Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict
ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham logo

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026

LodgingNJFranchising since 2024
BAbove averageAbove average60/100Editorial grade from public filings; not investment advice.
Investment
$11.6M – $17.4M
Disclosed sales
not disclosed
SBA charge-off
Not SBA-matched

Investment, fees, disclosed sales, units, SBA record and risk, as one PDF. Free; no spam; one click to unsubscribe.

FV-00828FDD 2026Data QualityExcellent86%
Manager-run OKYes: Protected territory

Data from FDD filing

Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham is an extended-stay hotel franchise offering value-priced suites with kitchens. Franchisees own and operate the properties, managing front desk, housekeeping, and revenue.

FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026

A ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham franchise requires a total initial investment of $11.6M – $17.4M, including a $40K franchise fee and an ongoing 5.5% royalty[2]. This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →

Limited operating history: franchising since 2024. A system this young has fewer than three years of Item 20 outlet history and rarely enough SBA loans for a charge-off rate, so its grade rests on less evidence than an established system's. Read its Item 20 tables and talk to its first franchisees before relying on the grade. Other new franchisors

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 scored3 of 5 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing; the rest are marked “Not cited” beside the figure.

Overview

Investment
$11.6M – $17.4M
45th pct Lodging
Avg gross sales
N/A
Royalty
5.5%
39th pct Lodging
Units
18
27th pct Lodging
SBA charge-off
N/A

Quick verdict · Lodging · color = vs category peers

Total Investment
$11.6M – $17.4M
Median $8.9M
above median ↑, worse than category
Franchise Fee
$40K – $40K
Median $50K
below median ↓, better than category
Liquid Capital Req'd
$63K – $94K
Median $312K
below median ↓, better than category
Avg Revenue
Not disclosed
Franchisor makes none
Royalty Rate
5.5%
Median 5.0%
near median
Ongoing Fees
8.5% of rev
Median 8.5%
near median
SBA Charge-Off Rate
Not SBA-matched
Not matched to SBA 7(a) loans
System Size
18 units
Median 60 units
below median ↓, worse than category
Turnover Rate
N/A
Median 0.7%
below median ↓, better than category
Territory
Protected, not exclusive
Limits on the franchisor opening nearby; not an exclusive zone
Owner-Operator
Optional
Can hire a manager
Litigation
13 cases
Review carefully

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 $11.6M – $17.4M including a $40K franchise fee, 5.5% ongoing royalty.
  • RETURNSThis franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.
  • RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 60/100 (higher is better).
  • GROWTHNegative, pipeline stalled: 47 agreements signed but not yet open against 18 open outlets (Item 20).
  • LEGAL13 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of these, 0 name the franchisor itself, 13 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
WHR Extended Stay, LLC
Parent company
Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC
FDD Item 1, page 9 of the 2026 FDD
Ultimate parent
Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
FDD Item 1, page 9 of the 2026 FDD
CEO title
President and Chief Executive Officer
Geoff Ballotti
Incorporated in
DE
HQ
22 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054
Auditor
Deloitte & Touche LLP
Audited financials
Franchisor revenue
$1.4B
vs $1.4B prior year

Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 9

16 other brands on this site name Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.

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
Geoff Ballotti
Headquarters
NJ
Founded
2007
FDD year
2026
States available
11

Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?

Entry cost runs 63% above the typical lodging franchise.

Total investment (Item 7)$11.6M – $17.4MCited, not corroborated — printed on page 39 of the 2026 FDD (Item 7). Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
Franchise fee$40,000Not cited — published from our reading of the franchisor's disclosure document; the page it is printed on has not been located.
Royalty5.5%Cited, not corroborated — printed on page 28 of the 2026 FDD (Item 6). Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
Ad fund3.5%Not cited — published from our reading of the franchisor's disclosure document; the page it is printed on has not been located.
Working capital$63K – $94K

Source: FDD 2026 · Items 5–7

FDD Item 7 · 2026 filing

Initial investment breakdown

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham: Item 7 initial investment breakdown
Cost componentLowHigh
Initial franchise fee$40K$40K
Working capital (3–6 mo)$63K$94K
Equipment, build-out, other$11.5M$17.3M
Total initial investment$11.6M$17.4M

Source: ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham 2026 FDD, Items 5 and 7[2]. “Equipment, build-out, other” is computed as total minus disclosed line items above.

Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate

The Vitals

Total investment
$11.6M – $17.4M
Middle of category vs category
Liquid capital req'd
$63K – $94K
Top 40% of category vs category
Franchise fee
$40K – $40K
Top 40% of category vs category
Royalty
5.5%
typical 6–8%
Ad fund
3.5%
typical 3–5%
Total fee load
8.5%
vs 9–13% typical

Ongoing fees · Item 6

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham: Item 6 recurring fees
FeeAmount
Royalty5.5% of gross sales
Marketing / ad fund3.5% of gross sales
Technology fee$734
Training fee$5K
Transfer fee$35K
Renewal fee$35K
Inventory (initial)$463K – $525K
Total fee load8.5% of rev
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
Blue values = direct from FDD (Item 7 investment, Item 19 revenue, Item 6 fees)Not set = no filing supplies it and we will not substitute one. Enter your own

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. 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 ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham unit return on the cash you put in?

From FDDNot set — you supply itYou overrode an FDD value
Revenue · per unit, per yearnot set
Item 19 not disclosed. Enter your own revenue assumption
Franchisor take · royalty + ad fundFDD
typ 6–8%
typ 3–5%
Operating costs · not in any FDDnot set

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.

Total invested capital · what you put in to openFDD
FDD Item 7: $11.6M–$17.4M (midpoint used)
FDD reports $63K–$94K

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.


Store EBITDA · annual
—
EBITDA margin
—
Total invested
$14.6M
Payback
—
Single-unit only. A multi-unit portfolio gives up roughly 5–15% of this to shared services (corporate G&A) before reaching the ~10-unit break-even point.

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

No financial performance representation

This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.

Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.

Showing the headline figures — all 117 extracted fields are in the Full FDD Report · $19 →

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 8.5% (near the Lodging median).

Disclosure

This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.

Operator retention

Net unit growth of +260.0% over 3 years (13 opened, 0 closed).

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 ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham Compares

Metric
ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham
Category median
vs median
Investment
$14.5M
$8.9Mmiddle half $1.2M–$18.3M · n=96
Above median, worse than category
Revenue
N/A
$1.4Mmiddle half $1.0M–$1.8M · n=2
N/A
Unit Count
18
60middle half 6–245 · n=126
Below median, worse than category

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?

Total units18Verified — printed on page 74 of the 2026 FDD (Item 20), and the table's own arithmetic closes on it three ways.
3-yr growthOutlier (see FDD) (caution)

Source: FDD 2026 · Item 20

Unit growth

Item 20 · unit dynamics

The Growth Chart

Total units
18
Opened
13
Last reporting year
Closed
0
Turnover rate
N/A
Company-owned
0
Corporate units in the system
% franchised
100%
vs corporate-owned
Net growth (3-yr)
Outlier (see FDD)
Likely small-sample artifact

Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers

Signed, not yet open
47
2.61 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
Projected new
13
Franchisor's next-year forecast
2023
0
Franchised units
2024
5+5
Franchised units
2025
18+13
Franchised units

Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.

Item 12 · 11 states reported

The Territory Map

FDD Item 12 reports the state count, but the specific list isn't in our current data. The map will appear once we re-extract from the FDD or enough franchisee contacts are available.

11

states with franchisees (per FDD Item 12)

Growth insight

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.

No SBA loan data available for this brand.

What could kill this investment?

SBA charge-offNot SBA-matched
Verdict score60/100 (higher is better)
Litigation13 cases · none name the franchisor
Auditor going-concern doubtNo (favorable vs category)

Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21

Risk analysis

FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21

Risk & Legal

BAbove average60Verdict score 60/100

ECHO Suites presents extreme risk: going concern franchisor, explosive unstable growth, multi-count litigation including price-fixing and antitrust allegations, no profitability disclosure, and $11.6M+ capital requirement with unvalidated returns.

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.

Moderate confidence±13 pts
4773

Litigation (Item 3)

Subject: officers or affiliates. The franchisor is not a named party in these cases.

No pending or resolved litigation against the franchisor itself. Multiple pending class actions against parent WHR and affiliates involving hotel price-fixing allegations (IDeaS revenue management software), misleading fee allegations in Canada, and other matters. Several resolved cases settled or dismissed.

