Why We're Equal-weight and What Could Make Us Change Our Minds

February 4, 2016 Online Travel Why We're Equal-weight and What Could Make Us Change Our Minds We remain on the sidelines in OTAs as we see slowing room night growth and deteriorating economics ahead. We are slightly above (PCLN) and below (EXPE) '17 Street EPS and need revisions to get more positive. For PCLN, unit economics need to improve. For EXPE, the AWAY consumer fee will be key. Still Cautious on OTAs in 2016: We took a cautious tone on OTAs in 2015 due to deteriorating industry economics and were wrong (in particular with EXPE, which outperformed the market by ~4,600bp) as room night growth trumped deteriorating fundamentals. Looking into 2016, we see slowing room night growth and continued deteriorating room night economics...which leaves us on the sidelines. PCLN and EXPE have sold off materially with the rest of tech to start 2016, (PCLN within 5% of our bear case). That said, the lack of forward upward revisions makes us question the ability for these companies to materially outperform the market (even if it rebounds). PCLN: Ad ROI Fell by 16% in 2015...Expect Continued Pressure in 2016: PCLN's cost of bookings is rising at record levels as PCLN's ratio of bookings growth to ad spend growth (a rough proxy for ad spend ROI) is set to fall 16% in 2015...4X more than the 5-year average decline. We attribute this to continued investment in lower ROI mobile channels, EXPE getting more aggressive in paid search, Google changes (such as increasing the minimum bids on branded keywords), and increased offline ad spend. Given these trends, we are lowering our expected forward margins. We are also modestly reducing our forward room night growth and take rates (due to macro uncertainty in Europe and increased competitive pressure). In all, this causes us to reduce our '17 non-gaap EPS by 1% (our '16 EPS remains roughly unchanged). We find ourselves only 2% above Street 2016 and 2017 non-gaap EPS. PCLN has been a beat and raise stock (beating the consensus estimates in 34 of the past 35 quarters), and we remain on the sidelines with a new, lower $1,320 PT (previously $1,350) until we can find a source of further upward revisions. Maintain EW. MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC Brian Nowak, CFA Brian.Nowak@morganstanley.com Michael Costantini Michael.Costantini@morganstanley.com Owen Hyde Owen.Hyde@morganstanley.com Kevin Liu Kevin.Liu@morganstanley.com Online Travel North America IndustryView +1 212 761-3365 +1 212 296-8248 +1 212 761-7036 +1 212 296-8180 No Rating EXPE: Managing For Room Night Growth Rather than EBITDA: We believe part of PCLN's increased ad spending is due to EXPE's strategic decision to reduce its hotel take rates to get more access to inventory...which has enabled them to get more aggressive in the travel paid search market. In effect EXPE is increasingly managing its business to maximize room night growth rather than earnings power. This worked for the stock last year as room nights accelerated, but looking into 2016, we see slowing room night growth ahead (27% Y/Y growth vs. 35% in 2015...excluding AWAY). This spending strategy is impacting EXPE's economics as well, as we estimate EXPE's core OTA incremental EBITDA margins fell by ~250bp in 2015 (to Morgan Stanley does and seeks to do business with companies covered in Morgan Stanley Research. As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of Morgan Stanley Research. Investors should consider Morgan Stanley Research as only a single factor in making their investment decision. For analyst certification and other important disclosures, refer to the Disclosure Section, located at the end of this report. 1

~23%). We don't see this strategy changing given EXPE's commentary that they expect to continue to reduce hotel take rates "through 2016," and we are reducing our core 2016 and 2017 incremental margin expectations. Online Travel February 4, 2016 5% Below EXPE 2017 Street EBITDA...even with AWAY: We are also adding AWAY into our EXPE model. As shown in our EBITDA bridge (see Exhibit 11), we see AWAY adding $113mn of EBITDA in 2016 and $157mn in 2017. That said, we are still 5% below 2017 Street EBITDA and 14% below on EPS (as there appears to be some noise in the Street 2017 EPS estimates). We believe EXPE needs a further improvement in AWAY in order to drive upside. Our analysis of AWAY's cost structure and the still-high competitive dynamics in the vacation rental paid search market speak to how AWAY can likely only deliver upside by successfully rolling out a consumer booking fee. We think this will be difficult (there is high execution risk given the "leakage" on platform and there is risk of customer push-back to an incremental booking fee), and investor expectations are high. For perspective, our sensitivity table shows that all else held equal EXPE will need to add a ~600bp booking fee to ~16% of AWAY's bookings just to reach Street 2017 EBITDA numbers. Room night growth may give EXPE support at these levels, but we remain on the sidelines until we can find a source of upward earnings revisions. We raise our PT to $115 (from $107) as we lower core and add in AWAY. Maintain EW. 2

