You should carefully consider each of the following risk factors and all of the other information set forth in this Annual Report. The risk factors generally have been separated into three groups: (1) risks relating to our indebtedness; (2) risks relating to our business; and (3) risks relating to our separation from Cendant Corporation, which changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc. in August 2006. Based on the information currently known to us, we believe that the following information identifies the most significant risk factors affecting the Company. However, the risks and uncertainties are not limited to those set forth in the risk factors described below. In addition, past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of future performance and historical trends should not be used to anticipate results or trends in future periods.

Risks relating to our indebtedness

Our significant indebtedness could prevent us from meeting our obligations under our debt instruments and could adversely affect our ability to fund our operations, react to changes in the economy or our industry, or incur additional borrowings under our existing facilities.

We are significantly encumbered by our debt obligations. As of December 31, 2010, after giving effect to the Refinancing Transactions, our total debt, excluding the securitization obligations, would have been $7,007 million (without giving effect to $179 million of outstanding letters of credit under our senior secured revolving credit facility and $473 million of undrawn availability under our revolving credit facility). In addition, as of December 31, 2010, our current liabilities included $331 million of securitization obligations which were collateralized by $393 million of securitization assets that are not available to pay our general obligations.

Our indebtedness was principally incurred to finance our acquisition by Apollo in April 2007 and reflected our then current earnings and our expectations that the housing downturn would recover in the near term. While our total debt has increased since the date of our acquisition in order to fund negative cash flows, the industry and economy have experienced significant declines that have negatively impacted our operating results. Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2007, on a pro forma combined basis, have decreased by approximately 32%. As a result, we have been, and continue to be, challenged by our heavily leveraged capital structure. There can be no assurance that we will be able to reduce the level of our leverage or debt in the future.

Our substantial degree of leverage could have important consequences, including the following:

26

Table of Contents

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness and be forced to take other actions to satisfy our obligations under our indebtedness, which may not be successful.

Our ability to make scheduled payments or to refinance our debt obligations depends on our financial and operating performance, which is subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and to certain financial, business and other factors beyond our control. We have needed to incur additional debt in order to fund negative cash flow. We cannot assure you that we will maintain a level of cash flows from operating activities and from drawings on our revolving credit facilities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness.

If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets or operations, seek additional debt or equity capital or restructure or refinance our indebtedness. We cannot assure you that we would be able to take any of these actions, that these actions would be successful and permit us to meet our scheduled debt service obligations or that these actions would be permitted under the terms of our existing or future debt agreements. In the absence of such operating results and resources, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations to meet our debt service and other obligations. Our senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes, the Extended Maturity Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes restrict our ability to dispose of assets and use the proceeds from the disposition. We may not be able to consummate those dispositions or realize the related proceeds from them and these proceeds may not be adequate to meet any debt service obligations then due.

If we cannot make scheduled payments on our debt, we will be in default and, as a result:

An event of default under our senior secured credit facility would adversely affect our operations and our ability to satisfy obligations under our indebtedness.

Our senior secured credit facility contains restrictive covenants, including a requirement that we maintain a specified senior secured leverage ratio, which is defined as the ratio of our total senior secured debt (net of unrestricted cash and permitted investments) to trailing 12-month Adjusted EBITDA. Specifically measured at the last day of each quarter, our senior secured leverage ratio may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0 for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2011 and for each fiscal quarter thereafter. Total senior secured debt, for purposes of this ratio, does not include the First and a Half Lien Notes, Second Lien Loans, other bank indebtedness not secured by a first lien on our assets (including indebtedness supported by letters of credit issued under our senior secured credit facility), securitization obligations or the Unsecured Notes. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, we were in compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant with a ratio of 4.59 to 1.0. After giving effect to the Refinancing Transactions, our senior secured leverage ratio would have been 3.51 to 1.0 at December 31, 2010. Based upon the consummation of the Refinancing Transactions and our financial forecast for 2011, we expect to remain in compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant for at least the next 12 months. If a housing recovery is delayed further or is weak, we will be subject to additional pressure in maintaining compliance with our senior secured leverage ratio. In future periods, if we are unable to renew or

27

Table of Contents

refinance bank indebtedness secured by letters of credit issued under our senior secured credit facility (which are not included in the calculation of the senior secured leverage ratio) and the letters of credit are drawn upon, the reimbursement obligations related to those letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility will be included in the calculation of the senior secured leverage ratio. A failure to maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio, or a breach of any of the other restrictive covenants, would result in a default under our senior secured credit facility.

We have the right to cure an event of default of the senior secured leverage ratio in three of any four consecutive quarters through the issuance of additional Holdings equity for cash, which would be infused as capital into Realogy to increase Adjusted EBITDA for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio for the applicable twelve-month period and reduce net senior secured indebtedness upon actual receipt of such capital. If we are unable to maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio and we fail to remedy or avoid a default through an equity cure permitted thereunder, there would be an “event of default” under the senior secured credit agreement. Other events of default include, without limitation, nonpayment, material misrepresentations, insolvency, bankruptcy, certain material judgments, change of control, and cross-events of default on material indebtedness as well as failure to obtain an unqualified audit opinion by 90 days after the end of any fiscal year. Upon the occurrence of any event of default under our senior secured credit facility, the lenders:

any of which could result in an event of default under the First and a Half Lien Notes, the Unsecured Notes or our Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program.

If we were unable to repay the amounts outstanding under our senior secured credit facility, then the lenders under our senior secured credit facility could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure the indebtedness thereunder. We have pledged a significant portion of our assets as collateral under our senior secured credit facility. If the lenders under our senior secured credit facility accelerate the repayment of borrowings, we may not have sufficient assets to repay our senior secured credit facility and our other indebtedness or borrow sufficient funds to refinance such indebtedness. Notwithstanding the completion of the Refinancing Transactions, our total indebtedness was not and will not be significantly reduced unless and until the Convertible Notes issued in the Debt Exchange Offering are converted into equity. In the future, we may need to seek new financing, or explore the possibility of amending the terms of our senior secured credit facility, and we may not be able to do so on commercially reasonable terms, or terms that are acceptable to us, if at all.

If an event of default is continuing under our senior secured credit facility, the First and a Half Lien Notes or our other material indebtedness, such event could cause a termination of our ability to obtain future advances under, and/or amortization of, our Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program.

Restrictive covenants under our indentures and the senior secured credit facility may limit the manner in which we operate.

Our senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the Extended Maturity Notes, the 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes contain, and any future indebtedness we incur may contain, various covenants and conditions that limit our ability to, among other things:

28

Table of Contents

As a result of these covenants, we are limited in the manner in which we conduct our business and we may be unable to engage in favorable business activities or finance future operations or capital needs.

Variable rate indebtedness subjects us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly.

