in Baltimore, Maryland and the construction of the Horseshoe Baltimore and a parking garage (collectively, the "Baltimore Development"). The Baltimore Credit Facility provides for (i) a $300.0 million senior secured term facility with a seven-year maturity, which is comprised of a $225.0 million facility that was funded on July 2, 2013 upon the closing of the Baltimore Credit Facility, a $37.5 million delayed draw facility available from the closing of the Baltimore Credit Facility that was fully drawn in June 2014 and a $37.5 million delayed draw facility that was drawn by $10.0 million in September 2014, $17.0 million in October 2014 and $10.5 million in November 2014 and (ii) a $10.0 million senior secured revolving facility with a five-year maturity that remained undrawn at March 31, 2016. The Baltimore Credit Facility is secured by substantially all material assets of CBAC and its wholly-owned domestic subsidiaries.

For the Baltimore Credit Facility, borrowings bear interest at a rate equal to the then current adjusted LIBOR or at a rate equal to the alternate base rate, in each case, plus an applicable margin of 7.00%. The adjusted LIBOR is equal to the greater of (i) 1.25% and (ii) the LIBOR in effect for such interest period. In addition, on a quarterly basis, CBAC is required to pay each lender (i) a 0.50% commitment fee in respect of any unused commitments under the revolving credit facility, (ii) a 0.125% fronting fee in respect of the aggregate face amount of outstanding letters of credit under the revolving credit facility and (iii) a 2.25% commitment fee in respect of unfunded commitments under the delayed draw facility until termination of such commitments.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the book value of the Baltimore Credit Facility was presented net of the unamortized discount of $7.5 million and $7.9 million, respectively, and net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $4.2 million and $4.4 million, respectively. The effective interest rate was 9.77% as of both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

In connection with the foregoing, Caesars Baltimore Investment Company, LLC and the other joint venture partners each provide, on a several and not joint basis, a completion guarantee with respect to the Baltimore Development, which guarantees completion of the construction of the Baltimore Development, availability of contemplated working capital and the discharge, bonding or insuring over of certain liens in connection with the Baltimore Development. The maximum liability of Caesars Baltimore Investment Company, LLC under its completion guarantee representing fair value was approximately $9.1 million. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the restrictions on cash set aside for this guarantee were released and the balance of $9.1 million was paid to CEOC.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the assets of Horseshoe Baltimore were pledged as collateral for the Baltimore Credit Facility.

The Baltimore Credit Facility contains customary affirmative covenants, subject to certain exceptions, requiring CBAC to, among other things, deliver annual and quarterly financial statements (following the commencement of operations of the Baltimore Development), annual budgets, construction progress reports and other notices, maintain its properties, maintain its books and records, maintain insurance, use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain a public rating for the term loans and comply with laws and material contracts.

The Baltimore Credit Facility contains customary negative covenants, subject to certain exceptions, restricting or limiting the ability of CBAC to, among other things, dispose of its assets and change its business or ownership, consummate mergers or acquisitions, make dividends, stock repurchases and optional redemptions of subordinated debt, incur debt and issue preferred stock, make loans and investments, create liens on its assets and enter into transactions with affiliates. In addition, the Baltimore Credit Facility includes a covenant prohibiting the senior secured leverage ratio from exceeding 7.5 to 1.0 for the first four quarters, 6.0 to 1.0 for the next four quarters and 4.75 to 1.0 for the remainder of the agreement beginning two quarters after the commencement of operations of the Baltimore Development. Commencement of operations is defined to occur when certain conditions as defined in the credit agreement are met, which occurred during the quarter ended June 30, 2015. As of March 31, 2016, CBAC Borrower, LLC's SSLR was 3.70 to 1.00.

Concurrently with the closing of the Baltimore Credit Facility, CBAC entered into an equipment financing term loan facility for up to $30.0 million (the "Baltimore FF&E Facility"). Under the Baltimore FF&E Facility, CBAC may use funds from the facility to finance or reimburse the purchase price and certain related costs of furniture, furnishings and equipment to be used in the Baltimore Development. Proceeds of the Baltimore FF&E Facility will also be available to refinance the purchase price of FF&E purchased with other amounts available to CBAC. The Baltimore FF&E Facility will mature in 2019. CBAC drew down $20.0 million from this facility in November 2014 and the remaining $10.0 million in December 2014.

For the Baltimore FF&E Facility, the loan bears interest at a floating rate per annum equal to the adjusted LIBOR plus 7.5%. The adjusted LIBOR will be determined by the Administrative Agent and will be equal to the greater of (i) the LIBOR in effect for such interest period multiplied by statutory reserves and (ii) 1.25%.

The Baltimore FF&E Facility has covenants and events of default substantially consistent with the Baltimore Credit Facility and other restrictive covenants customary for FF&E facilities of this type.

Management believes that CGP LLC is in compliance with the Baltimore Credit Facility and Baltimore FF&E Facility covenants as of March 31, 2016.

Cromwell Credit Facility

In November 2012, PropCo entered into the Cromwell Credit Facility to fund the renovation of The Cromwell. The renovation included a complete remodeling of the guest rooms, casino floor, and common areas, the addition of a second floor restaurant, and the construction of an approximately 65,000 square foot rooftop pool and dayclub/nightclub. The Cromwell owns the property and the dayclub/nightclub is leased to a third party. The Cromwell's gaming floor opened on April 21, 2014 and its 188 hotel rooms became available to guests starting on May 21, 2014.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the book value of the Cromwell Credit Facility was presented net of the unamortized discount of $3.6 million and $3.8 million, respectively, and net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $1.5 million and $1.6 million, respectively. The effective interest rate was 11.92% as of both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

The Cromwell Credit Facility also contains certain affirmative and negative covenants and requires PropCo to maintain a SSLR of no more than 5.25 to 1.00 during the first quarter of 2016, which is the ratio of PropCo's first lien senior secured net debt to consolidated PropCo EBITDA. The SSLR from the second quarter of 2016 through the first quarter of 2017 may not exceed 5.00 to 1.00. The SSLR beginning in the second quarter of 2017 and for each fiscal quarter thereafter may not exceed 4.75 to 1.00. As of March 31, 2016, PropCo's SSLR was 4.77 to 1.00.

The Cromwell Credit Facility allows the right to cure provided that (i) in each eight-fiscal-quarter period there shall be no more than five fiscal quarters in which the cure right is exercised and (ii) the cure right may not be exercised in any fiscal quarter that immediately follows two consecutive fiscal quarters in which it was exercised.

As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the assets of The Cromwell were pledged as collateral for the Cromwell Credit Facility.

Special Improvement District Bonds

In 2008, Bally's Las Vegas entered into a District Financing Agreement with Clark County, Nevada (the "County"). In accordance with the agreement, the County issued Special Improvement District Bonds to finance land improvements at Bally's Las Vegas and at an affiliate casino property, Caesars Palace. Of the total bonds issued by the County, $16.5 million was related to Bally's Las Vegas. These bonds bear interest at 5.30%, have principal and interest payments on June 1st of every year and interest only payments on December 1st of every year. The Special Improvement District Bonds mature on August 1, 2037.

Financing Obligations

During 2013, CGP LLC entered into multiple finance agreements for a total of $7.2 million for gaming equipment. The assets related to these agreements are included in Land, property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation in the accompanying Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets.

CIE Credit Facility

Caesars Interactive entered into a credit facility whereby Caesars Entertainment provided to Caesars Interactive unsecured intercompany loans as requested by CIE and approved by Caesars Entertainment on an individual transaction basis. No principal payments were required on the unsecured intercompany loans until their maturity date of November 29, 2016. The unsecured intercompany loans bore interest on the unpaid principal amounts at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus 5%. This credit facility did not have any restrictive or affirmative covenants. During the year ended December 31, 2015, CIE repaid in full the $39.8 million outstanding balance.

Contingently Issuable Non-voting Membership Units

Other Obligations and Commitments

The table below summarizes CGP LLC's debt and related interest obligations as of March 31, 2016.



	Payments Due by Period
(In millions)	Total		Remainder of 2016		1-3 years		4-5 years		After 5 years
Debt payable to third parties, face value	$	2,365.8	$	18.4	$	261.5	$	1,399.3	$	686.6
Estimated interest payments to third parties ⁽¹⁾	1,006.4		154.3		548.3		266.6		37.2

___________________________________________________


⁽¹⁾	Estimated interest for variable rate debt included in this table is based on rates at March 31, 2016.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

CGP LLC did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which amends the FASB Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") and creates a new Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This guidance provides that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Existing industry guidance, including revenue recognition guidance specific to the gaming industry, will be eliminated. In addition, interim and annual disclosures will be substantially revised. The amendments in this guidance are effective for public entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those reporting periods. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-14 defer the effective date of ASU 2014-09 for all entities by one year. Public business entities should apply the guidance in Update 2014-09 to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Earlier application is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. CGP LLC is currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on its financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which requires recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key quantitative and qualitative information about leasing arrangements. Generally, leases with terms of 12 months or less will not be required to be recognized on the balance sheet. The new standard requires the recognition and measurement of leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. The modified retrospective approach includes a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply. For public business entities, the ASU will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted. CGP LLC is currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on its financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-07, Investments - Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Simplifying the Transition to the Equity Method of Accounting, which eliminates the requirement for retroactive adjustment when an investment qualifies for use of the equity method as a result of an increase in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence. The amendments in this ASU also require that an entity that has an available-for-sale equity security that becomes qualified for the equity method of accounting recognize through earnings the unrealized holding gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income at the date the investment becomes qualified for use of the equity method. The amendments should be applied prospectively upon their effective date to increases in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence that result in the adoption of the equity method. The amendments in this guidance are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted. CGP LLC is currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on its financial statements.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, which (1) clarifies the principle for determining whether a good or service is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract and, therefore, should be accounted for separately, (2) allows entities to disregard items that are immaterial in the context of a contract, and (3) clarifies how an entity should evaluate the nature of its promise in granting a license by categorizing intellectual property into two categories which will determine whether revenue is recognized at a point in time or over time. The effective date and transition requirements for the amendments in this update are the same as the effective date and transition requirements in ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), as amended by ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date. CGP LLC is currently assessing the impact the adoption of this standard will have on its financial statements.

The information regarding additional recently issued accounting pronouncements is included in Note 2 — Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements as accounting pronouncements that are relevant to CAC are also relevant to CGP.

Recent Developments for CGP LLC

Contingently Issuable Non-voting Membership Units

Purchase of Caesars Interactive Entertainment, Inc. Common Stock

In April 2016, CIE repurchased shares of its outstanding common stock for a total net consideration of $13.5 million.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT PURSUANT TO THE PRIVATE

SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995

This Form 10-Q contains or may contain "forward-looking statements" intended to qualify for the safe harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements contain words such as "may," "will," "project," "might," "expect," "believe," "anticipate," "intend," "could," "would," "estimate," "continue," or "pursue," or the negative of these words or other words or expressions of similar meaning that may identify forward-looking statements and are found at various places throughout this Form 10-Q. These forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, those relating to future actions, new projects, strategies, future performance, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, and future financial results, wherever they occur in this Form 10-Q, are based on our current expectations about future events and are estimates reflecting the best judgment of CAC and CGP LLC's management and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements.

Investors are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or results and involve risks and uncertainties that cannot be predicted or quantified, and, consequently, the actual performance of CAC and CGP LLC may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following factors, as well as other factors described from time to time in the Company's reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (including the sections entitled "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" contained therein):


•	CAC and CGP LLC's dependence on Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries (including CES) to provide support and services, as well as CGP LLC's dependence on Caesars Entertainment's and CES' senior management's expertise and its participation in Caesars Entertainment's Total Rewards loyalty program;


•	the effects of a default by Caesars Entertainment or CEOC on certain debt obligations;


•	the ability of CEC to meet its financial obligations in light of its limited cash balances;


•	Caesars Entertainment's interests may conflict with CAC and CGP LLC's interests and Caesars Entertainment may possibly keep all potential development opportunities for itself;


•	the adverse effects due to the bankruptcy filing of CEOC and certain of its subsidiaries;


•	the effects if a third-party successfully challenges Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates' ownership of, or right to use, the intellectual property owned or used by subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment, which CIE and CGP LLC license for use in its businesses;


•	CIE's reliance on subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment to obtain online gaming licenses in certain jurisdictions, such as New Jersey;


•	the difficulty of operating CGP LLC's business separately from Caesars Entertainment and managing that process effectively could take up a significant amount of management's time;


•	CGP LLC's business model and short operating history;


•	CGP LLC's ability to realize the anticipated benefits of current or potential future acquisitions, and the ability to timely and cost-effectively integrate assets and companies that CGP LLC acquires into its operations;


•	the effects of any lawsuits against CAC, CGP LLC or CGPH related to the October 21, 2013 transactions, the May 2014 asset purchase transactions and the proposed CAC and Caesars Entertainment merger transaction;


•	the Proposed Merger may not be consummated on the terms contemplated or at all;


•	the adverse effects if extensive governmental regulation and taxation policies, which are applicable to CGP LLC, are enforced;


•	the effects of local and national economic, credit and capital market conditions on the economy in general, and on the gaming industry in particular;


•	the sensitivity of CGP LLC's business to reductions in discretionary consumer spending;


•	the rapidly growing and changing industry in which CGP LLC operates, such as CIE's social and mobile games business and internet gaming business;


•	any failure to protect CGP LLC's trademarks or other intellectual property, such as CIE's ownership of the WSOP trademark;


•	abnormal gaming holds ("gaming hold" is the amount of money that is retained by the casino from wagers by customers);


•	the effects of competition, including locations of competitors and operating and market competition, particularly the intense competition CGP LLC's casino properties face in their respective markets;


•	the uncertainty surrounding whether CIE's games, such as Slotomania, will retain their popularity;


•	CIE's reliance on a small portion of its total players for nearly all of its revenue from its social and mobile games;


•	CAC's ability to expand into international markets in light of additional business, regulatory, operational, financial and economic risks associated with such expansion;


•	evolving regulations concerning the social and mobile games industry as well as data privacy, including, but not limited to, the effect of U.S. and foreign laws, some of which are unsettled and still developing;


•	the low barriers to entry and intense competition of the social and mobile games industry could have adverse effects on CIE and CGP LLC;


•	evolving U.S. and foreign laws could subject CIE to claims and prevent CIE from providing its current games to players or the ability to modify its games;


•	the effect on CGP LLC's business strategy if online real money gaming is not legalized in states other than Delaware, Nevada or New Jersey in the United States, is legalized in an unfavorable manner or is banned in the United States;


•	political and economic uncertainty created by terrorist attacks and other acts of war or hostility; and


•	the other factors set forth under "Risk Factors."

Any forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and, as such, speak only as of the date made. CAC and CGP LLC disclaim any obligation to update the forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date stated or, if no date is stated, as of the date of this Form 10-Q.

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk

CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

Market risk is the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in market rates and prices, such as interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices.

Market Risks Related to Investments

CAC's primary exposure to market risk is related to concentration of credit risk associated with its investments in debt securities which are included as a component of equity in our Condensed Balance Sheets as these investments are not diversified across industries or companies.

CAC does not purchase or hold any derivative financial instruments for hedging or trading purposes.

CAESARS GROWTH PARTNERS, LLC

Market Risks Related to Debt

Assuming a constant outstanding balance for our variable rate debt with both third parties and with related parties, a hypothetical 1.0% increase in interest rates would increase interest expense for the next twelve months by $9.2 million. At March 31, 2016, the weighted average U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate on our variable rate debt was 0.62%. A hypothetical reduction of this rate to zero would decrease interest expense for the next twelve months by $0.1 million.

CGP LLC does not purchase or hold any derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.

As of March 31, 2016, CGP LLC's third party long-term variable rate debt reflects borrowings under their credit facilities provided to CGP LLC by a consortium of banks with a total capacity of $1,814.0 million. The interest rates charged on borrowings under these facilities are a function of LIBOR. As such, the interest rates charged to CGP LLC for borrowings under the facilities are subject to change as LIBOR changes.

Debt covenant compliance is disclosed in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section above.

Market Risks Related to Foreign Currency

CGP LLC's foreign currency risk primarily relates to social and mobile games revenue generated outside of the United States with cash denominated in foreign currencies. As of March 31, 2016, CGP LLC has operations in Argentina, Belarus, Canada, Israel, Japan, Romania, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. CIE's social and mobile games revenues generated outside of the United States were approximately 31.0% and 37.0% for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Approximately 1.2% and 1.3% of CGP LLC's Cash and cash equivalents balance is denominated in currencies other than the U.S. Dollar as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, CGP LLC recognized a gain of $0.2 million and a loss of $0.9 million, respectively, related to transactions denominated in foreign currencies. The gain and loss for the respective periods were primarily associated with the weakening and strengthening of the U.S. Dollar against multiple currencies held at CIE's operations outside the United States.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the specified time periods and accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Exchange Act) at March 31, 2016. Based on this evaluation required by paragraph (b) of Rules 13a-15 or 15d-15, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of March 31, 2016.

Changes in Internal Controls

There have not been changes in internal controls over financial reporting during the three months ended March 31, 2016 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

From time to time, CAC, Predecessor Growth Partners or CGP LLC may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business.

Horseshoe Baltimore

From time to time, the City of Baltimore may be subject to legal proceedings asserting claims related to the site. CBAC, Predecessor Growth Partners and CGP LLC have not been named as parties to these proceedings.

August 28, 2013. One of the plaintiffs withdrew from the case on October 10, 2013. The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland dismissed the case without prejudice on January 7, 2014 for lack of standing.

CAC-CEC Proposed Merger

CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes

On August 4, 2014, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, solely in its capacity as successor indenture trustee for the 10% Second-Priority Senior Secured Notes due 2018 (the "Notes"), on behalf of itself and, it alleges, derivatively on behalf of CEOC, filed a lawsuit (the "Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit") in the Court of Chancery in the State of Delaware against CEC, CEOC, CGP LLC, CAC, Caesars Entertainment Resort Properties, LLC ("CERP"), Caesars Enterprise Services, LLC ("CES"), Eric Hession, Gary Loveman, Jeffrey D. Benjamin, David Bonderman, Kelvin L. Davis, Marc C. Rowan, David B. Sambur, and Eric Press. The lawsuit alleges claims for breach of contract, intentional and constructive fraudulent transfer, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and corporate waste. The lawsuit seeks (1) an award of money damages; (2) to void certain transfers, the earliest of which dates back to 2010; (3) an injunction directing the recipients of the assets in these transactions to return them to CEOC; (4) a declaration that CEC remains liable under the parent guarantee formerly applicable to the Notes; (5) to impose a constructive trust or equitable lien on the transferred assets; and (6) an award to the plaintiffs for their attorneys' fees and costs. The only claims against CAC and CGP LLC are for intentional and constructive fraudulent transfer. CAC and CGP LLC believe this lawsuit is without merit and will defend themselves vigorously. A motion to dismiss this action was filed by CEC and other defendants in September 2014, and the motion was argued in December 2014. During the pendency of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, the action has been automatically stayed with respect to CEOC. The motion to dismiss with respect to CEC was denied on March 18, 2015. In a Verified Supplemental Complaint filed on August 3, 2015, the plaintiff stated that due to CEOC's bankruptcy filing, the continuation of all claims was stayed pursuant to the bankruptcy except for Claims II, III, and X. These are claims against CEC only, for breach of contract in respect of the release of the parent guarantee formerly applicable to the Notes, for declaratory relief in respect of the release of this guarantee, and for violations of the Trust

Indenture Act in respect of the release of this guarantee. CEC has informed us that fact discovery in the case is substantially complete. No trial date has been set.