Priceline Risk Reward Why Equal-weight? The OTAs are running out of hotel room night runway, which will likely lead to slowing room night growth and rising direct competition We see top-line pressure from rising hotel take rate concessions We see EBITDA margin pressure as Google's mobile travel products drive up the cost of paid search, and PCLN increasingly spends on less measurable advertising channels like TV Valuation keeps us from going Underweight Source: Thomson Reuters, Morgan Stanley Research Price Target $1,320 Bull $1,650 20X 2017e bull case adj. EPS of $83.61 Base $1,320 17X 2017e base case adj. EPS of $79.36 Bear $1,000 14X 2017e bear case adj. EPS of $70.31 Price target is derived using a 10-year discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. We assume a WACC of 10% (in line with Bloomberg data) and a 2% perpetual growth rate. Our bull case assumes '14-'18e gross profit growth of 15%, EBITDA margins as % of gross profit of 44% in 2018, and $83.61 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by 1) higher than expected ad spend efficiency, 2) reduced dependence on Google for traffic, and 3) industry consolidation leading to opex scale benefits and higher take rates. Our base case assumes '14-'18e gross profit growth of 15%, forward EBITDA margin (as % of gross profit) compression of 435bp to 41% in 2018, and $79.36 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by '14-'18 gross profit per room night growth of -2% (vs. -1% historical growth) and '14-'18e ad spend per room night growth of +1% (vs. +5% historical growth). Our bear case assumes '14-'18e gross profit growth of 13%, - 735bp of forward margin pressure (EBITDA margins as % of gross profit of 38% in 2018), and $70.31 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by 1) lower than expected ad spend efficiency and increasing TV ad spend, 2) increasing dependence on Google for traffic, especially on mobile, and 3) industry consolidation leading to higher than expected competition and lower than expected take rates. Risks to Achieving Price Target Higher ad spending leads to accelerating room night growth (upside) Mobile app user bases grow larger than mobile browser user bases, reducing dependence on Google for mobile search traffic (upside) Better than expected ad spend efficiency or reduced spending on TV advertising (upside) Industry consolidation leads to scale benefits over operating cost structure, more bargaining power vs. hotel/air suppliers, and ultimately, higher profitability (upside) Increased/lower-than-expected shareholder returns (upside/downside) The cost of acquiring traffic on Google rises more than we expect, and PCLN increasingly has to spend on less-measurable and less-efficient TV advertising and mobile app install ads (downside) Online travel industry competition rises more than we expect, leading to more ad spend and lower hotel take rates than we anticipate (downside) Continued and prolonged investments/m&a in non-core businesses such as OpenTable and Booking Suite (downside) Potential Catalysts 4Q:15 results and forward guidance Evidence of lower/higher ad spending, especially on TV (upside/downside) Accelerating/slowing room night growth (upside/downside) 3

Expedia Risk Reward Why Equal-weight? Revenue per room night pressure is rising, but this has led to accelerating hotel room night growth. We struggle to see a company with accelerating volumes materially under-performing over the next 12 months. Source: Thomson O ne, Morgan Stanley Research Price Target $115 Bull $150 20X 2017e bull case adj. EPS of $7.56 Base $115 19X 2017e base case adj. EPS of $6.13 Bear $85 16X 2017e bear case adj. EPS of $5.37 Price target is derived using a 10-year discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. We assume a WACC of 9.5% (in-line with Bloomberg data) and a 2% perpetual growth rate. Our bull case assumes '14-'18 gross profit growth of 20%, ~430bp of forward margin expansion (EBITDA margins of 22% in 2018), and $7.56 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by 1) higher than expected ad spend efficiency, 2) reduced dependence on Google for traffic, 3) better than expected performance from recent acquisitions, and 4) industry consolidation leading to opex scale benefits and higher take rates. Our base case assumes '14-'18 gross profit growth of 18%, forward EBITDA margin expansion of ~130bp to 19% in 2018, and $6.13 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by '14-'18 gross profit per room night growth of -7% (vs. 0% historical growth) and '14-'18 ad spend per room night growth of -5% (vs. +9% historical growth). Our bear case assumes '14-'18 gross profit growth of 17%, -100p of forward margin pressure (EBITDA margins of 17% in 2018), and $5.37 in 2017 adj. EPS. This is driven by 1) lower than expected ad spend efficiency and increasing TV ad spend, 2) increasing dependence on Google for traffic, especially on mobile, 3) worse than expected performance from recent acquisitions, and 4) industry consolidation leading to higher than expected competition and lower than expected take rates. Risks to Achieving Price Target Online travel industry competition rises more than we expect, leading to more ad spend and lower hotel take rates than we anticipate (downside) The cost of acquiring traffic on Google rises more than we expect, and EXPE increasingly has to spend on less-measurable and less-efficient TV advertising and mobile app install ads (downside) Greater than expected revenue per room night pressure (downside) Slowing room night growth (downside) Higher ad spending and hotel supply growth leads to accelerating room night growth (upside) Better than expected ad spend efficiency or reduced spending on TV advertising (upside) Mobile app user bases grow larger than mobile browser user bases, reducing dependence on Google for mobile search traffic (upside) Industry consolidation leads to scale benefits over operating cost structure, more bargaining power vs. hotel/air suppliers, and ultimately, higher profitability (upside) Higher than expected Orbitz synergies (upside) Increased/lower than expected shareholder returns (upside/downside) Potential Catalysts 4Q:15 results and forward guidance Higher than expected Orbitz synergies Successful implementation of HomeAway incremental consumer booking fee Evidence of lower/higher ad spending, especially on TV (upside/downside) Accelerating/slowing room night growth (upside/downside) 4