Largest disclosed settlement, in a case that does not name the franchisor: $7,000

Bankruptcy (Item 4)

None disclosed

Audited financials (Item 21)

Yes · Deloitte & Touche LLP

Franchisor revenue (Item 21)

Yr 1: $1408.0MYr 2: $1429.0M

Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)

Item 21 / Exhibit D contains the audited consolidated financial statements of the guarantor parent, Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and subsidiaries (balance sheets as of Dec 31, 2025 and 2024). The franchisor WHR Extended Stay, LLC does not provide its own statements. The actual statement pages (F-2 through F-9) and the named CPA firm did not appear in the extracted text (only the index page is present, listing the auditor as PCAOB ID No. 34); figures left null to avoid guessing.

ⓘ These are the parent company's consolidated financials (the parent guarantees the franchisor), not this brand's standalone results — the figure reflects the whole corporate group, not this brand alone.

Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16

  • Franchisor sells you products: Yes
  • Must buy proprietary products: Yes
  • Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
  • Can negotiate own supplier terms: No

Score breakdown · what drove the 60 / 100 verdict

  1. 01MINORExplosive unit growth (260% YoY) with only 18 units suggests instability, not health; growth from ~7 to 18 units is unsustainable trajectory indicator
  2. 02HIGHMultiple active class action litigations (price-fixing, misleading fees, privacy violations, antitrust) expose franchisees to brand reputation and potential liability
  3. 03MINORNo average revenue or net income disclosure (Item 19) prevents validation of $11.6M–$17.4M investment ROI claims
  4. 04MINORAntitrust class action (In Re Extended Stay Hotel) implicates entire franchisor business model and pricing practices
  5. 05HIGHLitigation where franchisor is plaintiff (LuxUrban breach of contract) suggests franchisor-franchisee relationship tension

Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification

Showing the headline figures — all 117 extracted fields are in the Full FDD Report · $19 →

Full litigation history from the FDD (Items 3 and 4) →

Litigation case detail13 matters · Item 3

Litigation cases

Parent, affiliates and predecessor

Pending (9)

  • Benoit v. Integrated Decision and Systems Inc. et al.

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. (ultimate parent) and Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Canada, Inc. (affiliate) · filed 2026 · Cour Superieure du Quebec · 200-06-000274-251

    “Benoit v. Integrated Decision and Systems Inc. et al. (Cour Supérieure du Québec, Case No. 200-06- 000274-251). In January 2026, Patrick Benoit filed a proposed class action against SAS Institute (Canada),”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Beard Real Estate Holding Two, LLC v. Travelodge Hotels, Inc. and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc.

    pending

    Brought by a franchisee · Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. (ultimate parent) and Travelodge Hotels, Inc. (Lodging Affiliate) · filed 2025-08-04 · Circuit Court of Chicot County, Arkansas, Civil Division · 09-cv-25-119

    “Case No. 09-cv-25-119). On August 4, 2025, Plaintiff filed suit against Travelodge Hotels, Inc. and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. (the “Wyndham Entities”) alleging breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Jantunen v. SAS Institute (Canada) Inc., et al.

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. (ultimate parent) and Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Canada, Inc. (affiliate) · filed 2025-12-05 · Supreme Court of British Columbia · VLC-S-S-259245

    “Jantunen v. SAS Institute (Canada) Inc., et al. (Supreme Court of British Columbia, Case No. VLC-S-S- 259245). On December 5, 2025, Evelyn Jantunen and John Jantunen sued SAS Institute (Canada),”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Proulx et al. v. Orsini Bros. Inns Inc. et al.

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. (ultimate parent, removed by the December 3, 2025 amendment), Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Canada, Inc. and Wyndham Hotel Group Canada, ULC (affiliates) · filed 2025-07-08 · Ontario Superior Court of Justice · CV-25-00000000-00CP

    “Proulx et al. v. Orsini Bros. Inns Inc. et al. (Ontario Superior Court of Justice, CV-25-00000000-00CP). On July 8, 2025, plaintiffs Patrick Proulx, Gordon Vanwestern, Boris Susac, and John Martin filed a proposed class action against Carmelo Niagara Company LTD.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Tumas Raju Patel and Kalpesh Solanki v. Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc., Wyndham Hotel Group, and Super 8 Worldwide, Inc.

    pending

    Brought by a franchisee · Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. (ultimate parent), Wyndham Hotel Group (direct parent) and Super 8 Worldwide, Inc. (Lodging Affiliate) · filed 2025-12-02 · United States District Court, Central District of California · CV25-03815

    “Case No. CV25- 03815). On December 2, 2025, Plaintiffs filed suit against Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc., Wyndham Hotel Group, and Super 8 Worldwide, Inc. (the “Wyndham Entities”) alleging that the Wyndham Entities (1) violated California law, including the Business and Professions Code and the California Franchise Relations Act”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Hanson Dai, et al. v. SAS Institute, Inc., et al.

