Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should be aware that the occurrence of any of the events described in this section and elsewhere in this report or in any other of our filings with the SEC could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows. In evaluating us, you should consider carefully, among other things, the risks described below. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face, but do represent those risks and uncertainties that we believe are material to us. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that, as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we deem immaterial may also harm our business. Some statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including statements in the following risk factors, constitute forward-looking statements. Please refer to the section entitled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

We are dependent on Caesars for the foreseeable future, and an event that has a material adverse effect on Caesars’ business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations or prospects would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Subsidiaries of Caesars are the lessees of all of our properties pursuant to the Lease Agreements and Caesars or CRC guarantees the obligations of the applicable tenants under the Lease Agreements. The Lease Agreements account for a significant majority of all of our revenues. Additionally, because the Lease Agreements are triple-net leases, we depend on the tenants to pay all insurance, taxes, utilities, and maintenance and repair expenses in connection with these leased properties and to indemnify, defend, and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation, and liabilities arising in connection with our businesses. See “Business.” There can be no assurance that the tenants will have sufficient assets, income, and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their payment obligations on account of the Lease Agreements, or that Caesars or its CRC will be able to satisfy its guarantee of the applicable tenant’s obligations under the Lease Agreements. The tenants and the applicable guarantor rely on the properties they or their subsidiaries own and/or operate for income to satisfy their obligations, including their debt service requirements and lease payments due to us under the Lease Agreements and the guarantees. If income from these properties were to decline for any reason, if any tenant’s or the applicable guarantor or their subsidiaries’ debt service requirements were to increase (whether due to an increase in interest rates or otherwise), or if Caesars’ subsidiaries were prevented from making distributions to Caesars or CRC (whether due to restrictions in their financing arrangements or otherwise), a tenant may become unable or unwilling to satisfy its payment obligations under the Lease Agreements and the applicable guarantor may become unable or unwilling to make payments under its guarantee of the Lease Agreements.

The inability or unwillingness of a tenant or the applicable guarantor to meet their rent and other obligations to us under the Lease Agreements and the related guarantee would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects, including our ability to make distributions to our stockholders as required to maintain our status as a REIT. For these reasons, if any tenant and/or the applicable guarantor were to experience a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations or prospects, we would also be materially and adversely affected.

In addition, due to our dependence on rental payments from Caesars as a primary source of revenues, we may be limited in our ability to enforce our rights under the Lease Agreements or to terminate the applicable lease with respect to a particular property. Failure by the tenants to comply with the terms of the Lease Agreements or to comply with the gaming regulations to which the leased properties are subject could require us to find another lessee for such leased property, to the extent possible, and there could be a decrease or cessation of rental payments by the tenants. In such event, we may be unable to locate a suitable, credit-worthy lessee at similar rental rates or at all, which could have a material and adverse effect on us.

Because a concentrated portion of our revenues are generated from the Strip, we are subject to greater risks than a company that is more geographically diversified.

Our properties on the Las Vegas Strip generated approximately 27.8% of our lease revenue for the period from October 6, 2017 to December 31, 2017. Therefore, our 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 the business of our tenants. We cannot control the number or frequency of flights to or from Las Vegas, but the tenants rely on air traffic for a significant portion of their visitors. Reductions in flights by major airlines as a result of higher fuel prices or lower demand can impact the number of visitors to our properties. Additionally, there is one principal interstate highway between Las Vegas and Southern California, where a large number of the customers that frequent our properties reside. Capacity constraints of that highway or any other traffic disruptions may also affect the number of customers who visit our facilities. Moreover, due to the importance of our two properties on the Strip, we may be disproportionately affected by general risks such

as acts of terrorism, natural disasters, including major fires, floods and earthquakes, and severe or inclement weather, should such developments occur in or nearby Las Vegas.

Caesars and its subsidiaries are party to certain leasing and financial commitments with us, which may have a negative impact on Caesars’ business and operating condition.

Caesars and/or its subsidiaries entered into certain leasing and financial commitments, evidenced by agreements, with us. See “Business—Our Relationship with Caesars” for additional information regarding such agreements.

Caesars is obligated to pay us in the aggregate approximately $735.3 million in fixed annual rents and golf course membership fees for each of the first seven years, subject to certain escalators and adjustments. If Caesars’ businesses and properties fail to generate sufficient earnings, the applicable tenants, Caesars and/or CRC may be unable to satisfy their respective obligations under the Lease Agreements or the related guarantees, respectively. Additionally, these obligations may limit their ability to make investments to maintain and grow their portfolio of businesses and properties, which may adversely affect their competitiveness and ability to satisfy their obligations to us. See “—We are dependent on Caesars for the foreseeable future, and an event that has a material adverse effect on Caesars’ business, financial condition, liquidity results of operations or prospects would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects” above.

Subsidiaries of Caesars are required to pay a significant portion of their cash flow from operations to us pursuant to, and subject to the terms and conditions of, the Lease Agreements, which could adversely affect Caesars’ ability to fund their operations or development projects, raise capital, make acquisitions, and otherwise respond to competitive and economic changes and its ability to satisfy its payment obligations to us under the Lease Agreements and the related guarantees.

Subsidiaries of Caesars are required to pay a significant portion of their cash flow from operations to us pursuant to, and subject to the terms and conditions of, the Lease Agreements. See “Business—Our Relationship with Caesars.” As a result of this commitment, Caesars’ ability to fund its operations or development projects, raise capital, make acquisitions and otherwise respond to competitive and economic changes may be adversely affected, which could adversely affect the ability of the applicable tenants to satisfy their obligations to us under the Lease Agreements and the ability of Caesars and/or CRC to satisfy their respective obligations to us under the related guarantees.

In addition, the annual rent escalations under the Lease Agreements will continue to apply regardless of the amount of cash flows generated by the properties that are subject to the Lease Agreements. Accordingly, if the cash flows generated by such properties decrease, or do not increase at the same rate as the rent escalations, the rents payable under the Lease Agreements will comprise a higher percentage of the cash flows generated by the subsidiaries of Caesars, which could make it more difficult for the applicable subsidiaries to make their payment obligations to us under the Lease Agreements and ultimately could adversely affect Caesars’ and/or CRC’s ability to satisfy their respective obligations to us under the related guarantees.

Caesars’ substantial indebtedness and the fact that a significant portion of its cash flow is used to make interest payments could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its obligations under the Lease Agreements.

As disclosed in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, Caesars’ consolidated estimated debt service (including principal and interest) for 2018 will be $504 million and $11.8 billion thereafter to maturity. On October 16, 2017, two wholly-owned subsidiaries of Caesars issued $1.7 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.25% senior notes due 2025; on or about December 22, 2017, the proceeds of the senior notes were released from escrow, and CRC assumed the obligations of one of the original issuer entities pursuant to a supplement to the original indenture governing the senior notes. On December 22, 2017, CRC entered into new $5.7 billion senior secured credit facilities, comprised of a $1 billion revolving credit facility maturing in 2022 and a $4.7 billion first lien term loan facility maturing in 2024, which amortizes at 0.25% per quarter. As a result, a significant portion of Caesars’ liquidity needs are for debt service, including significant interest payments. Such substantial indebtedness and the restrictive covenants under the agreements governing such indebtedness could limit the ability of the applicable tenants to satisfy their obligations to us under the Lease Agreements and the ability of Caesars’ and/or CRC to satisfy their respective obligations under the related guarantees.

We are dependent on the gaming industry and may be susceptible to the risks associated with it, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

As the landlord of gaming facilities, we are impacted by the risks associated with the gaming industry. Therefore, so long as our investments are concentrated in gaming-related assets, our success is dependent on the gaming industry, which could be adversely affected by economic conditions in general, changes in consumer trends and preferences and other factors over which we and our tenants have no control. As we are subject to risks inherent in substantial investments in a single industry, a decrease in the gaming business would likely have a greater adverse effect on us than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio, particularly

because a component of the rent under the Lease Agreements will be based, over time, on the performance of the gaming facilities operated by Caesars on our properties and such effect could be material and adverse to our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

The gaming industry is characterized by a high degree of competition among a large number of participants, including riverboat casinos, dockside casinos, land-based casinos, video lottery, sweepstakes and poker machines not located in casinos, Native American gaming, internet lotteries and other internet wagering gaming services and, in a broader sense, gaming operators face competition from all manner of leisure and entertainment activities. Gaming competition is intense in most of the markets where our facilities are located. Recently, there has been additional significant competition in the gaming industry as a result of the upgrading or expansion of facilities by existing market participants, the entrance of new gaming participants into a market or legislative changes. As competing properties and new markets are opened, we may be negatively impacted. Additionally, decreases in discretionary consumer spending brought about by weakened general economic conditions such as, but not limited to, lackluster recoveries from recessions, high unemployment levels, higher income taxes, low levels of consumer confidence, weakness in the housing market, cultural and demographic changes and increased stock market volatility may negatively impact our revenues and operating cash flows.

We face extensive regulation from gaming and other regulatory authorities, and our charter provides that any of our shares held by investors who are found to be unsuitable by state gaming regulatory authorities are subject to redemption.