At December 31, 2010 and after giving effect to the Refinancing Transactions, approximately $2,620 million of our borrowings under our senior secured credit facility and other bank indebtedness, would have been at variable rates of interest and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net income would decrease. Although we have entered into interest rate swaps with a notional value of $425 million, involving the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments, to reduce interest rate volatility, such interest rate swaps do not eliminate interest rate volatility for the unswapped portion of our variable rate indebtedness at December 31, 2010.

We are a holding company and are dependent on dividends and other distributions from our subsidiaries.

Realogy is a holding company with limited direct operations. Our principal assets are the equity interests that we hold in our operating subsidiaries. As a result, we are dependent on dividends and other distributions from those subsidiaries to generate the funds necessary to meet our financial obligations, including the payment of principal and interest on our outstanding debt. Our subsidiaries may not generate sufficient cash from operations to enable us to make principal and interest payments on our indebtedness. In addition, any payment of dividends, distributions, loans or advances to us by our subsidiaries could be subject to restrictions on dividends or repatriation of earnings under applicable local law and monetary transfer restrictions in the jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries operate. In addition, payments to us by our subsidiaries will be contingent upon our subsidiaries’ earnings. Our subsidiaries are permitted under the terms of our indebtedness, including our senior secured credit facility, the indentures governing the Unsecured Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes, to incur additional indebtedness that may restrict payments from those subsidiaries to us. We cannot assure you that agreements governing current and future indebtedness of our subsidiaries will permit those subsidiaries to provide us with sufficient cash to fund our debt service payments.

Our subsidiaries are legally distinct from us and, except for our existing and future subsidiaries that are guarantors of our indebtedness, including our senior secured credit facility, the Unsecured Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes, have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay amounts due on our debt or to make funds available to us for such payment.

29

Table of Contents

Apollo is our controlling stockholder and Paulson may become a significant stockholder. There can be no assurance that Apollo and Paulson will act in our best interests as opposed to their own best interests.

Because of its position as our controlling stockholder, to the extent not otherwise limited in our senior secured credit agreement or our indentures, Apollo is able to exercise significant control over decisions affecting us, including:

In addition, Paulson & Co. Inc., on behalf of the several investment funds and accounts managed by it (together with such investment funds and accounts, “Paulson”) owns Convertible Notes that may be converted into 21.5% of the total outstanding shares of Holdings common stock on an as converted basis assuming that all Convertible Notes are converted into shares of Class A Common Stock (as defined below). Pursuant to the Paulson Securityholders Agreement (as defined below), Paulson also has the right to nominate a member of our board of directors or designate a non-voting observer to attend meetings of our board of directors and have certain other rights with respect to issuances of our equity and debt securities.

Even if all of the outstanding Convertible Notes held by parties other than Apollo were converted into Class A Common Stock, which has one vote per share, Apollo, by virtue of its ownership of shares of Class B Common Stock (as defined below), which has five votes per share, would continue to control a majority of the voting power of the outstanding Common Stock. In addition, if all of the Convertible Notes were converted into Class A Common Stock, all of the Class B Common Stock would automatically convert into shares of Class A Common Stock and Apollo would then hold 66.2% of the outstanding shares of Class A Common Stock.

The concentration of ownership held by Apollo could delay, defer or prevent a change of control of us or impede a merger, takeover or other business combination that may be otherwise favorable to us. In addition, pursuant to Holdings’ Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, Apollo has the right to, and will have no duty to abstain from, exercising such right to, conduct business with any business that is competitive or in the same line of business as us, do business with any of our clients, customers or vendors, or make investments in the kind of property in which we may make investments. Apollo is in the business of making or advising on investments in companies and may hold, and may from time to time in the future acquire, interests in or provide advice to businesses that directly or indirectly compete with certain portions of our business or are suppliers or customers of ours. Apollo may also pursue acquisitions that may be complementary to our business, and, as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. So long as Apollo continues to own a significant amount of the equity of Holdings, even if such amount is less than 50%, Apollo will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions.

Because our equity securities are not registered under the Exchange Act and are not listed on any U.S. securities exchange, we are not subject to any of the corporate governance requirements of any U.S. securities exchanges.

If we encounter financial difficulties, or we are unable to pay our debts as they mature, the interests of our equity holders may conflict with those of the holders of first lien indebtedness under our senior secured credit facility, the First and a Half Lien Notes, the Unsecured Notes or any other holder of our debt and such equity holders have no obligation to provide any additional equity or any debt financing to us.

30

Table of Contents

We do not know if an active trading market will develop or be maintained for any of our Unsecured Notes or the First and a Half Lien Notes.

There can be no assurance that an active market for any of our Unsecured Notes or the First and a Half Lien Notes will develop or be maintained. Following the Refinancing Transactions, the aggregate outstanding principal amount of each series of Existing Notes and Extended Maturity Notes is significantly lower than the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the Existing Notes prior to the consummation of the Debt Exchange Offering. In the case of each of the 10.50% Senior Notes and the Senior Toggle Notes, the aggregate principal amount outstanding of such series is less than $65 million and in the case of the 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes, there is only approximately $10 million in aggregate principal amount outstanding. Additionally, the Convertible Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes are new issues of securities. The liquidity of any market for any series of our notes will depend on a number of factors, including:

The market for any series of our notes, similar to other non-investment grade debt, may be subject to disruptions that may cause substantial volatility in the prices of any such series and any disruptions may adversely affect the prices at which notes may be sold.

Risks relating to our business

The residential real estate market is cyclical and we are negatively impacted by downturns in this market.

The residential real estate market tends to be cyclical and typically is affected by changes in general economic conditions which are beyond our control. The U.S. residential real estate market has recently shown some signs of stabilizing from a lengthy and deep downturn that began in the second half of 2005. However, we cannot predict when the market and related economic forces will return the U.S. residential real estate industry to a period of sustained growth.

Any of the following could halt or limit a recovery in the housing market and have a material adverse effect on our business by causing a lack of sustained growth or a decline in the number of homesales and/or prices which, in turn, could adversely affect our revenues and profitability:

31

Table of Contents

Recently, banks and other lenders have come under investigations for alleged improper support for foreclosure actions. As a result, the foreclosure process in many areas has slowed and may face ongoing disruption. These foreclosure developments could reduce the level of homesales and could, once these homes reemerge on the market, add additional downward pressure on the price of existing homesales.

Our success is largely dependent on the efforts and abilities of the independent sales associates retained by company owned brokerage offices and by our franchisees. The ability of our company owned brokerage offices and our franchisees to retain independent sales associates is generally subject to numerous factors, including the compensation they receive and their perception of brand value. Given our high degree of leverage and negative perceptions in the media relating to our financial condition, neither our company owned brokerage offices or our independent franchisees may be successful in attracting or maintaining independent sales associates. If we or our franchisees fail to attract and retain independent sales associates, our business may be materially adversely affected.