Priceline; EW, $1,320 PT Expecting Continued Ad ROI Pressure in 2016 Priceline's cost of incremental bookings is rising at record levels as its ratio of bookings growth to ad dollar spend growth (a rough proxy for ad spend ROI) fell and estimated 16% in 2015...4X more than the 5 year average decline (see Exhibit 1). 1 We attribute this to continued investment in lower ROI mobile channels, Expedia getting more aggressive in paid search, Google changes (such as increasing the minimum bids on branded keywords), and increased offline ad spend. Exhibit 1: Priceline incremental bookings per ad dollar spent... Exhibit 2:...and Y/Y % change As a result, Priceline's ad spend as a percentage of bookings (both ex FX) has been on the rise over the past few years and is expected to reach 5.5% in 2015 (see Exhibit 3). 3 We do not see any reason why these trends should abate in the near term, and as such, we expect Priceline's ad spend as a percentage of bookings to reach 6% by 2017. Note that our 2017 numbers already imply an improvement in bookings economics (through more direct traffic, finding new and higher ROI channels like FB, etc)...so if that does not happen even these estimates could be at risk. This, in our view, speaks to the state of the industry, as its difficult to make a bullish case and find material upside. 5

Exhibit 3: Priceline advertising spend as a percentage of bookings (constant currency) Online Travel February 4, 2016 Given these trends, we are updating our model. We are lowering our expected forward margins and modestly reducing our forward room night growth and take rates (due to macro uncertainty in Europe and increased competitive pressure). In all, our 2016 non-gaap EPS remains unchanged and we are lowering our 2017 non- GAAP EPS by 1% (see Exhibit 4). 4 6

Exhibit 4: Morgan Stanley prior vs. current Priceline estimates Online Travel February 4, 2016 Source: Morgan Stanley Research We now find ourselves 2% above Street non-gaap EPS in 2016 and 2017. We maintain our Equal-weight rating on Priceline until we can find a source of further upward revisions, which we believe are necessary to drive meaningful upside in the stock. Exhibit 5: Morgan Stanley vs. Consensus Priceline estimates Source: ThomsonReuters data, Morgan Stanley Research PCLN has sold off year-to-date like most stocks in our sector and is now within 5% of our bear case. The trouble is, the lack of positive revisions on a stock that trades on positive revisions (see Exhibit 6) 6 and slowing room night growth (see Exhibit 7) 7 make us question the ability for PCLN to materially outperform. As such, we remain on the sidelines with a $1,320 DCF-driven price target (from $1,350 previously) until we can find a source of further upward revisions. 7

Exhibit 6: The magnitude of Priceline's EPS beats vs. the Street have been declining Exhibit 7: Priceline room night growth Online Travel February 4, 2016 Source: StreetAccount, Company data, Morgan Stanley Research Exhibit 8: Priceline DCF Valuation Source: Bloomberg, Company data, Morgan Stanley Research We note that our $1,320 Priceline price target is ~25% above its current market price, and combined with our new 2017 estimates, implies a 17X 2017 P/E multiple which is ~20% below its historical median forward multiple of 21X. That said, with growth set to slow, we think it is reasonable to assume the multiple will compress over time. We can make a valuation argument for why the stock can run to $1,320, but can't see much more than that. 8

Exhibit 9: Priceline historical forward consensus P/E multiple Online Travel February 4, 2016 Source: ThomsonReuters data, Morgan Stanley Research 9

Expedia: EW, $115 PT Playing for Room Night Growth Rather than EBITDA Growth We believe Expedia's strategic decision to reduce its hotel take rates to get more access to inventory which has enabled them to get more aggressive in the travel paid search market partially accounts for Priceline's increased ad spending (for more on this, see the Priceline section ). In effect, Expedia is increasingly managing its business to maximize room night growth rather than earnings power. But this is impacting the company's near-term economics as well, as we estimate Expedia's core OTA incremental EBITDA margins fell by ~250bp in 2015 (to ~23%). Exhibit 10: Exepdia Core OTA Incremental EBITDA margins *W e define "core EXPE" as ex Trivago, Egencia, Orbitz, HomeAw ay, and unallocated overhead/corporate costs We don't see this strategy changing given Expedia's commentary that they expect to continue to reduce hotel take rates "through 2016" (see below for full quote). As a result, w e are reducing our core Expedia 2016 and 2017 incremental margin expectations. Mark Okerstrom, Expedia Inc., CFO & EVP of Operations (3Q:15 earnings conference call; October 29, 2015): In terms of [hotel] margin reductions, we do expect them to continue through 2016. They will start to mitigate in the back part of the year. And then you have got some annualization of that. So I think we will be well into 2017 before we see ourselves in a position where that is no longer a significant headwind for us. Bridging our Way to 2017 10

As has been the case the past few years, it is important to piece together Expedia's non-gaap EBITDA between the organic and inorganic (this year, Orbitz and HomeAway) growth drivers. For Orbitz, we estimate $253mn EBITDA in 2016 and $284mn EBITDA in 2017, which includes $105mn of synergies (cost cuts and revenue/yield upside) in 2016. We have now also integrated HomeAway into our Expedia model, and we expect HomeAway to contribute $113mn EBITDA in 2016 and $157mn EBITDA in 2017. We note that the HomeAway acquisition closed on December 15, 2015, and per purchase accounting rules, Expedia cannot recognize any revenue associated with HomeAway bookings made before the deal closed, but will recognize 100% of the costs incurred in the same period. As such, there will be a HomeAway revenue and cost mismatch in 2016 (in particular, in 1Q:16) which we have adjusted for in our model. Exhibit 11: Expedia EBITDA Breakdown Online Travel February 4, 2016 Exhibit 12: Expedia EBITDA Breakdown Despite these contributions from Orbitz and HomeAway, we are still 5% below the Street's EBITDA expectations in 2017. In effect, we believe Expedia needs a further improvement from HomeAway in order to drive upside to our estimates. 11