The ownership, operation, and management of gaming and racing facilities are subject to pervasive regulation. These gaming and racing regulations impact our gaming and racing tenants and persons associated with our gaming and racing facilities, which in many jurisdictions include us as the landlord and owner of the real estate. Certain gaming authorities in the jurisdictions in which we hold properties may require us and/or our affiliates to maintain a license as a key business entity or supplier because of our status as landlord. Gaming authorities also retain great discretion to require us to be found suitable as a landlord, and certain of our stockholders, officers and directors may be required to be found suitable as well.

In many jurisdictions, gaming laws can require certain 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.

Gaming authorities may conduct investigations into the conduct or associations of our directors, officers, key employees or investors to ensure compliance with applicable standards. If we are required to be found suitable and are found suitable as a landlord, we will be registered as a public company with the gaming authorities and will be subject to disciplinary action if, after we receive notice that a person is unsuitable to be a stockholder or to have any other relationship with us, we:

•	pay that person any distribution or interest upon any of our voting securities;

•	allow that person to exercise, directly or indirectly, any voting right conferred through securities held by that person;

•	pay remuneration in any form to that person for services rendered or otherwise; or

•	fail to pursue all lawful efforts to require such unsuitable person to relinquish his or her voting securities, including, if necessary, the immediate purchase of the voting securities for cash at fair market value.

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% of a publicly-traded company, to report the acquisition to gaming authorities, and gaming authorities may require such holders to apply for qualification, licensure or a finding of suitability, subject to limited exceptions for “institutional investors” that hold a company’s voting securities for passive investment purposes only. Our outstanding shares of capital stock are held subject to applicable gaming laws. Any person owning or controlling at least 5% of the outstanding shares of any class of our capital stock is required to promptly notify us of such person’s identity. Some jurisdictions may also limit the number of gaming licenses in which a person may hold an ownership or a controlling interest.

Further, our directors, officers, key employees and investors in our shares must meet approval standards of certain gaming regulatory authorities. If such gaming regulatory authorities were to find such a person or investor unsuitable, we may be required to sever our relationship with that person or the investor may be required to dispose of his, her or its interest in us. Our charter provides that all of our shares held by investors who are found to be unsuitable by regulatory authorities are subject to redemption upon our receipt of notice of such finding.

Additionally, the loss of our gaming licenses could result in an event of default under our certain of our indebtedness, and cross-default provisions in our debt agreements could cause an event of default under one debt agreement to trigger an event of default under our other debt agreements.

Finally, substantially all material loans, significant acquisitions, leases, sales of securities and similar financing transactions by us and our subsidiaries must be reported to, and in some cases approved by, gaming authorities in advance of the transaction. Neither we nor any of our subsidiaries may make a public offering of securities without the prior approval of certain gaming authorities. Changes in control through merger, consolidation, stock or asset acquisitions, management or consulting agreements, or otherwise may be subject to receipt of prior approval of certain gaming authorities. Entities seeking to acquire control of us or one of our subsidiaries (and certain of our affiliates) must satisfy gaming authorities with respect to a variety of stringent standards prior to assuming control. Failure to satisfy the stringent licensing standards may preclude entities from acquiring control of us or one of our subsidiaries (and certain of our affiliates) and/or require the entities to divest such control.

Required regulatory approvals can delay or prohibit transfers of our gaming properties, which could result in periods in which we are unable to receive rent for such properties and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Our tenants are (and any future tenants of our gaming properties will be) required to be licensed under applicable law in order to operate any of our properties as gaming facilities. If the Lease Agreements, or any future lease agreements we will enter into, are terminated (which could be required by a regulatory agency) or expire, any new tenant must be licensed and receive other regulatory approvals to operate our properties as gaming facilities. Any delay in, or inability of, the new tenant to receive required licenses and other regulatory approvals from the applicable state and county government agencies may prolong the period during which we are unable to collect the applicable rent. Further, in the event that the Lease Agreements or future lease agreements are terminated or expire and a new tenant is not licensed or fails to receive other regulatory approvals, the properties may not be operated as gaming facilities and we will not be able to collect the applicable rent. Moreover, we may be unable to transfer or sell the affected properties as gaming facilities, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Tenants may choose not to renew the Lease Agreements.

The Lease Agreements each have an initial lease term of 15 years with the potential to extend the term for up to four additional five-year terms thereafter, provided that for certain facilities the aggregate lease term, including renewals, is cutback to the extent it would otherwise exceed 80% of the remaining useful life of the applicable leased property, solely at the option of the tenants. At the expiration of the initial lease term or of any additional renewal term thereafter, a tenant may choose not to renew the Lease Agreements. If the Lease Agreements expire without renewal and we are not able to find suitable, credit-worthy tenants to replace a tenant on the same or more attractive terms, our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects may be materially and adversely affected, including our ability to make distributions to our stockholders at the then current level, or at all. This risk would be exacerbated if Caesars determined not to renew, or was prohibited from renewing due to the remaining useful life of the leased property, all Lease Agreements at any one time.

Net leases may not result in fair market lease rates over time, which could negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows and reduce the amount of funds available to make distributions to stockholders.

All of our rental revenue is generated from the Lease Agreements, which are triple-net leases, and provide greater flexibility to the respective tenants related to the use of the applicable leased property than would be the case with ordinary property leases, such as the right to freely sublease portions of each leased property, to make alterations in the leased premises and to terminate the lease prior to its expiration under specified circumstances. Furthermore, net leases typically have longer lease terms and, thus, there is an increased risk that contractual rental increases in future years will fail to result in fair market rental rates during those years. As a result, our results of operations and cash flows and distributions to our stockholders could be lower than they would otherwise be if we did not enter into a net lease.

The Lease Agreements may restrict our ability to sell the properties.

Our ability to sell or dispose of our properties may be hindered by the fact that such properties are subject to the Lease Agreements, as the terms of the Lease Agreements require that a purchaser assume the Lease Agreements or enter into a severance lease with the tenants for the sold property on substantially the same terms as contained in the applicable Lease Agreement, which may make our properties less attractive to a potential buyer than alternative properties that may be for sale.

Properties within our portfolio are, and properties that we may acquire in the future are likely to be, operated and promoted under certain trademarks and brand names that we do not own.

Most of the properties within our portfolio are currently operated and promoted under trademarks and brand names not owned by us, including Caesars Palace, Horseshoe, Harrah’s and Bally’s. In addition, properties that we may acquire in the future may be operated and promoted under these same trademarks and brand names, or under different trademarks and brand names we do not, or will not, own. During the term that our properties are managed by Caesars, we will be reliant on Caesars to maintain and protect the trademarks, brand names and other licensed intellectual property used in the operation or promotion of the leased properties. Operation of the leased properties, as well as our business and financial condition, could be adversely impacted by infringement, invalidation, unauthorized use or litigation affecting any such intellectual property. Moreover, if any of our properties are rebranded unsuccessfully, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects, as we may not enjoy comparable recognition or status under a new brand. A transition of management away from a Caesars entity could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

A substantial portion of our cash is used to satisfy our debt service obligations and our distribution obligations to maintain our status as a REIT and avoid or otherwise minimize current entity level U.S. Federal income taxes, which may expose us to interest rate fluctuation risk, expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations and limit our ability to pursue our business and growth strategies.

We have substantial debt service obligations. As of December 31, 2017, we had approximately $4.817 billion of outstanding indebtedness under our Term B Loan Facility, Revolving Credit Facility, CPLV CMBS Debt, and Second Lien Notes requiring us to make annual debt service payments of approximately $249.3 million in 2018.

Our indebtedness is collateralized by substantially all of our properties. Payments of principal and interest under this indebtedness, or any other instruments governing debt we may incur in the future, may leave us with insufficient cash resources to pursue our business and growth strategies or to pay the distributions currently contemplated or necessary to qualify or maintain qualification as a REIT. Our substantial outstanding indebtedness or future indebtedness, and the limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements, could have other significant adverse consequences, including the following:

•	our cash flow may be insufficient to meet our required principal and interest payments;

•	we may be unable to borrow additional funds as needed or on favorable terms, which could, among other things, adversely affect our ability to capitalize upon emerging acquisition opportunities, including exercising our rights of first refusal and call rights described herein, or meet operational needs;

•	we may be unable to refinance our indebtedness at maturity or the refinancing terms may be less favorable than the terms of our original indebtedness;

•	we may be forced to dispose of one or more of our properties if permitted under the Lease Agreements, possibly on disadvantageous terms at a loss;

•	we may fail to comply with the payment and restrictive covenants in our loan documents, which would entitle the lenders to accelerate payment of outstanding loans and foreclose on any properties servicing such loans; and

•	we may be unable to hedge floating rate debt, counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under our hedge agreements and these agreements may not effectively hedge interest rate fluctuation risk.

If any one of these events were to occur, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, the market price of our common stock and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and to pay distributions to our stockholders could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, the foreclosure on our properties could create taxable income without accompanying cash proceeds, which could result in entity level taxes to us or could adversely affect our ability to meet the distribution requirements necessary to qualify or maintain qualification as a REIT.

In addition, the Code generally requires that a REIT distribute annually to its stockholders at least 90% of its REIT taxable income (with certain adjustments), determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, and that it pay tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it distributes annually less than 100% of its REIT taxable income, including capital gains. VICI Golf is also subject to U.S. Federal income tax at regular corporate rates on any of its taxable income. In order to maintain our status as a REIT and avoid or otherwise minimize current entity-level U.S. Federal income taxes, a substantial portion of our cash flow after operating expenses and debt service will be required to be distributed to our stockholders.