On September 3, 2014, holders of approximately $21 million of CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes due 2016 and 2017 filed suit in federal district court in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against CEC and CEOC, claiming broadly that an August 12, 2014 Note Purchase and Support Agreement between CEC and CEOC (on the one hand) and certain other holders of the CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes (on the other hand) impaired their own rights under the Senior Unsecured Notes. The lawsuit seeks both declaratory and monetary relief. On October 2, 2014, other holders of CEOC Senior Unsecured Notes due 2016 purporting to represent a class of all holders of these notes from August 11, 2014 to the present filed a substantially similar suit in the same court, against the same defendants, relating to the same transactions. Both lawsuits (the "Senior Unsecured Lawsuits") were assigned to the same judge. The claims against CEOC have been automatically stayed during its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. The court denied a motion to dismiss both lawsuits with respect to CEC. The parties have completed fact discovery with respect to both plaintiffs' claims against CEC. On October 23, 2015, plaintiffs in the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits moved for partial summary judgment, and on December 29, 2015, those motions were denied. On December 4, 2015, plaintiff in the action brought on behalf of holders of CEOC's 6.50% Senior Unsecured Notes moved for class certification and briefing has been completed. The judge presiding over these cases recently retired, and a new judge has been appointed to preside over these lawsuits. That judge has set a new summary judgment briefing schedule for May and June of 2016 and has indicated his intention to rule on these summary judgment motions on or before July 22, 2016. Trial of remaining issues would take place beginning August 22, 2016. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to these lawsuits.

On November 25, 2014, UMB Bank ("UMB"), as successor indenture trustee for CEOC's 8.5% senior secured notes due 2020, filed a verified complaint (the "Delaware First Lien Lawsuit") in Delaware Chancery Court against CEC, CEOC, CERP, CAC, CGP LLC, CES, and against an individual, and past and present members of the CEC and CEOC Boards of Directors, Gary Loveman, Jeffrey Benjamin, David Bonderman, Kelvin Davis, Eric Press, Marc Rowan, David Sambur, Eric Hession, Donald Colvin, Fred Kleisner, Lynn Swann, Chris Williams, Jeffrey Housenbold, Michael Cohen, Ronen Stauber, and Steven Winograd, alleging generally that defendants have improperly stripped CEOC of prized assets, have wrongfully affected a release of a CEC parental guarantee of CEOC debt and have committed other wrongs. Among other things, UMB has asked the court to appoint a receiver over CEOC. In addition, the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit pleads claims for fraudulent conveyances/transfers, insider preferences, illegal dividends, declaratory judgment (for breach of contract as regards to the parent guarantee and also as to certain covenants in the bond indenture), tortious interference with contract, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, usurpation of corporate opportunities, and unjust enrichment, and seeks monetary and equitable as well as declaratory relief. CAC and CGP LLC believe this lawsuit is without merit and will defend themselves vigorously. All of the defendants have moved to dismiss the lawsuit, and that motion has been fully briefed. In addition, this lawsuit has been automatically stayed with respect to CEOC during the Chapter 11 process and, pursuant to the (a) Fifth Amended and Restated Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement dated October 7, 2015, with certain holders of claims in respect of claims under CEOC's first lien notes (the "First Lien Bond RSA") and (b) Restructuring Support and Forbearance Agreement dated August 21, 2015, with certain holders of claims in respect of claims under CEOC's first lien credit agreement (the "First Lien Bank RSA" and, together with the First Lien Bond RSA, the "RSAs"), has been subject to a consensual stay for all. The consensual stay will expire upon the termination of the First Lien Bond RSAs.

On February 18, 2015, Caesars Entertainment received a Demand For Payment of Guaranteed Obligations (the "February 18 Notice") from BOKF, N.A. ("BOKF"), in its capacity as successor Trustee for CEOC's 12.75% Second-Priority Senior Secured Notes due 2018 (the "12.75% Second-Priority Notes"). The February 18 Notice alleges that CEOC's commencement of its voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case constituted an event of default under the indenture governing the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes; that all amounts due and owing on the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes therefore immediately became payable; and that CEC is responsible for paying CEOC's obligations on the 12.75% Second-Priority Notes, including CEOC's obligation to timely pay all principal, interest and any premium due on these notes, as a result of a parent guarantee provision contained in the indenture governing the notes that the February 18 Notice alleges is still binding. The

February 18 Notice therefore demands that CEC immediately pay BOKF cash in an amount of not less than $750 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest, accrued and unpaid attorneys' fees, and other expenses. The February 18 Notice also alleges that the interest, fees and expenses continue to accrue. CAC and CGP LLC are not parties to this demand.

Delaware First Lien Lawsuit and Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, at the present time, CAC and CGP LLC believe it is not probable that a material loss will result from the outcome of these matters. However, given the uncertainty of litigation, CAC and CGP LLC cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of these matters or of the range of reasonably possible losses should the matters ultimately be resolved against them. Should these matters ultimately be resolved through litigation outside of the financial restructuring of CEOC, which CAC and CGP LLC believe these matters would likely be long and protracted, and were a court to find in favor of the claimants in the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit or the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, such determination could have a material adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC's business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

National Retirement Fund

Other Matters

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risks Related to the Pending Acquisition of the Company by Caesars Entertainment

We may not be able to consummate our recently announced acquisition by CEC in the anticipated timeframe, or at all.

As previously announced, on December 21, 2014, we entered into the Merger Agreement with CEC, pursuant to which, subject to satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, CAC will merge with and into CEC, with CEC as the surviving company. There are a number of risks and uncertainties associated with the consummation of the Proposed Merger with CEC, and completion of the Proposed Merger is contingent upon customary closing conditions, including approval of the Merger Agreement by our stockholders as well as CEC's stockholders and receipt of certain regulatory approvals. In addition to obtaining the stockholder approvals, consummation of the Proposed Merger is also subject to other conditions, including the

CEOC restructuring plan in the form attached to the Merger Agreement having been confirmed by the bankruptcy court and minimum cash conditions for CGP LLC, as well as CEC and CERP. Failure to obtain the required approvals within the expected time frame, or having to make significant changes to the structure, terms, or conditions of the Proposed Merger to obtain such approvals, may result in a material delay in, or the abandonment of, the Proposed Merger. There can be no assurance that these conditions of the Proposed Merger will be satisfied, and if satisfied, when they will be satisfied. In no event will the Proposed Merger be completed later than August 6, 2016, unless CAC and CEC otherwise agree.

Even if the CEOC restructuring plan is confirmed, under certain circumstances the Exchange Ratio may be adjusted or the Merger Agreement may be terminated.

Additionally, CEC is subject to litigation which if decided adversely may increase the risk the conditions to consummation of the Proposed Merger are not satisfied. As further discussed in the section entitled "Legal Proceedings - CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes," on July 22, 2015, the bankruptcy judge presiding over the CEOC bankruptcy denied CEOC's request to stay certain litigation against CEC including the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, the New York First Lien Lawsuit, the New York Second Lien Lawsuit and the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits and, following multiple appeals, on December 23, 2015, a panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the bankruptcy court's denial of CEOC's requested stay and remanded the issue to the bankruptcy court for further consideration. On January 11, 2015, CEOC petitioned the Seventh Circuit to rehear the appeal. CEOC's petition for rehearing was denied on January 25, 2016, and the case was remanded to the bankruptcy court on February 2, 2016. On February 26, 2016, the bankruptcy court issued a ruling granting CEOC's request to stay the litigation identified above until the earlier of (i) 60 days after the examiner files his initial final report and (ii) May 9, 2016. The second lien notes trustee BOKF sought limited relief from the bankruptcy court's order on March 3, 2016, requesting that all pre-trial matters and rulings be allowed to move forward. On March 10, 2016, the bankruptcy court modified the preliminary injunction to clarify that BOKF may engage in all pre-trial matters. Accordingly, it is presently unclear whether or when those lawsuits will proceed after May 9, 2016. Adverse rulings may result in reinstatement of the CEC guarantee of certain CEOC debt which could increase the risk the conditions to consummation of the Proposed Merger are not satisfied. Adverse rulings may also result in the possibility that Caesars Entertainment enters bankruptcy or is unable to continue as a going concern.

Additionally, the significant amounts CEC has agreed to pay in connection with CEOC's reorganization raises substantial doubt about CEC's ability to continue as a going concern. It is possible that the amount of money CEC will be required to pay will be so substantial that it will diminish the value of CEC to such an extent that the proposed merger between CAC and CEC cannot be consummated. The proposed merger between CAC and CEC is subject to an exchange ratio governing the relative percentage ownership in the combined entity that CAC and CEC would each hold. Any revision to the exchange ratio must be approved by a special committee of the CAC board and ultimately by shareholder vote of CAC stockholders. Should CEC be required to pay such a substantial amount of money or other consideration to a reorganized CEOC that the value of CEC requires a revision to the exchange ratio for the merged entity, it is possible that the CAC special committee or CAC's stockholders would not approve the merger and the merger would not be consummated. See also risk factor below entitled "If a court were to find in favor of the claimants in the Noteholder Disputes, it would likely have a material adverse effect on CEC's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and, absent an intervening event, a reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code would likely be necessary due to the limited resources available at CEC to resolve such matters. The significant amounts CEC has agreed to pay in connection with CEOC's reorganization raise substantial doubt about CEC's ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, CEC estimates that it will require additional sources of funding to meet the ongoing financial commitments of the CEC holding company for amounts other than committed to under the RSAs."

We can therefore give you no assurance that the Proposed Merger will be consummated, in which case we would not realize the anticipated benefits of having completed the Proposed Merger, which may adversely affect us.

The combined company will require significant liquidity to fund CEOC's emergence from Chapter 11 and to achieve successful integration and achieve targeted synergies post-closing.

At emergence from Chapter 11, CEOC will be required to or may deem it advisable to settle in cash certain obligations (such as professional fees, certain accrued and unpaid interest and debt obligations) that matured during the Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases. Additionally, based on the most recent reorganization plan that CEOC has proposed, if the Bankruptcy Court approves such plan, Caesars Entertainment will be required to (i) contribute over $400 million to pay a forbearance fee, for general corporate purposes and to fund sources and uses and (ii) purchase up to approximately $1.0 billion of new equity in the restructured CEOC and its subsidiaries. As a result of these payments and investments, Caesars Entertainment may have less cash available in future periods for investments and operating expenses and, as a result, the confirmation of the CEOC reorganization plan and emergence of CEOC from bankruptcy may have a negative impact on the combined company and on its ability to sustain its operations.

While the Proposed Merger with CEC is pending, we are subject to business uncertainties and contractual restrictions that could disrupt our business.

We have experienced and, whether or not the pending Proposed Merger with CEC is completed, we may continue to experience disruption of our current plans and operations due to the pending Proposed Merger, which could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results. Our employees and other key personnel may have uncertainties about the effect of the pending Proposed Merger, and those uncertainties may impact our ability to retain, recruit and hire key personnel while the Proposed Merger is pending or if it is not consummated. To date, we have incurred, and will continue to incur, significant costs, expenses and fees for professional services and other transaction costs in connection with the Proposed Merger with CEC, and these fees and costs are payable by us whether or not the Proposed Merger is consummated. Furthermore, we cannot predict how our suppliers and customers will view or react to the Proposed Merger, and some may be hesitant to do business with us in light of uncertainties about our ability to perform due to the proposed acquisition of us by CEC. If we are unable to reassure our customers and suppliers to continue transacting business with us, whether or not the Proposed Merger is consummated, our financial results may be adversely affected.

Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, we are required to operate our business in the ordinary course, and we are also subject to certain restrictions on the conduct of our business prior to the consummation of the Proposed Merger without the consent of CEC, including, among other things, certain restrictions on our ability to enter new lines of business; make certain investments and acquisitions; sell, transfer, lease, dispose of or grant our assets; enter into certain contracts; incur indebtedness; and make certain capital expenditures. These restrictions, which could be in place for an extended period of time if the consummation of the Proposed Merger is delayed, could prevent us from pursuing otherwise attractive business opportunities, result in our inability to respond effectively to competitive pressures, industry developments and future opportunities and may otherwise harm our business, financial results and operations.

In the event that the pending Proposed Merger with CEC is not completed, the trading price of our common stock and our future business and financial results may be negatively impacted.

As noted above, the conditions to the completion of the Proposed Merger with CEC may not be satisfied, and even if the CEOC restructuring plan is confirmed, under certain circumstances the Exchange Ratio may be adjusted or the Merger Agreement may be terminated. If the Proposed Merger with CEC is not completed for any reason, we would still be liable for significant transaction costs and the focus of our management would have been diverted from seeking other potential opportunities without realizing any benefits of the completed Proposed Merger. If we do not complete the Proposed Merger, certain litigation against us such as the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit and the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit will remain outstanding and not be released. Furthermore, if we do not complete the Proposed Merger, it is possible that CEOC or its creditors could institute additional litigation against us, asserting claims such as those identified in the examiner's report. If we do not complete the Proposed Merger, the price of our common stock may decline significantly from the current market price, which may reflect a market assumption that the Proposed Merger will be completed.

If the Proposed Merger is not completed or we are not otherwise acquired, we may consider other strategic alternatives, which are subject to risks and uncertainties.

If the Proposed Merger with CEC is not completed, our Board will review and consider various alternatives available to us, including, among others, continuing as a public company with no material changes to our business or capital structure or other alternative transactions. Any alternative transaction may involve various additional risks to our business, including, among others, distraction of our management team and associated expenses similar to those described above in connection with the Proposed Merger, our ability to consummate an alternative transaction, the valuation assigned to our business in the alternative transaction, our ability or a potential buyer's ability to access capital on acceptable terms or at all and other variables that may adversely affect our operations.

We are subject to litigation initiated in connection with the Proposed Merger, which could be time consuming and divert the resources and the attention of management.

CAC and the individual members of our Board of Directors have been named as defendants in certain lawsuits relating to the Merger Agreement and the Proposed Merger, and may be named in additional lawsuits relating to the Merger Agreement and the Proposed Merger. The lawsuit filed to date generally alleges that the directors breached their fiduciary duties by engaging in a flawed sales process, by approving an inadequate price, and by agreeing to provisions that would allegedly preclude another interested buyer from making a financially superior proposal to acquire the company. The defense of any such lawsuits, and any additional lawsuits relating to the Merger Agreement and the Proposed Merger, may be expensive and may divert management's attention and resources, which could adversely affect our business results of operations and financial condition.

The Proposed Merger may be completed on terms different than those contained in the Merger Agreement.

Prior to the completion of the Proposed Merger, the parties may, by their mutual agreement, amend or alter the terms of the Merger Agreement, including with respect to, among other things, the merger consideration to be received by our stockholders or any covenants or agreements with respect to the parties' respective operations pending completion of the Proposed Merger. In addition, either party may choose to waive certain requirements of the Merger Agreement, including some conditions to closing the Proposed Merger. Any such amendments, alterations or waivers may have negative consequences to the other parties or their respective stockholders, including the possibility that consideration paid in the Proposed Merger may be reduced.

Our stockholders cannot be certain of the date they will receive the merger consideration or of the aggregate value of the merger consideration they will receive.

The date that our stockholders will receive the merger consideration depends on the completion date of the Proposed Merger, which is uncertain. In no event will the Proposed Merger be completed later than August 6, 2016 unless CAC and CEC otherwise agree. The date that the Proposed Merger becomes effective may be later than the date of the special meeting of our stockholders to approve the Proposed Merger, and at the time of our special meeting, our stockholders will not know the exact market value of the CEC Common Stock that they will receive upon completion of the Proposed Merger. The dollar value of the consideration received by our stockholders will depend upon the market value of CEC Common Stock at the effective time of the Proposed Merger, and such dollar value may be different from, and lower than, the dollar value of the merger consideration today or the date of the special meeting of our stockholders to approve the Proposed Merger.

Furthermore, the Exchange Ratio fixed in the Merger Agreement is subject to adjustment during the Adjustment Period and may be adjusted for changes in the market price of either CAC Common Stock or CEC Common Stock. Accordingly, any change in the price of CEC Common Stock prior to the Proposed Merger may affect the market value of the merger consideration that our stockholders will receive as a result of the Proposed Merger.

Risks Related to CGP LLC's Continued Dependence on Caesars Entertainment and CES

CAC and CGP LLC (including CGPH) are dependent on CES, CEOC and its subsidiaries to provide corporate services, back-office support and business advisory services through the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement and the Omnibus Agreement. CAC and CGP LLC cannot operate without the services provided by subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment and will be adversely affected if either the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement or Omnibus Agreement is terminated.

CES, a services joint venture among CEOC, CERP, a subsidiary of CEC, and CGPH, (together the "CES Members" and each a "CES Member") manages our properties and provides us with access to Caesars Entertainment's management expertise, intellectual property, back office services and Total Rewards® loyalty program. Pursuant to the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement, CEOC and its subsidiaries provide certain corporate services, back-office support and business advisory services to CAC and CGP LLC, however, generally, the services that would otherwise be performed under the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement are now performed by CES pursuant to other arrangements. Additionally, pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement, CES provides corporate services and back-office support to CGPH. Moreover, CES provides management services to CGP LLC owned casinos. CAC and CGP LLC have a very short history of operating casinos and interactive entertainment. Therefore, the business and operations of CAC and CGP LLC are dependent on the services provided by Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries, and CAC and CGP LLC cannot operate without these services. If the quality of the services provided by Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries deteriorates, or if the terms under which Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries provide such services change in a manner that is adverse to CGP LLC, it could have a material adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

In addition, if the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement or the Omnibus Agreement were to be terminated and not replaced, or if Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries were to suffer significant liquidity or operational difficulties, becoming incapable of providing support and management services (or unable to provide such services at agreed upon levels) to CAC or CGP LLC or cease operations altogether, CAC and/or CGP LLC would no longer have access to the operational support and management expertise provided by Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries and it could have a material adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results. The management of Caesars Entertainment has concluded that, due to the material uncertainty related to certain of the litigation proceedings against Caesars Entertainment, as more fully described in Item 1. Legal Proceedings - CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes, there is substantial doubt about Caesars Entertainment's ability to continue as a going concern. Additionally, in March 2015, CEOC filed an adversary proceeding requesting the bankruptcy court to issue an order staying these cases as to all claims against all defendants. On July 22, 2015, the bankruptcy judge presiding over the CEOC bankruptcy denied CEOC's request to stay certain litigation against CEC including the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit, the New York First Lien Lawsuit, the New York Second Lien Lawsuit and the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits. On December 23, 2015, a panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the bankruptcy court's denial of the requested stay and remanded the case to the bankruptcy court for further consideration. After a petition for rehearing by the Seventh Circuit was denied, on February 26, 2016, the Bankruptcy Court continued the debtors'

motion to stay the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit. The Bankruptcy Court has scheduled a May 4, 2016 status conference with respect to the continued motion for litigation stay. The Bankruptcy Court declined to stay the New York First Lien Lawsuit, the New York Second Lien Lawsuit and the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits. Accordingly, it is presently unclear whether or when those lawsuits will proceed after May 9, 2016. Adverse rulings may result in reinstatement of the CEC guarantee of certain CEOC debt which could increase the risk the conditions to consummation of the Proposed Merger are not satisfied. Adverse rulings may also result in the possibility that Caesars Entertainment enters bankruptcy or is unable to continue as a going concern.