Exhibit 13: Morgan Stanley vs. Consensus Priceline estimates Source: ThomsonReuters data, Morgan Stanley Research We believe Expedia traded on room night growth more than fundamentals (EBITDA/earnings power) in 2015, but looking into 2016, we see room night growth slowing (excluding AWAY) (see Exhibit 14). As such, even as we add in AWAY, we remain on the sidelines with a new $115 PT with ~20% upside (from $107 previously) until we can find a source of material incremental earnings power. Exhibit 14: Expedia room night growth *Inorganic benefit of ~800bp in 2015 (W otif, AirAsia, Travelocity, Orbitz) and ~400bp in 2016 (Orbitz) Could HomeAway Drive Upside? In our view, Expedia's 2017 EBITDA upside will largely be predicated on AWAY s ability to outperform our numbers. By way of background, on its conference call announcing its intent to acquire HomeAway, Expedia set a target of $350mn in HomeAway EBITDA by 2018 (which is ~90% higher than our current 2018 AWAY EBITDA estimate). The trouble is, there is not much sign of potential leverage in sales & marketing...and expectations for this new consumer fee (which isn't even set to launch until 2Q:16) are already high in Street numbers. We Struggle to Believe Sales & Marketing Will be a Material Source of Upside... 12

First, it is important to consider AWAY's P&L structure and sources of opex. Sales & marketing is HomeAway's most material expense, at an estimated 33% of revenue in 2015 (or $167mn). Therefore, to us, sales & marketing efficiency or investment is likely to be the biggest source of opex margin leverage. Exhibit 15: Sales & marketing is HomeAway's most material expense Online Travel February 4, 2016 Expedia bulls may counter that they will get sales & marketing efficiency from being part of the Expedia family (benefiting from Expedia's paid search expertise). We disagree given that HomeAway's sales & marketing expense as a percentage of revenue is already lower than Expedia (seeexhibit 16 and Exhibit 17). Since HomeAway's sales & marketing expense as a percentage of revenue is already closer to the most efficient ad spender in the industry (PCLN), to us, it seems more likely that HomeAway's ad spending as a percentage of revenue could rise rather than fall going forward (as competition rises and they invest). Exhibit 16: OTA Sales & Marketing expense (ex SBC) as a percentage of revenue Exhibit 17: HomeAway Sales & Marketing expense (ex SBC) as a percentage of revenue To this point, HomeAway competes against Priceline, other Expedia brands, Airbnb and other players for consumers' attention on television and digital marketing channels. Further, in our view, vacation rental search keyword bidding intensity is not likely to slow. To wit, data from our paid search tracker point out 13

that HomeAway is already bidding on more properties than any other player (see Exhibit 18). Of the top 20 European vacation rental destinations, HomeAway bids in 93% of the keyword queries. Within the U.S., HomeAway's presence is even higher, at 95% of the top 30 domestic vacation rentals destinations. The fact that competitors are not bidding as broadly yet speaks to further potential customer acquisition cost risk as these players become more focused on using paid search to grow their businesses by bidding on more locations and bidding more dollars per click. Over time we expect to see Priceline and other players move more aggressively into the paid search market, which would put further upward pressure on costs per click and customer acquisition costs. Exhibit 18: HomeAway is bidding on more keywords than any other player, but its competitors are bidding for (and winning) the #1 ad slot more often Online Travel February 4, 2016 Source: Google search, Morgan Stanley Research In addition, when looking at the distribution of each property's Google search ad units we see that Booking.com, Villas.com, and Airbnb are all winning the #1 paid ad slot more times than HomeAway in both Europe and the U.S. In short, HomeAway is bidding on more keywords than any other player, but its competitors are bidding for (and winning) the most valuable ad slot more ofte n. The question going forward will be whether HomeAway needs to increase its investment in paid search to win the top search slot...which will drive up sales & marketing spend and customer acquisition costs. In addition, Expedia has indicated it would like to (eventually) expand HomeAway's presence and inventory into more "urban markets," which puts it in more direct competition with Airbnb and Priceline for consumer traffic. Given these trends, we anticipate higher incremental SEM going forward as HomeAway moves to increase brand awareness and drive paid traffic....which Means Upside Will be Predicated on A Successful Consumer Booking Fee In our view, these trends indicate search intensity and ad bidding are not going to slow materially (if at all) in the near term and speak to how AWAY can likely only deliver upside by successfully rolling out a consumer booking fee. We think this will be difficult given the execution risk most bookings are still performed through emails and faxes, which creates leakage issues and potential customer pushback to an incremental booking fee. Investor expectations are already implicitly high too. For perspective, our sensitivity analysis shows that all else held equal EXPE will need to add a ~600bp booking fee to ~16% of AWAY's bookings just to reach Street 2017 EBITDA numbe rs. As shown in Exhibit 19, we estimate HomeAway generated $15bn in bookings in 2015 at a 3% take rate (in-line with Expedia's latest public comments), which we expect to grow to $17bn of bookings by 2017. Therefore, by our math, for our Expedia 2017 EBITDA estimates to come in-line with the Street, roughly 16% of AWAY's $17bn in 2017 bookings would need to flow through at AWAY's expected 9% take rate (the midpoint of AWAY's expected "8%-10% range" long term). 14