Because of the limitations on the amount of cash available to us after satisfying our debt service obligations and our distribution obligations to maintain our status as a REIT and avoid or otherwise minimize current entity- level U.S. Federal income taxes, our ability to pursue our business and growth strategies will be limited.

Any mechanic’s liens or similar liens incurred by the tenants under the Lease Agreements may attach to, and constitute liens on, our interests in the properties.

To the extent the tenants under the Lease Agreements make any improvements, these improvements could cause mechanic’s liens or similar liens to attach to, and constitute liens on, our interests in the properties. To the extent that mechanic’s liens or similar liens are recorded against any of the properties or any properties we may acquire in the future, the holders of such mechanic’s liens or similar liens may enforce them by court action and courts may cause the applicable properties or future properties to be sold to satisfy such liens, which could negatively impact our revenues, results of operations, cash flows and distributions to our stockholders. Further, holders of such liens could have priority over our stockholders in the event of bankruptcy or liquidation, and as a result, a trustee in bankruptcy may have difficulty realizing or foreclosing on such properties in any such bankruptcy or liquidation, and the amount of distributions our stockholders could receive in such bankruptcy or liquidation could be reduced.

Adverse changes in our credit rating may affect our borrowing capacity and borrowing terms.

Our outstanding debt is periodically rated by nationally recognized credit rating agencies. The credit ratings are based upon our operating performance, liquidity and leverage ratios, overall financial condition, and other factors viewed by the credit rating agencies as relevant to both our industry and the economic outlook. Our credit rating may affect the amount of capital we can access, as well as the terms of any financing we obtain. Because we rely in part on debt financing to fund growth, the absence of an investment grade credit rating or any credit rating downgrade or negative outlook may have a negative effect on our future growth.

We will have future capital needs and may not be able to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms.

We may incur additional indebtedness in the future to refinance our existing indebtedness or to finance newly acquired properties or for general corporate or other purposes. Any significant additional indebtedness could require a substantial portion of our cash flow to make interest and principal payments due on our indebtedness. Greater demands on our cash resources may reduce funds available to us to pay distributions, make capital expenditures and acquisitions, or carry out other aspects of our business and growth strategies. Increased indebtedness can also limit our ability to adjust rapidly to changing market conditions, make us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions and create competitive disadvantages for us compared to other companies with relatively lower debt levels. Increased future debt service obligations may limit our operational and financial flexibility. Further, to the extent we were required to incur indebtedness, our future interest costs would increase, thereby reducing our earnings and cash flows from what they otherwise would have been.

Moreover, our ability to obtain additional financing and satisfy our financial obligations under indebtedness outstanding from time to time will depend upon our future operating performance, which is subject to then prevailing general economic and credit market conditions, including interest rate levels and the availability of credit generally, and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. The prolonged continuation or worsening of current credit market conditions would have a material adverse effect on our ability to obtain financing on favorable terms, if at all.

We may be unable to obtain additional financing or financing on favorable terms or our operating cash flow may be insufficient to satisfy our financial obligations under indebtedness outstanding from time to time (if any). Among other things, the absence of an investment grade credit rating or any credit rating downgrade or negative outlook could increase our financing costs and could limit our access to financing sources. If financing is not available when needed, or is available on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to pursue our business and growth strategies or otherwise take advantage of new business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects. We may raise additional funds in the future through the issuance of equity securities and, as a result, our stockholders may experience significant dilution, which may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and make it more difficult for our stockholders to sell our shares at a time and price that they deem appropriate and could impair our future ability to raise capital through an offering of our equity securities.

Our ability to refinance our indebtedness as it becomes due depends on many factors, some of which are beyond our control.

Our ability to refinance our existing indebtedness and any future indebtedness will depend, in part, on our current and projected financial condition, liquidity and results of operations and economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors. Many of these factors are beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance any of our indebtedness as it becomes due, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are not able to refinance our indebtedness as it becomes due,

we will be obligated to pay such indebtedness with cash from our operations and we may not have sufficient cash to do so, which would have a material and adverse effect on us.

Covenants in our debt agreements limit our operational flexibility, and a covenant breach or default could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

The agreements governing our indebtedness contain customary covenants, including restrictions on our ability to grant liens on our assets, incur indebtedness, sell assets, make investments, engage in acquisitions, mergers or consolidations and pay certain dividends and other restricted payments. These covenants could impair our ability to pursue our business and growth strategies, take advantage of new business opportunities or successfully compete. A breach of any of these covenants or covenants under any other agreements governing our indebtedness could result in an event of default. Cross-default provisions in our debt agreements could cause an event of default under one debt agreement to trigger an event of default under our other debt agreements. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under any of our debt agreements, the lenders could elect to declare all outstanding debt under such agreements to be immediately due and payable. If we were unable to repay or refinance the accelerated debt, the lenders could proceed against any assets pledged to secure that debt, including foreclosing on or requiring the sale of our properties, and our assets may not be sufficient to repay such debt in full. Covenants that limit our operational flexibility as well as defaults under our debt instruments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

A rise in interest rates may increase our overall interest rate expense and could adversely affect our stock price.

Our Revolving Credit Facility and Term Loan B Facility are subject to variable interest rates. A rise in interest rates may increase our overall interest rate expense and have an adverse impact on our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders. The risk presented by holding variable rate indebtedness can be managed or mitigated by utilizing interest rate protection products. However, there is no assurance that we will utilize any of these products or that such products will be available to us. In addition, in the event of a rise in interest rates, new debt, whether fixed or variable, is likely to be more expensive and we may be unable to replace maturing debt with new debt at equal or better interest rates.

Further, the dividend yield on our common stock, as a percentage of the price of such common stock, will influence the market price of such common stock. Thus, an increase in market interest rates may lead prospective purchasers of our common stock to expect a higher dividend yield, which would adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

We may not be able to purchase the properties subject to the Call Right Agreements, the Amended and Restated Right of First Refusal Agreement or the Put-Call Agreement if we are unable to obtain additional financing. In addition, we may be forced to dispose of Harrah’s Las Vegas to Caesars, possibly on disadvantageous terms.

The Call Right Agreements provide for our right for up to five years after the Formation Date to enter into binding agreements to purchase the real property interest and all improvements associated with the Option Properties from Caesars. The Put Call Agreement that we entered into with Caesars, among other things, provides us with the opportunity or the obligation to acquire the Eastside Convention Center Property and lease it back to Caesars. The Amended and Restated Right of First Refusal Agreement provides us the right, subject to certain exclusions, to (i) acquire (and lease to Caesars) any domestic gaming facilities located outside of the Gaming Enterprise District of Clark County, Nevada, proposed to be acquired or developed by Caesars, and (ii) acquire (and lease to Caesars) any of the properties that Caesars has recently agreed to acquire from Centaur Holdings, LLC, in each case, should Caesars determine to sell any such properties. In order to exercise these rights, we would likely be required to secure additional financing and our substantial level of indebtedness following the Formation Date or other factors could limit our ability to do so on attractive terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain financing on terms acceptable to us, we may not be able to exercise these rights and acquire these properties. Even if financing with acceptable terms is available to us, there can be no assurance that we will exercise any of these rights.

The Put-Call Agreement, among other things, grants Caesars the right to sell to (and simultaneously lease back from) us the Eastside Convention Center Property. If Caesars exercises the right to sell to (and lease from) us the Eastside Convention Center Property and the transactions do not close for reasons other than a default by Caesars or a failure to obtain any required regulatory approvals, Caesars will have the right to acquire Harrah’s Las Vegas from us, all on and subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Put-Call Agreement. In addition, the HLV Lease Agreement grants Caesars the right to purchase Harrah’s Las Vegas from us if we engage in certain transactions with entities deemed to be competitors of Caesars or if the landlord under the lease otherwise becomes a competitor of Caesars. The disposition of Harrah’s Las Vegas to Caesars pursuant to the Put-Call Agreement or the HLV Lease Agreement may be at disadvantageous terms and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

The bankruptcy or insolvency of any tenant or guarantor could result in the termination of the Lease Agreements and the related guarantees and material losses to us.

Although the tenants’ performance and payments under the Lease Agreements are guaranteed by Caesars or CRC, as the case may be, a default by the applicable tenant under the Lease Agreement, or by Caesars or CRC with regard to its guarantee, may cause a default under certain circumstances with regard to the entire portfolio covered by the Lease Agreements. In event of a bankruptcy, there can be no assurances that the tenants, Caesars or CRC would assume the Lease Agreements or the related guarantees, and if the Lease Agreements or guarantees were rejected, the tenant, Caesars or CRC, as applicable, may not have sufficient funds to pay the damages that would be owed to us a result of the rejection and we might not be able to find a replacement tenant on the same or better terms. Similarly, in the event of a bankruptcy of Caesars or CRC, any claim for damages under the guarantee may not be paid in full. For these and other reasons, the bankruptcy of one or more tenants, Caesars or CRC would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Our pursuit of investments in, and acquisitions of, additional properties may be unsuccessful or fail to meet our expectations.