If Caesars Entertainment were unable to continue as a going concern, CERP and CEOC, as subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment, could be unable to provide CES with their respective contributions to CES's operating funds and capital, which would also render CES incapable of providing us with the support and management services we require. In addition, if CES were to become a debtor in a bankruptcy case, it may seek bankruptcy court approval to assume the Omnibus Agreement or the management agreements under the Bankruptcy Code, to assign such agreements to a third party or to reject such agreements. See "Our operations depend on material contracts with third parties, including Caesars Entertainment, the continued enforcement of which may be adversely impacted by a bankruptcy of Caesars Entertainment or CES." Any failure by CAC or CGP LLC to obtain the operational and management support of Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries, and particularly any failure by CGP LLC to obtain Caesars Entertainment's expertise in operating casinos or maintaining access to the Total Rewards loyalty program, would adversely affect CAC and/or CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

We do not control CES, and the interests of our co-investors may not align with our interests.

CEOC, CERP and CGPH are members of CES, and CGPH and its subsidiaries rely on CES to provide it with intellectual property licenses and property management services, among other services. Each member of CES is required to contribute as necessary to fund CES's operating costs and capital requirements in accordance with the terms of the operating agreement that governs CES. The amount CGPH will be required to fund in the future may be greater than its initial contribution, and will be subject to the review and approval of the CES steering committee. CGPH, CEOC and CERP control CES through its steering committee, which is comprised of one representative from each of CGPH, CEOC and CERP. In the event that CGPH interests do not align with those of CEOC or CERP, the interests of CEOC or CERP may be met before CGPH. In addition, certain decisions by CES may not be made without unanimous consent of the members, including CGPH. These actions include any decision with respect to liquidation or dissolution of CES, merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all the assets of CES, usage of CES assets in a manner inconsistent with the purposes of CES, material amendment to CES's operating agreement, admission of new investors to CES and filing of any bankruptcy or similar action by CES. Thus, any CES Member may block those actions requiring unanimous consent of the CES Members notwithstanding that such actions are in our interest. As a result of an annual review undertaken in September 2015 but effective July 2015, the allocation percentages of the CES Members were revised to 65.4%, 21.8% and 12.8%, respectively. CGPH has notified CES, CEOC and CERP that it objects to the new expense allocation but will pay the revised expense allocations under protest and reserves all rights.

CGP LLC is dependent on the expertise of Caesars Entertainment's and CES senior management, who may not be directly invested in CGP LLC's success, which may have an adverse effect on CGP LLC and/or CAC's business, financial condition and operating results.

CGP LLC relies a great deal on the expertise and guidance of Caesars Entertainment's senior management who do not receive direct compensation from CGP LLC. As a result, Caesars Entertainment's senior management may devote substantially less time to the business and operations of CGP LLC than were they to be employed by CGP LLC. Senior management that is not invested in the success of CGP LLC's business may have an adverse effect on CGP LLC and/or CAC's business, financial condition and operating results.

Loss of the services of any key personnel from Caesars Entertainment or CES could have a material adverse effect on the business of CGP LLC.

The leadership of Caesars Entertainment's and CES' senior management has been a critical element of Caesars Entertainment's success. The advisory and management services provided to CGP LLC depend on this senior management. The death or disability of, or other extended or permanent loss of services, or any negative market or industry perception of Caesars Entertainment's or CES' senior management could have a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's business. CGP LLC is not protected by key man insurance or similar life insurance covering members of Caesars Entertainment's senior management, nor does CGP LLC have employment agreements with any of Caesars Entertainment's senior management.

A default by Caesars Entertainment on certain of its debt obligations could adversely affect CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

Caesars Entertainment (including its consolidated subsidiaries) is a highly leveraged company and has pledged a significant portion of its assets and the assets of its subsidiaries as collateral under certain of its debt obligations, including the trademarks for which CIE has licensed the right to use, including "Caesars," "Total Rewards" and "Harrah's." The stock of CEOC is also pledged to secure these debt obligations. CEOC and its subsidiaries that are the owners of these trademarks filed

for bankruptcy in January 2015. If Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries were to default on these obligations, its lenders could exercise significant influence over CGP LLC's business. CGP LLC is dependent on a number of services from Caesars Entertainment, CEOC, CES and other subsidiaries of Caesars Entertainment, pursuant to the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement, the Omnibus Agreement and CIE's Shared Services Agreement. If Caesars Entertainment and/or its subsidiaries file for bankruptcy protection under the U.S. bankruptcy code, their filing may materially and adversely affect CGP LLC's assets and operations. For example, in the event of a default by Caesars Entertainment, its lenders or their successors may elect to reject the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement or the Omnibus Agreement as an executory contract in a bankruptcy proceeding. Furthermore, in the event of such a default, Caesars Entertainment's lenders also may seek to reject CIE's cross marketing and trademark license agreement with Caesars Entertainment in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding and, as a result, CIE would no longer have licenses to use certain trademarks owned by Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries. The result of this influence and any related disruption in CGP LLC's business could have a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results. Recent litigation against CEC may increase the risk these events occur. See Item 1. Legal Proceedings - CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes.

The value of the CEOC Notes held by CAC would be impaired in the event of a default by Caesars Entertainment or CEOC on certain of its debt obligations and such impairment could adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock.

Caesars Entertainment (including its consolidated subsidiaries) and CEOC are both highly leveraged companies and each has significant obligations for interest payments and restrictions due to its indebtedness. If CEOC is unable to pay the interest when due under their outstanding indebtedness, or otherwise defaults on their debt obligations, the value of the notes previously issued by CEOC ("CEOC Notes") held by CAC would be impaired. An impairment in the value of the CEOC Notes could adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock.

CGP LLC has an obligation to give a right of first refusal for any development opportunities to Caesars Entertainment, but Caesars Entertainment has no obligation to give any development opportunities to CGP LLC. Caesars Entertainment may keep all potential development opportunities for itself. CGP LLC would need to rely on a separate party to pursue any opportunities without the approval and assistance of Caesars Entertainment.

Pursuant to the CGP Operating Agreement, CGP LLC is required to first provide any potential development opportunities to Caesars Entertainment to be considered by a committee of the Caesars Entertainment board of directors comprised of disinterested directors. CGP LLC can only proceed with such investment or opportunity to the extent such Caesars Entertainment committee declines the opportunity for itself or CEOC. If the committee provides an opportunity to CGP LLC, we expect that CGP LLC will retain a 50% interest in the management fee to be received by Caesars Entertainment, unless otherwise agreed. However, because each opportunity will be negotiated as a separate transaction, there can be no assurances that CGP LLC and Caesars Entertainment will share equally (or that CGP LLC will share at all) in the management fee. If the committee does not provide the opportunity to CGP LLC, the committee can also decide to keep the opportunity for Caesars Entertainment. No assurances can be provided that the committee will ever provide an opportunity to CGP LLC.

Although certain employees of each of the Sponsors are on the boards of directors of Caesars Entertainment and CAC, the certificates of incorporation of both companies provide that neither the Sponsors nor directors have any obligation to present any corporate opportunity to Caesars Entertainment or CAC. Accordingly, the Sponsors may pursue gaming, entertainment or other activities outside of Caesars Entertainment or CAC and have no obligation to present such opportunity to Caesars Entertainment or CAC; however, if any choose to present such opportunity to Caesars Entertainment or CAC, then such opportunity must follow the rights of first offer.

If the committee declines an opportunity altogether and CGP LLC pursues the opportunity without the support of Caesars Entertainment, CGP LLC will be required to identify and obtain the necessary services from a third-party. No assurances can be provided that CGP LLC will be able to find a third-party to pursue an opportunity without Caesars Entertainment and any services provided may be more expensive than, or of less quality than, those that are provided by Caesars Entertainment, and as a result, could have a material adverse impact on the success of the opportunity.

Caesars Entertainment's interests may conflict with CGP LLC's interests.

The interests of Caesars Entertainment could conflict with CGP LLC's interests. Caesars Entertainment is in a casino and entertainment business similar to CGP LLC and may, from time to time in the future, pursue for itself acquisitions that would be complementary to CGP LLC's business, in which case, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities would not be available to us. Without access to acquisition opportunities, CGP LLC will be limited in growing its business.

The success of CGP LLC's business depends in part on its continued participation in Caesars' Total Rewards loyalty program. If casinos owned by CGP LLC are unable to access the Total Rewards loyalty program database, it could have a material adverse impact on CGP LLC's business.

The success of CGP LLC's business depends in part on its ability to direct targeted marketing efforts to important casino and hospitality customers. The ability of CGP LLC's business to undertake those marketing efforts depends to a

significant extent on its continued participation in the Total Rewards loyalty program owned and maintained by CEOC and its subsidiaries, and following its commencement of operations, licensed to CES. In connection with this program, the casinos owned by CGP LLC can develop information which allows them to track casino play and award complimentaries and other promotional opportunities to their customers. Complimentaries and other similar rewards are customarily offered by casino and gaming facilities to their customers and are important incentives to those customers. If the casinos owned by CGP LLC are unable to access the Total Rewards loyalty program database, it could have a material adverse impact on CGP LLC's business. Participation in the Total Rewards loyalty program is one of our competitive strengths and our business and growth strategy are, in part, based on tracked play and targeted marketing efforts.

In the past, the removal of the Total Rewards loyalty program from a casino property has resulted in negative impacts on such property's financial results. Similarly, if we are unable to access the Total Rewards loyalty program database, we expect our annual revenue would decline, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

CIE and CGP LLC license their right to use and sublicense various trademarks and service marks from Caesars Entertainment and certain of its affiliates. Accordingly, if a third-party successfully challenges Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates' ownership of, or right to use, the Caesars-related marks or if CIE or CGP LLC is unable to stop unauthorized use of such marks, or if Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates use such marks in a way that negatively impacts the value of such marks, CIE's and CGP LLC's business or results of operations could be harmed.

CIE and CGP LLC have licensed the right to use certain trademarks and service marks owned or used by various affiliates of Caesars Entertainment, including Caesars World, Inc., Caesars License Company, LLC and CEOC. These licensed trademarks and service marks include, among others, "Caesars," "Harrah's," and "Total Rewards." CGP LLC's rights to use these trademarks and service marks are among its most valuable assets. Caesars World, Inc., Caesars License Company, LLC and CEOC filed for bankruptcy protection in January 2015, as more fully discussed in the risk factor above entitled "A default by Caesars Entertainment on certain of its debt obligations could adversely affect CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results."

If the existing licensing arrangements were terminated and CGP LLC fails to enter into new arrangements in respect of these marks, CGP LLC could lose their rights to use these marks and the corresponding domain names, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and operating results. If a third-party successfully challenges Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates' ownership of, or right to use, these marks (including, for example, due to Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates' failure to file for protection of such marks), such a challenge could also have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

In addition, these trademarks and service marks are used by Caesars Entertainment and its affiliates around the United States and internationally. Any negative events associated with the use of these marks by Caesars Entertainment or its affiliates may be out of CGP LLC's control, and may negatively impact the "Caesars," "Harrah's" or "Total Rewards" brands, which could harm CGP LLC's business and results of operations.

Failure by CES or CEOC and its subsidiaries to protect the trademarks, technology and other intellectual property that CGP LLC uses could have a negative impact on the value of CGPH's brand names and adversely affect our business. In addition, CES or CEOC and its subsidiaries may have the right to limit the expansion of scope or usage of our intellectual property.

CGP LLC currently licenses from CES and CEOC and its subsidiaries, intellectual property and technology material to its overall business strategy, and CGP LLC regards such intellectual property and technology to be an important element of its success. CGP LLC relies on CES and CEOC and its subsidiaries to seek to establish and maintain proprietary rights in such intellectual property and technology through the use of patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secret laws. In addition, CGP LLC relies on CES and CEOC and its subsidiaries to maintain the trade secrets and confidential information licensed to CGP LLC by nondisclosure policies and through the use of appropriate confidentiality agreements. Despite these efforts to protect the proprietary rights on which CGP LLC relies, parties may infringe such intellectual property and use licensed information and technology that CGP LLC regards as proprietary and CGPH's rights may be invalidated or unenforceable. Monitoring the unauthorized use of CGP LLC's licensed intellectual property and technology is difficult. Litigation by CEOC and its subsidiaries or CES, as applicable, may be necessary to enforce the intellectual property rights and other rights on which we rely or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Litigation of this type could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources. We cannot assure you that all of the steps that CGP LLC, CEOC and its subsidiaries or CES have taken or will take to protect the licensed trademarks that CGP LLC uses in the United States will be adequate to prevent imitation of such trademarks by others. The unauthorized use or reproduction of the trademarks that CGPH uses could diminish the value of its brand and its market acceptance, competitive advantages or goodwill, which could adversely affect its business. In addition, the expansion of the scope or use of CGP LLC's intellectual property licensed from CEOC or CES, as applicable, in many cases is subject to the consent of CEOC or CES. Accordingly, CGP LLC may not be able to take advantage of new applications or uses of these licensed trade names, trademarks or other intellectual property without the consent of CEOC or CES, which may adversely affect CGP LLC's ability to compete or expand its business scope.

CIE may be reliant on Caesars Entertainment or CEOC to obtain online gaming licenses in many commercial jurisdictions and if the affiliation is terminated, or costs to maintain such affiliation exceed revenue generated from such affiliation, it would adversely affect CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business and results of operations.

Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey have enacted laws that require online casinos to also have a license to operate a brick-and-mortar casino, either directly or indirectly through an affiliate. If, like Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey, other U.S. jurisdictions enact legislation legalizing real money casino gaming subject to this brick-and-mortar requirement, CIE may be unable to offer online real money gaming in such jurisdictions if CIE does not have or is unable to establish an affiliation with a brick-and-mortar casino in such jurisdiction. If CIE is able to offer online real money gaming in such jurisdictions because of CIE's affiliation with Caesars Entertainment or CEOC, CIE will be reliant on continuing its relationship with Caesars Entertainment or CEOC, and there can be no assurances that Caesars Entertainment or CEOC will continue to maintain such affiliation. If CIE's affiliation with Caesars Entertainment or CEOC is terminated or the costs to maintain such affiliation exceed revenue generated from online real money gaming, it would adversely affect CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business and results of operations.

A bankruptcy court may conclude that each of the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions constitutes a financing rather than a true sale, and as a result we would no longer have ownership and control over assets sold or contributed to CGP LLC to the same extent as we do now.

Caesars Entertainment and its consolidated subsidiaries, as well as CEOC and its consolidated subsidiaries, have reported significant net losses during the past three fiscal years. In a bankruptcy of Caesars Entertainment or any of its subsidiaries (such as the bankruptcy proceeding of CEOC and certain of its subsidiaries that was filed in January 2015) that sold or contributed assets to CGP LLC, including CEOC, the court may conclude that each of the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions constitutes a disguised financing rather than a true sale. In such case, the court would deem CGP LLC's assets as belonging to Caesars Entertainment, and consider us to be a lender to Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries to the extent of the purchase price CGP LLC paid for those assets. While we should have a claim against Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries for the amounts paid to them for the assets, we would no longer have ownership and control over the assets to the same extent as we do now. Moreover, if our claim against Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries is considered a financing, no guaranty exists that our claim will be deemed a secured claim entitled to a priority right of repayment from the assets, rather than a general unsecured claim against Caesars Entertainment's or CEOC's bankruptcy estate that shares pro rata with other creditors in any recovery from the residual value of the bankruptcy estate. Finally, a risk exists that any such claim might be primed in favor of a debtor-in-possession financing, or that the court might equitably subordinate our claim to those of other creditors, recharacterize the claim as equity or otherwise not allow the claim (including on equitable grounds).

A bankruptcy court may substantively consolidate the bankruptcy estates of Caesars Entertainment and its debtor subsidiaries with CGP LLC, which would, among other things, allow the creditors of the bankrupt entities to satisfy their claims from the combined assets of the consolidated entities, including CGP LLC.

Even though CGP LLC has certain bankruptcy remote features that restrict its ability to file for bankruptcy relief, there can be no assurance that a bankruptcy court will not direct CGP LLC's or any of its subsidiaries' substantive consolidation with Caesars Entertainment or a subsidiary of Caesars Entertainment in a bankruptcy case of Caesars Entertainment (including the pending bankruptcy of CEOC and certain of its subsidiaries filed in January 2015) or such subsidiary even if CGP LLC or its subsidiaries do not themselves file a bankruptcy petition. CGP LLC's or its subsidiaries' substantive consolidation with Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries in their bankruptcy cases would, among other things, allow the creditors of the bankrupt entities to satisfy their claims from the combined assets of the consolidated entities, including CGP LLC and its subsidiaries. This may dilute the value of distributions available for recovery to CGP LLC's creditors, and may prevent recovery by our stockholders of any value at all if the combined creditor claims exceed the combined value of the entities. In addition, substantive consolidation with Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries' bankruptcies may subject our assets and operations to the automatic stay, and may impair CGP LLC's ability to operate independently, as well as otherwise restrict our operations and capacity to function as a standalone enterprise.

An independent investigation of the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions in connection with CEOC's bankruptcy is currently ongoing, which will expose our and CGP LLC's contractual relationships with Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries to heightened scrutiny.

The Bankruptcy Court previously engaged an independent examiner to investigate possible claims CEOC might have against CEC, CAC, CGP, other entities and certain individuals. On March 15, 2016, the examiner released his report in redacted form (to the public) and in unredacted form (to certain entities and individuals). CAC, CGP and CIE do not have access to the unredacted report, and accordingly the description below is based on the redacted publicly-available report. The examiner is working with numerous parties to release an unredacted report, which will be made available after confidentiality issues are resolved.

The examiner's report identifies a variety of potential claims against CAC, CGP, CIE, other entities and certain individuals related to a number of transactions dating back to 2009. Most of the examiner's findings are based on his view that CEOC was "insolvent" at the time of the applicable transactions. The examiner's report includes his conclusions on the relative strength of these possible claims, many of which are described in Note 7 of the Notes to Condensed Financial Statements. The examiner calculates an estimated range of potential damages for these potential claims as against all parties from $3.6 billion to $5.1 billion. The examiner calculates an estimated range of potential damages for potential claims against CAC, CGP and CIE from $1.7 billion to $2.29 billion, ignoring potential duplication of recovery from other defendants. Neither calculation takes into account probability of success, likelihood of collection, or the time or cost of litigation.

Although this report was prepared at the request of the Bankruptcy Court, none of the findings are legally binding on the Bankruptcy Court or any party. CAC, CGP and CIE contest many of the examiner's findings, including his finding that CEOC did not receive fair value for assets transferred, any suggestion that certain of the potential claims against CAC, CGP and CIE have merit, and his calculation of potential damages. CAC, CGP and its subsidiaries believe that each of the disputed transactions involving them provided substantial value to CEOC that was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset(s) transferred, and that they at all times acted in good faith.

We are subject to fraudulent transfer litigation that, if adversely decided, may require us to return the assets acquired in the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions, or their value, to Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries.

Creditors of Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries have sued CAC and CGP LLC under state law in an effort to recover, for their benefit, the assets CGP LLC acquired in the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions as fraudulent transfers. See Item 1. Legal Proceedings — CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes for a discussion of these proceedings. As a general matter, fraudulent transfer law allows a creditor to recover assets, or their value, from an initial or subsequent transferee if the debtor conveyed the assets with an actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud its creditors, or if the transfer was a constructive fraudulent transfer. The principal elements of a constructive fraudulent transfer are a transfer, made while a debtor was insolvent or that rendered a debtor insolvent, for less than reasonably equivalent value.

