avid hotels Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $11.1M – $16.8M
- Disclosed sales
- partial, no system average
- SBA charge-off
- 11.8%
- on 1,505 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
avid hotels is an IHG midscale, limited-service hotel franchise offering reliable, no-frills stays. Franchisees own and operate individual properties, running rooms and guest services on IHG's systems.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A avid hotels franchise requires a total initial investment of $11.1M – $16.8M, including a $50K franchise fee and an ongoing 5.0% royalty[2]. The 2026 FDD on file does not yield a unit-revenue figure we can publish. SBA 7(a) loans show a 11.8% charge-off rate across 1,505 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: low - issued within the last 12 months
Evidence: strong✓ Investment (Item 7)✓ Item 19 status✓ Units and owners (Item 20)✓ SBA loan coverage✓ Litigation (Item 3)✓ Financial statements (Item 21)✓ Franchisor identityhow this is scored4 of 5 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing; the rest are marked “Not cited” beside the figure.
Overview
- Investment
- $11.1M – $16.8M
- 44th pct Lodging
- Avg gross sales
- N/A
- Incl. company outletsProjection
- Royalty
- 5.0%
- 3rd pct Lodging
- Units
- 81
- 44th pct Lodging
- SBA charge-off
- 11.8%
- % of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category
Quick verdict · Lodging · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Lodging median · No shading = within ±10% · Red = unfavorable by >10% · Source: FDD filings + SBA 7(a)
Data from public FDD filings and SBA records. Not financial advice. Methodology
Bottom line
- COSTTotal investment $11.1M – $16.8M including a $50K franchise fee, 5.0% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSItem 19 reports operational metrics rather than annual gross sales, so unit revenue is not directly comparable.
- RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 56/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 11.8% across 1505 loans (above the 16% franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- GROWTHNegative, pipeline stalled: 106 agreements signed but not yet open against 81 open outlets (Item 20).
- LEGAL46 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of the 15 listed on this page, 13 name the franchisor itself, 2 its parent, affiliates or predecessor. Pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
- Parent company
- Six Continents Hotels, Inc. (SCH)
- FDD Item 1, page 6 of the 2026 FDD
- Ultimate parent
- InterContinental Hotels Group PLC
- FDD Item 1, page 6 of the 2026 FDD
- Predecessor
- Holiday Hospitality Franchising, Inc. (f/k/a Holiday Inns Franchising, Inc.)
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- Chief Executive Officer, InterContinental Hotels Group, PLC
- Elie W. Maalouf
- Incorporated in
- DE
- HQ
- Three Ravinia Drive, Suite 100, Atlanta, Georgia 30346
- Auditor
- PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $38.8M
- vs $39.4M prior year
- Management churn noted
- Frequent turnover
- Item 2 disclosed frequent executive changes
Affiliated brands
- Six Continents Limited
Other brands the franchisor or its parent operates (Item 1).
Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 6
8 other brands on this site name InterContinental Hotels Group PLC as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.
- Crowne PlazaB
- EVEN HotelsB
- Holiday InnB
- Hotel IndigoB
- InterContinental Hotels & ResortsB
- Kimpton® Hotels & RestaurantsB
- Ruby HotelsC
- Vignette CollectionC
Grouped by the owner's name as each filing prints it (this page: the 2026 FDD). Spelling variants of the same group may be listed apart; a brand is never grouped with an owner its filing does not name.
Overview
About
- CEO
- Elie W. Maalouf
- Headquarters
- GA
- Founded
- 1989
- FDD year
- 2026
- States available
- 27
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 57% above the typical lodging franchise.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown23 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application Fee | $50K | $50K | |
| PIP Feenot refundable | $0 | $10K | |
| Landnot refundable | — | — | |
| Building Constructionnot refundable | $9.4M | $14.0M | |
| Furniture, Fixtures & Equipmentnot refundable | $897K | $1.2M | |
| Operating Supplies & Equipmentnot refundable | $119K | $155K | |
| PMS Equipmentnot refundable | $22K | $31K | |
| Guest Internet Access (IHG Connect) - Hardwarenot refundable | $24K | $49K | |
| Guest Internet Access (IHG Connect) - Bandwidthnot refundable | $450 | $2K | |
| Entertainment, Security System and Other Technology Systems Equipment and Feesnot refundable | $129K | $158K | |
| Next-Gen Payment Solutionnot refundable | $223 | $794 | |
| Training Expensesnot refundable | $3K | $3K | |
| Opening Date Extension Feenot refundable | $0 | $5K | |
| Market Feasibility Studynot refundable | $0 | $30K | |
| License and Permitsnot refundable | — | — | |
| Professional Feesnot refundable | $282K | $698K | |
| Security Depositsnot refundable | $3K | $15K | |
| Insurancenot refundable | $46K | $197K | |
| Hotel Photographynot refundable | $4K | $5K | |
| Primary Identification Signnot refundable | $25K | $50K | |
| Total initial investment | $11.1M | $16.8M |
Line items extracted from FDD Item 7. Ranges reflect the franchisor's stated low and high per line. Total is the sum of line-item lows / highs — actual costs may fall outside this range depending on market and build-out scope.
Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate
The Vitals
- Total investment
- $11.1M – $16.8M
- Middle of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $100K – $175K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $50K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 5.0%
- typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 3.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 25.8%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 5.0% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 3.0% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $17 |
| Training fee | $3K |
| Transfer fee | $25K |
| Inventory (initial) | $119K – $155K |
| Total fee load | 25.8% of rev |
What do units actually make?
Source: FDD 2026 · Item 19
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
No Item 19 revenue figure for avid hotels is on file. The return models need a revenue figure to start from, and the operating costs that turn gross sales into a profit are in no FDD. Enter your own and the calculator runs on your assumptions — nothing here is modelled until you do.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one avid hotels unit return on the cash you put in?
Illustrative category typicals — not sourced to any filing, survey or sample. Replace them with figures from franchisee validation calls before you rely on the output.
Unlevered ROIC · per unit
Your modelled return on total invested capital, before any debt financing.
—
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for annual revenue, COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
These models are for research and scenario planning only. Not investment advice. Actual results depend on your specific location, management, and market conditions. Consult a franchise attorney and accountant before signing any franchise agreement.
Item 19 · Source: 2026 FDD
Financial Performance
Includes company-owned outlets
Not a revenue figure
- Item 19 type
- operational metrics
- Sample size
- 50
- vs category median 98
- Reporting year
- 2025
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2026
- Disclosed in the 2026 filing, covering 2025
Compared against 175 Lodging brands
Operator outlook
What the numbers say
Data-driven interpretation of this brand's financial disclosures, fee structure, and system trajectory.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 25.8% — above the Lodging median of 8.5%.
Disclosure
Item 19 reports operational metrics rather than annual gross sales, so unit revenue is not directly comparable.
Operator retention
System expanding at 28.6% CAGR over 3 years across 81 units — operators are staying and new ones are joining.
Multi-unit rate
Only 10% of franchisees own multiple units. Could indicate challenging economics or a young system where operators haven't had time to expand.
Source: FDD Item 19 financial performance representations and publicly filed FDD data. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Verify all figures with the franchisor and current franchisees before making any investment decision.
vs Lodging medians
How avid hotels Compares
Category median of published Lodging brands that report the figure; the middle half spans the 25th to 75th percentile and n counts the brands behind it. Medians are used because a few very large systems pull an average far from the typical brand. Revenue is disclosed gross sales, not profit.
Is the system healthy?
Source: FDD 2026 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 81
- Opened
- 10
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 0
- Terminated
- 0
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 0
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- N/A
- Company-owned
- 0
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 100%
- vs corporate-owned
- Multi-unit owners
- 10.0%
- Net growth (3-yr)
- +28.6%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- +28.6%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 0
- Not renewed
- 0
- Transferred
- 1
- Reacquired
- 0
- Franchisor bought back
- Signed, not yet open
- 106
- 1.31 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 8
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Transfer rate
- 1.2%
- Owners selling to other franchisees
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 29 states with active franchisees
The Territory Map
Derived from franchisee contact records. Shows states with at least one current operator. Not where the franchisor is registered to sell new units (that data is re-extracting in a future refresh).
States derived from franchisee contact records (FDD Item 20). Shows states with at least one current operator on file. Full state registration data (Item 12) will appear on a future FDD refresh.
Available to sell in · Item 12
- California
- Hawaii
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Maryland
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- New York
- North Dakota
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Virginia
- Washington
- Wisconsin
States where the franchisor is registered to sell new franchises (FDD registration filings).
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
76 current owners across 29 states.