We intend to pursue acquisitions of additional properties and seek acquisitions and other strategic opportunities. Accordingly, we may often be engaged in evaluating potential transactions and other strategic alternatives. In addition, from time to time, we may engage in discussions that may result in one or more transactions. Although there is uncertainty that any of these discussions will result in definitive agreements or the completion of any transaction, we may devote a significant amount of our management resources to such a transaction, which could negatively impact our operations. We may incur significant costs in connection with seeking acquisitions or other strategic opportunities regardless of whether the transaction is completed and in combining our operations if such a transaction is completed.

We operate in a highly competitive industry and face competition from other REITs, investment companies, private equity and hedge fund investors, sovereign funds, lenders, gaming companies and other investors, some of whom are significantly larger and have greater resources, access to capital and lower costs of capital. Increased competition will make it more challenging to identify and successfully capitalize on acquisition opportunities that meet our investment objectives. If we cannot identify and purchase a sufficient quantity of gaming properties and other properties at favorable prices or if we are unable to finance acquisitions on commercially favorable terms, our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. Additionally, the fact that we must distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT may limit our ability to rely upon rental payments from our leased properties or subsequently acquired properties in order to finance acquisitions. As a result, if debt or equity financing is not available on acceptable terms, further acquisitions might be limited or curtailed.

Investments in and acquisitions of gaming properties and other properties we might seek to acquire entail risks associated with real estate investments generally, including that the investment’s performance will fail to meet expectations, that the cost estimates for necessary property improvements will prove inaccurate or the operator or manager will underperform. Real estate development projects present other risks, including construction delays or cost overruns that increase expenses, the inability to obtain required zoning, occupancy and other governmental approvals and permits on a timely basis, and the incurrence of significant development costs prior to completion of the project.

Further, even if we were able to acquire additional properties in the future, there is no guarantee that such properties would be able to maintain their historical performance. In addition, our financing of these acquisitions could negatively impact our cash flows and liquidity, require us to incur substantial debt or involve the issuance of substantial new equity, which would be dilutive to existing stockholders. We have a substantial amount of indebtedness outstanding, which may affect our ability to pay distributions, may expose us to interest rate fluctuation risk and may expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations. In addition, we cannot assure you that we will be successful in implementing our business and growth strategies or that any expansion will improve operating results. The failure to identify and acquire new properties effectively, or the failure of any acquired properties to perform as expected, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We may sell or divest different properties or assets after an evaluation of our portfolio of businesses. Such sales or divestitures would affect our costs, revenues, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

From time to time, we may evaluate our properties and may, as a result, sell or attempt to sell, divest, or spin-off different properties or assets, subject to the terms of the Lease Agreements. These sales or divestitures would affect our costs, revenues, results of operations, financial condition, liquidity and our ability to comply with financial covenants. 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.

Our properties are subject to risks from natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, severe weather and terrorism.

Our properties are located in areas that may be subject to natural disasters, such as earthquakes, and extreme weather conditions, including, but not limited to, hurricanes. Such natural disasters or extreme weather conditions may interrupt operations at the casinos, damage our properties, and reduce the number of customers who visit our facilities in such areas. A severe earthquake could damage or destroy our properties. In addition, our operations could be adversely impacted by a drought or other cause of water shortage. A severe drought of extensive duration experienced in Las Vegas or in the other regions in which we operate could adversely affect the business and financial results at our properties. Although the tenants are required to maintain both property and business interruption insurance coverage, such coverage is subject to deductibles and limits on maximum benefits, including limitation on the coverage period for business interruption, and we cannot assure you that we or the tenants will be able to fully insure such losses or fully collect, if at all, on claims resulting from such natural disasters. While the Lease Agreements require, and new lease agreements are expected to require, that comprehensive insurance and hazard insurance be maintained by the tenants, there are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods, that may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Insurance coverage may not be sufficient to pay the full current market value or current replacement cost of a loss. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations, and other factors also might make it infeasible to use insurance proceeds to replace the property after such property has been damaged or destroyed. Under such circumstances, the insurance proceeds received might not be adequate to restore the economic position with respect to such property. If we experience a loss that is uninsured or that exceeds our policy coverage limits, we could lose the capital invested in the damaged properties as well as the anticipated future cash flows from those properties.

Terrorist attacks or other acts of violence may result in declining economic activity, which could harm the demand for goods and services offered by our tenants and the value of our properties and might adversely affect the value of an investment in our common stock. Such a resulting decrease in retail demand could make it difficult for us to renew or re-lease our properties to suitable, credit-worthy tenants at lease rates equal to or above historical rates. Terrorist activities or violence also could directly affect the value of our properties through damage, destruction or loss, and the availability of insurance for such acts, or of insurance generally, might be lower or cost more, which could increase our operating expenses and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. To the extent that any of our tenants is affected by future terrorist attacks or violence, its business similarly could be adversely affected, including the ability of our tenants to continue to meet their obligations to us. These events might erode business and consumer confidence and spending and might result in increased volatility in national and international financial markets and economies. Any one of these events might decrease demand for real estate, decrease or delay the occupancy of our new or redeveloped properties, and limit our access to capital or increase our cost of raising capital.

In addition, the Lease Agreements, as applicable, allow the tenants to remove a property from the Non-CPLV Lease Agreement and to terminate the CPLV Lease Agreement, the Joliet Lease Agreement or the HLV Lease Agreement, as the case may be, during the final two years of the lease terms if the cost to rebuild or restore a property in connection with a casualty event exceeds 25% of total property fair market value. Similarly, if a condemnation event occurs that renders a facility unsuitable for its primary intended use, the applicable tenants may remove the property from the Non-CPLV Lease Agreement and may terminate the CPLV Lease Agreement, the Joliet Lease Agreement or the HLV Lease Agreement, as the case may be. If a property is removed from the Non-CPLV Lease Agreement or if the CPLV Lease Agreement, the Joliet Lease Agreement or the HLV Lease Agreement, as the case may be, is terminated, we will lose the rent associated with the related facility, which would have a negative impact on our financial results. In this event, following termination of the lease of a property, even if we are able to restore the affected property, we could be limited to selling or leasing such property to a new tenant in order to obtain an alternate source of revenue, which may not happen on comparable terms or at all.

Changes in building and/or zoning laws may require us to update a property in the event of recapture or prevent us from fully restoring a property in the event of a substantial casualty loss and/or require us to meet additional or more stringent construction requirements.

Due to changes, among other things, in applicable building and zoning laws, ordinances and codes that may affect certain of our properties that have come into effect after the initial construction of the properties, certain properties may not comply fully with current building and/or zoning laws, including electrical, fire, health and safety codes and regulations, use, lot coverage, parking and setback requirements, but may qualify as permitted non-conforming uses. Although the Lease Agreements require our tenants to pay for and ensure continued compliance with applicable law, there is no assurance that future leases will be negotiated on the same basis or that our tenants will make any changes required by the terms of the Lease Agreements and/or any future leases we may enter into. In addition, such changes may limit a tenant’s ability to restore the premises of a property to its previous condition in the event of a substantial casualty loss with respect to the property or the ability to refurbish, expand or renovate such property to remain compliant, or increase the cost of construction in order to comply with changes in building or zoning codes and regulations.

If a tenant is unable to restore a property to its prior use after a substantial casualty loss or is required to comply with more stringent building or zoning codes and regulations, we may be unable to re-lease the space at a comparable effective rent or sell the property at an acceptable price, which may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Certain properties are subject to restrictions pursuant to reciprocal easement agreements, operating agreements or similar agreements.

Many of the properties that we own are, and properties that we may acquire in the future may be, subject to use restrictions and/or operational requirements imposed pursuant to ground leases, restrictive covenants or conditions, reciprocal easement agreements or operating agreements or other instruments (collectively, “Property Restrictions”) that could, among other things, adversely affect our ability to lease space to third parties. Such Property Restrictions could include: limitations on alterations, changes, expansions, or reconfiguration of properties; limitations on use of properties; limitations affecting parking requirements; or restrictions on exterior or interior signage or facades. In certain cases, consent of the other party or parties to such agreements may be required when altering, reconfiguring, expanding or redeveloping. Failure to secure such consents when necessary may harm our ability to execute leasing strategies, which could adversely affect us.

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

Our success and ability to grow depends, in large part, upon the leadership and performance of our executive management team, particularly our chief executive officer, our president and chief operating officer, and our chief financial officer. Any unforeseen loss of our executive officers’ services, or any negative market or industry perception with respect to them or arising from their loss, could have a material adverse effect on our business. We do not have key man or similar life insurance policies covering members of our senior management. We have employment agreements with our executive officers, but these agreements do not guarantee that any given executive will remain with us, and there can be no assurance that any such officers will remain with us. The appointment of certain key members of our executive management team will be subject to regulatory approvals based upon suitability determinations by gaming regulatory authorities in the jurisdictions where our properties are located. If any of our executive officers is found unsuitable by any such gaming regulatory authorities, or if we otherwise lose their services, we would have to find alternative candidates and may not be able to successfully manage our business or achieve our business objectives.

If we cannot attract, retain and motivate employees, we may be unable to compete effectively and lose the ability to improve and expand our businesses.