A prolonged decline or lack of sustained growth in the number of homesales and/or prices would adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Based upon data published by NAR, from 2005 to 2010, annual US existing homesale units declined by 31% and the median homesale price declined by 21%. Our Company’s revenues for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2007, on a pro forma combined basis, decreased approximately 32%. A further decline or lack of sustained growth in existing homesales, a continued decline in home prices or a decline in commission rates charged by brokers would further adversely affect our results of operations by reducing the royalties we receive from our franchisees and company owned brokerages, reducing the commissions our company owned brokerage operations earn, reducing the demand for our title and settlement

32

Table of Contents

services and reducing the referral fees earned by our relocation services business. For example, for 2010, a 100 basis point (or 1%) decline in either our homesale sides or the average selling price of closed homesale transactions, with all else being equal, would have decreased EBITDA by $2 million for our Real Estate Franchise Services segment and $9 million for our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment.

Our company owned brokerage operations are subject to geographic and high-end real estate market risks, which could continue to adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Our subsidiary, NRT, owns real estate brokerage offices located in and around large metropolitan areas in the U.S. Local and regional economic conditions in these locations could differ materially from prevailing conditions in other parts of the country. NRT has more offices and realizes more of its revenues in California, Florida and the New York metropolitan area than any other regions in the country. For the year ended December 31, 2010, NRT realized approximately 63% of its revenues from California (27%), the New York metropolitan area (26%) and Florida (10%). A further downturn in residential real estate demand or economic conditions in these regions could result in a further decline in NRT’s total gross commission income and have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, given the significant geographic overlap of our title and settlement services business with our company owned brokerage offices, such regional declines affecting our company owned brokerage operations could have an adverse effect on our title and settlement services business as well. A further downturn in residential real estate demand or economic conditions in these states could continue to result in a decline in our overall revenues and have a material adverse effect on us.

NRT has a significant concentration of transactions at the higher end of the U.S. real estate market. A shift in NRT’s mix of property transactions from the high range to lower and middle range homes would adversely affect the average price of NRT’s closed homesales.

Loss or attrition among our senior management or other key employees could adversely affect our financial performance.

Our success is largely dependent on the efforts and abilities of our senior management and other key employees. Our ability to retain our employees is generally subject to numerous factors, including the compensation and benefits we pay, the mix between the fixed and variable compensation we pay our employees and prevailing compensation rates. Given the lengthy and prolonged downturn in the real estate market and the cost-cutting measures we implemented during the downturn, certain of our employees have received, and may in the near term continue to receive, less variable compensation. As such, we may suffer significant attrition among our current key employees. If we were to lose key employees and not promptly fill their positions with comparably qualified individuals, our business may be materially adversely affected.

Tightened mortgage underwriting standards could continue to reduce homebuyers’ ability to access the credit market on reasonable terms.

During the past several years, many lenders have significantly tightened their underwriting standards, and many subprime and other alternative mortgage products are no longer being made available in the marketplace. If these trends continue and mortgage loans continue to be difficult to obtain, including in the jumbo mortgage markets important to our higher value and luxury brands, the ability and willingness of prospective buyers to finance home purchases or to sell their existing homes will be adversely affected, which will adversely affect our operating results.

Adverse developments in general business, economic and political conditions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and our results of operations.

Our business and operations and those of our franchisees are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the U.S. and worldwide. These conditions include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, consumer confidence and the general condition of the U.S. and world economy.

33

Table of Contents

Dramatic declines in the housing market during the past several years, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures, including disruptions and delays occasioned by recent investigations into alleged improper foreclosure processes, and unemployment, have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks as well as repayment and reimbursement arrangements between the originating banks and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These actions, which initially impacted mortgage-backed securities, spread to credit default swaps and other derivative securities and caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital, to merge with larger and stronger institutions and, in some cases, to fail. Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets generally and the strength of counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors reduced, and in some cases, ceased to provide funding to borrowers, including other financial institutions. Lack of available credit or lack of confidence in the financial sector could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A host of factors beyond our control could cause fluctuations in these conditions, including the political environment and acts or threats of war or terrorism. Adverse developments in these general business and economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and our results of operations.

Recent U.S. Governmental actions to assist in the stabilization and/or recovery of the residential real estate market may not be successful; reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae could have a material impact on our operations.

The U.S. government implemented certain actions during the past several years to assist in a stabilization and/or a recovery of the residential real estate market. These measures have included: (1) the placement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in conservatorship in September 2008 and the funding of over $130 billion to these entities to backstop shortfalls in their capital requirements; (2) the establishment, and subsequent expansion and extension, of a federal homebuyer tax credit for qualified buyers (that, as extended, required signed contracts on or before April 30, 2010); (3) as part of a broader plan to bring stability to credit markets and stimulate the housing market, the purchase of mortgage-backed securities by the Federal Reserve in an attempt to maintain low mortgage rates (the first phase of which ended on March 31, 2010); (4) the continuation of the 2008 higher loan limits for FHA, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae loans through September 30, 2011; and (5) the availability of low-cost refinancing through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to certain homeowners negatively impacted by falling home prices, encouraging lenders to modify loan terms with borrowers at risk of foreclosure or already in foreclosure. There can be no assurance that these actions or any other governmental action will continue to stabilize the housing market or that any recovery in this market will be sustained as these programs either wind down or expire by their terms.

Moreover, Congress has recently held hearings on the future of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and other government sponsored entities or GSEs with a view towards further legislative reform. On February 11, 2011, the Obama Administration issued a report to the U.S. Congress outlining proposals to reform the U.S. housing finance market, including, among other things, reform designed to reduce government support for housing finance and the winding down of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae over a period of years. Two significant questions that need to be addressed in any such reform are: (1) will banks and other private sources of capital be able to fill homebuyers’ needs as the government seeks to pull back some of the housing mortgage market support and (2) will these other sources of capital be available at rates which are reasonably attractive to potential homebuyers. Legislation, if enacted, which curtails Freddie Mac and/or Fannie Mae’s activities and/or results in the wind down of these entities could increase mortgage costs and could result in more stringent underwriting guidelines imposed by lenders, either of which could materially adverse affect the housing market in general and our operations in particular. Given the current uncertainty with respect to the extent, if any, of such reform, it is difficult to predict either the long-term or short-term impact of government action that may be taken.

34

Table of Contents

The Dodd-Frank Act and other financial reform legislation may, among other things, result in new rules and regulations that may adversely affect the housing industry.