CAC and CGP LLC strongly believe there is no merit to the actions described in Item 1. Legal Proceedings — CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes and CAC and CGP LLC will defend themselves vigorously and seek appropriate relief should any action be brought. However, in the CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes, plaintiffs seek, among other remedies, return to CEOC of six casino properties CGP LLC acquired in the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions for approximately $3.1 billion in cash and assumed debt. The six casino properties acquired in the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions are the only casino properties owned by CGP LLC and account for 100% of CGP LLC's revenue from casino operations. If CAC and CGP LLC lose the lawsuits described above, they may have to return the assets or their value to Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries, or be forced to pay additional amounts therefor. During the three months ended March 31, 2016, revenue from casino operations accounted for 64.6% of CGP LLC's total net revenue. If CGP LLC were forced to return the casino properties to Caesars Entertainment and its subsidiaries, that could cause it to lose the benefit of substantial revenue generated by those properties. Additionally, if a court were to find that the transfers and sales in the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions were improper, that could trigger a default under the debt that we raised to finance these transfers. These consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

CES may be subject to fraudulent transfer or other litigation that may result in its unwinding, or its licensing agreements with CEOC may otherwise be rescinded or terminated.

Creditors of Caesars Entertainment, CEOC and their subsidiaries may commence an action against CES under state or federal bankruptcy law in an effort to rescind, avoid or otherwise terminate, for their benefit, the licensing agreements CEOC entered into with CES. Alternatively, as CEOC and certain of its subsidiaries has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they may reject their licensing agreements with CES. If CES can no longer enforce such licensing agreements, it may be unable to perform under its licensing agreements with CGP LLC and its subsidiaries. As a result, among other things, CGP LLC and its subsidiaries may no longer have access to the Total Rewards loyalty program and may no longer be able to use certain intellectual property, such as the Caesars trademark, which could have a material adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

Our operations depend on material contracts with third parties, including Caesars Entertainment, the continued enforcement of which may be adversely impacted by a bankruptcy of Caesars Entertainment or CES.

A debtor operating under the protection of the Bankruptcy Code may exercise certain rights that may adversely affect our contractual relations and ability to participate in the Caesars Entertainment system. For example, the protection of the statutory automatic stay which arises by operation of Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code upon the commencement of a bankruptcy case prohibits us from terminating a contract with CEOC or any of its debtor subsidiaries. The Bankruptcy Code also invalidates clauses that permit the termination of contracts automatically upon the filing by one of the parties of a bankruptcy petition or which are conditioned on a party's insolvency. Meanwhile in this circumstance, we would ordinarily be required to continue performing our obligations under such agreement. As a practical matter, legal proceedings to obtain relief from the automatic stay and to enforce rights to payments or terminate agreements can be time consuming, costly and uncertain as to outcome.

In addition, under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor may decide whether to assume or reject an executory contract, including the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement, the management contracts for all of the casino properties owned by CGP LLC, the shared service agreement with CIE, or any licensing agreement with CES. Assumption of a contract would permit the debtor to continue operating under the assumed contract; provided that the debtor (i) immediately cures all existing defaults thereunder or provides adequate assurance that such defaults will be promptly cured, (ii) compensates the non-debtor party for any actual monetary loss incurred as a result of the debtor's default or provides adequate assurance that such compensation will be forthcoming and (iii) provides the non-debtor party with adequate assurance of future performance under the contract. As a general matter, a bankruptcy court approves a debtor's assumption of a contract as long as assumption appears to be in the best interest of the debtor's estate, the debtor is able to perform and it is a good business decision to assume the contract. Subject to bankruptcy court approval and satisfaction of the "business judgment" rule, a debtor in Chapter 11 may reject an executory contract, and rejection of an executory contract in a Chapter 7 case may occur automatically by operation of law. If a debtor rejects an executory contract, the non-debtor party to the contract generally has an unsecured claim against the debtor's bankruptcy estate for breach of contract damages arising from the rejection. On request of any party to such contract, a bankruptcy court may order the debtor to determine within a specific period of time whether to assume or reject an executory contract.

Further, CEOC and its subsidiaries that filed for bankruptcy protection, as debtors, may seek bankruptcy court approval to assume material contracts, including among others, the CGP LLC Management Services Agreement, the Omnibus Agreement, the CIE Cross-Marketing Agreement or other valuable license agreements under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code and may also seek to assign such agreement to a third-party. A debtor may also seek to reject such contracts. If CEOC, for example, rejects the Omnibus Agreement, CES may not be able to provide us operational support and management expertise, with the result that we may lack sufficient support to manage our operations, and may no longer be able to use certain licensed intellectual property, such as certain trademarks.

In addition, Caesars Entertainment, if it were to become a debtor for a bankruptcy, may attempt to reject the CGP LLC Operating Agreement as an executory contract. This might affect our continued existence and other corporate governance rights. It may also relieve Caesars Entertainment from performing its obligations under CGP LLC's limited liability company agreement, including honoring its obligations under the liquidation right and call right.

Claims of our stockholders and CGP LLC against Caesars Entertainment or CEOC in a Caesars Entertainment or CEOC bankruptcy might be equitably subordinated or disallowed.

Bankruptcy law allows the court to equitably subordinate claims to those of other creditors or equity holders based on inequitable conduct. A bankruptcy court may also recharacterize a claim for debt as equity, or not allow a claim for other reasons including on equitable grounds. Claims of insiders, including stockholders, are subject to heightened scrutiny and a court may find inequitable conduct in the form of overreaching or self-dealing transactions. If a claim is subordinated to those of other creditors, or recharacterized as equity, the claim will likely receive no distribution from the bankruptcy estate unless the estate has enough assets to satisfy the non-subordinated creditors in full; a claim that is disallowed would not share in recoveries from the estate to the extent of such disallowance. The equitably subordinated or disallowed claim need not necessarily relate to the inequitable conduct. Therefore, a damages claim arising from the rejection of an executory contract may be subordinated or disallowed based on conduct wholly unrelated to the contractual relationship itself. Under these principles, should a court determine that they are triggered in the bankruptcy of CEOC or in a bankruptcy of CEC, if one were to occur, claims of our stockholders and CGP LLC, including claims based on notes issued by Caesars Entertainment or CEOC or guarantees by Caesars Entertainment, may not share ratably with claims from other general unsecured creditors or may be disallowed.

Following assignment of the management agreements to CES upon its commencing operations as of October 1, 2014, CGPH is dependent upon CES to operate CGPH's properties.

Each of CGPH's properties is managed by CES. CGPH is dependent upon CES to provide the services necessary to operate CGPH's properties. CGPH does not have a history of operating casinos. Therefore, CGPH's properties are dependent on

the services provided by CES and CGPH cannot operate CGPH's properties without these services. If the quality of the services provided by CES deteriorates, or the terms under which CES provides services change in a manner that is adverse to CGPH, it could have a material adverse effect on CGPH's business, financial condition and operating results. Following the commencement of operations and receipt of regulatory approvals for CES, at CGPH's request, the property management agreements were assigned to CES. CES is a newly formed entity and will not receive the management fees under the property management agreements. Furthermore, CES is dependent upon its members (CGPH, CEOC and CERP) to provide it with the operating funds and capital requirements (the allocation of which shall be based on each member's ownership interest in CES) necessary to provide services under the property management agreements. If any of the members of CES fail to provide it with the operating funds necessary to operate CES, CES may not be able to fully provide the services required by the property management agreements to operate CGPH's properties.

In addition, if the property management agreements were to be terminated, or if CES were to suffer significant liquidity or operational difficulties, becoming incapable of providing property management services (or unable to provide such services at agreed upon level) to CGPH or cease operations altogether, CGPH may be unable to continue to operate its properties, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

If a court were to find in favor of the claimants in the Noteholder Disputes, it would likely have a material adverse effect on CEC's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and, absent an intervening event, a reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code would likely be necessary due to the limited resources available at CEC to resolve such matters. The significant amounts CEC has agreed to pay in connection with CEOC's reorganization raise substantial doubt about CEC's ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, CEC estimates that it will require additional sources of funding to meet the ongoing financial commitments of the CEC holding company for amounts other than committed to under the RSAs.

CEC is subject to a number of Noteholder Disputes related to various transactions that CEOC has completed since 2008. Plaintiffs in certain of these actions raise allegations of breach of contract, intentional and constructive fraudulent transfer, and breach of fiduciary duty, among other claims. Although the Delaware First Lien Lawsuit has been subject to a consensual stay pursuant to the First Lien Bond RSA since CEOC's filing for Chapter 11, and the Delaware Second Lien Lawsuit is not proceeding with respect to fraud or breach of fiduciary duty claims, should a court find in favor of the plaintiffs on such claims in any of the Noteholder Disputes, including the New York First Lien Lawsuit, the New York Second Lien Lawsuit or the Senior Unsecured Lawsuits, the transactions at issue in those lawsuits may be subject to rescission and/or CEC may be required to pay damages to the plaintiffs. In the event of an adverse outcome on one or all of these matters, it is likely that a reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code would be necessary for CEC due to the limited resources available at CEC to resolve such matters.

A number of the Noteholder Disputes also involve claims that CEC is liable for all amounts due and owing on certain notes issued by CEOC, based on allegations that provisions in the governing indentures pursuant to which CEC guaranteed CEOC's obligations under those notes remain in effect (the "Guarantee Claims"). Such Guarantee Claims were most recently raised against Caesars Entertainment in the New York Senior Notes Lawsuit. Adverse rulings on the Guarantee Claims in this action or any of the other Noteholder Disputes could negatively affect CEC's position on such Guarantee Claims in other Noteholder Disputes, or with respect to potential claims by other holders of certain other notes issued by CEOC. If the court in any of these Noteholder Disputes were to find in favor of the plaintiffs on the Guarantee Claims, CEC may become obligated to pay all principal, interest, and other amounts due and owing on the notes at issue. If CEC became obligated to pay amounts owed on CEOC's indebtedness as a result of the Guarantee Claims, it is likely that a reorganization of CEC under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code would be necessary due to the limited resources available at CEC to resolve such matters. Accordingly, as certain of the Guarantee Claims have not been stayed, and given the timing on which these Guarantee Claims are proceeding and the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we have concluded that these matters raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. The remaining issues in these lawsuits are expected to be tried as early as August 2016. In the event of an adverse outcome on such matters, CEC would likely seek reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code soon thereafter.

In addition to the liquidity issues raised as a result of complying with the material commitments CEC made under the RSAs, CEC estimates that it will require additional sources of funding to meet the ongoing financial commitments of the CEC holding company for amounts other than committed to under the RSAs, primarily resulting from significant expenditures made to (1) defend CEC against the matters disclosed in in Item 1. Legal Proceedings and (2) support CEOC's plan of reorganization. As a result of the foregoing, there is substantial doubt about CEC's ability to continue as a going concern, which could have a materially adverse effect on CAC and CGP LLC, and could also have a material adverse effect on the Proposed Merger.

Risks Related to Caesars Growth Partners, LLC's Business

CGP LLC may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of current or potential future acquisitions.

On May 20, 2014, we closed a transaction whereby CGPH, an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of CGP LLC acquired from Caesars Entertainment certain of its properties and related assets as more fully described in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. There are incremental risks and uncertainties related to the Agreement and the Asset Purchase Transactions contemplated thereunder, many of which are outside of our control, including the following:


•	the diversion of our management's attention from our ongoing business concerns;


•	the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against us and/or others relating to the Transactions; and


•	the amounts of the costs, fees, expenses and charges related to the Asset Purchase Transactions.

For example, we and CGP LLC have been named in two separate lawsuits related to the Asset Purchase Transactions, as more fully described in Item 1. Legal Proceedings under CEOC Bondholder Litigation, or Noteholder Disputes.

In addition, CGP LLC's ability to realize the anticipated benefits of acquisitions, including, but not limited to the Asset Purchase Transactions, will depend, in part, on its ability to integrate the businesses acquired with its business. The combination of two independent companies is a complex, costly and time consuming process. This process may disrupt the business of either or both of the companies, and may not result in the full benefits expected. The difficulties of combining the operations of two companies include, among others:


•	coordinating marketing functions;


•	undisclosed liabilities;


•	unanticipated issues in integrating information, communications and other systems;


•	unanticipated incompatibility of purchasing, marketing and administration methods;


•	retaining key employees;


•	consolidating corporate and administrative infrastructures;


•	the diversion of management's attention from ongoing business concerns;


•	coordinating geographically separate organizations; and


•	obtaining all necessary gaming regulatory approvals.

For instance, CIE has been highly reliant on its acquisition of Playtika and other companies, including Pacific Interactive, to generate revenues. CGP LLC may not realize the expected benefits of future CIE acquisitions, if any, and may not continue to realize the benefits of the Pacific Interactive acquisition, due to one or more of the difficulties listed above or other difficulties associated with the combination of the operations of two or more companies. If CGP LLC is unable to realize in whole or in part the benefits anticipated for any current or future acquisitions, it could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CGP LLC may sell or divest different properties or assets as a result of its evaluation of its portfolio of businesses. Such sales or divestitures could affect CGP LLC's costs, revenues, profitability and financial position.

From time to time, CGP LLC may evaluate its properties and portfolio of businesses and may, as a result, sell or attempt to sell, divest or spin-off different properties or assets.

These sales or divestitures may affect its costs, revenues, profitability, and financial position. Divestitures have inherent risks, including possible delays in closing transactions (including potential difficulties in obtaining regulatory approvals), the risk of lower-than-expected sales proceeds for the divested businesses, and potential post-closing claims for indemnification. In addition, current economic conditions and relatively illiquid real estate markets may result in fewer potential bidders and unsuccessful sales efforts. Expected costs savings, which are offset by revenue losses from divested properties, may also be difficult to achieve or maximize.

CGP LLC may require additional capital to support business growth, and this capital might not be available on acceptable terms or at all.

CGP LLC intends to continue to make significant investments to support its business growth and may require additional funds to respond to business challenges, expand into new markets, develop new games and features or enhance CIE's existing games, improve its operating infrastructure or acquire complementary businesses, personnel and technologies. Accordingly, CAC and CGP LLC may need to engage in equity or debt financings to secure additional funds. If CAC raises additional funds through future issuances of equity or convertible debt securities, our existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution, and

any new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences and privileges superior to those of holders of our Class A common stock. Any debt financing we or CGP LLC secure in the future could involve restrictive covenants relating to capital raising activities and other financial and operational matters, which may make it more difficult to obtain additional capital and to pursue business opportunities, including potential acquisitions. CAC and CGP LLC are recently formed entities and may not be able to obtain additional financing on favorable terms, if at all. For instance, the lack of operating history and relationship with Caesars Entertainment may impede CGP LLC's ability to raise debt or equity financing on acceptable terms, if at all, and there can be no assurances that we could pursue a future offering of securities at an appropriate price to raise the necessary financing. If CAC and CGP LLC are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to them when they require it, their ability to continue to support CGP LLC's business growth and to respond to business challenges could be significantly impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CAC and CGP LLC do not have restrictions on their ability to raise debt and may highly leverage their capital structure, which could adversely affect CGP LLC's ability to pursue certain opportunities.

CAC and CGP LLC have no restrictions on their ability to raise a significant amount of debt financing and/or alter their capital structures. Should CAC or CGP LLC significantly leverage themselves, CAC or CGP LLC will be subject to considerable interest payment expenses that could adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing. Further, once CAC has a highly leveraged capital structure, CGP LLC may lose certain advantages it has against competitors that have similar capital structures that makes pursuing new, capital-intensive opportunities more challenging.

We may not realize any or all of our projected cost savings, which would have a negative effect on our results of operations.

As part of our business strategy, CEC and CES have implemented certain cost savings programs and are in the process of identifying opportunities to improve profitability by reducing costs. For example, Caesars Entertainment and CES have identified cost savings, a portion of which would directly reduce our expenses. Any cost savings that we realize from such efforts may differ materially from our estimates. In addition, any cost savings that we realize may be offset, in whole or in part, by reductions in revenues, or through increases in other expenses. For example, cutting advertising or marketing expenses may have an unintended negative affect on our revenues. These cost savings plans are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that may change at any time. We cannot assure you that cost-savings initiatives will be completed as anticipated or that the benefits we expect will be achieved on a timely basis or at all.

Our historical financial information may not be a reliable indicator of our future results.

The historical financial information we have included in this Form 10-Q has been prepared using assumptions and allocations that we believe are reasonable. However, such historical financial information does not necessarily reflect what our financial position, results of operations and cash flows would have been as a stand-alone entity separate from Caesars Entertainment during the periods presented. In addition, the historical information is not necessarily indicative of what our results of operations, financial position and cash flows will be in the future.

CGP LLC's business may be subject to seasonal fluctuations which could result in volatility or have an adverse effect on the market price of our Class A common stock.

CGP LLC's business may be subject to some degree of seasonality. In the case of CGP LLC's casino properties, weather conditions may deter or prevent customers from reaching the facilities or undertaking trips. Such conditions would particularly affect customers who are traveling longer distances to visit CGP LLC's casino properties. We believe the number of customer visits to CGP LLC's casino properties will fluctuate based on the season, with winter months experiencing lower visitation; however, volume of business generated by our Las Vegas properties is generally lower during the summer months. Seasonality may cause CGP LLC's casino properties working capital cash flow requirements to vary from quarter to quarter depending on the variability in the volume and timing of sales. These factors, among other things, make forecasting more difficult and may adversely affect CGP LLC's casino properties ability to manage working capital and to predict financial results accurately, which could adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock.

There may be a significant degree of difficulty in operating CGP LLC's businesses separately from Caesars Entertainment, and managing that process effectively could require a significant amount of management's time.

The separation from Caesars Entertainment could cause an interruption of, or loss of momentum in, the operation of CGP LLC's businesses. Management may be required to devote considerable amounts of time to the separation, which will decrease the time they will have to manage their ordinary responsibilities. If management is not able to manage the separation effectively, or if any significant business activities are interrupted as a result of the separation, CGP LLC's businesses and operating results could suffer.

We will be allocated taxable income from CGP LLC for U.S. federal income tax purposes regardless of whether we receive corresponding cash distributions from CGP LLC to pay our tax liability.

Because CGP LLC is a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we will be allocated taxable income from CGP LLC for U.S. federal income tax purposes for each fiscal year according to the terms of the CGP LLC Operating Agreement. We will be required to pay U.S. federal income tax on such income at the current U.S. federal corporate income tax rate, regardless of whether CGP LLC makes corresponding cash distributions to us to pay our tax liability. The CGP LLC Operating Agreement provides for quarterly cash tax distributions (other than in connection with a liquidation or certain partial liquidations) to be made to us and Caesars Entertainment, but there is no guarantee that such tax distributions (or other cash distributions from CGP LLC) will be sufficient for us to pay our tax liabilities.

There are no assurances that there will be future development opportunities for CGP LLC or that CGP LLC will obtain a development project.

CGP LLC's ability to expand into new markets to pursue development opportunities depends on passage of legislation that legalizes gambling in new markets and Caesars Entertainment not exercising its right of first offer. Although in the past few years a number of states have passed legislation permitting the development of gaming facilities, there can be no assurances that such trend will continue, and it is possible that legislatures and public sentiment will turn against permitting the development of gaming facilities. Should the states pass no additional legislation for issuing licenses or permitting the development of gaming facilities, CGP LLC will be unable to pursue development opportunities in new markets. Moreover, even if new markets open up, there can be no assurances that Caesars Entertainment and/or CGP LLC will be successful in the bid process for any new development opportunities; therefore, there can be no assurances that CGP LLC will be able to enter those new markets. For example, CGP LLC recently bid for a gaming license in the State of New York but was not selected. Further, there can be no assurances that Caesars Entertainment will not exercise its right of first refusal, thereby depriving CGP LLC of access to any potential development project.

CGP LLC and CAC are subject to extensive governmental regulation and taxation policies, the enforcement of which could adversely impact CGP LLC's business, financial condition and results of operations.