Our success and ability to grow depend, in part, on our ability to hire, retain and motivate sufficient numbers of talented people with the increasingly diverse skills needed to serve clients and expand our business. We face intense competition for highly qualified, specialized technical, managerial, and consulting personnel. Recruiting, training, retention and benefit costs place significant demands on our resources. Additionally, CEOC’s bankruptcy proceedings and our recent formation may make recruiting executives to our business more difficult. The inability to attract qualified employees in sufficient numbers to meet particular demands or the loss of a significant number of our employees could have an adverse effect on us.

We may become involved in legal proceedings that, if adversely adjudicated or settled, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

The nature of our business subjects us to the risk of lawsuits related to matters incidental to our business filed by our tenants, customers, employees, competitors, business partners and others. As with all legal proceedings, no assurance can be provided as to the outcome of these matters and, in general, legal proceedings can be expensive and time consuming. We may not be successful in the defense or prosecution of these lawsuits, which could result in settlements or damages that could have a material adverse effect on us.

Environmental compliance costs and liabilities associated with real estate properties owned by us may materially impair the value of those investments.

As an owner of real property, we are subject to various Federal, state and local environmental and health and safety laws and regulations. Although we do not operate or manage most of our properties, we may be held primarily or jointly and severally liable for costs relating to the investigation and clean-up of any property from which there has been a release or threatened release of a regulated material as well as other affected properties, regardless of whether we knew of or caused the release, and to preserve claims for damages. Further, some environmental laws create a lien on a contaminated site in favor of the government for damages and the costs the government incurs in connection with such contamination.

Although under the Lease Agreements the tenants are required to indemnify us for certain environmental liabilities, including environmental liabilities it causes, the amount of such liabilities could exceed the financial ability of the applicable tenants to

indemnify us. In addition, the presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease our properties or to borrow using our properties as collateral.

We may be required to contribute insurance proceeds with respect to casualty events at our properties to the lenders under our debt financing agreements.

In the event that we were to receive insurance proceeds with respect to a casualty event at any of our properties, we may be required under the terms of our debt financing agreements to contribute all or a portion of those proceeds to the repayment of such debt, which may prevent us from restoring such properties to their prior state. If the remainder of the proceeds (after any such required repayment) were insufficient to make the repairs necessary to restore the damaged properties to a condition substantially equivalent to its state immediately prior to the casualty, we may not have sufficient liquidity to otherwise fund these repairs and may be required to obtain additional financing, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

If we fail to establish and maintain an effective system of integrated internal controls, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

As a reporting company, we are required to develop and implement substantial control systems, policies and procedures in order to qualify and maintain our qualification as a REIT and satisfy our periodic SEC reporting requirements. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully develop and implement these systems, policies and procedures and to operate our company or that any such development and implementation will be effective. Failure to do so could jeopardize our status as a REIT or as a reporting company, and the loss of such statuses would materially and adversely affect us. If we fail to develop, implement or maintain proper overall business controls, including as required to support our growth, our operating and financial results could be harmed or we could fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, the existence of a material weakness or significant deficiency could result in errors in our Financial Statements that could require a restatement, cause us to fail to meet our SEC reporting obligations and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a material adverse effect on us and on the market price of our common stock.

Risk Factors Relating to the Formation Transactions

We may be unable to make, on a timely or cost-effective basis, the changes necessary to operate as a stand-alone company primarily focused on owning a portfolio of gaming properties.

We have limited historical operations as an independent company. As a stand-alone entity, we are subject to, and responsible for, regulatory compliance, including periodic public filings with the SEC, compliance with the listing requirements of the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), and with applicable state gaming rules and regulations, as well as compliance with generally applicable tax and accounting rules. Because our business did not operate as a stand-alone company until the Formation Date, we cannot ensure that we will be able to successfully implement the infrastructure or retain the personnel necessary to operate as a stand-alone company or that we will not incur costs in excess of anticipated costs to establish such infrastructure and retain such personnel.

The historical financial information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may not be a reliable indicator of future results.

We are a newly organized company with limited operating history and did not operate as a REIT or otherwise as a stand-alone business prior to the Formation Date. Therefore, our growth prospects must be considered in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered when any new business is formed. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully operate our business profitably or implement our operating policies and business and growth strategies as described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Financial Statements and other financial information included herein may not reflect what our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations will be in the future now that we are a separate public company. The properties acquired by our Operating Partnership from subsidiaries of Caesars were historically operated by subsidiaries of Caesars as part of its larger corporate organization and not as a stand-alone business or independent company. Significant changes have occurred in our cost structure, financing and business operations as a result of our operation as a stand-alone company and the entry into transactions with Caesars that have not existed historically, including the Lease Agreements and the related guarantees.

For additional information about the basis of presentation of the financial information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, see “Selected Financial Data,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation” and the historical combined Financial Statements of Caesars Entertainment Outdoor, our TRS prior to the Formation Date, included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our actual financial results may vary significantly from the financial projections filed with the Bankruptcy Court.

In connection with the Plan of Reorganization, the Debtors were required to file projected financial information with the Bankruptcy Court to demonstrate the feasibility of the Plan of Reorganization and the ability of the Debtors to continue operations upon emergence from bankruptcy. These projections were prepared for the specific purpose of satisfying statutory requirements in connection with confirmation of the Plan of Reorganization and are neither included nor incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. At the time they were filed, the projections reflected numerous assumptions concerning anticipated future performance and market and economic conditions that were and remain beyond our and the Debtors’ control and that may not materialize. Projections are inherently subject to uncertainties and to a wide variety of significant business, economic and competitive risks. Our actual results will vary from those contemplated by the projections and the variations may be material.

We may be unable to achieve the expected benefits from operating as a company independent of Caesars.

We believe that as a company independent from Caesars, we will have the ability, subject to the Amended and Restated Right of First Refusal Agreement and the Lease Agreements, to pursue transactions with other gaming operators, to fund acquisitions with equity on significantly more favorable terms than those that would be available to Caesars, to diversify into different businesses in which Caesars, as a practical matter, could not diversify, and to pursue certain transactions that Caesars otherwise would be disadvantaged by or precluded from pursuing due to regulatory constraints. However, we may not be able to achieve some or all of the benefits from operating as a company independent from Caesars in a timely manner, if at all.

Some members of our management team may have limited experience operating as part of a REIT structure.

The requirements for qualifying as a REIT are highly technical and complex. We did not operate as a REIT prior to the Formation Date, and some members of our management team may have limited experience in complying with the income, asset, and other limitations imposed by the real estate investment provisions of the Code. Any failure to comply with those provisions in a timely manner could prevent us from qualifying as a REIT or could force us to pay unexpected taxes and penalties, which could materially harm our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects. In addition, there is no assurance that any past experience with the acquisition and disposition of gaming facilities will be sufficient to enable us to successfully manage our portfolio of properties as required by our business plan or the REIT provisions of the Code.

We cannot be certain that the bankruptcy proceedings will not adversely affect our operations going forward.

Our properties operated in bankruptcy for over two years and we cannot assure you that having been subject to bankruptcy will not adversely affect our operations going forward. For example, we may be subject to claims that were not discharged in the bankruptcy proceedings. Substantially all, if not all, of the material claims against the Debtors that arose prior to the date of the bankruptcy filing were addressed during the bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, the Bankruptcy Code provides that the confirmation of a plan of reorganization discharges a debtor from substantially all debts arising prior to confirmation and certain debts arising afterwards. Circumstances in which claims and other obligations that arose prior to the bankruptcy filing were not discharged primarily relate to certain actions by governmental units under police power authority, where CEOC agreed to preserve a claimant’s claims, as well as, potentially, instances where a claimant had inadequate notice of the bankruptcy filing. If any such claims remain and can be asserted against us, the ultimate resolution of such claims and other obligations may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and profitability.

Our separation from subsidiaries of Caesars could give rise to disputes or other unfavorable effects, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects.

Disputes with third parties could arise out of our separation from subsidiaries of Caesars, and we could experience unfavorable reactions to the separation from employees, ratings agencies, regulators, or other interested parties. For example, The City Of Hammond, Indiana, The City of Hammond Department of Redevelopment, Department of Waterworks of The City of Hammond, and Hammond Port (collectively, the “Hammond Entities”) filed an objection with the Bankruptcy Court in November 2017 to the assignment of the respective leases, licenses and contracts to which they are counterparties relating to Horseshoe Hammond property. The Objection alleges that given the prohibition terms of the various leases, licenses, contracts and the Hammond agreements, the Debtors had no authority or power to make the assignments to VICI and, at the present, the Hammond Entities do not consent and do object to the property assignments. These disputes and reactions of third parties could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity results of operations and prospects. In addition, disputes between us and Caesars could arise in connection with any of the Lease Agreements, the Management and Lease Support Agreements, the Amended and Restated Right of First Refusal Agreement, the Call Right Agreements, the Put-Call Agreement, the Tax Matters Agreement or other agreements.

If our separation from CEOC, together with certain related transactions, does not qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. Federal income tax purposes, CEOC could be subject to significant tax liabilities and, in certain circumstances, we could be required to indemnify CEOC for material taxes pursuant to indemnification obligations under the Tax Matters Agreement.