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law for the express purpose of regulating the financial services industry and also establishes an independent federal bureau of consumer financial protection to enforce laws involving consumer financial products and services, including mortgage finance. The bureau is empowered with examination and enforcement authority. The Dodd-Frank Act also establishes new standards and practices for mortgage originators, including determining a prospective borrower’s ability to repay their mortgage, removing incentives for higher cost mortgages, prohibiting prepayment penalties for non-qualified mortgages, prohibiting mandatory arbitration clauses, requiring additional disclosures to potential borrowers and restricting the fees that mortgage originators may collect. While we are continuing to evaluate all aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act, such legislation and regulations promulgated pursuant to such legislation as well as other legislation that may be enacted to reform the U.S. housing finance market could materially and adversely affect the mortgage and housing industries, result in heightened federal regulation and oversight of the mortgage and housing industries, increase mortgage costs and result in increased costs and potential litigation for housing market participants.

Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the operation and practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and require sponsors of securitizations to retain a portion of the economic interest in the credit risk associated with the assets securitized by them. Federal regulators have been authorized to provide exceptions to the risk retention requirements for certain “qualified mortgages” and mortgages meeting certain underwriting standards prescribed in such regulations, however, it is unclear what types of mortgage loans will be encompassed by future regulations related to the definition of “qualified mortgages.” If mortgage loans originated for purchasers of homes are sold into GSE-sponsored mortgage-backed securities that do not meet the definition of a “qualified mortgage,” then the GSEs may be required to retain a portion of the risk of assets they securitize, which may in turn substantially reduce or eliminate the GSEs’ ability to issue mortgage-backed securities. Substantial reduction in, or the elimination of, GSE demand for mortgage loans could have a material adverse effect on the mortgage industry and the housing industry in general. It is also unclear what effect future laws or regulations may have on the ability of the GSEs to issue mortgage-backed securities.

Monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies may have a material impact on our operations.

Our business is significantly affected by the monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies. We are particularly affected by the policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the U.S. The Federal Reserve Board’s policies affect the real estate market through their effect on interest rates as well as the pricing on our interest-earning assets and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities.

We are affected by any rising interest rate environment. Changes in the Federal Reserve Board’s policies, the interest rate environment and mortgage market are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, the possibility of the elimination of the mortgage interest deduction could have an adverse effect on the housing market by reducing incentives for buying or refinancing homes and negatively affecting property values.

Competition in the residential real estate and relocation business is intense and may adversely affect our financial performance.

Competition in the residential real estate services business is intense. As a real estate brokerage franchisor, our products are our brand names and the support services we provide to our franchisees. Upon the expiration of a franchise agreement, a franchisee may choose to franchise with one of our competitors or operate as an independent broker. Competitors may offer franchisees whose franchise agreements are expiring similar products and services at rates that are lower than we charge. Our largest national competitors in this industry include The Prudential Real Estate Affiliates, Inc., Real Living (which includes the franchise business that had been

35

Table of Contents

conducted by GMAC Real Estate, LLC), RE/MAX and Keller Williams Realty, Inc. Some of these companies may have greater financial resources than we do, including greater marketing and technology budgets, and may be less leveraged. Regional and local franchisors provide additional competitive pressure in certain areas. To remain competitive in the sale of franchises and to retain our existing franchisees, we may have to reduce the fees we charge our franchisees to be competitive with those charged by competitors, which may accelerate if market conditions further deteriorate.

Our company owned brokerage business, like that of our franchisees, is generally in intense competition. We compete with other national independent real estate organizations, including Home Services of America, franchisees of our brands and of other national real estate franchisors, franchisees of local and regional real estate franchisors, regional independent real estate organizations, discount brokerages, and smaller niche companies competing in local areas. Competition is particularly severe in the densely populated metropolitan areas in which we operate. In addition, the real estate brokerage industry has minimal barriers to entry for new participants, including participants pursuing non-traditional methods of marketing real estate, such as Internet-based brokerage or brokers who discount their commissions. Discount brokers have had varying degrees of success and while they have been negatively impacted by the prolonged downturn in the residential housing market, they may increase their market share in the future. Real estate brokers compete for sales and marketing business primarily on the basis of services offered, reputation, personal contacts and brokerage commission. As with our real estate franchise business, a decrease in the average brokerage commission rate may adversely affect our revenues. We also compete for the services of qualified licensed independent sales associates. Some of the firms competing for sales associates use a different model of compensating agents, in which agents are compensated for the revenue generated by other agents that they recruit to those firms. This business model may be appealing to certain agents and hinder our ability to attract and retain those agents. Competition for sales associates could reduce the commission amounts retained by our company after giving effect to the split with independent sales associates and possibly increase the amounts that we spend on marketing. Our average homesale commission rate per side in our Company Owned Real Estate Services segment has declined from 2.62% in 2002 to 2.48% in 2010.

In our relocation services business, we compete primarily with global and regional outsourced relocation service providers. The larger outsourced relocation service providers that we compete with include SIRVA, Inc., Weichert Relocation Resources, Inc. and Prudential Real Estate and Relocation Services, Inc.

The title and settlement services business is highly competitive and fragmented. The number and size of competing companies vary in the different areas in which we conduct business. We compete with other title insurers, title agents and vendor management companies. The title and settlement services business competes with a large, fragmented group of smaller underwriters and agencies as well as national competitors.

Several of our businesses are highly regulated and any failure to comply with such regulations or any changes in such regulations could adversely affect our business.

Several of our businesses are highly regulated. The sale of franchises is regulated by various state laws as well as by the FTC. The FTC requires that franchisors make extensive disclosure to prospective franchisees but does not require registration. A number of states require registration or disclosure in connection with franchise offers and sales. In addition, several states have “franchise relationship laws” or “business opportunity laws” that limit the ability of franchisors to terminate franchise agreements or to withhold consent to the renewal or transfer of these agreements. While we believe that our franchising operations are in compliance with such existing regulations, we cannot predict the effect any existing or future legislation or regulation may have on our business operation or financial condition.

Our real estate brokerage business must comply with the requirements governing the licensing and conduct of real estate brokerage and brokerage-related businesses in the jurisdictions in which we do business. These laws and regulations contain general standards for and prohibitions on the conduct of real estate brokers and sales associates, including those relating to licensing of brokers and sales associates, fiduciary and agency duties,

36

Table of Contents

administration of trust funds, collection of commissions, advertising and consumer disclosures. Under state law, our real estate brokers have the duty to supervise and are responsible for the conduct of their brokerage business.

Several of the litigation matters we are involved with allege claims based upon breaches of fiduciary duties by our licensed brokers, violations of state laws relating to business practices or consumer disclosures and with respect to compliance with wage and hour regulations. We cannot predict with certainty the cost of defense or the ultimate outcome of these or other litigation matters filed by or against us, including remedies or awards, and adverse results in any such litigation may harm our business and financial condition.