- TX 13
- GA 7
- AL 5
- FL 4
- MI 4
- TN 4
- AR 3
- IA 3
- OK 3
- PA 3
- VA 3
- WI 3
- +17 more states
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20; 36 entries carry no state. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
Fast growth in a small system. Newer franchisors expanding quickly may not yet have the support infrastructure of larger systems.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 1,505
- Loan volume
- $3.3B
- Median loan
- $5.0M
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 11.8%
- on 1,505 loans · rates vary by category · see methodology
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- 88.2%
- 5-yr charge-off
- 0.0%
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 167
- Defaults
- 101
- Typical loan rate
- 7.1%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 6.3%
- brand above franchise avg ↑
- Jobs supported
- 118
- 0.4 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 14%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 83% went to startups / new businesses, 17% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in hotels (except casino hotels) and motels, franchised businesses charge off at 6.3% vs 9.2% for independents — franchising is associated with 32% lower SBA default risk in this category.
Top lenders financing avid hotels franchisees
Showing 3 of 167 lenders. The full breakdown — every lender, state distribution, interest rates & risk ratings — is in the SBA Lending Report below.
Explore lender portfolios on Bank Reports or regional data on State Reports.
Lender network · 7(a) + 504
SBA Lending Report
Full lending analysis for avid hotels from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 0.0%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 75%
- Avg interest rate
- 7.07%
- Lender concentration
- 14.3%
- Job velocity
- 0.4 per $100K
- NAICS benchmark
- 7.6%
- NAICS 721110
- Jobs supported
- 118
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 14% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hanmi Bank | 1 | $4.6M | 0.0% |
| 2 | American Commerce Bank, National Association | 1 | $3.9M | N/A |
| 3 | LGE Community CU | 1 | $600K | N/A |
| 4 | Synovus Bank | 1 | $5.0M | N/A |
| 5 | US Metro Bank | 1 | $5.0M | N/A |
| 6 | Plains State Bank | 1 | $5.0M | N/A |
| 7 | Celtic Bank Corporation | 1 | $5.0M | N/A |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| TXTexas | 3 | 0 | -- |
| GAGeorgia | 2 | 0 | -- |
| NYNew York | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
| SCSouth Carolina | 1 | 0 | -- |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Borrower profile
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
What could kill this investment?
SBA loans charge off at 11.8% — 26% below the 16.0% national norm, i.e. lower lender-observed risk.
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
Avid Hotels presents elevated risk due to undisclosed financial performance, extensive litigation, massive capital requirements, and absence of territorial protection—making ROI validation impossible before $11M+ investment.
Why this reads harsher than the B grade: the grade weighs financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency across the whole filing, while this summary lists individual flags without that weighting. The flags are worth checking with current owners; neither is investment advice.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
Holiday is defendant in class action suits (5 consolidated) and multiple individual licensee suits involving breach of contract, wrongful termination, and kickback allegations. Holiday is plaintiff in suits seeking liquidated damages from licensees who failed to pay fees or complete construction.
Largest disclosed settlement: $10,900,000
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Item 21 audited statements are for Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC (the franchisor), audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, years ended Dec 31, 2025/2024/2023. Figures are stated in whole US dollars (not thousands). FY2025 total revenues $38,788,364 comprise franchise royalty fees $37,179,522, franchise royalty fees from affiliate $57,662, and OLCC fees $1,551,180 (other_revenue). Balance sheet reconciles: total assets $1,011,118,965 = total liabilities $122,195,307 + member's equity $888,923,658. Net income $69,768,979 exceeds operating income because of $30.5M interest income from an affiliate line of credit. yr1=2025, yr2=2024.
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: Yes
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 56 / 100 verdict
- 01MEDMassive capital requirement ($11.1M–$16.8M) with no disclosed average revenue or net income to validate ROI
- 02HIGHExtensive litigation history including class actions, fee disputes, and data security breaches suggests systemic operational/compliance issues
- 03MINORNo protected territory in competitive midscale hotel segment increases cannibalization risk
- 04MINOR5% royalty on gross rooms revenue (not net) creates fixed burden regardless of profitability
- 05MINOR14.1% YoY unit growth is modest for a growing franchise and may indicate saturation or franchisee recruitment challenges
- 06HIGH20-year term is exceptionally long given litigation exposure and lack of financial transparency
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
Litigation case detail46 matters · Item 3
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Pending (8)
WGI Palm Springs LLC, Amarjit Shokeen, and Ramesh K. Shokeen v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC, Six Continents Hotels, Inc., and Does 1 through 25
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2026 · Central District of California (removed from Superior Court of the State of California, County of Riverside, Case No. CVRI2507185, filed Dec. 18, 2025) · Case No. 5:26-cv-01038
“alleging that a former Holiday salesperson made representations to them regarding the hotel’s performance and projections that were not contained in the Franchise Disclosure Document and made certain misrepresentations regarding the hotel’s property improvement plan, ramp up, and financial incentives.”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Holiday removed the case to federal court on March 5, 2026.”