The IRS issued a private letter ruling with respect to certain issues relevant to our separation from CEOC, including relating to the separation and certain related transactions as tax-free for U.S. Federal income tax purposes under certain provisions of the Code. The IRS ruling does not address certain requirements for tax-free treatment of the separation. CEOC received from its tax advisors a tax opinion substantially to the effect that, with respect to such requirements on which the IRS did not rule, such requirements should be satisfied. The IRS ruling and the tax opinion that CEOC received, relied on (among other things) certain representations, assumptions and undertakings, including those relating to the past and future conduct of our business, and the IRS ruling and the opinion would not be valid if such representations, assumptions and undertakings were incorrect in any material respect.

Notwithstanding the IRS ruling and the tax opinion, the IRS could determine the separation should be treated as a taxable transaction for U.S. Federal income tax purposes if it determines any of the representations, assumptions or undertakings that were included in the request for the IRS ruling are false or have been violated or if it disagrees with the conclusions in the opinion that are not covered by the IRS ruling.

If the reorganization fails to qualify for tax-free treatment, in general, CEOC would be subject to tax as if it had sold our assets to us in a taxable sale for their fair market value, and CEOC’s creditors who received shares of our common stock pursuant to the Plan of Reorganization would be subject to tax as if they had received a taxable distribution in respect of their claims equal to the fair market value of such shares.

Under the Tax Matters Agreement that we entered into with Caesars, we generally are required to indemnify Caesars against any tax resulting from the separation to the extent that such tax resulted from certain of our representations or undertakings being incorrect or violated. Our indemnification obligations to Caesars are not limited by any maximum amount. As a result, if we are required to indemnify Caesars or such other persons under the circumstances set forth in the Tax Matters Agreement, we may be subject to substantial liabilities.

We may not be able to engage in desirable strategic or capital-raising transactions following the spin-off. In addition, we could be liable for adverse tax consequences resulting from engaging in significant strategic or capital-raising transactions.

To preserve the tax-free treatment to CEOC of the spin-off, for the two-year period following the spin-off, we may be prohibited, except in specific circumstances, from: (1) entering into any transaction pursuant to which all or a portion of our stock would be acquired, whether by merger or otherwise, (2) issuing equity securities beyond certain thresholds, (3) repurchasing our common stock, (4) ceasing to actively conduct the business of operating VICI Golf, or (5) taking or failing to take any other action that prevents the spin-off and related transactions from being tax-free. These restrictions may limit our ability to pursue strategic transactions or engage in new business or other transactions that may maximize the value of our business.

Risks Related to our Status as a REIT

We may not qualify or maintain our qualification as a REIT.

We intend to elect and qualify to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. Federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2017 and expect to operate in a manner that will allow us to continue to be classified as such. Once an entity is qualified as a REIT, the Code generally requires that such entity distribute annually to its stockholders at least 90% of its REIT taxable income (with certain adjustments), determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, and that it pay tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it distributes annually less than 100% of its REIT taxable income, including capital gains. In addition, a REIT is required to pay a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which the distributions it makes in a calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of its ordinary income, 95% of its capital gain net income and 100% of its undistributed income from prior years. As a result, in order to avoid current entity level U.S. Federal income taxes, a substantial portion of our cash flow after operating expenses and debt service will be required to be distributed to our stockholders.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to U.S. Federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to our stockholders would not be deductible by us in computing our REIT taxable income. Any resulting corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the market price of our common stock. Unless we were entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, we also would be disqualified from re-electing to be taxed as a REIT for the four taxable

years following the year in which we failed to qualify as a REIT. As a result, the amount available for distribution to holders of equity securities that would otherwise receive dividends would be reduced for the year or years involved. Furthermore, the U.S. Federal income tax consequences of distributions and sales of our shares to certain of our stockholders could be adversely impacted if we were to fail to qualify as a REIT.

Qualification to be taxed as a REIT involves highly technical and complex provision of the Code, and violations of these provisions could jeopardize our REIT qualification.

Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. Our qualification as a REIT depends on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. In addition, our ability to satisfy the requirements to qualify as a REIT may depend in part on the actions of third parties over which we have no control or only limited influence, including in cases where we own an equity interest in an entity that is classified as a partnership for U.S. Federal income tax purposes.

The opinion we expect to receive regarding our status as a REIT does not guarantee our ability to qualify as a REIT.

We intend to operate in a manner that will allow us to qualify to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. Federal income tax purposes. We expect that we will receive an opinion of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP (“REIT Tax Counsel”) that, commencing with our taxable year ending December 31, 2017, we are organized in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the U.S. Federal income tax laws and our proposed method of operations will enable us to satisfy the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the U.S. Federal income tax laws for our taxable year ending December 31, 2017 and subsequent taxable years. Investors should be aware, however, that opinions of counsel are not binding on the IRS or any court. The opinion of REIT Tax Counsel represents only the view of REIT Tax Counsel, based on its review and analysis of existing law and on certain representations as to factual matters and covenants made by us, including representations relating to the values of our assets and the sources of our income. The opinion is expressed as of the date of this offering. REIT Tax Counsel will have no obligation to advise us or the holders of shares of our common stock of any subsequent change in the matters stated, represented or assumed or of any subsequent change in applicable law. Furthermore, both the validity of the opinion of REIT Tax Counsel and our qualification to be taxed as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis, the results of which will not be monitored by REIT Tax Counsel. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. Any failure to qualify to be taxed as a REIT, or failure to remain to be qualified to be taxed as a REIT, would have a material and adverse effect on us.

We may in the future choose to pay dividends in the form of our own common stock, in which case stockholders may be required to pay income taxes in excess of the cash dividends they receive.

We may seek in the future to distribute taxable dividends that are payable in cash or our common stock. Taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend as ordinary income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for U.S. Federal income tax purposes as to which non-corporate stockholders will generally be eligible for a deduction equal to 20% of such distributions. As a result, stockholders receiving dividends in the form of common stock may be required to pay income taxes with respect to such dividends in excess of the cash dividends received, if any. If a U.S. stockholder sells the common stock that it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our common stock at the time of the sale. In addition, in such case, a U.S. stockholder could have a capital loss with respect to the common stock sold that could not be used to offset such dividend income. Moreover, with respect to certain non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold U.S. Federal income tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in common stock. Furthermore, such a taxable share dividend could be viewed as equivalent to a reduction in our cash distributions, and that factor, as well as the possibility that a significant number of our stockholders determine to sell our common stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, may put downward pressure on the market price of our common stock.

Changes to the U.S. Federal income tax laws, including the recent enactment of certain tax reform measures, could have a material and adverse effect on us.

U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs and other corporations and the administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended at any time, potentially with retroactive effect. We cannot predict whether, when or to what extent new U.S. federal tax laws, regulations, interpretations or rulings will be issued. Prospective investors are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding the effect of potential changes to the U.S. Federal tax laws on an investment in our common stock.

Recently enacted changes to the U.S. federal income tax laws could have a material and adverse effect on us. For example, certain changes in law pursuant to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act could reduce the relative competitive advantage of operating as a REIT as compared with operating as a C corporation, including by:

•	reducing the rate of tax applicable to individuals and C corporations, which could reduce the relative attractiveness of the generally single level of taxation on REIT distributions;

•	permitting immediate expensing of capital expenditures, which could likewise reduce the relative attractiveness of the REIT taxation regime; and

•	limiting the deductibility of interest expense, which could increase the distribution requirement of REITs (though such limitations should not affect REITs).

We could fail to qualify to be taxed as a REIT if income we receive from Caesars or its subsidiaries is not treated as qualifying income.

Under applicable provisions of the Code, we will not be treated as a REIT unless we satisfy various requirements, including requirements relating to the sources of our gross income. Rents received or accrued by us from Caesars or its subsidiaries will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of these requirements if the leases are not respected as true leases for U.S. federal income tax purposes and instead are treated as service contracts, joint ventures or some other type of arrangement. If some or all of our leases are not respected as true leases for U.S. Federal income tax purposes, we may fail to qualify to be taxed as a REIT. Furthermore, our qualification as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, stockholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we may not obtain independent appraisals.