Our company owned real estate brokerage business, our relocation business, our title and settlement service business and the businesses of our franchisees (excluding commercial brokerage transactions) must comply with RESPA. RESPA and comparable state statutes, among other things, restrict payments which real estate brokers, agents and other settlement service providers may receive for the referral of business to other settlement service providers in connection with the closing of real estate transactions. Such laws may to some extent restrict preferred vendor arrangements involving our franchisees and our company owned brokerage business. RESPA and similar state laws also require timely disclosure of certain relationships or financial interests that a broker has with providers of real estate settlement services.

Our title insurance business also is subject to regulation by insurance and other regulatory authorities in each state in which we provide title insurance. State regulations may impede or impose burdensome conditions on our ability to take actions that we may want to take to enhance our operating results.

There is a risk that we could be adversely affected by current laws, regulations or interpretations or that more restrictive laws, regulations or interpretations will be adopted in the future that could make compliance more difficult or expensive. There is also a risk that a change in current laws could adversely affect our business. For example, the “Bush tax cuts,” which have reduced ordinary income and capital gains rates on federal taxes, were recently extended until the end of 2012, after which these tax cuts are due to expire. There can be no assurance that these tax cuts will be extended or if extended, the extension may apply only to a portion of the tax cuts and/or the extension could be limited in duration. Other potential federal tax legislation includes the elimination or narrowing of mortgage tax deductions. Higher federal income tax rates or further limits on mortgage tax deductions could negatively impact the purchase and sale of residential homes. We cannot assure you that future legislative or regulatory changes will not adversely affect our business operations.

In April 2007, the FTC and Justice Department issued a report on competition in the real estate brokerage industry and concluded that while the industry had undergone substantial changes in prior years, particularly with the increasing use of the Internet, competition has been hindered as a result of actions taken by some real estate brokers, acting through multiple listing services and NAR, state legislatures, and real estate commissions, and recommend, among other things, that the agencies should continue to monitor the cooperative conduct of private associations of real estate brokers, and bring enforcement actions in appropriate circumstances.

In addition, regulatory authorities have relatively broad discretion to grant, renew and revoke licenses and approvals and to implement regulations. Accordingly, such regulatory authorities could prevent or temporarily suspend us from carrying on some or all of our activities or otherwise penalize us if our financial condition or our practices were found not to comply with the then current regulatory or licensing requirements or any interpretation of such requirements by the regulatory authority. Our failure to comply with any of these requirements or interpretations could limit our ability to renew current franchisees or sign new franchisees or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our operations.

We are also, to a lesser extent, subject to various other rules and regulations such as:

37

Table of Contents

Our failure to comply with any of the foregoing laws and regulations may subject us to fines, penalties, injunctions and/or potential criminal violations. Any changes to these laws or regulations or any new laws or regulations may make it more difficult for us to operate our business and may have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Seasonal fluctuations in the residential real estate brokerage and relocation businesses could adversely affect our business.

The residential real estate brokerage business is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, real estate brokerage revenues and relocation revenues have been strongest in the second and third quarters of the calendar year (although, due to the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit, the third quarter of this year was adversely affected by the acceleration of activity into the first half of this fiscal year). However, many of our expenses, such as rent and personnel, are fixed and cannot be reduced during a seasonal slowdown. As a result, we may be required to borrow in order to fund operations during seasonal slowdowns or at other times. Since the terms of our indebtedness may restrict our ability to incur additional debt, we cannot assure you that we would be able to borrow sufficient amounts. Our inability to finance our funding needs during a seasonal slowdown or at other times would have a material adverse effect on us.

Changes in accounting standards, subjective assumptions and estimates used by management related to complex accounting matters could have an adverse effect on results of operations.

Generally accepted accounting principles in the United States and related accounting pronouncements, implementation guidance and interpretations with regard to a wide range of matters, such as stock-based compensation, asset impairments, valuation reserves, income taxes and fair value accounting, are highly complex and involve many subjective assumptions, estimates and judgments made by management. Changes in these rules or their interpretations or changes in underlying assumptions, estimates or judgments to be made by management could significantly change our reported results.

We may not have the ability to complete future acquisitions; we may not be successful in developing the Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate brand.

We have pursued an active acquisition strategy as a means of strengthening our businesses and have sought to integrate acquisitions into our operations to achieve economies of scale. Our company owned brokerage

38

Table of Contents

business has completed over 350 acquisitions since its formation in 1997 and, in 2004, we acquired the Sotheby’s International Realty ^® residential brokerage business and entered into an exclusive license agreement for the rights to the Sotheby’s International Realty ^® trademarks with which we are in the process of building the Sotheby’s International Realty ^® franchise system. In January 2006, we acquired our title insurance underwriter and certain title agencies. As a result of these and other acquisitions, we have derived a substantial portion of our growth in revenues and net income from acquired businesses. The success of our future acquisition strategy will continue to depend upon our ability to find suitable acquisition candidates on favorable terms and to finance and complete these transactions.

In October 2007, we entered into a long-term agreement to license the Better Homes and Gardens ^® Real Estate brand from Meredith. We seek to build a new international residential real estate franchise company using the Better Homes and Gardens ^® Real Estate brand name. The licensing agreement between us and Meredith became operational on July 1, 2008 and is for a 50-year term, with a renewal term for another 50 years at our option. We may not be able to successfully develop the brand in a timely manner or at all. Our inability to complete acquisitions or to successfully develop the Better Homes and Gardens ^® Real Estate brand would have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy.

We may not realize anticipated benefits from future acquisitions.

Integrating acquired companies involves complex operational and personnel-related challenges. Future acquisitions may present similar challenges and difficulties, including:

A prolonged diversion of management’s attention and any delays or difficulties encountered in connection with the integration of any business that we have acquired or may acquire in the future could prevent us from realizing the anticipated cost savings and revenue growth from our acquisitions.

We may be unable to maintain anticipated cost savings and other benefits from our restructuring activities.

We are committed to various restructuring initiatives targeted at reducing costs and enhancing organizational effectiveness while consolidating existing processes and facilities. We may not be able to achieve or maintain the anticipated cost savings and other benefits from these restructuring initiatives that are described elsewhere in this Annual Report. If our cost savings or the benefits are less than our estimates or take longer to implement than we project, the savings or other benefits we projected may not be fully realized.

Our financial results are affected by the operating results of franchisees.

Our real estate franchise services segment receives revenue in the form of royalties, which are based on a percentage of gross commission income earned by our franchisees. Accordingly, the financial results of our real estate franchise services segment are dependent upon the operational and financial success of our franchisees. If industry trends or economic conditions worsen for franchisees, their financial results may worsen and our royalty

39

Table of Contents

revenues may decline. In addition, we may have to increase our bad debt and note reserves. We may also have to terminate franchisees more frequently due to non-reporting and non-payment. Further, if franchisees fail to renew their franchise agreements, or if we decide to restructure franchise agreements in order to induce franchisees to renew these agreements, then our royalty revenues may decrease.

Our franchisees and independent sales associates could take actions that could harm our business.

