How are companies valued?

How are companies valued?

https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/how-are-companies-valued?
Tim Koller is a partner in McKinsey’s Denver office, Marc Goedhart is a senior knowledge expert in the Amsterdam office, and Susan Nolan Foushee is a senior knowledge expert in the Connecticut office.


Three McKinsey experts explain what really drives valuation—and where leaders often get it wrong.


Valuation is often understood as a verdict handed down by the stock market: a number that rises and falls based on earnings announcements, investor sentiment, or headline multiples. But in truth, behind every valuation are fundamental choices about growth, capital allocation, time horizons, and trade-offs—choices that matter far more for long-term value than short-term market signals.

In this video Explainer, McKinsey’s Marc Goedhart, Susan Nolen Foushee, and Tim Koller draw on decades of research and client experience to explain how to actually value companies. They unpack what drives value creation over the long term, when growth helps—or hurts—valuation, the most common mistakes leaders make, and why focusing on the wrong metrics can quietly erode value. Along the way, they challenge some of the most persistent myths about earnings, cash flow, and the investors that truly matter.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Why is value creation so important for companies?

Tim Koller: Value creation is so important for companies because the company’s shareholders have invested their capital in the company, and they expect a return on that investment. That’s the fundamental reason why value creation is so important.

Marc Goedhart: What we know from a lot of research and from our experience is that companies that focus more on value creation not only create more value for their shareholders but also tend to be more innovative and create more jobs.

When companies maximize value creation for shareholders, they help allocate resources across the economy in the most effective way. So essentially, if companies focus on value creation, they also contribute to increasing wealth for society as a whole.

An example of an entire industry that has created enormous value for shareholders, but also huge benefits for society at large, is high tech—especially the American high-tech industry. Companies like Apple and Microsoft have not just made shareholders a lot richer, they have also driven innovation at scale and economic growth.

Susan Nolen Foushee: Beyond responsibility to investors, the factors that drive value creation—growth, profitability, and the efficient use of capital—are really important for the economic and organizational health of a company. Those factors, such as top-line growth and the effective use of resources, are really what’s going to make a company sustainable over the long run.

What are the fundamental drivers of a company’s valuation?

Tim Koller: The rule of thumb for CEOs thinking about the valuation of their companies is to focus on the ultimate drivers of value creation: revenue growth and return on capital.

Return on capital is simply the operating profits of the company divided by the amount of capital you’ve got invested in the company—fixed assets, working capital, et cetera. Those two measures will drive your cash flows, and ultimately, the value of a company is driven by its cash flows.

The advantage of focusing on return on capital and revenue growth is that these are strategic things you can debate. You can analyze whether you’re growing faster or slower than your peers, whether your return on capital is above your cost of capital, and whether it’s going up or down.

Marc Goedhart: The emphasis you need to put on return on capital versus growth depends on where you are as a company.

Companies that generate high returns on capital can actually generate most of their value by focusing on growth—by boosting the revenues they generate. That’s what you typically see in industries like pharmaceuticals and high tech, where margins and returns on capital are high.

In contrast, companies that have low returns on capital—which we typically see in very competitive industries such as airlines, telecoms, or chemicals—do not create most of their value by generating more growth. They create more value by improving the return on capital itself, by improving margins and improving capital efficiency.

That’s why you see companies in those industries focusing much more on cost management and capital efficiency than on improving growth.

Susan Nolen Foushee: Growth and return on invested capital are both really important in terms of the valuation of a company. Growth is obviously very important to bring cash into the company.

But ROIC captures two different uses of resources. One is operating margin: how profitable a company is. The other is capital efficiency, which means companies need to think about their assets, whether those are inventories or the capital expenditures they’re making in new stores or new factories.

Companies that don’t think about those are missing a chance to optimize their cash flow. So we ask CEOs and their teams to think about what’s going on with growth and what’s going on with ROIC, because those two factors combined drive cash flow, and cash flow is what eventually drives valuation.

Can growth erode value?

Tim Koller: If you grow earnings without earning attractive returns on capital, you might be destroying value.

It’s not that we ignore earnings. Earnings are important. But if you do a good job with return on capital and revenue growth, you will also generate attractive earnings growth.

Marc Goedhart: It’s not just profit maximization or maximization of EBITDA. That is insufficient. You really need to make sure that you combine the concept of profit—EBITDA, EBIT, or EBITA—with the amount of capital that’s being deployed.