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. · filed 2024-04-26 · United States District Court, Northern District of California · 4:24-cv-02537

    “Hanson Dai, et al. v. SAS Institute, Inc., et al. (United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. 4:24-cv-02537). On April 26, 2024, Plaintiffs Hanson Dai, Max Chiswick, Adolph Robles, Steven”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • In Re Extended Stay Hotel Antitrust Litigation

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. · filed 2024-07-24 · United States District Court, Northern District of California · 4:24-cv-09060-JSW

    “In Re Extended Stay Hotel Antitrust Litigation (United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. 4:24- cv-09060-JSW). On July 24, 2024, Plaintiffs Andy Au, Karen Austin, Mignon”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC, TMH Worldwide, LLC, Travelodge Hotels, Inc, and Baymont Franchise Systems, Inc. v. LuxUrban Hotels, Inc., LuxUrban RE Holdings LLC, CorpHousing RSL LLC, and Brian Ferdinand

    pending

    Brought against a franchisee · Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC (the franchisor's direct parent) with TMH Worldwide, LLC, Travelodge Hotels, Inc. and Baymont Franchise Systems, Inc. (Lodging Affiliates), as plaintiffs · filed 2024 · The Superior Court of New Jersey, Morris County · MRS-L-000977-24

    “Case No. MRS-L-000977-24). On May 16, 2024, as amended on November 14, 2024, Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC, TMH Worldwide, LLC, Travelodge Hotels, Inc., and Baymont Franchise Systems, Inc. filed suit against defendants for breach of contract seeking recurring fees, liquidated damages, outstanding balance of various development incentive notes, interest,”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
  • Norma Knuth v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.

    pending

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC (the franchisor's direct parent), Wyndham Worldwide Corporation (former parent) and the Lodging Affiliates Days Inns Worldwide, Ramada Worldwide, Super 8 Worldwide, Travelodge · filed 2014-12-05 · Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan, Judicial Centre of Regina · QBG-2650/2014

    “Norma Knuth v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al. (Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan, Judicial Centre of Regina, QBG-2650/2014). On December 5, 2014, Plaintiff Norma Knuth filed a class action suit as a representative of all”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (4)

  • Jay Brodsky v. Hilton Worldwide Inc., et al.

    settled

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotels (the filing names only 'Wyndham Hotels' among numerous hotel industry companies) · filed 2018-08-20 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:18-cv-13045-KM-JBC

    “Jay Brodsky v. Hilton Worldwide Inc., et al. (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case 2:18-cv-13045-KM-JBC). On August 20, 2018, plaintiff Jay Brodsky filed an individual lawsuit against numerous hotel industry companies”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome:“Defendants jointly settled for $7,000 payment ($1,400 as to Wyndham Hotels) to Mr. Brodsky on February 22, 2019, resulting in a dismissal of the action”

  • Thomas Luca, Jr. v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.

    settled

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC (the franchisor's direct parent), Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC and Wyndham Hotel Management, Inc. · filed 2016-06-06 · United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania · 2:16-cv-00746-MRH

    “Thomas Luca, Jr. v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al. (United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Case 2:16-cv-00746-MRH). On June 6, 2016, Plaintiff Thomas Luca, Jr. filed a class action lawsuit against defendants Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC,”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome:“Wyndham Hotel Group and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC entered into a settlement agreement with Plaintiff whereby a class was certified for settlement purposes and eligible class members will receive either $22 or 2,200 Wyndham Rewards points, and Wyndham will make certain display changes. The Court granted preliminary approval on October 18, 2019, and granted final approval on February 24, 2020.” (page 24)

  • FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.