Our franchisees are independent business operators and the sales associates that work with our company owned brokerage operations are independent contractors, and, as such, neither are our employees, and we do not exercise control over their day-to-day operations. Our franchisees may not successfully operate a real estate brokerage business in a manner consistent with our standards, or may not hire and train qualified independent sales associates or employees. If our franchisees and independent sales associates were to provide diminished quality of service to customers, our image and reputation may suffer materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

Additionally, franchisees and independent sales associates may engage or be accused of engaging in unlawful or tortious acts such as, for example, violating the anti-discrimination requirements of the Fair Housing Act. Such acts or the accusation of such acts could harm our and our brands’ image, reputation and goodwill.

Franchisees, as independent business operators, may from time to time disagree with us and our strategies regarding the business or our interpretation of our respective rights and obligations under the franchise agreement. This may lead to disputes with our franchisees and we expect such disputes to occur from time to time in the future as we continue to offer franchises. To the extent we have such disputes, the attention of our management and our franchisees will be diverted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Our relocation business is subject to risks related to acquiring, carrying and reselling real estate.

On January 21, 2010, Cartus acquired a global relocation service provider, Primacy, which is a supplier of relocation services to corporate clients as well as certain U.S. government agencies under “at risk” contracts. At December 31, 2010, Primacy was merged into Cartus. Under “at risk” contracts, our relocation business enters into homesale transactions whereby we acquire the homes being sold by relocating employees and bear the risk of all expenses associated with acquiring, carrying and selling the homes, including potential loss on sale. In “at risk” homesale transactions where the ultimate third party buyer is not under contract at the time we become the owner of the home, we are subject to the market risk that the home we purchase will lose value while we are carrying it as well as the risk that our carrying costs will increase, both of which would increase the costs that we may incur on the home. A significant increase in the number of “at risk” home sale transactions could have a material adverse effect on our relocation business if housing prices continue to fall and we are unable to sell our at-risk homes in a timely manner or at favorable prices.

Clients of our relocation business may terminate their contracts at any time.

Substantially all of our contracts with our relocation clients are terminable at any time at the option of the client. If a client terminates its contract, we will only be compensated for all services performed up to the time of termination and reimbursed for all expenses incurred up to the time of termination. If a significant number of our relocation clients terminate their contracts with us, our results of operations would be materially adversely affected.

Our marketing arrangement with PHH Home Loans may limit our ability to work with other key lenders to grow our business.

Under our Strategic Relationship Agreement relating to PHH Home Loans, we are required to recommend PHH Home Loans as originator of mortgage loans to the independent sales associates, customers and employees of our company owned and operated brokerage offices. This provision may limit our ability to enter into beneficial business relationships with other lenders and mortgage brokers.

40

Table of Contents

We do not control our joint venture PHH Home Loans and management of that venture may make decisions that are contrary to our best interests.

Under our Operating Agreement with PHH relating to PHH Home Loans, we own a 49.9% equity interest but do not have control of the operations of the venture. Rather, our joint venture partner, PHH, is the managing partner of the venture and may make decisions with respect to the operation of the venture, which may be contrary to our best interests and may adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, our joint venture may be materially adversely impacted by changes affecting the mortgage industry, including but not limited to regulatory changes, increases in mortgage interest rates and decreases in operating margins.

We may experience significant claims relating to our operations and losses resulting from fraud, defalcation or misconduct.

We issue title insurance policies which provide coverage for real property to mortgage lenders and buyers of real property. When acting as a title agent issuing a policy on behalf of an underwriter, our insurance risk is typically limited to the first $5,000 of claims on any one policy, though our insurance risk is not limited if we are negligent. The title underwriter which we acquired in January 2006 typically underwrites title insurance policies of up to $1.5 million. For policies in excess of $1.5 million, we typically obtain a reinsurance policy from a national underwriter to reinsure the excess amount. To date, our title underwriter has experienced claims losses that are significantly below the industry average; our claims experience could increase in the future, which could negatively impact the profitability of that business. We may also be subject to legal claims arising from the handling of escrow transactions and closings. Our subsidiary, NRT, carries errors and omissions insurance for errors made during the real estate settlement process of $15 million in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $1 million per occurrence. In addition, we carry an additional errors and omissions insurance policy for Realogy and its subsidiaries for errors made for real estate related services up to $35 million in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $2.5 million per occurrence. This policy also provides excess coverage to NRT creating an aggregate limit of $50 million, subject to the NRT deductible of $1 million per occurrence. The occurrence of a significant title or escrow claim in excess of our insurance coverage in any given period could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations during the period.

Fraud, defalcation and misconduct by employees are also risks inherent in our business. We carry insurance covering the loss or theft of funds of up to $30 million annually in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $1 million per occurrence. To the extent that any loss or theft of funds substantially exceeds our insurance coverage, our business could be materially adversely affected.

In addition, we rely on the collection and use of personally identifiable information from customers to conduct our business. We disclose our information collection and dissemination practices in a published privacy statement on our websites, which we may modify from time to time. We may be subject to legal claims, government action and damage to our reputation if we act or are perceived to be acting inconsistently with the terms of our privacy statement, customer expectations or the law. Further, we may be subject to claims to the extent individual employees or independent contractors breach or fail to adhere to company policies and practices and such actions jeopardize any personally identifiable information. In addition, concern among potential home buyers or sellers about our privacy practices could keep them from using our services or require us to incur significant expense to alter our business practices or educate them about how we use personally identifiable information.

We could be subject to severe losses if banks do not honor our escrow and trust deposits.

Our company owned brokerage business and our title and settlement services business act as escrow agents for numerous customers. As an escrow agent, we receive money from customers to hold until certain conditions are satisfied. Upon the satisfaction of those conditions, we release the money to the appropriate party. We deposit this money with various banks and while these deposits are not assets of the Company (and therefore excluded

41

Table of Contents

from our consolidated balance sheet), we remain contingently liable for the disposition of these deposits. The banks may hold a significant amount of these deposits in excess of the federal deposit insurance limit. If any of our depository banks were to become unable to honor our deposits, customers could seek to hold us responsible for these deposits and, if the customers prevailed in their claims, we could be subject to severe losses. These escrow and trust deposits totaled $190 million and $161 million at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.

Title insurance regulations limit the ability of our insurance underwriter to pay cash dividends to us.

Our title insurance underwriter is subject to regulations that limit its ability to pay dividends or make loans or advances to us, principally to protect policy holders. Generally, these regulations limit the total amount of dividends and distributions to a certain percentage of the insurance subsidiary’s surplus, or 100% of statutory operating income for the previous calendar year. These restrictions could limit our ability to receive dividends from our insurance underwriter , make acquisitions or otherwise grow our business.

We may be unable to continue to securitize certain of our relocation assets, which may adversely impact our liquidity.