There are risks for executives who, faced with very high valuation levels, may become overenthusiastic about investing and acquiring. The danger is investing far too much capital in businesses that do not have very attractive long-term perspectives but seem attractive because valuations were high.

An example of this is what we saw in 2000 and 2001, with the first internet boom and bust. We saw quite a few companies valued at very high levels that were ultimately hard to reconcile with long-term growth and long-term returns on capital.

Susan Nolen Foushee: When companies earn returns on capital that are less than the cost of capital, even though there may be profits coming in, over time, that will destroy value.

We see this sometimes with retailers that build many stores or industrial companies that overbuild their factories. Even though there may be profits coming in from the products sold or manufactured, cash flows are weighed down because the investments are so high.

That’s why we ask people to think beyond metrics such as earnings per share and really think about ROIC, because it helps bring a spotlight to an important issue that might otherwise be overlooked.

What are the biggest mistakes companies make when thinking about valuation?

Susan Nolen Foushee: One mistake companies make when they think about their valuation is overemphasizing valuation multiples.

Often, they will look at a peer that has the highest multiple and decide, “We must be undervalued relative to that company.” But the question they should be asking is why.

Maybe that peer is exposed to higher-growth segments in the industry. Or maybe your own valuation is lower because your investors have yet to see the benefits of announced transformation programs or synergies.

It’s really important to look at your own performance with an objective eye and think, based on what investors can see about my current performance and realistic improvement, what value should I deserve—rather than quickly deciding you’re undervalued just because you don’t have the same multiple as a peer.

Tim Koller: Often, CEOs will complain that their shares are undervalued, particularly relative to their peers. When you dig deeper, you often find that they’re comparing themselves to the wrong peers. Or they’re comparing themselves to aspirational peers—whom they aspire to be like, rather than who they actually are. When we look at companies in the same industry that are performing the same as you in terms of growth and return on capital, we find that the valuation discount often disappears.

When you compare companies with similar performance, you often find that the valuation discount disappears. It’s very rare that companies are truly undervalued once you take performance into account.

Marc Goedhart: One of the biggest mistakes we see companies make is that they do not focus on return on capital, but instead focus on EBIT or EBITDA.

Many companies understand that both growth and profit are important. But very few companies include the capital dimension when thinking about value creation. Focusing exclusively on boosting EBIT or EBITDA without considering the amount of capital required means you’re not focusing sufficiently on value creation.

Another common mistake is that companies look at multiples rather than discounted cash flows. Multiples are not a good guide for understanding what companies need to do to improve value creation for shareholders.

Thinking through exactly how new investments or acquisitions affect the discounted cash flow of your company—by understanding how they affect future cash flows and the cost of capital—is key.

And finally, companies can be naive about what shareholders actually care about. Shareholders are not interested in higher net profits or earnings per share. They are interested in what fundamentally drives the value of a company and whether improvements in cash flows will last.

Why does cash flow matter more than earnings or earnings per share?

Marc Goedhart: What really drives the value of a company is not the next couple of years of earnings or growth or even return on capital.

It’s really about the longer-term pattern of cash flows—five years, seven years, and beyond—as captured in returns on capital and growth.

Managers should be aware that it’s not about this year’s earnings per share [EPS], not about this year’s EBITDA, not even about this year’s return on capital and growth. It’s really about the long term.

Companies should not refer to decisions or actions that lead to lower value in the long term just to improve their earnings for the next 12 months or for the next quarter.

Susan Nolen Foushee: One mistake CEOs and their teams can make is getting too focused on earnings per share as a specific metric. Companies can get really tangled up here; we urge them to take a bigger-picture view.

EPS is not a metric that reflects cash flow because it is not impacted by capital expenditures, so it doesn’t capture the capital-efficiency lens of value creation. It can also be affected by a variety of nonoperating factors, such as extraordinary items or interest expense, which makes it hard to compare with other companies.

Our research shows that investors see through EPS as a metric, particularly the intrinsic investors who really move share prices.

Tim Koller: Many companies feel pressure to achieve short-term profits, and they often blame that pressure on the stock market.

As a result, you see companies passing up attractive investments because they don’t generate profits right away.