Exhibit 19: Implied HomeAway incremental 2017 EBITDA and percentage of bookings at a 9% take rate required to move our Expedia estimates in-line with Consensus 2017 EBITDA Online Travel February 4, 2016 In Exhibit 20, we outline the implied percentage of HomeAway bookings at a 9% take rate required to move our Expedia estimates in-line or above Consensus 2017 EBITDA. As shown, we estimate AWAY needs to monetize ~40% of its 2017 bookings at a 9% take rate in order to move our Expedia 2017 EBITDA estimates 10% above the Street. Again, this highlights how incremental Expedia upside not to mention the achievability of AWAY's $350mn EBITDA target is heavily dependent on HomeAway's success in implementing and executing its proposed traveller booking fee. We intend to monitor this closely. Exhibit 20: Implied percentage of HomeAway bookings at a 9% take rate required to move our Expedia estimates in-line or above Consensus 2017 EBITDA Raising PT to $115 and Remaining on Sidelines In all, after layering HomeAway into our model, our 2016 Expedia revenue and EBITDA estimates rise by 7% and 11%, respectively, but our EPS estimates only rise by 4% (primarily due to the expected issuance of ~20mn EXPE shares to fund part of the purchase price). As a result of our higher topline and EBITDA estimates, we are raising our DCF-based price target on EXPE to $115 (from $107). 15

Solid room night growth (we are modeling 27% in 2016, including Orbitz) may give Expedia support at current levels, but we remain on the sidelines until we can find a source of material upward earnings revisions. Exhibit 21: Expedia DCF valuation Online Travel February 4, 2016 Source: Bloomberg, Company data, Morgan Stanley Research 16