BMK Realty LLC and Majid Koza v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2025 · Eastern District of Michigan (removed from State of Michigan, Oakland County Circuit Court, Case No. 2025-219022, filed November 18, 2025) · Case No. 2:25-cv-13975
“The Michigan Action alleges that Holiday induced plaintiff Majid Koza to sign the license agreement and guaranty as a placeholder/nominal party until he could create a separate legal entity, BMK Realty LLC. The Michigan Action asserts breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims.”Page 15 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On December 10, 2025, Holiday removed the Michigan Action to federal court and filed a motion to transfer, stay, or dismiss the Michigan Action, which is pending before the court.”
Holiday Hospitality Franchising LLC v. Aspen Grand Hotels LLC, Sikandar Malik, and Sara Malik
pendingBrought against a franchisee · filed 2025 · Northern District of Georgia · Case No. 1:25-cv-5379
“On September 19, 2025, Holiday filed a lawsuit against the defendants seeking liquidated damages and unpaid system fees owed under a Holiday Inn Express & Suites license agreement that Holiday terminated as a result of the licensee’s failure to pay amounts owed to Holiday under the agreement.”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Holiday believes the counterclaims to be meritless and is defending vigorously.”
Laurel Investment, LLC, Majid Koza, Kenny Koza, Lyon Koza, Carlo Koza and Derek Koza vs. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2025 · Eastern District of Michigan (removed from State of Michigan, Oakland County Circuit Court, Case No. 2025-212490-CZ, filed January 31, 2025) · Case No. 2:25-cv-10656
“alleging that Holiday’s marketing fails to differentiate between the Holiday Inn and Holiday Inn Express brands and services, that Holiday added three Holiday Inn Express branded hotels in the same market as plaintiffs’ hotel, and that Holiday’s obligations under the license agreement are illusory.”Page 15 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Plaintiffs appealed the court’s decision on January 26, 2026.”
Atlanta Hospitality Investment, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, and Mohammad Sarower Hossain, individually v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2023-10-31 · Georgia Court of Appeals · Appeal No. A26A0270
“The amended petition alleges that Holiday made certain misrepresentations to plaintiffs in advance of the execution of the license agreement but asserted no claim for damages. The amended petition seeks a declaratory judgment finding that Holiday’s license agreement is unconscionable and unenforceable, that the liquidated damages clause is an unenforceable penalty, and that the defendants are not”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Plaintiffs appealed the Court’s ruling on July 28. 2025, which is now fully briefed.”
TJM Columbus, LLC d/b/a Crowne Plaza-Columbus North and TJM Syracuse, LLC d/b/a Crowne Plaza Syracuse v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC and Six Continents Hotels, Inc. d/b/a InterContinental Hotels Group
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2022-05-23 · Georgia Court of Appeals · Appeal No. A26A0466
“Plaintiffs were Crowne Plaza licensees (for the Crowne Plaza Columbus North – Worthington and the Crowne Plaza Syracuse, respectively). Plaintiffs assert a breach of contract claim against Holiday and SCH related to a proposed sale of the subject hotels to a developer that intended to convert the subject hotels out of the Crowne Plaza system.”Page 17 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The plaintiffs appealed the Court’s decision on August 26, 2025, which is now fully briefed.”
Scion Hotels LLC vs. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2021-02-18 · United States District Court, New Jersey · Case No. 2:21-cv-02276-MCA-MAH
“Scion Hotels LLC (“Scion”), a New Jersey licensee of a Holiday Inn hotel, filed a civil complaint against Holiday to obtain damages for violation of the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act in allegedly wrongfully imposing unreasonable standards of performance upon Scion and then wrongfully refusing to renew its license agreement.”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The case is now proceeding in the trial court.”
Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC v. Niranjan Khatiwala, Nimesh D. Vesuwala and Mayur N. Khatiwala
pendingBrought against a franchisee · filed 2020-12-11 · State Court of Dekalb County, Georgia (transferred to Superior Court of DeKalb County, Civil Action No. 22CV4560) · Civil Action File No. 20A83898
“On December 11, 2020, Holiday filed a lawsuit against the defendants seeking liquidated damages and unpaid system fees owed under a Crowne Plaza license agreement that Holiday terminated as a result of the licensee’s failure to pay amounts owed to Holiday under the agreement.”Page 17 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The case is currently pending in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia under Civil Action No. 22CV4560.” (page 18)
Concluded (5)
Park 80 Hotels, LLC, PL Hotels, LLC, PH Lodging Tomball, LLC, 110 Sunport, LLC, and Synergy Hotels, LLC, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC and Six Continents Hotels, Inc. d/b/a InterContinental Hotels Group
settledBrought by a franchisee · filed 2025 · 11th Cir. (appeal from N.D. Ga. consolidated Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-04650-ELR) · Case No. 25-10068
“Each of the lawsuits allege that Holiday and SCH engaged in unlawful and otherwise improper franchise business practices, including, imposing unreasonable products, services and requirements and receiving improper kickbacks from required purchases.”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Plaintiffs then moved to voluntarily dismiss the appeal on May 16, 2025, after the parties settled the case with no money paid by Holiday or SCH.” (page 27)
Ahijit Vasani a/k/a Andy Vasani, Bhavna Vasani a/k/a Becky Vasani, Innvite Hospitality Group, LLC v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC and Six Continents Hotels, Inc. d/b/a Intercontinental Hotel Group
dismissedBrought by a franchisee · filed 2024-08-07 · Northern District of Georgia (refiled after the Lucas County, Ohio action) · Case No. 1:24-cv-03498-LMM
“Plaintiffs claim that, in connection with the sale process related to the Hotel, they were misled into believing the scope of work required by the change of ownership license agreement for the hotel would be lighter in scope and less expensive than what it turned out to be.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The court granted the motion to dismiss on March 20, 2025 and dismissed the case in its entirety.” (page 26)
Coquihalla Motor Inn Ltd. v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC
settledBrought by a franchisee · filed 2024-08-22 · Supreme Court of British Columbia · Court File No. VER-S-S-58661
“Coquihalla Motor Inn Ltd. v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC, Supreme Court of British Columbia, Court File No. VER-S-S-58661 (August 22, 2024). Defendant (a Holiday licensee) filed a Notice of Civil Claim seeking a declaration that no binding license agreement exists and costs.”Page 18 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The parties resolved the matter a confidential settlement. The parties filed a consent order of dismissal on October 31, 2024.”
Park 80 Hotels, LLC, PL Hotels, LLC, Mayur Patel, JSK Exton LLC, Jay Z. Kuber Hospitality, Inc., Parmattma Corporation and Synergy Hotels, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC and Six Continents Hotels, Inc. d/b/a InterContinental H
dismissedBrought by a franchisee · filed 2022 · N.D.Ga. · Case 1:22-cv-03709-LMM
“The putative class action lawsuit brought on behalf of putative classes of Holiday licensees related to an unauthorized access to certain of IHG’s systems by third party bad actors that resulted in a temporary disruption of certain services which plaintiffs alleged had a negative impact on their businesses.”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The Court granted the motion on July 31, 2024, dismissing the second amended complaint with prejudice and directing the clerk to close the case.”
Lenexa Hotel, LP v. Holiday Hospitality Franchising, Inc.
settledBrought by a franchisee · filed 2012 · United States District Court, District of Kansas, Kansas City Division, KS · Case No. 12CV2775; Case No. 15-9196
“A lawsuit was filed by a Crowne Plaza licensee in Lenexa, Kansas, initially on December 10, 2012, and later amended on January 17, 2013, alleging breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and seeking declaratory relief as result of Holiday’s alleged failure to meet its contractual obligations concerning the reservation system.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Following a mediation, the parties resolved this matter with no admission of liability by either party and Holiday making a payment to Plaintiff of $10.9M.”