I know one company that had a rule that every business unit had to increase its profits faster than its revenues. They had business units with very high 30 percent profit margins and very high 40 or 50 percent returns on capital. This created an incentive for managers to pass up growth opportunities that might have earned only 25 percent margins—which most companies would love to have. So this company went from being one of the more innovative companies 20 years ago to struggling today. They’re so short-term oriented that there’s no longer any growth.

Marc Goedhart: When communicating with investors, companies should be aware that not all stock market participants are equally sophisticated.

What they should try to find out is which of their shareholders are what we would call intrinsic investors—investors that focus on the long term and are truly interested in the underlying quality of the business and long-term outlook for the markets the company operates in.

Those investors are the ones who, in the long term, will set the share price for a company. They are also the investors you can have a meaningful dialogue with as an executive, because they are informed about the business and the market you’re operating in.

That is in contrast to other investors, such as index trackers, who may hold large stakes simply because a company is part of a market index. What you say in an earnings call or capital markets day presentation is not going to change their position in the stock.

Susan Nolen Foushee: Some companies tend to think that the stock market is naive, and that investors will overfixate on one metric or one earnings call.

What our research shows is that the investors that matter are the intrinsic investors, those focused on long-term performance, including cash flow generation, and less bothered by a single quarter where earnings per share might be lower because of, for example, transformation costs.

Sometimes you’ll see a short-term reaction in the stock market right after an earnings call. But often, several days later, you’ll see a course correction. That’s why we urge managers to hold steady and think about the longer term, rather than managing the business to minute-by-minute fluctuations in the stock price.

Tim Koller: We find that many companies believe they are under pressure from the stock market to be short-term oriented, but in reality, there are plenty of investors who are long-term oriented. They’re just not the noisiest investors.

Play Video. Often, the pressure to focus on the short term has more to do with internal factors, such as the compensation of the CEO or whether the board fully understands the decisions the company is making. Companies can be more long-term oriented by doing a better job of allocating their existing resources across different product lines or initiatives. We see that companies are too static in how they allocate resources. They continue to invest in legacy businesses because of inertia, rather than reallocating capital and people toward businesses and initiatives that have better value creation opportunities.

That creates a big opportunity for companies to be more long-term oriented without necessarily spending more money—simply by moving resources away from areas that are not going to create value and toward those that are.


Hoteliers face headwinds with industry's resilience top of mind
Execs weigh continued slow-but-promising deals pace


https://www.costar.com/article/1636857569/hoteliers-face-headwinds-with-industrys-resilience-top-of-mind?



ATLANTA — On the second day of the 2026 Hunter Hotel Investment Conference, hoteliers on stage continued some of the optimistic sentiments from the first day while zooming in on market trends they are most concerned about.

Taking the main stage were the annual "Wall Street talks" and "Main Street talks" panels that brought together investors and hotel owners to discuss their top concerns. Panelists were most focused on the hospitality industry continuing last year's slow-but-promising deals pace.

Later, hotel data experts took the spotlight to share some of the key data points that paint a picture of what's happening across the industry. For the most part, forecasts have been maintained from earlier in the year, and experts say only time will tell what the year — including the World Cup — will hold for hotel demand and performance.

Ultimately, the industry is a resilient one, as Thom Geshay, CEO and president of Davidson Hospitality, reminded everyone: "Hospitality will survive any shock, anytime. It always does."

Quotes of the day

"You factor noise into the underwriting."

—Mit Shah, founder and CEO of Noble Investment Group, spoke on the "Wall Street talks" panel about the realities of underwriting hotel deals amid geopolitical headwinds.

"We still get the question about comparing it to 2019, and I just want to make this one point. Room rates compared to 2019 were up in 2025 22%. That's great, except inflation was up 25%, so in real terms, room rates are now lower than they were pre-pandemic, down 3% or so. The same math obviously holds for RevPAR, and that's the problem that you're in."

—Jan Freitag, CoStar's national director of hospitality analytics, said at the "Key statistics shaping hospitality in 2026" panel that featured several data presentations.

“I think that with the larger pressures that we're seeing... we have to be relentless in every single part of what we do. It is no longer a group strategy. It's no longer a labor strategy. It's an everything strategy. Every day. You have to attack every market segment — you have to attack every distribution channel, you have to attack every group strategy, you have to attack everything on the food, beverage side — to make sure that you look at each one of your revenue lines, each one of your businesses and your P&L as a business itself to be profitable.”

—Thom Geshay, CEO and president of Davidson Hospitality, spoke on "The performance mandate" panel about current operating and ownership conditions.