4Q:15 Estimates Exhibit 22: Priceline 4Q:15 Estimates 17

Exhibit 23: Expedia 4Q:15 Estimates 18

Changes to Our Estimates Exhibit 24: Priceline Prior vs. Current Estimates 19

Exhibit 25: Expedia Prior vs. Current Estimates 20

Priceline Financials 21

Exhibit 26: Priceline Income Statement Online Travel February 4, 2016 22

Exhibit 27: Priceline Balance Sheet 23

Exhibit 28: Priceline Cash Flow Statement 24

Exhibit 29: Priceline Discounted Cash Flow Analysis 25

Expedia Financials 26

Exhibit 30: Expedia Income Statement Online Travel February 4, 2016 27

Exhibit 31: Expedia Balance Sheet 28

Exhibit 32: Expedia Cash Flow Statement 29

Exhibit 33: Expedia Discounted Cash Flow Analysis 30

Disclosure Section The information and opinions in Morgan Stanley Research were prepared by Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, and/or Morgan Stanley C.T.V.M. S.A., and/or Morgan Stanley Mexico, Casa de Bolsa, S.A. de C.V., and/or Morgan Stanley Canada Limited. As used in this disclosure section, "Morgan Stanley" includes Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley C.T.V.M. S.A., Morgan Stanley Mexico, Casa de Bolsa, S.A. de C.V., Morgan Stanley Canada Limited and their affiliates as necessary. For important disclosures, stock price charts and equity rating histories regarding companies that are the subject of this report, please see the Morgan Stanley Research Disclosure Website at www.morganstanley.com/researchdisclosures, or contact your investment representative or Morgan Stanley Research at 1585 Broadway, (Attention: Research Management), New York, NY, 10036 USA. For valuation methodology and risks associated with any price targets referenced in this research report, please contact the Client Support Team as follows: US/Canada +1 800 303-2495; Hong Kong +852 2848-5999; Latin America +1 718 754-5444 (U.S.); London +44 (0)20-7425-8169; Singapore +65 6834-6860; Sydney +61 (0)2-9770-1505; Tokyo +81 (0)3-6836-9000. Alternatively you may contact your investment representative or Morgan Stanley Research at 1585 Broadway, (Attention: Research Management), New York, NY 10036 USA. Analyst Certification The following analysts hereby certify that their views about the companies and their securities discussed in this report are accurately expressed and that they have not received and will not receive direct or indirect compensation in exchange for expressing specific recommendations or views in this report: Brian Nowak, CFA. Unless otherwise stated, the individuals listed on the cover page of this report are research analysts. Global Research Conflict Management Policy Morgan Stanley Research has been published in accordance with our conflict management policy, which is available at www.morganstanley.com/institutional/research/conflictpolicies. Important US Regulatory Disclosures on Subject Companies As of January 29, 2016, Morgan Stanley beneficially owned 1% or more of a class of common equity securities of the following companies covered in Morgan Stanley Research: Priceline Group Inc. Within the last 12 months, Morgan Stanley has received compensation for investment banking services from Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. In the next 3 months, Morgan Stanley expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. Within the last 12 months, Morgan Stanley has received compensation for products and services other than investment banking services from Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. Within the last 12 months, Morgan Stanley has provided or is providing investment banking services to, or has an investment banking client relationship with, the following company: Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. Within the last 12 months, Morgan Stanley has either provided or is providing non-investment banking, securities-related services to and/or in the past has entered into an agreement to provide services or has a client relationship with the following company: Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC makes a market in the securities of Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. The equity research analysts or strategists principally responsible for the preparation of Morgan Stanley Research have received compensation based upon various factors, including quality of research, investor client feedback, stock picking, competitive factors, firm revenues and overall investment banking revenues. Morgan Stanley and its affiliates do business that relates to companies/instruments covered in Morgan Stanley Research, including market making, providing liquidity, fund management, commercial banking, extension of credit, investment services and investment banking. Morgan Stanley sells to and buys from customers the securities/instruments of companies covered in Morgan Stanley Research on a principal basis. Morgan Stanley may have a position in the debt of the Company or instruments discussed in this report. Certain disclosures listed above are also for compliance with applicable regulations in non-us jurisdictions. STOCK RATINGS Morgan Stanley uses a relative rating system using terms such as Overweight, Equal-weight, Not-Rated or Underweight (see definitions below). Morgan Stanley does not assign ratings of Buy, Hold or Sell to the stocks we cover. Overweight, Equal-weight, Not-Rated and Underweight are not the equivalent of buy, hold and sell. Investors should carefully read the definitions of all ratings used in Morgan Stanley Research. In addition, since Morgan Stanley Research contains more complete information concerning the analyst's views, investors should carefully read Morgan Stanley Research, in its entirety, and not infer the contents from the rating alone. In any case, ratings (or research) should not be used or relied upon as investment advice. An investor's decision to buy or sell a stock should depend on individual circumstances (such as the investor's existing holdings) and other considerations. Global Stock Ratings Distribution (as of January 31, 2016) For disclosure purposes only (in accordance with NASD and NYSE requirements), we include the category headings of Buy, Hold, and Sell alongside our ratings of Overweight, Equal-weight, Not-Rated and Underweight. Morgan Stanley does not assign ratings of Buy, Hold or Sell to the stocks we cover. Overweight, Equal-weight, Not-Rated and Underweight are not the equivalent of buy, hold, and sell but represent recommended relative weightings (see definitions below). To satisfy regulatory requirements, we correspond Overweight, our most positive stock rating, with a buy recommendation; we correspond Equal-weight and Not-Rated to hold and Underweight to sell recommendations, respectively. COVERAGE UNIVERSE INVESTMENT BANKING CLIENTS (IBC) STOCK RATING CATEGORY COUNT % OF TOTAL COUNT % OF TOTAL IBC % OF RATING CATEGORY Overweight/Buy 1206 36% 323 43% 27% Equal-weight/Hold 1432 42% 331 44% 23% Not-Rated/Hold 79 2% 9 1% 11% Underweight/Sell 658 19% 86 11% 13% TOTAL 3,375 749 Data include common stock and ADRs currently assigned ratings. Investment Banking Clients are companies from whom Morgan Stanley received investment banking compensation in the last 12 months. Analyst Stock Ratings 31

Overweight (O). The stock's total return is expected to exceed the average total return of the analyst's industry (or industry team's) coverage universe, on a risk-adjusted basis, over the next 12-18 months. Equal-weight (E). The stock's total return is expected to be in line with the average total return of the analyst's industry (or industry team's) coverage universe, on a risk-adjusted basis, over the next 12-18 months. Not-Rated (NR). Currently the analyst does not have adequate conviction about the stock's total return relative to the average total return of the analyst's industry (or industry team's) coverage universe, on a risk-adjusted basis, over the next 12-18 months. Underweight (U). The stock's total return is expected to be below the average total return of the analyst's industry (or industry team's) coverage universe, on a risk-adjusted basis, over the next 12-18 months. Unless otherwise specified, the time frame for price targets included in Morgan Stanley Research is 12 to 18 months. Analyst Industry Views Attractive (A): The analyst expects the performance of his or her industry coverage universe over the next 12-18 months to be attractive vs. the relevant broad market benchmark, as indicated below. In-Line (I): The analyst expects the performance of his or her industry coverage universe over the next 12-18 months to be in line with the relevant broad market benchmark, as indicated below. Cautious (C): The analyst views the performance of his or her industry coverage universe over the next 12-18 months with caution vs. the relevant broad market benchmark, as indicated below. Benchmarks for each region are as follows: North America - S&P 500; Latin America - relevant MSCI country index or MSCI Latin America Index; Europe - MSCI Europe; Japan - TOPIX; Asia - relevant MSCI country index or MSCI sub-regional index or MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan Index. Stock Price, Price Target and Rating History (See Rating Definitions) 32