CGP LLC and CAC are subject to extensive gaming regulations and political and regulatory uncertainty. Regulatory authorities in the jurisdictions where CGP LLC operates have broad powers with respect to the licensing of casino operations and may revoke, suspend, condition or limit the gaming or other licenses of CGP LLC's casino properties or developments, impose substantial fines and take other actions, any one of which could adversely impact CGP LLC's business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, regulatory authorities in one or more jurisdictions may require CGP LLC or CAC to obtain new licenses in connection with the Transactions and the Asset Purchase Transactions or due to future changes in regulation. For instance, the Missouri Gaming Commission has required that CAC obtain certain licenses after the closing of the Transactions even though CGP LLC does not operate in Missouri. The failure of CAC to maintain a license from the Missouri Gaming Commission could, among other things, result in the loss of Caesars Entertainment's gaming license in Missouri. If other jurisdictions require CGP LLC or CAC to obtain new licenses in connection with its operations, the formation of CES or due to future changes in regulation, and CGP LLC or CAC is unable to obtain those licenses, it could adversely impact CGP LLC's business, financial condition and results of operations. As another example, CGP LLC's ability to expand its operations at Harrah's New Orleans, which could include increasing the number of rooms at the hotel or opening new restaurants at the complex, is subject to regulatory approval, and any such proposal may or may not be approved.

As a result of CIE holding an online gaming license, its operations and activities are subject to various gaming laws and laws in Nevada and New Jersey. We also expect CIE to be subject to these or similar laws as CIE seeks additional licenses for online real money gaming in the United States if additional states legalize and regulate online gaming. For example, CIE has obtained a license in Nevada as an "operator of an interactive gaming system" and obtained regulatory approval to launch online poker in Nevada. In addition, CIE holds a license in New Jersey to operate internet gaming in New Jersey. Among these laws are various "suitability" requirements which could limit CIE's ability to conduct business with certain third parties, make certain acquisitions and otherwise freely conduct its business. The results of such restrictions could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Furthermore, interpretations of laws and local regulations and ordinances on which CGP LLC and CAC rely may change or be made conditional on certain other factors, which could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, Harrah's New Orleans is currently subject to a local ordinance in New Orleans related to the minimum number of people who must be employed at Harrah's New Orleans. A change in the interpretation of this ordinance or a change in this ordinance could force a reevaluation of staffing at that property in a manner that could adversely affect the financial results of Harrah's New Orleans.

Furthermore, because CGP LLC and CAC are subject to regulation in each jurisdiction in which they operate, and because regulatory agencies within each jurisdiction review our compliance with gaming laws in other jurisdictions, it is possible that gaming compliance issues in one jurisdiction may lead to reviews and compliance issues in other jurisdictions.

From time to time, individual jurisdictions have also considered legislation or referendums, such as bans on smoking in casinos and other entertainment and dining facilities, which could adversely impact the operations of CGP LLC's casino properties. For example, Maryland law prohibits smoking inside the Horseshoe Baltimore facility. Additionally, the city council in New Orleans enacted an ordinance restricting smoking indoors in public places, including in Harrah's New Orleans, which went into effect in April 2015. The likelihood or outcome of similar legislation in such jurisdictions and referendums in the future cannot be predicted, though any smoking ban would be expected to negatively impact CGP LLC's financial performance.

The casino entertainment industry represents a significant source of tax revenues to the various jurisdictions in which casinos operate. From time to time, various state and federal legislators and officials have proposed changes in tax laws, or in the administration of such laws, including increases in tax rates, which would affect the industry. If adopted, such changes could adversely impact CGP LLC's business, financial condition and results of operations.

Acts of terrorism, natural disasters, severe weather and political, economic and military conditions may impede CGP LLC's ability to operate or harm its financial results.

Terrorist attacks and other acts of war or hostility have created many economic and political uncertainties. For example, a substantial number of the customers of CGP LLC's casinos in Las Vegas and New Orleans use air travel for transportation to and from the casino. As a result of terrorist acts, domestic and international travel was severely disrupted, which resulted in a decrease in customer visits to Las Vegas or New Orleans. We cannot predict the extent to which disruptions in air or other forms of travel as a result of any further terrorist act, security alerts or war, uprisings, or hostilities in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan, or other countries throughout the world, will continue to directly or indirectly impact CGP LLC's business and operating results. As a consequence of the threat of terrorist attacks and other acts of war or hostility in the future, premiums for a variety of insurance products have increased, and some types of insurance are no longer available. If any such event were to affect our properties, we would likely be adversely impacted. In addition, natural and man-made disasters such as major fires, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes and oil spills, or severe or inclement weather affecting the ability of CGP LLC's casino customers to travel can have a negative impact on its results of operations. In most cases, we have insurance that covers portions of any losses from a natural disaster, but it is subject to deductibles and maximum payouts in many cases. Although we may be covered by insurance from a natural disaster, the timing of our receipt of insurance proceeds, if any, is out of our control. In some cases, however, we may receive no proceeds from insurance. Additionally, a natural disaster affecting one or more of our properties may affect the level and cost of insurance coverage we may be able to obtain in the future, which may adversely affect our financial position. As our operations depend in part on our customers' ability to travel, severe or inclement weather can also have a negative impact on our results of operations.

Political, economic and military conditions may directly affect CGP LLC's business by impeding its operations or player demand. In particular, a key portion of the operations and personnel of Playtika, a subsidiary of CIE and the operator of Slotomania, are located in Israel, a country located in a particularly volatile region. CIE also has approximately 600 employees in Ukraine, a country currently facing political unrest and hostilities. Any hostilities, or any future armed conflicts, political or economic instability or violence in the Middle East or further disruptions in Ukraine could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Any violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or other similar laws and regulations could have a negative impact on us.

CGP LLC is subject to risks associated with doing business outside of the United States, which exposes CGP LLC to complex foreign and U.S. regulations inherent in engaging in a cross-border business and in each of the countries in which CGP LLC and its businesses transact business. CGP LLC is subject to requirements imposed by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA") and other anti-corruption laws that generally prohibit U.S. companies and their affiliates from offering, promising, authorizing or making improper payments to foreign government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Violations of the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws may result in severe criminal and civil sanctions as well as other penalties and the SEC and U.S. Department of Justice have increased their enforcement activities with respect to the FCPA. Policies and procedures and employee training and compliance programs that CGP LLC has implemented to deter prohibited practices may not be effective in prohibiting our employees, contractors or agents from violating or circumventing our policies and the law. If the employees, contractors or agents of CGP LLC's casino properties or CIE fail to comply with applicable laws or company policies governing its international operations, CGP LLC may face investigations, prosecutions and other legal proceedings and actions which could result in civil penalties, administrative remedies and criminal sanctions. Any determination that CGP LLC has violated any anti-corruption laws could have a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's financial condition. Compliance with international and U.S. laws and regulations that apply to CGP LLC's international operations increase CGP LLC's cost of doing business in foreign jurisdictions. CGP LLC and its businesses also deal with significant amounts of cash in its operations and are subject to various reporting and AML regulations. Any violation of AML or regulations, on which in recent years, governmental authorities have been increasingly focused, with a particular focus on the gaming industry, by any of our resorts could have a negative effect on our results of operations. As an example, a major gaming company recently settled a U.S. Attorney investigation into its AML practices. In recent years, governmental authorities have been increasingly focused on AML policies and procedures, with a particular focus on the gaming industry. In October 2013, CEOC's subsidiary, Desert Palace, Inc. (the

owner of and referred to herein as Caesars Palace), received a letter from Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the United States Department of the Treasury ("FinCEN"), stating that FinCEN was investigating Caesars Palace for alleged violations of the Bank Secrecy Act to determine whether it is appropriate to assess a civil penalty and/or take additional enforcement action against Caesars Palace. Caesars Palace responded to FinCEN's letter in January 2014. Additionally, CEC was informed in October 2013 that a federal grand jury investigation regarding anti-money laundering practices of CEC and its subsidiaries had been initiated. CEC and Caesars Palace have been cooperating with FinCEN, the Department of Justice and the Nevada Gaming Control Board (the "GCB") on this matter. On September 8, 2015, FinCEN announced a settlement pursuant to which Caesars Palace agreed to an $8 million civil penalty for its violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, which penalty shall be treated as a general unsecured claim in Caesars Palace's bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, Caesars Palace agreed to conduct periodic external audits and independent testing of its AML compliance program, report to FinCEN on mandated improvements, adopt a rigorous training regime, and engage in a "look-back" for suspicious transactions. The terms of the FinCEN settlement are subject to bankruptcy court approval. CEOC and the GCB reached a settlement on the same facts as above, wherein CEC agreed to pay $1.5 million and provide to the GCB the same information that is reported to FinCEN and to resubmit its updated AML policies. On September 17, 2015, the settlement agreement was approved by the Nevada Gaming Commission.

We are, or may become involved, in legal proceedings that if adversely adjudicated or settled, could impact our financial condition.

From time to time, CAC and CGP LLC are defendants in various lawsuits or other legal proceedings relating to matters incidental to our business. The nature of our business subjects CAC and CGP LLC to the risk of lawsuits filed by customers, past and present employees, competitors, business partners, and others in the ordinary course of business. As with all legal proceedings, however, no assurance can be provided as to the outcome of these matters and in general, legal proceedings can be expensive and time consuming. CAC and CGP LLC may not be successful in the defense or prosecution of these lawsuits, which could result in settlements or damages that could significantly impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

CAC and CGP LLC are defendants in certain legal proceedings, including the lawsuits relating to the Merger Agreement and the Proposed Merger, as discussed in Item 1. Legal Proceedings. If a court were to find in favor of the claimants in these proceedings, such determination could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our obligation to fund multi-employer pension plans to which we contribute may have an adverse impact on us.

We contribute to and participate in various multi-employer pension plans for employees represented by certain unions. We are required to make contributions to these plans in amounts established under collective bargaining agreements. We do not administer these plans and, generally, are not represented on the boards of trustees of these plans. The Pension Protection Act enacted in 2006, or the PPA, requires under-funded pension plans to improve their funding ratios. Based on the information available to us, some of the multi-employer plans to which we contribute are either "critical" or "endangered" as those terms are defined in the PPA. Specifically, the Pension Plan of the UNITE HERE National Retirement Fund is less than 65% funded. We cannot determine at this time the amount of additional funding, if any, we may be required to make to these plans. However, plan assessments could have an adverse impact on our results of operations or cash flows for a given period. Furthermore, under current law, upon the termination of a multi-employer pension plan, due to the withdrawal of all its contributing employers (a mass withdrawal), or in the event of a withdrawal by us, which we consider from time to time, we would be required to make payments to the plan for our proportionate share of the plan's unfunded vested liabilities, that would have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In January 2015, the Trustees of the National Retirement Fund ("NRF"), a multi-employer defined benefit pension plan, voted to expel the CEC and its participating subsidiaries, the CEC Group, from the plan. NRF claims that CEOC's bankruptcy presents an "actuarial risk" to the plan purportedly permitting such expulsion. The CGP LLC affiliate that is included in NRF is the Las Vegas laundry. NRF has advised the CEC Group that its expulsion has triggered withdrawal liability with a present value of approximately $360 million, payable in 80 quarterly payments of about $6 million.

The CEC Group disputes NRF's authority to take such action. Prior to NRF's vote, the CEC Group reiterated its commitment to remain in the plan and not seek rejection of any collective bargaining agreement in which the obligation to contribute to NRF exists. CEOC is current with respect to pension contributions. The CEC Group is pursuing several litigation strategies to challenge NRF's action. There can be no assurance that our strategies will have a successful outcome, and the CEC Group may become liable for the withdrawal liability, which would have an adverse impact on us.

CGP LLC's Casino Properties and Developments business is particularly sensitive to reductions in discretionary consumer spending resulting from downturns in the economy, the volatility and disruption of the capital and credit markets, adverse changes in the global economy and other factors which could negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to access financing.

Changes in discretionary consumer spending or consumer preferences are driven by factors beyond CGP LLC's control, such as perceived or actual general economic conditions; high energy, fuel and other commodity costs; the cost of travel; the potential for bank failures; a soft job market; an actual or perceived decrease in disposable consumer income and wealth; fears of recession and changes in consumer confidence in the economy; and terrorist attacks or other global events. CGP LLC's Casino Properties and Developments business is particularly susceptible to any such changes because CGP LLC's casino properties offers a highly discretionary set of entertainment and leisure activities and amenities. If discretionary consumer spending declines, then CGP LLC's results of operations will be adversely impacted.

The adverse conditions in certain local, regional, national and global markets have negatively affected CGP LLC and may continue to negatively affect CGP LLC in the future. During periods of economic contraction, CGP LLC's revenues may decrease while some of its costs remain fixed or even increase, resulting in decreased earnings. In addition, CGP LLC may also be unable to find additional cost savings to offset any decrease in revenues. Even an uncertain economic outlook may adversely affect consumer spending in CGP LLC's gaming operations and related facilities, as consumers spend less in anticipation of a potential economic downturn.

Theoretical win rates for CGP LLC's casino operations depend on a variety of factors, some of which are beyond its control.

The gaming industry is characterized by an element of chance. Accordingly, CGP LLC's casino properties employ theoretical win rates to estimate what a certain type of game, on average, will win or lose in the long run. In addition to the element of chance, theoretical win rates are also affected by the spread of table limits and factors that are beyond CGP LLC's control, such as a player's skill and experience and behavior, the mix of games played, the financial resources of players, the volume of bets placed and the amount of time players spend gambling. As a result of the variability in these factors, the actual win rates at the casino may differ from the theoretical win rates and could result in the winnings of CGP LLC's gaming customers exceeding those anticipated. The variability of these factors, alone or in combination, have the potential to negatively impact our actual win rates, which may adversely affect CGP LLC's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

CGP LLC's casino operations extend credit to its customers and may not be able to collect gaming receivables from its credit players.

CGP LLC's casino properties conduct their gaming activities on a credit basis as well as a cash basis, which credit is unsecured. Table games players typically are extended more credit than slot players, and high stakes players are typically extended more credit than patrons who tend to wager lower amounts. High-end gaming is more volatile than other forms of gaming, and variances in win-loss results attributable to high-end gaming may have a significant positive or negative impact on cash flow and earnings in a particular quarter.

CGP LLC's casino properties extend credit to those customers whose level of play and financial resources warrant, in the opinion of management, an extension of credit. These receivables could have a significant impact on our results of operations if deemed uncollectible. While gaming debts are evidenced by a credit instrument, including what is commonly referred to as a "marker," and judgments on gaming debts are enforceable under the current laws of the jurisdictions in which CGP LLC allows play on a credit basis and judgments in such jurisdictions on gaming debts are enforceable in all states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, other jurisdictions may determine that enforcement of gaming debts is against public policy. Although courts of some foreign nations will enforce gaming debts directly and the assets in the U.S. of foreign debtors may be reached to satisfy a judgment, judgments on gaming debts from U.S. courts are not binding on the courts of many foreign nations.

We face the risk of fraud and cheating.

Casino gaming customers may attempt or commit fraud or cheat in order to increase winnings. Acts of fraud or cheating could involve the use of counterfeit chips or other tactics, possibly in collusion with the employees of CGP LLC's casinos. Internal acts of cheating could also be conducted by employees through collusion with dealers, surveillance staff, floor managers or other casino or gaming area staff. Failure to discover such acts or schemes in a timely manner could result in losses in gaming operations. In addition, negative publicity related to such schemes could have an adverse effect on CGP LLC's reputation, potentially causing a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Because a majority of CGP LLC's major gaming resorts are concentrated on the Las Vegas Strip, we are subject to greater risks than a gaming company that is more geographically diversified.

Given that a majority of CGP LLC's major resorts are concentrated on the Las Vegas Strip, CGP LLC's business may be significantly affected by risks common to the Las Vegas tourism industry. For example, the cost and availability of air services and the impact of any events that disrupt air travel to and from Las Vegas can adversely affect our business. We cannot control the number or frequency of flights to or from Las Vegas, but CGP LLC relies on air traffic for a significant portion of its visitors. Reductions in flights by major airlines as a result of higher fuel prices or lower demand can impact the number of visitors to CGP LLC's resorts. Additionally, there is one principal interstate highway between Las Vegas and Southern California, where a large number of CGP LLC's customers reside. Capacity constraints of that highway or any other traffic disruptions may also affect the number of customers who visit CGP LLC's facilities.

CGP LLC's business is particularly sensitive to energy prices and a rise in energy prices could harm its operating results.

CGP LLC is a large consumer of electricity and other energy and, therefore, higher energy prices may have an adverse effect on its results of operations. Accordingly, increases in energy costs may have a negative impact on its operating results. Additionally, higher electricity and gasoline prices that affect its customers may result in reduced visitation to its resorts and a reduction in its revenues. CGP LLC may be indirectly impacted by regulatory requirements aimed at reducing the impacts of climate change directed at up-stream utility providers, as it could experience potentially higher utility, fuel, and transportation costs.

If we are unable to effectively compete against our competitors, our profits will decline.

The gaming industry is highly competitive and CGP LLC's competitors vary considerably in size, quality of facilities, number of operations, brand identities, marketing and growth strategies, financial strength and capabilities, and geographic diversity. CGP LLC also competes with other non-gaming resorts and vacation areas, and with various other entertainment businesses. Competitors in each market that CGP LLC participates may have greater financial, marketing, or other resources than CGP LLC does, and there can be no assurance that they will not engage in aggressive pricing action to compete with CGP LLC. Although we believe CGP LLC is currently able to compete effectively in each of the various markets in which we participate, we cannot ensure that CGP LLC will be able to continue to do so or that they will be capable of maintaining or further increasing their current market share. CGP LLC's failure to compete successfully in their various markets could adversely affect their business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow.

In recent years, many casino operators have been reinvesting in existing markets to attract new customers or to gain market share, thereby increasing competition in those markets. As companies have completed new expansion projects, supply has typically grown at a faster pace than demand in some markets, including Las Vegas, CGP LLC's largest market, and competition has increased significantly. For example, SLS Las Vegas opened in August 2014 on the northern end of the Strip, and the Genting Group has announced plans to develop a casino and hotel called Resorts World Las Vegas, which is expected to open in 2018 on the northern end of the Strip. Also, in response to changing trends, Las Vegas operators have been focused on expanding their non-gaming offerings, including upgrades to hotel rooms, new food and beverage offerings, and new entertainment offerings. MGM's The Park and joint venture with AEG, T-Mobile Arena, located between New York-New York and Monte Carlo, opened in April 2016 and includes retail and dining options and a 20,000 seat indoor arena for sporting events and concerts. There have also been proposals for other large scale non-gaming development projects in Las Vegas by various other developers. The expansion of existing casino entertainment properties, the increase in the number of properties and the aggressive marketing strategies of many of CGP LLC's competitors have increased competition in many markets in which they operate, and this intense competition is expected to continue. These competitive pressures have and are expected to continue to adversely affect CGP LLC's financial performance. Growth in consumer demand for non-gaming offerings could also negatively impact our gaming revenue.

In addition, in the mid-Atlantic region, existing casino resorts provide a number of gaming options for customers, thereby creating significant competition for Horseshoe Baltimore. The casino resorts in the mid-Atlantic region compete with each other on the basis of overall atmosphere, range of amenities, level of service, price, location, entertainment offered and size. Further, when MGM National Harbor in Maryland opens, it may draw additional customers away from Horseshoe Baltimore. If Horseshoe Baltimore is unable to effectively compete with other regional casino resorts or keep customers, this inability may negatively affect Horseshoe Baltimore's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business and operations.

CGP LLC also competes with legalized gaming from casinos located on Native American tribal lands, primarily those located in California. While the competitive impact on our operations in Las Vegas from the continued growth of Native American gaming establishments in California remains uncertain, the proliferation of gaming in California and other areas located in the same region as our Las Vegas properties and other properties could have an adverse effect on CGP LLC's results of operations.