Editors' takeaways

In my takeaway from the first day of the conference, I spoke about the resounding optimism I heard from hotel industry executives. The second day was the more of the same.

Whether it was executives speaking on panels or conversations I had with eventgoers in passing, the sentiment was the same: There are certainly headwinds present, but if you take a look at the big picture, things are good.

As Azim Saju, CEO of Ark Holdings, put it during the "Main Street talks" panel: "If there was no risk, there would be no rewards."

Hotel executives are willing to bet on their strategies and philosophies, whether it's in regard to hotel development or company culture. They often say this is a cyclical business, so even in the down times they can look ahead to the future for the light at the end of the tunnel.

— Trevor Simpson, staff writer/staff editor

Follow Trevor on LinkedIn.

"When Wall Street zigs, oftentimes Main Street will zag," said Vision Hospitality CEO Mitch Patel on the "Main Street talks" panel at the Hunter Conference on Tuesday. I think that sentiment really sums up the variables at play in the hotel industry today among different stakeholders. Institutional hotel investors are still weighing their options — particularly if they're choosing where to deploy investment among asset classes other than hotels — and real estate investment trusts are still on the sidelines.

But owners from smaller Main Street firms talked a lot about "patient capital," or the idea that the decisions they make about their equity contributions and overall investment need to be based on calculated risk so the deal gets done. While the Blackstones of the world still may not be sold on betting too big on hotel real estate again, the Main Street investors are determined to seize the day this year.

— Stephanie Ricca, editorial director

Follow Stephanie on LinkedIn.

Today, I wanted to dig deeper on the optimism in the industry, and for the most part, I got it. CoStar's Jan Freitag said in his presentation for the statistics panel said that last month was the best February for hotel demand on record.

However, not everything was overly optimistic. In some of my conversations and on some of the panels I sat in on, I got a healthy dose of realism. Specifically, the hotel transaction market isn't as active as the hospitality industry hoped it would be, and the World Cup, which is less than 100 days out, isn't seeming like it's going to be as big of a boon as expected either. From the owner and operator side of things, the top concerns are with the margins and the bottom line — and that's just the new normal.

— Natalie Harms, reporter


Commanalities exist between Wall Street and Main Street hotel investors. It just matters who you ask.


https://hotelsmag.com/news/commanalities-exist-between-wall-street-and-main-street-hotel-investors-it-just-matters-who-you-ask/


The hotel industry is a peculiar business. It’s one where a single asset can have multiple hands in it: the owner of the real estate; the operator of the real estate; the brand affixed to the real estate. Oftentimes, each has competing motivations within that triangle: the owner wants profit; the operator pushes revenue; and the brand, well, it really wants to add more hotels. It’s seemingly diametric, but, somehow, has not only become the norm—it’s worked! 

A similar sort of antithesis exists between institutional capital and private equity that gun for huge, often highly leveraged returns and smaller real estate firms firmly planted in hotel real estate investment with a tendency toward longer asset hold periods. 

At the Hunter Conference, which swapped out its longtime location at the Atlanta Marriott Marquis for the Signia by Hilton Atlanta Georgia World Congress Center, disparities—and parities—between Wall Street’s notions of investment compared to Main Street’s were put under the microscope during two back-to-back panel discussions. 

Street Smarts

Hotels are a unique asset class, as Mitch Patel, founder & CEO of Vision Hospitality Group, made clear—a service business that is layered atop real estate. This structure makes it decidedly different from other asset types. “Wall Street forgets this is a people business,” he said, adding that because hotels are a service business, and in an era of hyper transparency, people—those serving customers—have the ability to impact cash flow positively or negatively. “A 4.8 versus 4.0 rating can be the decider between success and mediocrity,” Patel said. “There are many levers to pull, unlike other asset classes.” 

Fellow hotel owner Bo Patel, COO of Coury Hospitality, shared Patel’s view of how staffing a hotel has a direct impact on success and performance. “GSS [guest satisfaction scores] matter,” he said. “That gets lost. The customer isn’t just going to come.” 

Main Street capital sometimes acts differently than institutional capital, Mitch Patel offered. Both invest with partners that fund these enterprises, but, as Patel suggested, not all investment partners are equal. “We have a disciplined model and patient capital,” he said, intimating that on Wall Street, money can be more restless. (The recent spate of private-capital investors wanting to pull their money out of funds is evidence of this.) Patel said that they look at deals through a different prism, with longer timelines, and with partners, who, he said, “have no pressure to get out.” 