Important Disclosures for Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC Customers Important disclosures regarding the relationship between the companies that are the subject of Morgan Stanley Research and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC or Morgan Stanley or any of their affiliates, are available on the Morgan Stanley Wealth Management disclosure website at www.morganstanley.com/online/researchdisclosures. For Morgan Stanley specific disclosures, you may refer to www.morganstanley.com/researchdisclosures. Each Morgan Stanley Equity Research report is reviewed and approved on behalf of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC. This review and approval is conducted by the same person who reviews the Equity Research report on behalf of Morgan Stanley. This could create a conflict of interest. Other Important Disclosures Morgan Stanley & Co. International PLC and its affiliates have a significant financial interest in the debt securities of Expedia Inc., Priceline Group Inc. Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute, advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Morgan Stanley produces an equity research product called a "Tactical Idea." Views contained in a "Tactical Idea" on a particular stock may be contrary to the recommendations or views expressed in research on the same stock. This may be the result of differing time horizons, methodologies, market events, or other factors. For all research available on a particular stock, please contact your sales representative or go to Matrix at http://www.morganstanley.com/matrix. Morgan Stanley Research is provided to our clients through our proprietary research portal on Matrix and also distributed electronically by Morgan Stanley to clients. Certain, but not all, Morgan Stanley Research products are also made available to clients through third-party vendors or redistributed to clients through alternate electronic means as a convenience. For access to all available Morgan Stanley Research, please contact your sales representative or go to Matrix at http://www.morganstanley.com/matrix. Any access and/or use of Morgan Stanley Research is subject to Morgan Stanley's Terms of Use (http://www.morganstanley.com/terms.html). By accessing and/or using Morgan Stanley Research, you are indicating that you have read and agree to be bound by our Terms of Use (http://www.morganstanley.com/terms.html). In addition you consent to Morgan Stanley processing your personal data and using cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy and our Global Cookies Policy (http://www.morganstanley.com/privacy_pledge.html), including for the purposes of setting your preferences and to collect readership data so that we can deliver better and more personalized service and products to you. To find out more information about how Morgan Stanley processes personal data, how we use cookies and how to reject cookies see our Privacy Policy and our Global Cookies Policy (http://www.morganstanley.com/privacy_pledge.html). If you do not agree to our Terms of Use and/or if you do not wish to provide your consent to Morgan Stanley processing your personal data or using cookies please do not access our research. Morgan Stanley Research does not provide individually tailored investment advice. Morgan Stanley Research has been prepared without regard to the circumstances and objectives of those who receive it. Morgan Stanley recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial adviser. The appropriateness of an investment or strategy will depend on an investor's circumstances and objectives. The securities, instruments, or strategies discussed in Morgan Stanley Research may not be suitable for all investors, and certain investors may not be eligible to purchase or participate in some or all of them. Morgan Stanley Research is not an offer to buy or sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any security/instrument or to participate in any particular trading strategy. The value of and income from your investments may vary because of changes in interest rates, foreign exchange rates, default rates, prepayment rates, securities/instruments prices, market indexes, operational or financial conditions of companies or other factors. There may be time limitations on the exercise of options or other rights in securities/instruments transactions. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized. If provided, and unless otherwise stated, the closing price on the cover page is that of the primary exchange for the subject company's securities/instruments. The fixed income research analysts, strategists or economists principally responsible for the preparation of Morgan Stanley Research have received 33