At December 31, 2010, $331 million of securitization obligations were outstanding through special purpose entities monetizing certain assets of our relocation services business under two lending facilities. We have provided a performance guaranty which guarantees the obligations of our Cartus subsidiary and its subsidiaries, as originator and servicer under the Apple Ridge securitization program. The securitization markets have experienced significant disruptions which may have the effect of increasing our cost of funding or reducing our access to these markets in the future. If we are unable to continue to securitize these assets, we may be required to find additional sources of funding which may be on less favorable terms or may not be available at all.

The occurrence of any trigger events under our Apple Ridge securitization facility could cause us to lose funding under that facility and therefore restrict our ability to fund the operation of our U.S. relocation business.

The Apple Ridge securitization facility, which we use to advance funds on behalf of certain U.S. clients of our relocation business in order to facilitate the relocation of their employees, contains terms which if triggered may result in a termination or limitation of new or existing funding under the facility and/or may result in a requirement that all collections on the assets be used to pay down the amounts outstanding under such facility. Some of the terms which could affect the availability of funds under the securitization facility include restrictive covenants and trigger events, including performance triggers linked to the age and quality of the underlying assets, limits on net credit losses incurred, financial reporting requirements, restrictions on mergers and change of control, and cross defaults under our senior secured credit facility, the Unsecured Notes and other material indebtedness. Given the current economic conditions, there is an associated risk relating to compliance with the Apple Ridge securitization performance trigger relating to limits on “net credit losses” (the estimated losses incurred on securitization receivables that have been written off, net of recoveries of such receivables), as net credit losses may not exceed $750 thousand in any one month or $1.5 million in any trailing 12 month period. The Apple Ridge facility has trigger events based on change in control and cross-defaults to material indebtedness. The occurrence of a trigger event under the Apple Ridge securitization facility could restrict our ability to access new or existing funding under this facility and adversely affect the operation of our relocation business.

We are highly dependent on the availability of the asset-backed securities market to finance the operations of our relocation business, and disruptions in this market or any adverse change or delay in our ability to access the market could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

Reduced investor demand for asset-backed securities could result in our having to fund our relocation assets until investor demand improves, but our capacity to fund our relocation assets is not unlimited. If we confront a

42

Table of Contents

reduction in borrowing capacity under the Apple Ridge facility due to a reduced demand for asset-backed securities, it could require us to reduce the amount of relocation assets we fund and to find alternative sources of funding for working capital needs. Adverse market conditions could also result in increased costs and reduced margins earned in connection with securitization transactions.

If we need to increase the funding available under the Apple Ridge securitization facility, such funding may not be available to us or, if available, on terms acceptable to us. In addition, our Apple Ridge securitization facility matures in April 2012. We could encounter difficulties in renewing this facility and if this source of funding is not available to us for any reason, we could be required to borrow under our revolving credit facility or incur other indebtedness to finance our working capital needs or we could require our clients to fund the home purchases themselves, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our business and financial objectives.

Our international operations are subject to risks not generally experienced by our U.S. operations.

Our relocation services business operates worldwide, and to a lesser extent, our real estate franchise services segment has international operations. For the year ended December 31, 2010, revenues from these operations are approximately 2.5% of total revenues. Our international operations are subject to risks not generally experienced by our U.S. operations. The risks involved in our international operations that could result in losses against which we are not insured and therefore affect our profitability include:

We are subject to certain risks related to litigation filed by or against us, and adverse results may harm our business and financial condition.

We cannot predict with certainty the cost of defense, the cost of prosecution, insurance coverage or the ultimate outcome of litigation and other proceedings filed by or against us, including remedies or damage awards, and adverse results in such litigation and other proceedings may harm our business and financial condition. Such litigation and other proceedings may include, but are not limited to, actions relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements, franchising arrangements, actions against our title company alleging it knew or should have known that others were committing mortgage fraud, standard brokerage disputes

43

Table of Contents

like the failure to disclose hidden defects in the property such as mold, vicarious liability based upon conduct of individuals or entities outside of our control, including franchisees and independent sales associates, antitrust claims, general fraud claims, and employment law, including claims challenging the classification of our sales associates as independent contractors. In the case of intellectual property litigation and proceedings, adverse outcomes could include the cancellation, invalidation or other loss of material intellectual property rights used in our business and injunctions prohibiting our use of business processes or technology that is subject to third party patents or other third party intellectual property rights. In addition, we may be required to enter into licensing agreements (if available on acceptable terms or at all) and pay royalties.

In 2002, Frank K. Cooper Real Estate #1, Inc. filed a putative class action (the “Cooper Litigation”) against Cendant and Cendant’s subsidiary, Century 21 Real Estate Corporation (“Century 21”). The complaint alleges breach of certain provisions of the Real Estate Franchise Agreement entered into between Century 21 and the plaintiffs, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and breach of certain express and implied fiduciary duties. The complaint alleges, among other things, that Cendant diverted money and resources from Century 21 franchisees and allotted them to NRT owned brokerages and otherwise improperly charged expenses to advertising funds. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief, interest, attorney’s fees and costs. The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act provides for treble damages, attorney’s fees and costs as remedies for violation of the Act. On August 17, 2010, the court granted plaintiffs’ renewed motion to certify a class. The certified class includes Century 21 franchisees at any time between August 1, 1995 and April 17, 2002 whose franchise agreements contain New Jersey choice of law and venue provisions and who have not executed releases releasing the claim (unless the release was a provision of a franchise renewal agreement).

A case management order was entered on November 29, 2010 that includes, among other deadlines, a trial date of April 16, 2012. On December 20, 2010, the court held a status conference to address plaintiffs’ motion regarding notice to be issued to the class, the language of the notice, publication of the notice and how class members can opt out of the class. As directed by a court order, Century 21 has delivered to plaintiffs’ counsel and the court lists of the names and contact information for (1) franchisees that meet the class definition and (2) franchisees that would have met the class definition but for the fact that they signed a waiver of claims against Century 21. Pursuant to the court order, a notice of pendency of the action will be mailed to class members on March 4, 2011, and a summary of that notice will be published in various publications within 30 days of that mailing. Plaintiffs’ counsel has advised that it may file a motion requesting that notice be sent to all Century 21 franchisees during the class period, not solely those that meet the class definition. This case remains in its very early stages, with most of the effort in the past six months directed at class identification. Discovery on the merits is in its early stages. This class action involves substantial, complex litigation. Class action litigation is inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties. The resolution of the Cooper Litigation could result in substantial losses and we cannot assure you that such resolution will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

We are reliant upon information technology to operate our business and maintain our competitiveness, and any disruption or reduction in our information technology capabilities could harm our business.