In addition, subject to certain exceptions, rents received or accrued by us from Caesars or its subsidiaries will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of these requirements if we or an actual or constructive owner of 10% or more of our stock actually or constructively owns 10% or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of Caesars stock entitled to vote or 10% or more of the total value of all classes of Caesars stock. Our charter provides for restrictions on ownership and transfer of our shares of stock, including restrictions on such ownership or transfer that would cause the rents received or accrued by us from Caesars or its subsidiaries to be treated as non-qualifying rent for purposes of the REIT gross income requirements. Nevertheless, there can be no assurance that such restrictions will be effective in ensuring that rents received or accrued by us from Caesars or its subsidiaries will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of REIT qualification requirements.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (with certain adjustments), determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding any net capital gains, in order for us to qualify as a REIT so that U.S. Federal corporate income tax does not apply to earnings that we distribute. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement and qualify for taxation as a REIT but distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and including any net capital gains, we will be subject to U.S. Federal corporate income tax on any undistributed portion of such taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we distribute to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under U.S. Federal tax laws. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the Code and to avoid or otherwise minimize paying entity level Federal or excise tax (other than at any TRS of ours). We may generate taxable income greater than our income for financial reporting purposes prepared in accordance with GAAP. In particular, during the first several years of the leases, under the terms of the Lease Agreements, rental income will be allocated for tax purposes generally in an amount greater than cash rents. Further, we may generate taxable income greater than our cash flow from operations after operating expenses and debt service as a result of differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash or the effect of nondeductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. In order to avoid or otherwise minimize current entity level U.S. Federal income taxes, we will generally be required to distribute sufficient cash flow after operating expenses and debt service payments to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements. While we intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the Code, we may not have sufficient liquidity to meet the REIT distribution requirements. If our cash flow is insufficient to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements, we could be required to raise capital on unfavorable terms, sell assets at disadvantageous prices, distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions or issue dividends in the form of shares of our common stock to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our REIT taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs or change the value of our equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain U.S. Federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income and state or local income, property and transfer taxes. For example, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements, we currently hold and expect in the future to hold some of our assets and conduct certain of our activities through one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to Federal, state, and local corporate-level income taxes as regular C corporations (i.e., corporations generally subject to corporate-level income tax under Subchapter C of Chapter 1 the Code). In addition, we may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with a taxable REIT subsidiary if they are not conducted on an arm’s length basis. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT, we must ensure that, at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and “real estate assets” (as defined in the Code), including certain mortgage loans and securities. The remainder of our investments (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a taxable REIT subsidiary) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our total assets (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a taxable REIT subsidiary) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 25% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries (20% for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017). If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investments. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. In addition to the asset tests set forth above, to qualify as a REIT we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may be unable to pursue investments that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to make certain attractive investments.

We may be subject to built-in gains tax on the disposition of certain of our properties.

If we acquire certain properties in tax-deferred transactions, which properties were held by one or more C corporations before they were held by us, we may be subject to a built-in gain tax on future disposition of such properties. This is the case with respect to all or substantially all of the properties acquired from CEOC pursuant to the formation transactions. If we dispose of any such properties during the five-year period following acquisition of the properties from the respective C corporation (i.e., during the five-year period following ownership of such properties by a REIT), we will be subject to U.S. Federal income tax (and applicable state and local taxes) at the highest corporate tax rates on any gain recognized from the disposition of such properties to the extent of the excess of the fair market value of the properties on the date that they were contributed to or acquired by us in a tax-deferred transaction over the adjusted tax basis of such properties on such date, which are referred to as built-in gains. Similarly, if we recognize certain other income considered to be built-in income during the five-year period following the property acquisitions described above, we could be subject to U.S. Federal tax under the built-in gains tax rules. We would be subject to this corporate-level tax liability (without the benefit of the deduction for dividends paid) even if we qualify and maintain our status as a REIT. Any recognized built-in gain will retain its character as ordinary income or capital gain and will be taken into account in determining REIT taxable income and the REIT distribution requirements. Any tax on the recognized built-in gain will reduce REIT taxable income. We may choose to forego otherwise attractive opportunities to sell assets in a taxable transaction during the five-year built-in gain recognition period in order to avoid this built-in gain tax. However, there can be no assurance that such a taxable transaction will not occur. The amount of any such built-in gain tax could be material and the resulting tax liability could have a negative effect on our cash flow and limit our ability to pay distributions required to qualify and maintain our status as a REIT.

Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.

The REIT provisions of the Code substantially limit our ability to hedge our assets and liabilities. Income from certain hedging transactions that we may enter into to manage risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets or from transactions to manage risk of currency fluctuations with respect to any item of income or gain that satisfy the REIT gross income tests (including gain from the termination of such a transaction) does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests that apply to REITs, provided that certain identification requirements are met. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions or fail to properly identify such transaction as a hedge, the income is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may be required to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a taxable REIT

subsidiary. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because the taxable REIT subsidiary may be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates that we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in the taxable REIT subsidiary will generally not provide any tax benefit, except that such losses could theoretically be carried back or forward against past or future taxable income of the taxable REIT subsidiary.

We may pay a purging distribution, if any, in common stock and cash.

In order to qualify as a REIT, we must distribute any “earnings and profits,” as defined in the Code, that are allocated from CEOC to us in connection with the formation transactions by the end of the first taxable year in which we elect REIT status. Based on analysis of CEOC’s earnings and profits, we currently do not believe that any earnings and profits were allocated to us in connection with the formation transactions and therefore do not currently expect to be required to make a purging distribution. If notwithstanding this expectation we are required to make a purging distribution, we may pay the purging distribution to our stockholders in a combination of cash and shares of our common stock. Each of our stockholders will be permitted to elect to receive the stockholder’s entire entitlement under the purging distribution in either cash or shares of our common stock, subject to a cash limitation. If our stockholders elect to receive a portion of cash in excess of the cash limitation, each such electing stockholder will receive a pro rata portion of cash corresponding to the stockholder’s respective entitlement under the purging distribution declaration. The IRS issued a private letter ruling with respect to certain issues relevant to the separation from Caesars providing generally that, subject to the terms and conditions contained therein, the amount of any shares of our common stock received by any of our stockholders as part of a purging distribution, if any, will be considered to equal the amount of cash that could have been received instead. Although we may generally rely upon the ruling, no assurance can be given that the IRS will not challenge our qualification as a REIT on the basis of other issues or facts outside the scope of the ruling. Furthermore, the IRS has issued a revenue procedure that provides that, so long as a REIT complied with certain provisions therein, certain distributions that are paid partly in cash and partly in stock will be treated as taxable dividends that would satisfy the REIT distribution requirements and qualify for the dividends paid deduction for U.S. Federal income tax purposes. In a purging distribution, if any, a stockholder of our common stock will be required to report dividend income equal to the amount of cash and common stock received as a result of the purging distribution even though we may distribute no cash or only nominal amounts of cash to such stockholder.

Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.

The Maryland General Corporation Law (the “MGCL”) provides that a director has no liability in any action based on an act of the director if he or she has acted in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in the corporation’s best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. As permitted by the MGCL, our charter limits the liability of our directors and officers to our company and our stockholders for money damages, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. Under Maryland law, our present directors and officers will not have any liability to us or our stockholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:

•	actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services; or

•	a final judgment based upon a finding that his or her action or failure to act was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty by the director or officer and was material to the cause of action adjudicated.

Our charter provides that we have the power to obligate ourselves, and our amended and restated bylaws obligate us, to indemnify our directors and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities and to pay or reimburse their reasonable expenses in advance of final disposition of a proceeding to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. In addition, we have entered into indemnification agreements with our directors and executive officers that provide for indemnification and advance expenses to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist under common law.

Our board of directors may change our major corporate policies without stockholder approval and those changes may materially and adversely affect us.

Our board of directors will determine and may eliminate or otherwise change our major corporate policies, including our acquisition, investment, financing, growth, operations and distribution policies. While our stockholders have the power to elect or remove directors, changes in our major corporate policies may be made by our board of directors without stockholder approval and those changes could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and prospects, the market price of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and to satisfy our debt service requirements.

The ability of our board of directors to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT qualification, with stockholder approval, may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.

Our charter provides that our board of directors may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, only with the affirmative vote of stockholders entitled to cast a majority of all votes entitled to be cast on the matter, if the board determines that it is no longer in our best interests to continue to qualify as a REIT. If we cease to be a REIT, we would become subject to Federal income tax on our taxable income and would no longer be required to distribute most of our taxable income to our stockholders, which may have adverse consequences on the total return to our stockholders.

Our charter and bylaws contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent an acquisition of our common stock or a change in control.

Our charter and bylaws contain provisions, the exercise or existence of which could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for our stockholders or otherwise be in their best interests, including the following:

Our charter contains restrictions on the ownership and transfer of our stock.

In order for us to qualify as a REIT, no more than 50% of the value of outstanding shares of our stock may be owned, beneficially or constructively, by five or fewer individuals (or certain other persons) at any time during the last half of each taxable year (“closely held”). Subject to certain exceptions, our charter prohibits any stockholder from owning beneficially or constructively, with respect to any class or series of our capital stock, more than 9.8% (in value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of such class or series of our capital stock.

The constructive ownership rules under the Code are complex and may cause the outstanding stock owned by a group of related individuals or entities to be deemed to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of 9.8% or less of the outstanding shares of a class or series of our stock by an individual or entity could cause that individual or entity or another individual or entity to own constructively in excess of the relevant ownership limits.

Among other restrictions on ownership and transfer of shares, our charter also prohibits any person from owning shares of our stock that would result in our being “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code or otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT. Any attempt to own or transfer shares of our common stock or of any of our other capital stock in violation of these restrictions may result in the shares being automatically transferred to a charitable trust or may be void.

Our charter provides that our board may grant exceptions to the 9.8% ownership limit, subject in each case to certain initial and ongoing conditions designed to protect our status as a REIT. These ownership limits may prevent a third-party from acquiring control of us if our board of directors does not grant an exemption from the ownership limits, even if our stockholders believe the change in control is in their best interests. An exemption from the 9.8% ownership limit was granted to certain stockholders, and our board may in the future provide exceptions to the ownership limit for other stockholders, subject to certain initial and ongoing conditions designed to protect our status as a REIT.

Our board of directors has the power to cause us to issue and authorize additional shares of our capital stock without stockholder approval.