In addition, certain states have legalized, and others may legalize, casino gaming in specific areas, including metropolitan areas from which we traditionally attract customers. A number of states have permitted or are considering permitting gaming, on Native American reservations and through expansion of state lotteries.

The current global trend toward liberalization of gaming restrictions and resulting proliferation of gaming venues could result in a decrease in the number of visitors to our Las Vegas facilities by attracting customers close to home and away from Las Vegas, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

The success of third parties adjacent to CGP LLC's properties is important to its ability to generate revenue and operate CGP LLC's business and any deterioration to their success could materially adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

In certain cases, CGP LLC does not own the businesses and amenities adjacent to its properties. However, the adjacent third-party businesses and amenities stimulate additional traffic through its complexes. For example, the Grand Bazaar Shops located in front of Bally's Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas. Any decrease in the popularity of, or the number of customers visiting, these adjacent businesses and amenities may lead to a corresponding decrease in the traffic through our complexes, which would negatively affect CGP LLC's business and operating results. Further, if newly opened properties, such as The Cromwell, are not as popular as expected, CGP LLC will not realize the increase in traffic through CGP LLC's properties that it expects as a result of their opening, which would negatively affect its business projections.

CGP LLC's Casino Properties and Developments Business may be subject to material environmental liability, including as a result of unknown environmental contamination.

The Casino Properties and Developments Business is subject to certain federal, state and local environmental laws, regulations and ordinances which govern activities or operations that may have adverse environmental effects, such as emissions to air, discharges to streams and rivers and releases of hazardous substances and pollutants into the environment, as well as handling and disposal from municipal/non-hazardous waste, and which also apply to current and previous owners or operators of real estate generally. Federal examples of these laws include the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation Recovery Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. Certain of these environmental laws may impose cleanup responsibility and liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of or caused particular contamination or release of hazardous substances. Should unknown contamination be discovered on CGP LLC's property, or should a release of hazardous substances occur on CGP LLC's property, CGP LLC could be required to investigate and clean up the contamination and could also be held responsible to a governmental entity or third parties for property damage, personal injury or investigation and cleanup costs incurred in connection with the contamination or release, which may be substantial. Moreover, such contamination may also impair CGP LLC's ability to use the affected property. Such liability could be joint and several in nature, regardless of fault, and could affect CGP LLC even if such property is vacated. The potential for substantial costs and an inability to use the property could adversely affect our business.

Work stoppages and other labor problems could negatively impact our future profits.

Some of our employees are represented by labor unions and, accordingly, we are subject to the risk of work stoppages or other labor disruptions from time to time. We have seven collective bargaining agreements covering various employees in Las Vegas expiring in 2016. We intend to negotiate renewal agreements for all collective bargaining agreements expiring and are hopeful that we will be able to reach agreements with the respective unions without any work stoppage. Work stoppages and other labor disruptions could have a material adverse impact on our operations. Also, wage and/or benefit increases resulting from new labor agreements may be significant and could also have an adverse impact on our results of operations. From time to time, we have experienced attempts by labor organizations to organize certain of our non-union employees. To the extent that our non-union employees join unions, we could have greater exposure to risks associated with labor problems and could negatively impact our profits.

CGP LLC's insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all possible losses it could suffer, and, in the future, its insurance costs may increase significantly or it may be unable to obtain the same level of insurance coverage.

CGP LLC's casino properties may suffer damage to its property caused by a casualty loss (such as fire, natural disasters and acts of war or terrorism) that could severely disrupt its business or subject it to claims by third parties who are injured or harmed. Although CGP LLC maintains insurance (including property, casualty, terrorism and business interruption insurance), that insurance may be inadequate or unavailable to cover all of the risks to which its business and assets may be exposed. Should an uninsured loss or loss in excess of insured limits occur, it could have a significant adverse impact on CGP LLC's operations and revenues.

CGP LLC renews its insurance policies on an annual basis. If the cost of coverage becomes too high, CGP LLC may need to reduce its policy limits or agree to certain exclusions from its coverage in order to reduce the premiums to an acceptable amount. Among other factors, homeland security concerns, other catastrophic events or any change in the current U.S. statutory requirement that insurance carriers offer coverage for certain acts of terrorism could adversely affect available insurance coverage and result in increased premiums on available coverage (which may cause CGP LLC to elect to reduce its policy

limits) and additional exclusions from coverage. Among other potential future adverse changes, in the future CGP LLC may elect to not, or may be unable to, obtain any coverage for losses due to acts of terrorism.

Planet Hollywood licenses the Planet Hollywood brand from affiliates of Robert Earl and there can be no assurances that the Planet Hollywood brand would not be negatively impacted by its use outside of our control.

Affiliates of Robert Earl license certain intellectual property relating to the operation of the Planet Hollywood Resort and Casino to Planet Hollywood. The license includes certain names and trademarks and the right to display certain memorabilia on the Planet Hollywood premises. Planet Hollywood has invested significant time and financing to establish its brand as a Hollywood-themed entertainment and non-gaming destination. The expiration or termination, or modification of the terms of this license may have a materially adverse effect on Planet Hollywood's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial conditions and operating results.

In addition, the Planet Hollywood brand is used by affiliates of Robert Earl in Hollywood-themed restaurants, hotels and shops around the United States and internationally. Any negative events associated with the use of the Planet Hollywood brand with these restaurants and shops may be out of CGP LLC's control, and may negatively impact the brand's image for the Planet Hollywood casino, which could harm Planet Hollywood's, therefore CGP LLC's, business and results of operations.

The Maryland Joint Venture adds additional risk that may result in a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

CGP LLC indirectly holds approximately 40.9% interest in the Maryland Joint Venture. While CGP LLC can influence the ownership of the Maryland Joint Venture through its equity ownership, CGP LLC relies on the other equity partners for providing certain funding for the Maryland Joint Venture and there can be no assurances that the other equity partners will provide sufficient funding, or any funding at all, if needed. The failure of other equity partners in the Maryland Joint Venture to provide the appropriate level of funding may result in a material adverse effect on CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

Risks Related to CGP LLC's Interactive Entertainment Business

One game has historically generated the majority of CIE's revenue, and CIE must continue to launch and enhance games that attract and retain a significant number of players in order to grow its revenue and sustain its competitive position.

Historically, CIE has depended on one game for the majority of its revenue and we expect that this dependency will likely continue for the foreseeable future. Specifically, Slotomania accounted for 45.2% of CIE's social and mobile online game revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 43.3% of CIE's total revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2016. CIE's growth depends on its ability to increase interest in its key established game, Slotomania, by continually enhancing the game. Each of CIE's games requires significant engineering, marketing and other resources to develop, launch and sustain via regular upgrades and expansions, and such costs on average have increased and are likely to continue to increase in the future. CIE's ability to successfully launch, sustain and expand games and attract and retain players largely depends on its ability to:


•	anticipate and effectively respond to changing player interests and preferences;


•	anticipate and respond to changes in the competitive landscape, including any future legalization of online real money gaming in the United States and other jurisdictions;


•	attract, retain and motivate talented game designers, product managers and engineers;


•	develop, sustain and expand games that are fun, interesting and compelling to play;


•	effectively market new games and enhancements to CIE's existing players and new players;


•	minimize launch delays and cost overruns on new games and game expansions;


•	minimize downtime and other technical difficulties; and


•	acquire high quality assets, personnel and companies.

It is difficult to consistently anticipate player demand on a large scale, particularly as CIE develops new games in new markets, including international markets and mobile platforms. If CIE does not successfully launch and/or sustain games that attract and retain a significant number of players and extend the life of CIE's existing games, it could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

If CIE's top game, Slotomania, does not maintain its popularity, CIE's results of operations could be harmed.

In addition to creating new games or expanding current games that are attractive to a significant number of players, CIE must extend the life of its existing games, in particular its most successful game, Slotomania. For a game to remain popular, CIE

must routinely enhance, expand and/or upgrade the game with new features and content that players find attractive. Such enhancement requires the investment of significant resources, integration into new platforms, introduction of new languages, expansion into new jurisdictions and often presents new marketing and other challenges. CIE may not be able to successfully enhance, expand or upgrade CIE's current library of games. Any decrease in the popularity of CIE's social and mobile games, or any other adverse developments relating to CIE's most popular game, Slotomania, could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CIE relies on a small portion of its total players for nearly all of its revenue from social and mobile games and if CIE fails to grow or sustain its player base, its results of operations could be adversely affected.

Consistent with the social and mobile games business model, only a small portion of CIE's social and mobile games players pay for virtual goods. During the three months ended March 31, 2016, CIE's social and mobile games business had approximately 922 thousand average Monthly Unique Payers, or 4.5% of the total number of CIE's average Monthly Unique Users, on its social and mobile platforms. In order to sustain and increase CIE's revenue levels, CIE must attract, retain and increase the number of players that are payers. To retain players, CIE must devote significant resources so that the games they play retain their interest and attract them to CIE's other games. If CIE fails to grow or sustain its player base, or if the rates at which CIE attracts and retains players declines or if the average amount of revenue CIE receives from its players declines, it could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

The social and mobile games industry is rapidly growing and changing, which makes it difficult to evaluate CIE's business and prospects.

Social and mobile games, from which CGP LLC derived 95.8% of the revenue for the Interactive Entertainment business during the three months ended March 31, 2016, is a rapidly growing and evolving industry. The growth of the industries and the level of demand and market acceptance of CIE's games are subject to a high degree of uncertainty. CIE's future operating results will depend on numerous factors affecting the social and mobile games industry and the online gaming industry in the U.S., many of which are beyond CIE's control, including, among others:


•	the occurrence and manner of legalization of online real money gaming in the United States beyond Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey;


•	continued worldwide growth in the adoption and use of Facebook, other social networks and mobile platforms;


•	changing rules and requirements on social networks, like Facebook and mobile platforms, like Android and Apple iOS;


•	changes in consumer demographics and public tastes and preferences;


•	changing laws and regulations affecting social and mobile games;


•	the availability and popularity of other forms of entertainment;


•	the worldwide growth of personal computer, broadband Internet and mobile device users, and the rate of any such growth; and


•	general economic conditions, particularly economic conditions adversely affecting discretionary consumer spending.

CIE's ability to plan for game development, distribution and promotional activities will be significantly affected by its ability to anticipate and adapt to relatively rapid changes in the tastes and preferences of its current and potential players. New and different types of entertainment may increase in popularity at the expense of social and mobile games. A decline in the popularity of social or mobile games in general, or CIE's games in particular, could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

The low barriers to entry and intense competition that characterizes the social and mobile games industry could have an adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and results of operations.

The social and mobile games industry has low barriers to entry and we expect more companies to enter the sector and a wider range of social and mobile games to be introduced. The industry is also highly competitive. CIE's competitors that develop social and mobile games vary in size and include publicly traded companies such as Zynga Inc. ("Zynga"), Glu Mobile, Inc., IGT, King Digital Entertainment plc and Electronic Arts. In addition, online game developers and distributors who are primarily focused on specific international markets, such as Tencent Holdings Limited in Asia, and high-profile companies with significant online presences that to date have not developed social and mobile games, such as Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Facebook, Google Inc., Microsoft Corporation and Yahoo! Inc., may decide to develop social and mobile games in the future. Some of these current and potential competitors have significant resources for developing or acquiring additional games, may be able to incorporate their own highly recognized brands and assets into their games, have a more diversified set of revenue sources than CIE currently does and may be less severely affected by changes in consumer preferences, regulations or other developments that may impact the social and mobile games industry. As CIE continues to devote significant resources to developing games for

social and mobile platforms, CIE will face significant competition from established companies that may have far greater experience than CIE, including Zynga and Electronic Arts. Moreover, there exists in the social and mobile games industry a significant "first mover" advantage. CIE's ability to compete effectively in respect to a particular style of game may be premised on introducing a game in that style before CIE's competitors. We cannot assure you that CIE will be able to continue to compete effectively or that CIE will be capable of maintaining or further increasing its current market share. CIE's failure to compete successfully in its various markets could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and results of operations.

If CIE fails to effectively manage its growth, CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business and operating results could be harmed.

CIE continues to experience rapid growth in its headcount and operations, which will continue to place significant demands on its management and operational, financial and technological infrastructure. As of March 31, 2016, approximately 32.9% of CIE's employees had been with CIE for less than one year and approximately 59.7% for less than two years. Moreover, a number of the individuals CIE relies on for its operations are consultants, not full-time employees on CIE's payroll. As CIE continues to grow, it must expend significant resources to identify, hire, integrate, develop and motivate a large number of qualified employees. If CIE fails to effectively manage its hiring needs and successfully integrate its new hires, CIE's ability to continue launching new games and enhance existing games could suffer.

To effectively manage the growth of CIE's business and operations, it will need to continue spending significant resources to improve its technology infrastructure, its operational, financial and management controls, and its reporting systems and procedures by, among other things:


•	monitoring and updating CIE's technology infrastructure to maintain high performance and minimize down time;


•	enhancing information and communication systems to ensure that CIE's employees and offices around the world are well-coordinated and can effectively communicate with each other; and


•	appropriately documenting CIE's information technology systems and business processes.

If CIE fails to successfully do these things, it could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CIE's growth prospects will suffer if it is unable to develop successful games and versions of games for new and emerging devices and platforms.

We expect CIE to devote substantial resources to the development of its social online and mobile games on new and emerging platforms, and its limited experience makes it difficult to know whether CIE will succeed in developing such games that appeal to players or advertisers on such new and emerging platforms. The uncertainties CIE faces include:


•	its experience in developing social games for use primarily on Facebook, Google's Android and Apple's iOS may not be relevant for developing games for new and emerging platforms;


•	many new and emerging platforms are located in countries where CIE has no or limited operating experience;


•	new and emerging platforms may require different technological requirements to adapt CIE's games than its current platforms, which may require significant expense;


•	CIE has limited experience working with wireless carriers, new and emerging platform providers and other partners whose cooperation CIE may need in order to be successful; and


•	CIE will need to move beyond payment methods provided by social networks and successfully allow for a variety of payment methods and systems based on new mobile platforms, geographies and other factors, including on our website Slotomania.com.

These and other uncertainties make it difficult to know whether CIE will succeed in developing commercially viable games for new and emerging social and mobile platforms. If CIE does not succeed in doing so, it could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

If CIE is unable to maintain a good relationship with Facebook, Apple and/or Google, or if Facebook, Apple or Google were to change their respective terms of service in ways unfavorable to CIE, CIE's business may suffer.

Facebook, Apple iOS and Google Android are significant distribution, marketing, promotion and payment platforms for CIE's games. In the first quarter of 2016, CIE generated approximately 96.4% of social and mobile games revenue and 93.4% of its social and mobile games users through the Facebook, Apple iOS and Google Android platforms and we expect CIE to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. CIE is subject to Facebook's, Apple's and Google's respective standard terms and

conditions for application developers, which govern the promotion, distribution and operation of games and other applications on the Facebook, Apple iOS and Android platforms. Additionally, Apple and Google rate each game for age appropriateness.

CIE has benefited from Facebook's, Apple's and Google's strong brand recognition and large user bases. If Facebook, Apple iOS and/or Google Android loses its market position or otherwise falls out of favor with Internet users, CIE would need to identify alternative channels for marketing, promoting and distributing CIE's social and mobile games, which would consume substantial resources and may not be effective. In addition, Facebook, Apple and Google each have broad discretion to change their respective terms of service and other policies, without CIE's consent and without notice, with respect to CIE and other developers, and those changes may be unfavorable to CIE. Facebook, Apple and/or Google may also change their respective fee structures, add fees associated with access to and use of the Facebook, Apple iOS and Android platforms, change how the personal information of their respective users is made available to application developers on the Facebook, Apple iOS or Android platforms, restrict how Facebook, Apple iOS or Android users can share information with friends on their respective platforms, restrict or discontinue access for consumers from certain countries, discontinue or limit access to their respective platforms by CIE and other game developers or develop their own competitive offerings. Also, Apple and Google may change their age rating criteria at any time. In 2015, Google changed its age rating criteria, adopting the criteria of the International Age Rating Coalition. If any of these events were to materialize, it could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

The loss of the services of key personnel at CIE could have a material adverse effect on its business.

The leadership of CIE's chief executive officer, Mitch Garber, and other executive officers and senior management has been a critical element of its success. The death or disability of Mitch Garber or other extended or permanent loss of his services, or any negative market or industry perception with respect to him or arising from his loss, could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, therefore CGP LLC's, business. CIE's other executive officers and other members of senior management, including Robert Antokol, co-founder of Playtika, have substantial experience and expertise in the social and mobile games industry and have made significant contributions to CIE's growth and success. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of these individuals could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results. CIE is not protected by key man or similar life insurance covering members of its senior management. CIE has employment agreements with certain of its executive officers, but these agreements do not guarantee that any given executive will remain with CIE.

If CIE is unable to attract, retain and motivate employees, it may not be able to compete effectively and may not be able to successfully expand its businesses.

CIE's success and ability to grow are dependent, in part, on its ability to hire, retain and motivate sufficient numbers of talented people, with the increasingly diverse skills needed to serve and expand its business. Such employees, particularly game designers, product managers and engineers, are in high demand, and CIE devotes significant resources to identifying, hiring, training, integrating and retaining these employees. These efforts place significant demands on CIE's resources. Historically, CIE has hired a number of key personnel through strategic acquisitions, such as our acquisition of Playtika, and as competition with other social and mobile games companies increases, CIE may incur significant expenses in continuing this practice. The inability to attract qualified employees in sufficient numbers to meet particular demands or the loss of a significant number of CIE's employees could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Expansion into international markets is important for CIE's growth, and as CIE expands internationally it faces additional business, political, regulatory, operational, financial and economic risks, any of which could increase its costs and hinder its growth.

Continuing to expand CIE's business to attract players in countries other than the United States is a critical element of CIE's business strategy. An important part of targeting international markets is developing offerings that have localized content and are customized for the players in those markets. We expect to continue to devote significant resources to international expansion through acquisitions, the establishment of additional offices and development studios, and increasing CIE's foreign language strategic offerings. CIE's ability to expand its business and to attract talented employees and players in an increasing number of international markets requires considerable management attention and resources and is subject to the particular challenges of supporting a rapidly growing business in an environment of multiple languages, cultures, customs, legal systems, alternative dispute systems, regulatory systems and commercial infrastructures. Expanding CIE's international focus may subject it to risks that it has not faced before or increase risks that CIE currently faces, including risks associated with:


•	recruiting and retaining talented and capable management and employees in foreign countries;


•	challenges caused by distance, language and cultural differences;


•	developing and customizing games and other offerings that appeal to the tastes and preferences of players in international markets;


•	competition from local game makers with significant market share in those markets and with a better understanding of local player preferences;


•	protecting and enforcing CIE's intellectual property rights;


•	negotiating agreements with local distribution platforms that are economically beneficial to CIE and protective of its rights;


•	the inability to extend proprietary rights in CIE's brand, content or technology into new jurisdictions;


•	implementing alternative payment methods for virtual goods in a manner that complies with local laws and practices and protects CIE from fraud;


•	compliance with applicable foreign laws and regulations, including privacy laws and laws relating to content;


•	compliance with anti-bribery laws, including, without limitation, compliance with the FCPA;


•	credit risk and higher levels of payment fraud;


•	currency exchange rate fluctuations;


•	protectionist laws and business practices that favor local businesses in some countries;


•	foreign tax consequences, including the requirement to pay value added tax, or VAT, in certain jurisdictions;


•	foreign exchange controls or U.S. tax restrictions that might restrict or prevent CIE from repatriating income earned in countries outside the United States; and


•	political, economic and social instability.