Private-equity groups like Blackstone had been rather quiet on the hotel acquisition front post-COVID, but in the last 16 months, Blackstone has made a series of hotel deals, including Four Seasons Hotel San Francisco, Kimpton Hotel Eventi in New York, three hotels in Japan, including The Ritz-Carlton, Okinawa, and EAST Miami. Last November, fellow private-equity giant Brookfield Asset Management scooped up the 1,003-room Sheraton Phoenix Downtown, the city’s biggest hotel. The seller was Blackstone.

Outside Control

These recent deals bode well for a headier transaction market through 2026 after a strong start to 2025, which was derailed in April by the so-named “Liberation Day,” when President Donald Trump initiated major tariff increases, as Scott Trebilco, senior managing director in the real estate group at Blackstone, alluded to. “There was optimism into into 2025,” he said. “Then April happened.” 

The back half of 2025 picked up. “We were calculated and targeted,” Trebilco said. Blackstone, with its thematic investment ethos, homed in on assets in major urban cities, like New York, Miami and, bucking the trend, San Francisco, areas “with multiple demand drivers,” as Trebilco put it.  

At the Americas Lodging Investment Summit, earlier this year, in Los Angeles, Mit Shah, CEO of Noble Investment Group, which invests in and owns hotels, said Noble’s fourth quarter was up 7%, which carried over into January 2025, when they were up 8%. “I was wildly optimistic,” he said. Then came DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, an initiative by the second Trump administration to modernize information technology, maximize productivity and cut excess regulations and spending within the federal government. “It took a significant amount of government travel out of the system almost immediately,” he said. “Then the Canadians started disliking us and then there was Liberation Day and a record government shutdown.” 

Two months later, Shah is optimistic about RevPAR growth in 2026, despite most forecasters predicting flat to even negative growth. He is buoyed by events such as FIFA World Cup and America250. 

On the deal side, Noble bucked the overall trend. Shah said Noble had its largest transactional year in 2025 in its 32-year history as a company. Hospitality, he said, is an eight-cap business where buyers can finance deals at SOFR-plus 200.    

Karim Alibhai, founder and principal of Gencom, has been active; he’s been aggressive. One of its most recent acquisitions, in partnership with two other firms, was the InterContinental New York Times Square for a reported $230 million or just shy of $379,000 per key. A year ago, Gencom acquired The Ritz-Carlton, New Orleans and the Courtyard by Marriott French Quarter Iberville, a combined 758-room hotel portfolio in the city’s French Quarter.

“There has been some loosening up in the last 24 months,” he said. “Sellers are more realistic on pricing and valuations.” Despite more challenging underwriting, Gencom’s advantage is its preference of long-term asset holds. “We don’t have pressure of three-year IRR goals. We underwrite 10-year goals,” he said. “You factor the noise into the underwriting,” Shah added. 

Christian Charnaux, CDO for Hilton, pointed to the resilience of the hotel industry despite the cost pressures that owners face down. “We are manically focused down the middle of the P&L,” said Trebilco, since its hotels aren’t managed by them. 

The resilience theme is shared by Main Street, as voiced by Mitch Patel. “You couldn’t create policies less detrimental to our industry, but we still have positive gains,” he said. 

Positivity in overall travel was a sentiment shared by Shah, who said that travel is innate within us all. And while the K-shaped economy has been an enduring theme, where high-income earners thrive and rise and lower-income households struggle, Shah said it’s starting to narrow. He also referred to the great wealth transfer, an unprecedented, multi-decade shift of an estimated up to $124 trillion in assets from baby boomers and the silent generation to their heirs (Gen X, millennials, and Gen Z). “When you pass down money they didn’t earn, they will spend it on travel,” Shah jokingly said. 

Back on Main Street, Mitch Patel reminded the audience that the hotel industry is a corner-street business. And while it can be a risky business, as Azim Saju, CEO of ARK Holdings, said, those with conviction, belief and entrepreneurship are positioned to succeed. “Bet on yourself,” he said.


German Tourist Has a Bad Vacation in Times Square, Sues for $20 Million


emyu/iStock
https://www.fodors.com/world/north-america/usa/new-york/new-york-city/experiences/news/german-tourist-has-a-bad-vacation-in-times-square-sues-for-20-million


He was unsuccessful in all three pursuits of compensation.