Our charter authorizes us to issue authorized but unissued shares of common or preferred stock in addition to the shares of common stock issued and outstanding. In addition, our board of directors may, without stockholder approval, amend our charter to increase the aggregate number of our shares of stock or the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue and classify or reclassify any unissued shares of common or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. As a result, our board of directors may establish a class or series of shares of common or preferred stock that could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for our shares of common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Certain provisions of Maryland law may limit the ability of a third party to acquire control of us.

Certain provisions of the MGCL may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from acquiring us or of impeding a change of control under circumstances that otherwise could provide our common stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then prevailing market price of such shares, including:

•	“business combination” provisions that, subject to limitations, (a) prohibit certain business combinations between an “interested stockholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our outstanding shares of voting stock or an affiliate or associate of ours who, at any time within the two-year period

immediately prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of our then outstanding shares of our common stock) or an affiliate of any interested stockholder and us for five years after the most recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, and (b) thereafter impose two super-majority stockholder voting requirements on these combinations; and

•

“control share” provisions that provide that holders of “control shares” of our company (defined as voting shares of stock that, if aggregated with all other shares of stock owned or controlled by the acquirer (except solely by virtue of a revocable proxy), would entitle the acquirer to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of ownership or control of “control shares”) have no voting rights with respect to “control shares” except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all votes entitled to be cast by the acquirer of control shares, and by any of our officers and employees who are also our directors.

Our charter provides that, notwithstanding any other provision of our charter or our bylaws, the Maryland Business Combination Act (Title 3, Subtitle 6 of the MGCL) does not apply to any business combination between us and any interested stockholder or any affiliate of any interested stockholder of ours and that we expressly elect not to be governed by the provisions of Section 3-602 of the MGCL in whole or in part. Any amendment to such provision of our charter must be approved by the affirmative vote of stockholders entitled to cast a majority of all votes entitled to be cast on the matter. Pursuant to the MGCL, our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act any and all acquisitions by any person of shares of our stock. This provision of our bylaws may not be altered, amended or repealed except by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. There can be no assurance that this exemption contained in our bylaws will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future.

Additionally, provisions of Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL permit a Maryland corporation such as the Company, by action of its board of directors and without stockholder approval and regardless of what is provided in the charter or bylaws, to elect to avail itself of certain takeover defenses, such as a classified board, unless the charter or a resolution adopted by the board of directors prohibits such election. Our charter provides that we are prohibited from making any such election unless first approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of a majority of all votes entitled to be cast on the matter.

A small number of our stockholders could significantly influence our business and affairs.

A few stockholders own substantial amounts of our outstanding voting stock. Large holders may be able to affect matters requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and the approval of mergers or other business combination transactions.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

The cash available for distribution to stockholders may not be sufficient to pay dividends at expected levels, nor can we assure you of our ability to make distributions in the future. We may use borrowed funds to make distributions

If cash available for distribution is less than the amount necessary to make cash distributions, our inability to make the expected distributions could result in a decrease in the market price of our common stock. All distributions will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend upon various factors, including, but not limited to: our historical and projected financial condition, cash flows, results of operations and REIT taxable income, limitations contained in financing instruments, debt service requirements, operating cash inflows and outflows, including capital expenditures and acquisitions, limitations on our ability to use cash generated in one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries, if any, to fund distributions and applicable law. We may not be able to make distributions in the future. In addition, some of our distributions may include a return of capital. To the extent that we decide to make distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits in the future, such distributions would generally be considered a return of capital for Federal income tax purposes to the extent of the holder’s adjusted tax basis in their shares. A return of capital is not taxable, but it has the effect of reducing the holder’s adjusted tax basis in our common stock. To the extent that such distributions exceed the adjusted tax basis of a holder’s shares, they will be treated as gain from the sale or exchange of such stock. If we borrow to fund distributions, our future interest costs would increase, thereby reducing our earnings and cash available for distribution from what they otherwise would have been.

For purposes of satisfying the minimum distribution requirement to qualify for and maintain REIT status, our REIT taxable income will be calculated without reference to our cash flow. Consequently, under certain circumstances, we may not have available cash to make our required distributions, and we may need to raise additional equity or debt in order to fund our intended distributions, or we may distribute a portion of our distributions in the form of our common stock or debt instruments, which could result in significant stockholder dilution or higher leverage. While the IRS has issued a revenue procedure indicating that certain distributions that are made partly in cash and partly in stock will be treated as taxable dividends that would satisfy that REIT annual distribution

requirement and qualify for the dividends paid deduction for U.S. Federal income tax purposes, no assurance can be provided that we will be able to satisfy the requirements of the revenue procedure. Therefore it is unclear whether and to what extent we will be able to make taxable dividends payable in-kind. In addition, to the extent we were to make distributions that include our common stock or debt instruments, a stockholder of ours will be required to report dividend income as a result of such distributions even though we distributed no cash or only nominal amounts of cash to such stockholder.

VICI REIT is a holding company with no direct operations and will rely on distributions received from the Operating Partnership to make distributions to its stockholders.

VICI REIT is a holding company and conducts its operations through subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership and VICI Golf. VICI REIT does not have, apart from the units that it owns in the Operating Partnership and VICI Golf, any independent operations. As a result, VICI REIT relies on distributions from its Operating Partnership to make any distributions to its stockholders it might declare on its common stock and to meet any of its obligations, including any tax liability on taxable income allocated to it from the Operating Partnership (which might not be able to make distributions to VICI REIT equal to the tax on such allocated taxable income). In turn, the ability of subsidiaries of the Operating Partnership to make distributions to the Operating Partnership, and therefore, the ability of the Operating Partnership to make distributions to VICI REIT, depends on the operating results of these subsidiaries and the Operating Partnership and on the terms of any financing arrangements they have entered into. In addition, because VICI REIT is a holding company, claims of common stockholders of VICI REIT are structurally subordinated to all existing and future liabilities and other obligations (whether or not for borrowed money) and any preferred equity of the Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries. Therefore, in the event of our bankruptcy, liquidation or reorganization, VICI REIT’s assets and those of the Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries will be available to satisfy the claims of VICI REIT common stockholders only after all of VICI REIT’s, the Operating Partnership’s and its subsidiaries’ liabilities and other obligations and any preferred equity of any of them have been paid in full.

The Operating Partnership may, in connection with its acquisition of additional properties or otherwise, issue additional common units or preferred units to third parties. Such issuances would reduce VICI REIT’s ownership in the Operating Partnership. Because stockholders of VICI REIT do not directly own common units or preferred units of the Operating Partnership, they do not have any voting rights with respect to any such issuances or other partnership level activities of the Operating Partnership.

Conflicts of interest could arise between the interests of our stockholders and the interests of holders of Operating Partnership units which may impede business decisions that could benefit our stockholders.

Conflicts of interest could arise as a result of the relationships between us, on the one hand, and our Operating Partnership or any limited partner thereof, if any, on the other. Our directors and officers have duties to us under applicable Maryland law. At the same time, we, as general partner of our Operating Partnership, have fiduciary duties and obligations to our Operating Partnership and its limited partners under Delaware law and the partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership in connection with the management of our Operating Partnership. Our duties as general partner to our Operating Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to VICI REIT. These conflicts may be resolved in a manner that is not in the best interests of our stockholders.

The market price and trading volume of shares of our common stock may be volatile.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot assure you that the market price of our common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future.

Some of the factors, many of which are beyond our control, that could negatively affect the market price of our common stock or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our common stock include:

•	actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly results of operations or distributions;

•	changes in our earnings, Funds From Operations (“FFO”), Adjusted Funds From Operations (“AFFO ”) or Adjusted EBITDA estimates;

•	publication of research reports about us, Caesars or the real estate or gaming industries;

•	adverse developments involving Caesars;

•	changes in market interest rates that may cause purchasers of our shares to demand a different yield;

•	changes in market valuations of similar companies;

•	market reaction to any additional capital we raise in the future;

•	additions or departures of key personnel;

•	actions by institutional stockholders;

•	speculation in the press or investment community about our company or industry or the economy in general;

•	the occurrence of any of the other risk factors presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K or our other SEC filings; and

•	general market and economic conditions.

Future offerings of debt and/or preferred equity securities, which may be senior to our shares for purposes of distributions or upon liquidation, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, including medium-term notes, trust preferred securities, senior or subordinated notes and preferred shares. If a liquidation event were to occur, holders of our debt securities and preferred shares and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders of our shares. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock, or both. Holders of shares of our common stock are not entitled to preemptive rights or other protections against dilution. Our preferred shares, if issued, could have a preference on liquidating distributions or a preference on distribution payments that could limit our ability to make a distribution to the holders of shares of our common stock. Since our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, our stockholders bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of shares of our common stock and diluting their shareholdings in us.

Our earnings and cash distributions could affect the market price of shares of our common stock.

Our common stock may trade at prices that are higher or lower than the net asset value per share. To the extent that we retain operating cash flow for investment purposes, working capital reserves or other purposes rather than distributing the cash flows to stockholders, these retained funds, while increasing the value of our underlying assets, may negatively impact the market price of shares of our common stock. Our failure to meet market expectations with regard to future earnings and cash distributions could adversely affect the market price of shares of our common stock.