Entering new international markets can be expensive, CIE's ability to successfully gain market acceptance in any particular market is uncertain and the distraction of CIE's senior management team could mean that it is unable to capitalize on other strategic opportunities. If CIE is unable to successfully expand into new international markets, it could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

The value of CIE's virtual goods is highly dependent on how CIE manages the economies in its games. If CIE fails to manage its game economies properly, its business may suffer.

Players from whom CIE derives revenue purchase virtual goods in CIE's games because of the perceived value of these goods, which is dependent on the relative ease of securing an equivalent good via non-paid means within the game. The perceived value of these virtual goods can be impacted by various actions that CIE takes in the games, including offering discounts for virtual goods, giving away virtual goods in promotions or providing easier non-paid means to secure these goods. If CIE fails to manage its virtual economies properly, players may be less likely to purchase virtual goods, which could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

The proliferation of hacking, security breaches, computer malware, "cheating" programs and scam offers that seek to exploit CIE's games and players affects the game-playing experience and may lead players to stop playing CIE's games.

Security breaches, computer malware and computer hacking attacks have become more prevalent in CIE's industry and may occur on its systems in the future. Because of CIE's prominence in the social and mobile game industry, CIE's affiliation with one of the largest gaming entertainment companies in the world, and because of the prominence of the brands CIE uses in its businesses, including Caesars, WSOP, Slotomania and Bingo Blitz, we believe CIE is a particularly attractive target for hackers. Though it is difficult to determine what harm may exactly result from any specific interruption or breach, any failure to maintain performance, reliability, security and availability of CIE's network infrastructure to the satisfaction of its players may harm CIE's reputation and its ability to retain existing players and attract new players. CIE is particularly exposed to these risks in its online real money gaming business where players place an especially high value on the proper functioning of CIE's games. Any security breach caused by hacking, which involves efforts to gain unauthorized access to information or systems, or to cause intentional malfunctions or loss or corruption of data, software, hardware or other computer equipment, and the inadvertent transmission of computer viruses could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results.

Unrelated third parties have developed, and may continue to develop, "cheating" programs and activities that enable players to exploit CIE's games, play them in an automated way or obtain unfair advantages over other players who do play fairly, including through the unauthorized sale of CIE's virtual goods. These programs and activities harm the experience of players who play fairly and may disrupt the real money operations and virtual economies of CIE's games. CIE devotes significant resources to discover and disable these programs and activities, but if CIE is unable to do so quickly its operations may be disrupted, its reputation damaged and players may stop playing its games. This may lead to lost revenue from paying players, increased cost of developing technological measures to combat these programs and activities, legal claims relating to the

diminution in value of CIE's real money gaming credits, virtual currency and increased customer service costs needed to respond to dissatisfied players.

CIE is subject to payment-related risks, such as risk of fraudulent use of credit or debit cards, which could have adverse effects on CIE's business or results of operations due to unusually large or frequent chargebacks from customers.

CIE accepts payments using a variety of methods, including PayPal, credit and debit cards. As CIE continues to introduce new payment options to its players, CIE may be subject to additional regulatory and compliance requirements. CIE also may be subject to the risk of fraudulent use of credit or debit cards, or other payment options. For certain payment methods, including credit and debit cards, CIE pays interchange and other fees, which may increase over time and, therefore, raise operating costs and reduce profitability. CIE relies on third parties to provide payment processing services and it could disrupt CIE's business if these companies become unwilling or unable to provide these services to CIE. CIE is also subject to rules and requirements governing electronic funds transfers, which could change or be reinterpreted to make it difficult or impossible for CIE to comply. If CIE fails to comply with these rules or requirements, CIE may be subject to fines and higher transaction fees and lose its ability to accept PayPal, credit card, debit card, or other payments from consumers which could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's business, financial condition and operating results. In addition, depending on the merchant category code assigned to CIE by the credit card associations, especially for its online real money gaming business, CIE may be subject to a higher percentage of declined transactions which could reduce the amount of money deposited.

Chargebacks occur when customers seek to void credit card or other payment transactions. Cardholders are intended to be able to reverse card transactions only if there has been unauthorized use of the card or the services contracted for have not been provided. In CIE's business, players occasionally seek to reverse their online real money gaming losses or purchases of virtual goods through chargebacks. Although CIE places great emphasis on control procedures to protect from chargebacks, these control procedures may not be sufficient to protect CIE from adverse effects on its business or results of operations due to unusually large or frequent chargebacks.

Programming errors or flaws in CIE's social and mobile games, or on its regulated online real money gaming websites, could harm CIE's reputation or decrease market acceptance of CIE's games, which could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CIE's social and mobile games, and its regulated online real money gaming websites, may contain errors, bugs, flaws or corrupted data, and these defects may only become apparent after their launch, particularly as CIE launches new games and rapidly launches new features to existing games under tight time constraints. We believe that if CIE's players have a negative experience with its games, they may be less inclined to continue or resume playing CIE's games or recommend its games to other potential players. Undetected programming errors, game defects and data corruption can disrupt CIE's operations, adversely affect the game experience of CIE's players by allowing players to gain unfair advantage, harm CIE's reputation, cause CIE's players to stop playing its games, divert CIE's resources and delay market acceptance of CIE's games, any of which could have a material adverse effect on its, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Companies and governmental agencies may restrict access to Facebook, CIE's websites or the Internet generally, which could lead to the loss or slower growth of CIE's player base.

CIE's online players need to access the Internet to play CIE's games. Companies and governmental agencies could block access to the Internet generally or the particular platform on which a player wishes to play CIE's games (e.g., Facebook) for a number of reasons such as security or confidentiality concerns or regulatory reasons, or they may adopt policies that prohibit employees from accessing Facebook, CIE's website, CIE's online gaming websites or other social platforms for work related efficiency reasons. For example, the government of the People's Republic of China has blocked access to Facebook in China and, according to an article in The Wall Street Journal, Proctor & Gamble implemented a policy restricting employee access to a number of popular entertainment websites. If companies or governmental entities block or limit access to Facebook, CIE's website, CIE's online gaming websites or otherwise adopt policies restricting players from playing CIE's games, it could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Evolving regulations concerning data privacy may result in increased regulation and different industry standards, which could prevent CIE from providing its current games to its players or require CIE to modify its games, thereby harming its business.

The regulatory framework for privacy issues worldwide is currently in flux and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Practices regarding the collection, use, storage, transmission and security of personal information by companies operating over the Internet and mobile platforms have recently come under increased public scrutiny. The U.S. government, including the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Commerce, has announced that it is reviewing the need for greater regulation for the collection of information concerning consumer behavior on the Internet, including regulation aimed at restricting certain targeted advertising practices. In addition, the European Union is in the process of proposing reforms to its existing data

protection legal framework, which may result in a greater compliance burden for companies with users in Europe. Various government and consumer agencies have also called for new regulation and changes in industry practices.

CIE's business, including its ability to operate and expand internationally, could be adversely affected if laws or regulations are adopted, interpreted or implemented in a manner that is inconsistent with CIE's current business practices and that require changes to these practices, the design of CIE's website, games, features or its privacy policy. In particular, the success of CIE's business has been, and we expect will continue to be, driven by CIE's ability to responsibly use the data that CIE's players share with it. Therefore, CIE's business could be harmed by any significant change to applicable laws, regulations or industry practices regarding the use or disclosure of data CIE's players choose to share with it, or regarding the manner in which the express or implied consent of consumers for such use and disclosure is obtained. Such changes may require CIE to modify its games and features, possibly in a material manner, and may limit CIE's ability to develop new games and features that make use of the data that CIE's players voluntarily share with it.

CIE's business is subject to a variety of other U.S. and foreign laws, many of which are unsettled and still developing and which could subject CIE to claims or otherwise harm its business.

It is possible that a number of laws and regulations may be adopted or construed to apply to CIE in the United States and elsewhere that could restrict the social and mobile industry, including player privacy, advertising, taxation, content suitability, copyright, distribution and antitrust. For example, certain jurisdictions in the United States and elsewhere may deem CIE's social and mobile games to be gambling or marketing gambling to underage persons and therefore in violation of the laws of such jurisdictions. Furthermore, the growth and development of electronic commerce and virtual goods may prompt calls for more stringent consumer protection laws that may impose additional burdens on companies such as CIE conducting business through the Internet and mobile devices. We anticipate that scrutiny and regulation of CIE's industry will increase and that CIE will be required to devote legal and other resources to address such regulation. For example, existing laws or new laws regarding the regulation of currency and banking institutions may be interpreted to cover real money gaming credits, virtual currency or virtual goods. If that were to occur CIE may be required to seek licenses, authorizations or approvals from relevant regulators, the granting of which may be dependent on CIE meeting certain capital and other requirements and CIE may be subject to additional regulation and oversight, all of which could significantly increase CIE's operating costs. Changes in current laws or regulations or the imposition of new laws and regulations in the United States or elsewhere regarding these activities may lessen the growth of social or mobile games or online real money gaming services and impair CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition, and operating results.

Any failure to protect CIE's trademarks or other intellectual property could have a negative impact on the value of CIE's brand names and adversely affect its business.

The development of intellectual property is part of CIE's overall business strategy, and CIE regards its intellectual property to be an important element of its success. For example, CIE owns the WSOP brand and intellectual property, and CIE licenses or sublicenses trademarks for a variety of products and businesses related to this brand. CIE also owns the Slotomania brand. CIE seeks to establish and maintain its proprietary rights in its business operations and technology through the use of patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secret laws. CIE files applications for and obtains copyrights and trademarks in the United States and in foreign countries where CIE believes filing for such protection is appropriate. CIE also seeks to maintain its trade secrets and confidential information by nondisclosure policies and through the use of appropriate confidentiality agreements. Despite CIE's efforts to protect its proprietary rights, parties may infringe its copyrights, trademarks and patents and use information that CIE regards as proprietary and CIE's rights may be invalidated or unenforceable. In addition, parties may challenge CIE's copyrights, trademarks or patents in the United States or other jurisdictions. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to as great an extent as do the laws of the United States. Monitoring the unauthorized use of CIE's intellectual property is difficult. Litigation may be necessary to enforce CIE's intellectual property rights or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Litigation of this type could result in substantial costs and diversion of CIE's resources. The unauthorized use or reproduction of CIE's trademarks could diminish the value of its brand and its market acceptance, competitive advantages or goodwill, which could have a material adverse effect on CIE's and, therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

In the future, it is possible that CIE will face allegations that it has infringed the trademarks, copyrights, patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties, including from its competitors, non-practicing entities and former employers of its personnel. Patent and other intellectual property litigation may be protracted and expensive, and the results are difficult to predict. As the result of any court judgment or settlement, CIE may be obligated to cancel the launch of a new game, stop offering certain features, pay royalties or significant settlement costs, purchase licenses or modify its games and features while it develops substitutes.

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the "Leahy-Smith Act"), was adopted in September 2011. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has developed

regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation may in the future increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of CIE's patent applications and the enforcement or defense of its issued patents, all of which could harm its business.

CIE's business strategy is premised, in part, on the legalization of online real money gaming in the United States and its ability to predict and capitalize on any such legalization.

In the last few years, California, Pennsylvania, New York, Florida, Mississippi, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Iowa, Illinois, Washington D.C. and the Federal government have considered legislation that would legalize online real money gaming. To date, only Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey have enacted such legislation. If a large number of additional states or the Federal government fail to enact online real money gaming legislation or CIE is unable to obtain the necessary licenses to operate online real money gaming websites in United States jurisdictions where such games are legalized, CIE's future growth could be materially impaired as CIE would be limited to offering online real money gaming to players in jurisdictions outside the United States where legal. Moreover, there were bills introduced in Congress in 2014 and 2015 that would ban online gaming in the United States. In addition, states or the Federal government may legalize online real money gaming in a manner that is unfavorable to CIE. For example, several states and the Federal government are considering draft laws that require online casinos to also have a license to operate a brick-and-mortar casino, either directly or indirectly through an affiliate. If, like Nevada and New Jersey, U.S. jurisdictions enact legislation legalizing real money casino gaming subject to this brick-and-mortar requirement, CIE may be unable to offer online real money gaming in such jurisdictions if CIE is unable to establish an affiliation with a brick-and-mortar casino in such jurisdiction. If, however, legislation is enacted legalizing real money casino gaming without this requirement, CIE would lose its advantage over some of its potential competitors that do not have an affiliate with a brick-and-mortar casino operation. The loss of this or other similar advantages CIE receives as an affiliate of Caesars Entertainment, or the passage of a federal law banning online gaming in the United States could materially impair its ability to grow its online real money gaming business in the future.

There also exists in the online real money gaming industry a significant "first mover" advantage. CIE's ability to compete effectively in respect of a particular style of online real money gaming in the United States may be premised on introducing a style of gaming before its competitors. CIE's failure to do so could materially impair its ability to grow its online real money gaming business in the future.

In addition to the risk that online real money gaming will be legalized in a manner unfavorable to CIE, CIE may fail to accurately predict when online real money gaming will be legalized in significant jurisdictions. The legislative process in each U.S. state and at the Federal level is unique and capable of rapid, often unpredictable change. If CIE fails to accurately forecast when and how, if at all, online real money gaming will be legalized in additional U.S. jurisdictions, such failure could impair CIE's readiness to introduce online real money gaming offerings in such jurisdictions, which could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey are the only U.S. jurisdictions that have affirmatively legalized online real money gaming and are small jurisdictions that may not yield significant revenue.

Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey are the only U.S. jurisdictions that have enacted legislation legalizing online real money gaming. Both Nevada and Delaware are relatively small jurisdictions in terms of population compared to the rest of the United States and there may be significant competition for online real money gaming in these jurisdictions, and as a result, CIE may not be able to obtain a significant amount of revenue in these jurisdictions.

Individuals may seek to participate in online real money gaming in jurisdictions where it is illegal. If CIE is unsuccessful in blocking such individuals, CIE may suffer legal penalties or an impairment of its ability to offer online real money gaming in general.

Individuals in jurisdictions in which online real money gaming is illegal may nonetheless seek to engage CIE's online real money gaming offerings. While CIE will take steps to block access by individuals in such jurisdictions, those steps may be unsuccessful. In the event that individuals in jurisdictions in which online real money gaming is illegal engage CIE's online real money gaming offerings, CIE may be subject to criminal sanctions, regulatory penalties, the loss of existing or future licenses necessary to offer online real money gaming or other legal liabilities, any one of which could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results. For example, gambling laws and regulations in many jurisdictions require gaming industry participants to maintain strict compliance with various laws and regulations. If CIE is unsuccessful in blocking access to its online real money gaming offerings by individuals in a jurisdiction where such offerings are illegal, CIE could lose or be prevented from obtaining a license necessary to offer online real money gaming in a jurisdiction in which such offerings are legal and CGP LLC's other gaming licenses may be materially impacted.

Social and mobile games may become subject to regulation or prohibition in certain jurisdictions, which could increase CIE's compliance costs or limit the number of jurisdictions in which CIE is able to offer social and mobile games.

Certain jurisdictions may seek to regulate or ban social and mobile games. For example, the UK Gambling Commission publicly indicated that it will consider whether to regulate social and mobile games in the future after considering the issues of consumer protection. Under recent proposed legislation in Australia, certain online social games with a paid-for element would fall under the Interactive Gambling Act, and by being considered gambling would be at risk of outright ban. Thus far, in considering whether regulation or restriction is necessary, most jurisdictions have been interested in understanding the games and whether they constitute gambling under their laws or otherwise require regulation to protect the consumer. If the UK, Australia, or another jurisdiction important to CIE's social and mobile games business bans, regulates or restricts the business, it could have material impacts on how CGP LLC markets its product, on the cost associated with compliance with such regulation or, depending on the nature of the regulation, CIE could be prohibited from providing social and mobile games, all of which could have material adverse impacts on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

CIE is dependent on a small number of third parties for its online real money gaming platforms.

CIE contracts with a small number of third-party partners to develop, launch, maintain and operate its software platforms for online real money gaming, including its relationship with 888 and NYX Gaming. In addition, CIE enters into license agreements and pays license fees for certain intellectual property rights for the development, launch, maintenance and operation of CIE's real money gaming services. If, in the future, these third parties choose not to provide such services or licenses to CIE on terms acceptable to it, CIE will have to seek alternative means of securing comparable services or licenses, which may be on terms that are not as favorable as the current terms. With respect to CIE's platforms for online real money gaming, the termination of these services or licenses by any of these third parties could delay the launch of CIE's real money online poker operations in the United States if such operations are legalized. For example, if CIE's agreement with 888 related to online gaming services in the United States were to be breached, CIE would not be able to offer online poker in Nevada and/or New Jersey. The occurrence of such events could have a material adverse effect on CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, business, financial condition and operating results.

Changes in U.S. tax laws, the enactment of future legislation implementing changes in the U.S. taxation of international business activities, a change in the application of the tax laws of various jurisdictions or the adoption of other tax reform policies could materially impact CIE's financial position and results of operations.

Changes to U.S. tax laws, including limitations on the ability of taxpayers to claim and utilize foreign tax credits and the deferral of certain tax deductions until earnings outside of the United States are repatriated to the United States, as well as changes to U.S. tax laws that may be enacted in the future, could impact the tax treatment of CIE's foreign earnings. The Obama administration has made public statements indicating that it has made international tax reform a priority, and key members of the U.S. Congress have conducted hearings and proposed legislation in the past that addresses several international tax issues. Due to the large and expanding scale of CIE's international business activities, any changes in the U.S. taxation of such activities may increase CIE's worldwide effective tax rate and harm CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, financial position and results of operations. Additionally, any increase or changes in taxes in other countries where CIE has significant operations, such as Israel, could harm CIE's, and therefore CGP LLC's, financial position and results of operations.

Moreover, CIE's corporate structure and intercompany arrangements, including the manner in which CIE develops and uses its intellectual property and the transfer pricing of its intercompany transactions, are intended to provide CIE worldwide tax efficiencies. The application of the tax laws of various jurisdictions, including the United States, to CIE's international business activities is subject to interpretation and depends on CIE's ability to operate its business in a manner consistent with its corporate structure and intercompany arrangements. The taxing authorities of the jurisdictions in which CIE operates may challenge CIE's methodologies for valuing developed technology or intercompany arrangements, including CIE's transfer pricing, or determine that the manner in which CIE operates its business is not consistent with the manner in which CIE reports its income to the jurisdictions, which could increase CIE's worldwide effective tax rate and harm its, and therefore CGP LLC's, financial position and results of operations.

CIE is no longer a member of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group for U.S. federal income tax purposes, which will trigger intercompany gains between CIE and Caesars Entertainment or other members of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group. CIE could be liable for taxes owed by Caesars Entertainment for periods prior to the date CIE became deconsolidated including with respect to the intercompany gains.

Caesars Entertainment no longer owns 80% or more of the common stock of CIE, and therefore, under U.S. federal income tax laws, CIE ceased to be a member of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The triggering of deferred intercompany gains between CIE and Caesars Entertainment or other members of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group resulted in the realization of a gain for Caesars Entertainment with respect to the WSOP assets that CIE acquired from CEOC and its subsidiaries.

After its deconsolidation from Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group, CIE is the parent of a new consolidated group for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Pursuant to the terms of the tax matters agreement between CIE and Caesars Entertainment (the "Tax Matters Agreement"), however, CIE may be required to make payments to Caesars Entertainment in respect of taxes owed by Caesars Entertainment for periods prior to the date CIE became deconsolidated. In addition, under U.S. federal income tax laws, each member of a consolidated group is liable for the consolidated group's entire tax obligation. Therefore, to the extent that Caesars Entertainment, or other members of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group, fail to make any U.S. federal income tax payments required by law attributable to periods during which CIE was a member of Caesars Entertainment's consolidated group, CIE could be liable for the shortfall. Similar principles may apply for foreign, state or local income tax purposes where CIE filed combined, consolidated or unitary returns with Caesars Entertainment or its subsidiaries for foreign, state or local income tax purposes.