Parent, affiliates and predecessor
Pending (1)
K.J. Harjani & Cia Ltda v. Six Continents Hotels, Inc.
pendingBrought by a franchisee · Six Continents Hotels, Inc. · filed 2006-07-05 · 3rd Civil Court of Manaus, Brazil · Case No. 0022145-55.2006.8.04.0001
“K.J. Harjani & Cia Ltda v. Six Continents Hotels, Inc., 3rd Civil Court of Manaus, Brazil, Case No. 0022145- 55.2006.8.04.0001 (July 5, 2006). The former licensee of the Holiday Inn hotel in Manaus, Brazil filed a lawsuit seeking damages for alleged wrongful termination of the license agreement. The license agreement was terminated due to non- compliance with brand standards in 2002.”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“SCH intends to defend against this claim vigorously.”
Concluded (1)
Hospitality Marketing Concepts, Inc. v. Six Continents Hotels, Inc. & InterContinental Hotels Group, PLC
settledThird-party plaintiff · Six Continents Hotels, Inc.; InterContinental Hotels Group, PLC · filed 2015-11-02 · United States District Court, Central District of California, Southern Division · Civil Action No. 8:15-cv-01791
“On June 12, 2015, Hospitality Marketing Concepts, Inc. (“HMC”) filed suit against “InterContinental Hotels Group” in California Superior Court. Following an amended complaint and voluntary dismissal, HMC filed a new action in California federal court on November 2, 2015 against Six Continents Hotels, Inc. and InterContinental Hotels Group, PLC alleging breach of oral contracts, fraud, fraudulent”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Following a partially successfully motion for summary judgment by SCH, the parties resolved this matter with SCH making a payment of $699,000 to HMC.” (page 25)
This list shows 15 of the 46 matters Item 3 discloses; the rest are in the filing.
Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 25.8% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 20 years |
|---|---|
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 0 |
| Territory type | No territory protection |
| Protected territory | No |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Restricted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Optional |
| Right of first refusalℹ | No |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 30 days |
| Mandatory arbitration | No |
| Arbitration location | N/A |
| Jury trial waiver | No |
| Governing law | GA |
| Litigation count | 46 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
Holiday is defendant in class action suits (5 consolidated) and multiple individual licensee suits involving breach of contract, wrongful termination, and kickback allegations. Holiday is plaintiff in suits seeking liquidated damages from licensees who failed to pay fees or complete construction.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 460 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 24 hrs
- Training location
- Your Hotel, Atlanta GA, or Virtual
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 24 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- Holiday
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- HotelKey Cloud PMS / OPERA Cloud
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: HotelKey Cloud PMS / OPERA Cloud
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
112 owners to call
Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20
Frequently asked questions
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does it cost to open a avid hotels franchise?
The total investment to open a avid hotels franchise ranges from $11.1M – $16.8M, with an initial franchise fee of $50K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do avid hotels franchise owners earn?
Item 19 of the avid hotels FDD discloses figures for part of the system but no single average across all outlets. These are gross sales figures, not profit; the Revenue section shows what the filing reports and on what basis. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Who owns avid hotels?
avid hotels is franchised by Holiday Hospitality Franchising, LLC. Its parent company is Six Continents Hotels, Inc. (SCH). The ultimate parent named in the FDD is InterContinental Hotels Group PLC. Source: FDD Item 1, 2026 filing.
What is Item 19 in the avid hotels FDD?
The FDD section where a franchisor may disclose financial performance of its outlets. Disclosure is optional and formats vary; figures are typically gross sales, which is revenue before expenses, not profit. FranchiseVerdict extracts these figures directly from the avid hotels FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is avid hotels's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, avid hotels has a charge-off rate of 11.8% across 1,505 loans, meaning 11.8% of franchise loans were charged off. Charge-off rates are one proxy for franchise risk, though they do not capture all closures. This data comes from FOIA-sourced SBA lending records.
How many avid hotels franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, avid hotels has 81 total units in the United States, including 81 franchised units and 0 company-owned units. 10 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is avid hotels a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates avid hotels as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 56 out of 100 (higher is better). The grade is a deterministic score built from six weighted dimensions — financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency — then calibrated against SBA loan charge-off rates and FDD age. Transparency is one of the six, so a filing that discloses less scores lower on that dimension than one that discloses more. Our rating is based solely on publicly available FDD and government data; we recommend speaking with current franchisees before making any investment decision. This is not investment advice.
Data sourced from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) FOIA records. Not financial advice.
For franchisors
Are you the franchisor?
If you represent avid hotels, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Lodging franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Lodging category
Data extracted from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) loan disclosures (FOIA). This information is provided for research purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Verify all figures with the franchisor's current Franchise Disclosure Document before making any investment decision.