German tourist faced disappointment after disappointment on his trip to New York in 2024. So much so that he filed three lawsuits seeking $20 million in compensation from a taco chain, Walmart, and the New York Police Department for discrimination and distress. However, all his attempts to get damages were thwarted after judges dismissed the lawsuits.


It’s a wild story of a disgruntled tourist with frivolous lawsuits. Faycal Manz, from southern Germany, came to New York in 2024 to see the U.S. Open, a famous tennis event and one of the four Grand Slams. He booked a room in Times Square, the hub of tourist activity. His trip, however, did not turn out as he had hoped.

A part-time student and engineer, Manz filed three lawsuits after his six-day trip, all without any legal representation.

The First Lawsuit: Tacos

The first incident occurred when he ordered three tacos from Los Tacos No. 1 in Times Square. He added a serving of salsa to the tacos, and it did not turn out well. In the court filing, he said his mouth and tongue burned, his heart rate increased, and he experienced tongue blisters. In his hotel room, he self-soothed with medication for acid reflux and diarrhea. He admitted to having gastrointestinal issues and avoiding spicy food. He sued Los Tacos No. 1—which has multiple branches in New York—for $100,000, alleging that the taco spot doesn’t warn customers about its spice levels.

Los Tacos No. 1 said in court documents that his discomfort was caused by his “own culpable conduct, carelessness, recklessness, and negligence.”

U.S. District Judge Dale Ho agreed. In mid-February, he dismissed the lawsuit because Manz “failed to state a claim that Los Tacos negligently served excessively spicy salsa.” Ho also acknowledged that Manz could have easily discovered that the tacos were spicy with a simple Google search. The judge wrote, “Manz admits that he never asked anyone, whether a customer or a Los Tacos employee, about the contents of the salsa bar before putting a large amount on each of his tacos.” The judge also said that with salsa, spice is often the point.

The Second Lawsuit: Walmart

The second incident, which led to another lawsuit, happened at a Walmart in New Jersey. Manz’s phone failed to connect to the store’s Wi-Fi, which he said caused him emotional distress. He alleged discrimination by Walmart because he needed a U.S. number to access the internet. He demanded $10 million from the retail giant.

This lawsuit was also dismissed after Walmart filed a motion. The judge concurred that with a German phone number, Manz was not protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Third Lawsuit: NYPD

The last case, against the New York Police Department, is equally bizarre. Manz called 911 after witnessing two men assault a homeless person. When police officers arrived, they refused to investigate because the assailants had fled. This dismissal by officers caused Manz insomnia, and he alleged that a doctor diagnosed him with psychosomatic and post-traumatic symptoms.

He sought $10 million from the police department. Not pulling any punches, the police responded to his lawsuit, saying he only had himself to blame. Manz dropped this lawsuit himself this week.

Manz may not have fond memories from the trip, but the stories—and court documents—will make for interesting party conversations for life. Guess New York isn’t for everyone.






DUHC&S | Strategic Hospitality Consulting & Advisory

We transform hospitality and tourism businesses through strategic solutionsoperational efficiency, and comprehensive renovation. With over  40 years of experience  working with brands like Hilton, Hyatt, Sheraton, and Sonesta, we enhance asset value and profitability through:

*Operational excellence and brand standards (GSI +90%)
*Market penetration and commercial strategies
*Key partnerships and disruptive innovation
*Hotel openings and repositioning

Proven results :
✅ 48% GOP | 
✅ +120% asset valuation growth
✅ Successful projects across 6 Latin American countries

🔹 Let's connect :
📩 Email:  diurugeles@gmail.com
📱 WhatsApp: +57 3153259968
     Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/diur_2000/

               https://viajes-noticias-duhospitality.blogspot.com
               https://viajes-duhospitality.blogspot.com
               https://travel-duhospitality.blogspot.com



Disclaimer

DUHC&S shares this information for educational and informational purposes only. The news articles reproduced here are sourced from public and recognized media outlets. We are not the original authors of this content but rather distributors of it. All credits go to the original sources cited in each article. If you are the legitimate owner of any material and wish to have it modified or removed, please contact us immediately at  diurugeles@gmail.com, and we will address your request promptly.





Comments

https://travel-news-duhospitality.blogspot.com