Risks Related to Our Class A Common Stock

Caesars Entertainment's call right on our Class A common stock may result in you being forced to sell our Class A common stock at a disadvantageous time and will cause you to own stock of Caesars Entertainment. This call right may not occur at all due to the discretion of Caesars Entertainment or the inability of Caesars Entertainment to meet the conditions required to exercise such right.

After October 21, 2016, Caesars Entertainment will have the right, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to any transferee of all non-voting units of CGP LLC held by Caesars Entertainment, to acquire all or a portion of the voting units of CGP LLC (or, at our option, shares of CAC's Class A common stock) not otherwise owned by Caesars Entertainment at such time. As a result, you may be forced to sell your shares of CAC's Class A common stock on little notice and at a value that may cause you to realize a loss. The exercise of this right by Caesars Entertainment will result in you receiving consideration entirely or partly in the form of stock of Caesars Entertainment, which may be a tax-free reorganization for U.S. federal income tax purposes in certain circumstances. If the exchange is not a tax-free reorganization, you may recognize gain or loss for U.S. federal income tax purposes on such exchange depending on the amount of cash and the value of the stock of Caesars Entertainment you receive in such exchange and the adjusted tax basis of your shares of CAC's Class A common stock. There can be no assurances that the stock of Caesars Entertainment will maintain its value from the time of Caesars Entertainment's exercise of the call right or be part of an active trading market. As a consequence, you may be forced to dispose of the stock of Caesars Entertainment at a great loss.

In addition, Caesars Entertainment may exercise the call right in its sole discretion, subject to meeting certain conditions, or Caesars Entertainment may decide to not exercise the call right for any reason whatsoever. Moreover, if Caesars Entertainment does not meet certain liquidity requirements, debt leverage ratio and other requirements, it will be unable to exercise the call right. The uncertainty as to the timing of the exercise of the call right, if at all, by Caesars Entertainment may adversely affect the trading value of our stock.

CGP LLC is required to be liquidated on April 21, 2022, which may result in you receiving less than the full value of your Class A common stock.

Following October 21, 2018 and until April 21, 2022, our Board will have the right to cause a liquidation of CGP LLC, including the sale or winding up of CGP LLC or other monetization of all of its assets. On April 21, 2022 (unless otherwise agreed by Caesars Entertainment and CAC), if our Board has not previously exercised its liquidation right, CGP LLC shall, and our Board shall cause CGP LLC to, effect a liquidation. Because the liquidation will occur on a set schedule, it is possible that regulations or market factors at the time of liquidation may impede the ability to liquidate the assets of CGP LLC. If CGP LLC is unable to liquidate portions of its assets, proceeds from the liquidation will be negatively impacted. Moreover, the forced liquidation does not preserve the flexibility to maximize the value of CGP LLC's assets in a sale by waiting for an advantageous time. In addition, CAC's allocable portion of the gain (if any) on the liquidation of the assets of CGP LLC will generally be subject to U.S. federal income tax at the regular corporate rate. As a result, you may receive less than the full value of your Class A common stock should liquidation occur on April 21, 2022.

An active trading market for our Class A common stock may not develop.

Prior to the closing of the Rights Offering and our listing on the NASDAQ Global Select market on November 19, 2013, there had not been a public market for our Class A common stock. We cannot predict the extent to which investor interest in us will lead to the development of an active trading market or how liquid that market might become. The Sponsors own approximately 65.6% of our Class A common stock and while the shares are eligible for resale, currently such shares are not available for the public market. As a result, our shares may be less liquid than the shares of other newly public companies or other public companies generally and there may be imbalances between supply and demand for our shares. As a result, our share price may experience significant volatility and may not necessarily reflect the value of our expected performance. If an active trading market does not develop, you may have difficulty selling any of our common stock that you buy. Consequently, you may not be able to sell our Class A common stock at prices equal to or greater than the price you paid.

Future sales or the possibility of future sales of a substantial amount of our Class A common stock may depress the price of shares of our Class A common stock.

Future sales or the availability for sale of substantial amounts of our Class A common stock in the public market could adversely affect the prevailing market price of our Class A common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through future sales of equity securities.

All of the outstanding shares of our Class A common stock are eligible for resale under Rule 144 or Rule 701 of the Securities Act, subject to volume limitations, applicable holding period requirements and the lock-up agreements or other contractual restrictions related to certain of our stockholders.

We cannot predict the size of future issuances of our Class A common stock or other securities or the effect, if any, that future issuances and sales of our Class A common stock or other securities, including future sales by Caesars Entertainment, will have on the market price of our Class A common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of Class A common stock (including shares of Class A common stock issued in connection with an acquisition), or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices for our Class A common stock.

The price and trading volume of our Class A common stock may fluctuate significantly, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

The market price of our Class A common stock may be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume of our Class A common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Volatility in the market price of our Class A common stock may prevent you from being able to sell your shares at or above the price you paid for your shares of Class A common stock. The market price for our Class A common stock could fluctuate significantly for various reasons, including:


•	our operating and financial performance and prospects;


•	news and events regarding CEOC's bankruptcy and negotiations with its creditors;


•	the outcome of litigation against CEC and its affiliates;


•	our quarterly or annual earnings or those of other companies in our industry;


•	conditions that impact demand for the products and services of CGP LLC's businesses;


•	the public's reaction to our press releases, other public announcements and filings with the SEC;


•	changes in earnings estimates or recommendations by securities analysts who track our Class A common stock;


•	market and industry perception of our success, or lack thereof, in pursuing our growth strategy;


•	strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions or restructurings;


•	changes in government and environmental regulation, including gaming taxes;


•	changes in accounting standards, policies, guidance, interpretations or principles;


•	arrival and departure of key personnel;


•	the small percentage of our shares that are publicly traded;


•	changes in our capital structure;


•	increases in market interests rates that would decrease the value of CGP LLC's fixed-rate securities;


•	changes in the stock price of, or a restructuring of, Caesars Entertainment;


•	sales of Class A common stock by us or affiliates of the Sponsors;


•	the expiration of contractual lock-up agreements; and


•	changes in general market, economic and political conditions in the United States and global economies or financial markets, including those resulting from natural disasters, terrorist attacks, acts of war and responses to such events.

In addition, in recent years, the stock market has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. This volatility has had a significant impact on the market price of securities issued by many companies, including companies in the gaming, lodging, hospitality and entertainment industries. The changes frequently appear to occur without regard to the operating performance of the affected companies. Hence, the price of our Class A common stock could fluctuate based upon factors that have little or nothing to do with us, and these fluctuations could materially reduce our share price.

The bonds of CEOC and other fixed rate securities we hold are sensitive to fluctuations in interest rates and would decrease in value if the interest rate increases.

As of March 31, 2016, CAC held approximately $290 million in aggregate principal amount of the CEOC Notes with fixed rates of interest. Fixed rate securities are sensitive to fluctuations in market interest rates and if interest rates increase, the fixed rate securities held by CAC will decrease in value. Currently, market interest rates have been at record low rates. Accordingly, an increase in market interest rates from current levels could cause the value of the fixed rate securities to decrease significantly.

We may incur impairments to goodwill, indefinite-lived intangible assets, or long-lived assets which could negatively affect our future profits.

We review our goodwill, intangible assets and long-lived assets on an annual basis and during interim reporting periods in accordance with the authoritative guidance. Significant negative trends, reduced estimates of future cash flows, disruptions to our business, slower growth rates or lack of growth have resulted in write-downs and impairment charges in the past and, if one or more of such events occurs in the future, additional impairment charges may be required in future periods. If we are required to record additional impairment charges, this could have a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations.

Hamlet Holdings controls us and their interests may conflict with or differ from your interests as a stockholder.

Hamlet Holdings beneficially owns approximately 65.6% of our Class A common stock. Hamlet Holdings has the power to control our Board. Moreover, Hamlet Holdings has the ability to vote on any transaction that requires the approval of our Board or our stockholders, including the approval of significant corporate transactions such as mergers and the sale of substantially all of our assets. In addition, Hamlet Holdings, the members of which are comprised of individuals affiliated with Apollo and TPG, as of the date hereof beneficially owned a majority of Caesars Entertainment's common stock pursuant to an irrevocable proxy providing Hamlet Holdings with sole voting and sole dispositive power over those shares, which gives them power to elect all of Caesars Entertainment's directors. As a result, even though an independent committee of the Board of Caesars Entertainment may make decisions with regard to development opportunities for CGP LLC, Hamlet Holdings is in a position to exert a significant influence over both of CAC and Caesars Entertainment and the direction of their business and operations.

The interests of Hamlet Holdings and the Sponsors could conflict with or differ from the interests of holders of our Class A common stock. Affiliates of the Sponsors are in the business of making or advising on investments in companies they hold, and may from time to time in the future acquire interests in or provide advice to businesses that directly or indirectly compete with certain portions of our business or are suppliers or customers of ours or may pursue acquisitions that may be complementary to our business, in which case and, as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us.

The concentration of ownership held by Hamlet Holdings could delay, defer or prevent a change of control of us or impede a merger, takeover or other business combination which another stockholder may otherwise view favorably. In addition, a sale of a substantial number of shares of stock in the future by Hamlet Holdings could cause our stock price to decline. So long as Hamlet Holdings continues to beneficially own a significant amount of the outstanding shares of our Class A common stock, Hamlet Holdings will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions.

Our stockholders are subject to extensive governmental regulation and if a stockholder is found unsuitable by the gaming authority, that stockholder would not be able to beneficially own our Class A common stock directly or indirectly and we will have the right to redeem the Class A common stock of such disqualified holder.

In many jurisdictions, gaming laws can require any of our stockholders to file an application, be investigated and qualify or have his, her or its suitability determined by gaming authorities. Gaming authorities have very broad discretion in determining whether an applicant should be deemed suitable. Subject to certain administrative proceeding requirements, the gaming regulators have the authority to deny any application or limit, condition, restrict, revoke or suspend any license, registration, finding of suitability or approval, or fine any person licensed, registered or found suitable or approved, for any cause deemed reasonable by the gaming authorities. For additional information on the criteria used in making determinations regarding suitability, see "Gaming Regulation Overview" in Exhibit 99.2 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

For example, under Nevada gaming laws, each person who acquires, directly or indirectly, beneficial ownership of any voting security, or beneficial or record ownership of any non-voting security or any debt security, in a public corporation which is registered with the Nevada Gaming Commission, or the Gaming Commission, may be required to be found suitable if the Gaming Commission has reason to believe that his or her acquisition of that ownership, or his or her continued ownership in general, would be inconsistent with the declared public policy of Nevada, in the sole discretion of the Gaming Commission. Any person required by the Gaming Commission to be found suitable shall apply for a finding of suitability within 30 days after the Gaming Commission's request that he or she should do so and, together with his or her application for suitability, deposit with the GCB a sum of money which, in the sole discretion of the Control Board, will be adequate to pay the anticipated costs and

charges incurred in the investigation and processing of that application for suitability, and deposit such additional sums as are required by the Control Board to pay final costs and charges.

Furthermore, any person required by a gaming authority to be found suitable, who is found unsuitable by the gaming authority, may not hold directly or indirectly the beneficial ownership of any voting security or the beneficial or record ownership of any non-voting security or any debt security of any public corporation which is registered with the gaming authority beyond the time prescribed by the gaming authority. Such a finding could result in an owner of our securities being required to dispose of their securities at prices less than the price paid for such securities. A violation of the foregoing may constitute a criminal offense. A finding of unsuitability by a particular gaming authority impacts that person's ability to associate or affiliate with gaming licensees in that particular jurisdiction and could impact the person's ability to associate or affiliate with gaming licensees in other jurisdictions. The Certificate of Incorporation contains provisions establishing the right to redeem our Class A common stock held by disqualified holders if such holder is determined by any gaming regulatory agency to be unsuitable.

Many jurisdictions also require any person who acquires beneficial ownership of more than a certain percentage of voting securities of a gaming company and, in some jurisdictions, non-voting securities, typically 5%, to report the acquisition to gaming authorities, and gaming authorities may require such holders to apply for qualification or a finding of suitability, subject to limited exceptions for "institutional investors" that hold a company's voting securities for investment purposes only. Under Maryland gaming laws, we may not sell or otherwise transfer more than 5% of the legal or beneficial interest in Horseshoe Baltimore without the approval of the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission, or the Maryland Commission, after the Maryland Commission determines that the transferee is qualified or grants the transferee an institutional investor waiver. Some jurisdictions may also limit the number of gaming licenses in which a person may hold an ownership or a controlling interest and in Maryland an individual or business entity may not own an interest in more than one video lottery facility. It is unclear whether and to what extent such prohibitions will apply to online real money gaming operations when and if such operations become legal in U.S. jurisdictions other than Nevada, New Jersey, and Delaware.

Your percentage ownership in us may be diluted in the future.

Your percentage ownership in CAC may be diluted in the future because of equity awards that may be granted to our directors, officers, employees and service providers in the future. We may decide to establish equity incentive plans that will provide for the grant of common stock-based equity awards to our directors, officers, employees and service providers. In addition, we may issue equity in order to raise capital or in connection with future acquisitions and strategic investments, which would dilute your percentage ownership.

Because we do not anticipate paying dividends on our Class A common stock in the foreseeable future, you should not expect to receive dividends on shares of our Class A common stock.

We have no present plans to pay cash dividends to our stockholders and, for the foreseeable future, intend to retain all of our earnings for use in our business. The declaration of any future dividends by us is within the discretion of our Board and will be dependent on our earnings, financial condition and capital requirements, as well as any other factors deemed relevant by our Board.

We are a parent company and our primary source of cash is and will be distributions from CGP LLC.

We are a parent company with limited business operations of our own. Our main asset is our units in CGP LLC. Accordingly, our primary sources of cash are dividends and distributions with respect to our ownership interests in CGP LLC. CGP LLC might not generate sufficient earnings and cash flow to pay dividends or distributions in the future.

We are a "controlled company" within the meaning of the NASDAQ Marketplace rules and, as a result, will qualify for, and intend to rely on, exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements.

Hamlet Holdings controls a majority of our voting Class A common stock. As a result, we are a "controlled company" within the meaning of the NASDAQ corporate governance standards. Under the NASDAQ Marketplace rules, a company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an individual, group or another company is a "controlled company" and we have elected not to comply with certain NASDAQ corporate governance requirements, including:


•	the requirement that we have a nominating and corporate governance committee that is composed entirely of independent directors;


•	the requirement that we have a compensation committee that is composed entirely of independent directors; and


•	the requirement for an annual performance evaluation of the nominating and corporate governance and compensation committees.

As a result of these exemptions, our nominating and corporate governance and compensation committees do not consist entirely of independent directors, and we are not required to have an annual performance evaluation of the nominating and

corporate governance and compensation committees. Accordingly, a holder of our Class A common stock will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the NASDAQ corporate governance requirements.

Our bylaws and certificate of incorporation contain provisions that could discourage another company from acquiring us and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Provisions of our bylaws and our certificate of incorporation may delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace or remove our directors. These provisions include:


•	establishing a classified board of directors;


•	establishing limitations on the removal of directors;


•	permitting only an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the Board to fix the number of directors;


•	prohibiting cumulative voting in the election of directors;


•	empowering only the board of directors to fill any vacancy on the board of directors, whether such vacancy occurs as a result of an increase in the number of directors or otherwise;


•	eliminating the ability of stockholders to call special meetings of stockholders;


•	prohibiting stockholders from acting by written consent if the Company ceases to be a "controlled company" under the NASDAQ Marketplace rules; and


•	establishing advance notice requirements for nominations for election to the board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted on by stockholders at stockholder meetings.

Together, these charter and statutory provisions could make the removal of management more difficult and may discourage transactions that otherwise could involve payment of a premium over prevailing market prices for our common stock. Furthermore, the existence of the foregoing provisions, as well as the significant Class A Common Stock controlled by Hamlet Holdings, could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Class A Common Stock. They could also deter potential acquirers of our company, thereby reducing the likelihood that you could receive a premium for your Class A Common Stock in an acquisition.

We are an "emerging growth company" and our possible election to delay adoption of new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies may result in our financial statements not being comparable to those of other public companies. As a result of this and other reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our Class A common stock may be less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the "JOBS Act"), and we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not "emerging growth companies," including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the "Sarbanes-Oxley Act"), reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an "emerging growth company" can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards such that an "emerging growth company" can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies.

We have elected to delay such adoption of new or revised accounting standards, and as a result, we may not comply with new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for non-emerging growth companies. As a result, our financial statements may not be comparable to the financial statements of other public companies.

We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an "emerging growth company." We will remain an "emerging growth company" until the earliest to occur of (i) the last day of the fiscal year during which our total annual gross revenues equal or exceed $1.0 billion, (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering, (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt or (iv) the date on which we are deemed a "large accelerated filer" under Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

We cannot predict if investors will find our Class A common stock less attractive because we will rely on certain of these exemptions. If some investors find our Class A common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Class A common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

As a result of our becoming a company with publicly traded common stock, our expenses and administrative burden increased and will likely further increase particularly after we are no longer an "emerging growth company" as defined in the JOBS Act.

As a company with publicly traded common stock, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a company without a publicly traded equity security. In addition, our administrative staff is required to perform additional tasks. For example, we need to create or revise the roles and duties of our Board committees and retain a transfer agent. We are also required to hold an annual meeting for our stockholders, which will require us to expend resources to prepare, print and mail a proxy statement relating to the annual meeting.

In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related regulations implemented by the SEC and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ("Dodd-Frank"), which amended the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, among other federal laws, are creating uncertainty for public companies, increasing legal and financial compliance costs and making some activities more time consuming. Dodd-Frank, signed into law on July 21, 2010, effects comprehensive changes to the regulation of financial services in the United States and will subject us to additional federal regulation. We cannot predict with any certainty the requirements of the regulations ultimately adopted or how Dodd-Frank and such regulations will impact the cost of compliance for a company with publicly traded common stock. We are currently evaluating and monitoring developments with respect to Dodd-Frank and other new and proposed rules and cannot predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management's time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed. We also expect that being a company with publicly traded common stock, these new rules and regulations will make it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our Board, particularly to serve on our audit committee, and qualified executive officers.

As discussed elsewhere in this Quarter Report on Form 10-Q, as an "emerging growth company" as defined in the JOBS Act, we may take advantage of certain temporary exemptions from various reporting requirements, including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. When these exemptions cease to apply, we expect to incur additional expenses and devote increased management effort toward ensuring compliance with them. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur as a result of becoming a public company or the timing of such costs.

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

None.

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

None.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

Item 5. Other Information

None.

Item 6. Exhibits

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit

Number

Exhibit Description

Filed Herewith

Form

Period Ending

Exhibit

Filing Date

31.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

* 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

—

* 32.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

—

99.1

Consolidated Condensed financial information of Caesars Growth Partners, LLC as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 and for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015.

101

The following financial statements from the Company's Form 10-Q as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 and for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 formatted in XBRL: (i) Condensed Balance Sheets, (ii) Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, (iii) Condensed Statements of Stockholders' Equity, (iv) Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, (v) Notes to Condensed Financial Statements.



*	Furnished herewith.

SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.




	CAESARS ACQUISITION COMPANY

May 5, 2016	By:	/S/ TROY J. VANKE
		Troy J. Vanke
		Chief Accounting Officer

Caesars Acquisition Co - FORM 10-Q - May 5, 2016

Attached files

Caesars Acquisition Co Reports