    settled

    Government or regulatory action · Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC (the franchisor's direct parent), Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC and Wyndham Hotel Management, Inc. · filed 2012-06-26 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (filed in the District of Arizona) · 13-cv-1887 (ES)(JAD)

    “FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al. (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 13-cv-1887 (ES)(JAD)). On June 26, 2012, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome:“The parties settled the case by executing a Stipulated Order for Injunction, which does not hold the Wyndham Entities liable for any violations, nor require it to pay any monetary relief. The Court entered the Order and dismissed the case with prejudice on December 11, 2015.” (page 25)

  • Joyce Roberts, individually and on behalf of classes of similarly situated individuals v. Wyndham International, Inc., Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc., Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC & Does 1-10

    settled

    Third-party plaintiff · Wyndham International, Inc., Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc. and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC · filed 2012-07-17 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Cruz (removed to the United States District Court, Northern District of California) · RG 12639589

    “Joyce Roberts, individually and on behalf of classes of similarly situated individuals v. Wyndham International, Inc., Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc., Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC & Does 1- 10 (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Cruz (RG 12639589). On July 17, 2012, a purported class action complaint was filed against Wyndham International, Inc.,”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome:“The parties reached a settlement before the class certification motion hearing took place, which had been scheduled for September 1, 2015, and thereafter executed a settlement agreement. The Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered an order on the same, dismissing the lawsuit, on October 27, 2016.”

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 8.5% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.

Initial term20 yrs
Renewal termNot extracted
TerritoryProtected, not exclusive
Initial training75 hrs

Source: FDD 2026 · Items 11, 12, 17

FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal

Contract & Territory Detail

Initial term20 years
Allowed renewalsℹ0
Territory typeProtected territory
Protected territoryYes
Exclusive territoryℹNo
Online sales rightsRestricted
Franchisor can competeYes
Hire a manager?Allowed
Owner-operatorOptional
Right of first refusalℹNo
Transfer requires consentYes
Termination notice30 days
Curable defaultsℹ3
Mandatory arbitrationNo
Arbitration locationMorris County, New Jersey (non-binding mediation; venue is Morris County NJ / US District Court NJ)
Jury trial waiverNo
Governing lawNJ
Litigation count13
View Item 3 litigation summary

No pending or resolved litigation against the franchisor itself. Multiple pending class actions against parent WHR and affiliates involving hotel price-fixing allegations (IDeaS revenue management software), misleading fee allegations in Canada, and other matters. Several resolved cases settled or dismissed.

Items 10, 11

Training & Operations

Classroom training
34 hrs
On-the-job training
0 hrs
Training location
Corporate designated location (Parsippany, NJ or other central locations) or online (hybrid or virtual formats)
Ongoing training
Required
Site selection
Franchisee selects; franchisor approves
Franchisor financing
Offered
Item 10
POS system
OPERA Cloud Foundation (by Oracle)
Operating tech stack

Items 5 & 11

Franchisor Support

✓Site selection assistance
✓Grand opening support
✗Lease negotiation help

Technology: OPERA Cloud Foundation (by Oracle)

Item 20 · call current owners

Franchisee Contacts

16 owners to call

Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20

Unlock 16 contacts · $49
Free preview
(786) 252-••••
Unlock all 16 contacts
(214) 727-••••
(972) 818-••••
744)532••••
(804) 241-••••

Frequently asked questions

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does it cost to open a ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham franchise?

The total investment to open a ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham franchise ranges from $11.6M – $17.4M, with an initial franchise fee of $40K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).

What do ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham franchise owners earn?

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.

Who owns ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham?

ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham is franchised by WHR Extended Stay, LLC. Its parent company is Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC. The ultimate parent named in the FDD is Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.. Source: FDD Item 1, 2026 filing.

What is Item 19 in the ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham 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 ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.

What is ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham's franchise failure rate?

SBA 7(a) loan charge-off data is not available for ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham (fewer than 10 loans on file). Charge-off rates are one way to gauge franchise risk, but not all franchise loans go through the SBA program. We recommend reviewing turnover and closure data in the FDD and speaking with current franchisees.

How many ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham franchise locations are there?

As of their most recent FDD filing, ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham has 18 total units in the United States, including 18 franchised units and 0 company-owned units. 13 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.

Is ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham a good franchise to buy?

FranchiseVerdict rates ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 60 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 ECHO Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham, 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.