compensation based upon various factors, including quality, accuracy and value of research, firm profitability or revenues (which include fixed income trading and capital markets profitability or revenues), client feedback and competitive factors. Fixed Income Research analysts', strategists' or economists' compensation is not linked to investment banking or capital markets transactions performed by Morgan Stanley or the profitability or revenues of particular trading desks. The "Important US Regulatory Disclosures on Subject Companies" section in Morgan Stanley Research lists all companies mentioned where Morgan Stanley owns 1% or more of a class of common equity securities of the companies. For all other companies mentioned in Morgan Stanley Research, Morgan Stanley may have an investment of less than 1% in securities/instruments or derivatives of securities/instruments of companies and may trade them in ways different from those discussed in Morgan Stanley Research. Employees of Morgan Stanley not involved in the preparation of Morgan Stanley Research may have investments in securities/instruments or derivatives of securities/instruments of companies mentioned and may trade them in ways different from those discussed in Morgan Stanley Research. Derivatives may be issued by Morgan Stanley or associated persons. With the exception of information regarding Morgan Stanley, Morgan Stanley Research is based on public information. Morgan Stanley makes every effort to use reliable, comprehensive information, but we make no representation that it is accurate or complete. We have no obligation to tell you when opinions or information in Morgan Stanley Research change apart from when we intend to discontinue equity research coverage of a subject company. Facts and views presented in Morgan Stanley Research have not been reviewed by, and may not reflect information known to, professionals in other Morgan Stanley business areas, including investment banking personnel. Morgan Stanley Research personnel may participate in company events such as site visits and are generally prohibited from accepting payment by the company of associated expenses unless pre-approved by authorized members of Research management. Morgan Stanley may make investment decisions that are inconsistent with the recommendations or views in this report. To our readers in Taiwan: Information on securities/instruments that trade in Taiwan is distributed by Morgan Stanley Taiwan Limited ("MSTL"). Such information is for your reference only. The reader should independently evaluate the investment risks and is solely responsible for their investment decisions. Morgan Stanley Research may not be distributed to the public media or quoted or used by the public media without the express written consent of Morgan Stanley. Information on securities/instruments that do not trade in Taiwan is for informational purposes only and is not to be construed as a recommendation or a solicitation to trade in such securities/instruments. MSTL may not execute transactions for clients in these securities/instruments. To our readers in Hong Kong: Information is distributed in Hong Kong by and on behalf of, and is attributable to, Morgan Stanley Asia Limited as part of its regulated activities in Hong Kong. If you have any queries concerning Morgan Stanley Research, please contact our Hong Kong sales representatives. Morgan Stanley is not incorporated under PRC law and the research in relation to this report is conducted outside the PRC. Morgan Stanley Research does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities in the PRC. PRC investors shall have the relevant qualifications to invest in such securities and shall be responsible for obtaining all relevant approvals, licenses, verifications and/or registrations from the relevant governmental authorities themselves. Morgan Stanley Research is disseminated in Brazil by Morgan Stanley C.T.V.M. S.A.; in Mexico by Morgan Stanley México, Casa de Bolsa, S.A. de C.V which is regulated by Comision Nacional Bancaria y de Valores. Paseo de los Tamarindos 90, Torre 1, Col. Bosques de las Lomas Floor 29, 05120 Mexico City; in Japan by Morgan Stanley MUFG Securities Co., Ltd. and, for Commodities related research reports only, Morgan Stanley Capital Group Japan Co., Ltd; in Hong Kong by Morgan Stanley Asia Limited (which accepts responsibility for its contents) and by Bank Morgan Stanley AG, Hong Kong Branch; in Singapore by Morgan Stanley Asia (Singapore) Pte. (Registration number 199206298Z) and/or Morgan Stanley Asia (Singapore) Securities Pte Ltd (Registration number 200008434H), regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (which accepts legal responsibility for its contents and should be contacted with respect to any matters arising from, or in connection with, Morgan Stanley Research) and by Bank Morgan Stanley AG, Singapore Branch (Registration number T11FC0207F); in Australia to "wholesale clients" within the meaning of the Australian Corporations Act by Morgan Stanley Australia Limited A.B.N. 67 003 734 576, holder of Australian financial services license No. 233742, which accepts responsibility for its contents; in Australia to "wholesale clients" and "retail clients" within the meaning of the Australian Corporations Act by Morgan Stanley Wealth Management Australia Pty Ltd (A.B.N. 19 009 145 555, holder of Australian financial services license No. 240813, which accepts responsibility for its contents; in Korea by Morgan Stanley & Co International plc, Seoul Branch; in India by Morgan Stanley India Company Private Limited; in Indonesia by PT Morgan Stanley Asia Indonesia; in Canada by Morgan Stanley Canada Limited, which has approved of and takes responsibility for its contents in Canada; in Germany by Morgan Stanley Bank AG, Frankfurt am Main and Morgan Stanley Private Wealth Management Limited, Niederlassung Deutschland, regulated by Bundesanstalt fuer Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin); in Spain by Morgan Stanley, S.V., S.A., a Morgan Stanley group company, which is supervised by the Spanish Securities Markets Commission (CNMV) and states that Morgan Stanley Research has been written and distributed in accordance with the rules of conduct applicable to financial research as established under Spanish regulations; in the US by Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, which accepts responsibility for its contents. Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc, authorized by the Prudential Regulatory Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulatory Authority, disseminates in the UK research that it has prepared, and approves solely for the purposes of section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, research which has been prepared by any of its affiliates. RMB Morgan Stanley (Proprietary) Limited is a member of the JSE Limited and regulated by the Financial Services Board in South Africa. RMB Morgan Stanley (Proprietary) Limited is a joint venture owned equally by Morgan Stanley International Holdings Inc. and RMB Investment Advisory (Proprietary) Limited, which is wholly owned by FirstRand Limited. The information in Morgan Stanley Research is being disseminated by Morgan Stanley Saudi Arabia, regulated by the Capital Market Authority in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and is directed at Sophisticated investors only. The information in Morgan Stanley Research is being communicated by Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc (DIFC Branch), regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (the DFSA), and is directed at Professional Clients only, as defined by the DFSA. The financial products or financial services to which this research relates will only be made available to a customer who we are satisfied meets the regulatory criteria to be a Professional Client. The information in Morgan Stanley Research is being communicated by Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc (QFC Branch), regulated by the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority (the QFCRA), and is directed at business customers and market counterparties only and is not intended for Retail Customers as defined by the QFCRA. As required by the Capital Markets Board of Turkey, investment information, comments and recommendations stated here, are not within the scope of investment advisory activity. Investment advisory service is provided exclusively to persons based on their risk and income preferences by the authorized firms. Comments and recommendations stated here are general in nature. These opinions may not fit to your financial status, risk and return preferences. For this reason, to make an investment decision by relying solely to this information stated here may not bring about outcomes that fit your expectations. The trademarks and service marks contained in Morgan Stanley Research are the property of their respective owners. Third-party data providers make no warranties or representations relating to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the data they provide and shall not have liability for any damages relating to such data. The Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) was developed by and is the exclusive property of MSCI and S&P. Morgan Stanley Research, or any portion thereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of Morgan Stanley. INDUSTRY COVERAGE: Online Travel COMPANY (TICKER) RATING (AS OF) PRICE* (//) Stock Ratings are subject to change. Please see latest research for each company. * Historical prices are not split adjusted. 2016 Morgan Stanley 34