Our business depends upon the use of sophisticated information technologies and systems, including technology and systems utilized for communications, records of transactions, procurement, call center operations and administrative systems. The operation of these technologies and systems is dependent upon third party technologies, systems and services, for which there are no assurances of continued or uninterrupted availability and support by the applicable third party vendors on commercially reasonable terms. We also cannot assure you that we will be able to continue to effectively operate and maintain our information technologies and systems. In addition, our information technologies and systems are expected to require refinements and enhancements on an ongoing basis, and we expect that advanced new technologies and systems will continue to be introduced. We may not be able to obtain such new technologies and systems, or to replace or introduce new technologies and

44

Table of Contents

systems as quickly as our competitors or in a cost-effective manner. Also, we may not achieve the benefits anticipated or required from any new technology or system, and we may not be able to devote financial resources to new technologies and systems in the future.

In addition, our information technologies and systems are vulnerable to damage or interruption from various causes, including (1) natural disasters, war and acts of terrorism, (2) power losses, computer systems failure, Internet and telecommunications or data network failures, operator error, losses and corruption of data, and similar events and (3) computer viruses, penetration by individuals seeking to disrupt operations or misappropriate information and other physical or electronic breaches of security. We maintain certain disaster recovery capabilities for critical functions in most of our businesses, including certain disaster recovery services from International Business Machines Corporation. However, these capabilities may not successfully prevent a disruption to or material adverse effect on our businesses or operations in the event of a disaster or other business interruption. Any extended interruption in our technologies or systems could significantly curtail our ability to conduct our business and generate revenue. Additionally, our business interruption insurance may be insufficient to compensate us for losses that may occur.

We do not own two of our brands and must manage cooperative relationships with both owners.

The Sotheby’s International Realty ^® and Better Homes and Gardens ^® real estate brands are owned by the companies that founded these brands. We are the exclusive party licensed to run brokerage services in residential real estate under those brands, whether through our franchisees or our company owned operations. Our future operations and performance with respect to these brands requires the continued cooperation from the owners of those brands. In particular, Sotheby’s has the right to approve the master franchisors of, and the material terms of our master franchise agreements governing our relationships with, our Sotheby’s franchisees located outside the U.S., which approval cannot be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If Sotheby’s unreasonably withholds or delays its approval for new international master franchisors, our relationship with them could be disrupted. Any significant disruption of the relationships with the owners of these brands could impede our franchising of those brands and have a material adverse effect on our operations and performance.

The weakening or unavailability of our intellectual property rights could adversely impact our business.

Our trademarks, trade names, domain names, trade dress and other intellectual property rights are fundamental to our brands and our franchising business. The steps we take to obtain, maintain and protect our intellectual property rights may not be adequate and, in particular, we may not own all necessary registrations for our intellectual property. Applications we have filed to register our intellectual property may not be approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities. Our intellectual property rights may not be successfully asserted in the future or may be invalidated, circumvented or challenged. We may be unable to prevent third parties from using our intellectual property rights without our authorization or independently developing technology that is similar to ours. Also third parties may own rights in similar trademarks. Any unauthorized use of our intellectual property by third parties could reduce any competitive advantage we have developed or otherwise harm our business and brands. If we had to litigate to protect these rights, any proceedings could be costly, and we may not prevail. Our intellectual property rights, including our trademarks, may fail to provide us with significant competitive advantages in the U.S. and in foreign jurisdictions that do not have or do not enforce strong intellectual property rights.

We cannot be certain that our intellectual property does not and will not infringe issued intellectual property rights of others. We may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of our business, including claims of alleged infringement of the patents, trademarks and other intellectual property rights of third parties. Any such claims, whether or not meritorious, could result in costly litigation. Depending on the success of these proceedings, we may be required to enter into licensing or consent agreements (if available on acceptable terms or at all), or to pay damages or cease using certain service marks or trademarks.

45

Table of Contents

We franchise our brands to franchisees. While we try to ensure that the quality of our brands is maintained by all of our franchisees, we cannot assure that these franchisees will not take actions that hurt the value of our intellectual property or our reputation.

Our license agreement with Sotheby’s for the use of the Sotheby’s International Realty ^® brand is terminable by Sotheby’s prior to the end of the license term if certain conditions occur, including but not limited to the following: (1) we attempt to assign any of our rights under the license agreement in any manner not permitted under the license agreement, (2) we become bankrupt or insolvent, (3) a court issues a non-appealable, final judgment that we have committed certain breaches of the license agreement and we fail to cure such breaches within 60 days of the issuance of such judgment, or (4) we discontinue the use of all of the trademarks licensed under the license agreement for a period of twelve consecutive months.

Our license agreement with Meredith for the use of the Better Homes and Gardens ^® real estate brand is terminable by Meredith prior to the end of the license term if certain conditions occur, including but not limited to the following: (i) we attempt to assign any of our rights under the license agreement in any manner not permitted under the license agreement, (ii) we become bankrupt or insolvent, or (iii) a trial court issues a final judgment that we are in material breach of the license agreement or any representation or warranty we made was false or materially misleading when made.

Our ability to use our NOLs and other tax attributes may be limited if we undergo an “ownership change.”

Our ability to utilize our net operating losses (“NOLs”) and other tax attributes could be limited if we undergo an “ownership change” within the meaning of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). An ownership change is generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point increase in equity ownership by five-percent stockholders in any three-year period.

Although we do not believe that we have undergone an ownership change within the last three years, it is possible that we will undergo an ownership change in the future and, as a result, our use of NOL carryforwards may be limited.

Risks relating to our separation from Cendant

We are responsible for certain of Cendant’s contingent and other corporate liabilities.

Under the Separation and Distribution Agreement dated July 27, 2006 (the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”) among Realogy, Cendant Corporation (“Cendant”), which changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc. (“Avis Budget”) in August 2006, Wyndham Worldwide Corporation (“Wyndham Worldwide”) and Travelport Inc. (“Travelport”), and other agreements, subject to certain exceptions contained in the Tax Sharing Agreement dated as of July 28, 2006, as amended, among Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport, Realogy and Wyndham Worldwide have each assumed and are generally responsible for 62.5% and 37.5%, respectively, of certain of Cendant’s contingent and other corporate liabilities not primarily related to the businesses of Travelport, Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide or Avis Budget Group. The due to former parent balance was $104 million at December 31, 2010 and represents Realogy’s accrual of its share of potential Cendant contingent and other corporate liabilities.

If any party responsible for Cendant contingent and other corporate liabilities were to default in its payment, when due, of any such assumed obligations related to any such contingent and other corporate liability, each non-defaulting party (including Cendant) would be required to pay an equal portion of the amounts in default. Accordingly, Realogy may, under certain circumstances, be obligated to pay amounts in excess of its share of the assumed obligations related to such contingent and other corporate liabilities, including associated costs and expenses.

Adverse outcomes from the unresolved Cendant liabilities for which Realogy has assumed partial liability under the Separation and Distribution Agreement could be material with respect to our earnings or cash flows in any given reporting period.

46

Table of Contents