The Yellow Chilli Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $238K – $977K
- Disclosed sales
- not disclosed
- SBA charge-off
- Not SBA-matched
Data from FDD filing
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
The Yellow Chilli is an Indian restaurant franchise, from celebrity chef Sanjeev Kapoor, serving regional Indian cuisine. Franchisees run the restaurants, managing the kitchen, dining service, and staffing.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A The Yellow Chilli franchise requires a total initial investment of $238K – $977K, including a $75K franchise fee and an ongoing 6.0% 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: C (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: medium - issued 12 to 24 months ago; a newer filing is likely on file
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
- $238K – $977K
- 9th pct Service Resta…
- Avg gross sales
- N/A
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- 25th pct Service Resta…
- Units
- 5
- 8th pct Service Resta…
- SBA charge-off
- N/A
Quick verdict · Full-Service Restaurants · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Full-Service Restaurants 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 $238K – $977K including a $75K franchise fee, 6.0% 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 C (Average), verdict score 49/100 (higher is better).
- GROWTHFlat: no net change in franchised outlets in the latest year (0 opened, 0 closed) (Item 20).
- FLAGAuditor disclosed a going-concern note, which flagged doubt about the franchisor's ability to continue operations. Verify against the latest FDD.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- SK Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.
- CEO title
- Founder and Chairman
- Sanjeev Kapoor
- Founder active
- Yes
- Original founder still leading the business
- Incorporated in
- India
- HQ
- C-18 Dalia Estate, Near Fun Republic, Andheri Link Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai, India 400053
- Auditor
- Stalwart CPA Services LLC
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $320K
- vs $387K prior year
- ⚠ Going-concern note
- Disclosed in FDD 2025
- Auditor flagged doubt about continued operations. Verify against the latest FDD before deciding.
Overview
About
- CEO
- Sanjeev Kapoor
- FDD year
- 2025
- States available
- 3
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 10% below the typical full-service restaurants franchise.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7
FDD Item 7 · 2025 filing
Initial investment breakdown
| Cost component | Low | High |
|---|---|---|
| Initial franchise fee | $75K | $75K |
| Working capital (3–6 mo) | $75K | $100K |
| Equipment, build-out, other | $88K | $802K |
| Total initial investment | $238K | $977K |
Source: The Yellow Chilli 2025 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
- $238K – $977K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $75K – $100K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $75K – $75K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- Tiered by sales volume · typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 1.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 7.0%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 6.0% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 1.0% of gross sales |
| Training fee | $12K |
| Transfer fee | $38K |
| Renewal fee | $38K |
| Inventory (initial) | $5K – $20K |
| Total fee load | 7.0% of rev |
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
The Yellow Chilli 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 The Yellow Chilli 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: 2025 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.
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 7.0% (near the Full-Service Restaurants 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.
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 Full-Service Restaurants medians
How The Yellow Chilli Compares
Category median of published Full-Service Restaurants 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 2025 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 5
- Opened
- 0
- 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
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 0
- Not renewed
- 0
- Signed, not yet open
- 0
- 0.00 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 0
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Continuity rate
- 100.0%
- Units that stayed open
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 12 · 3 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.
3
states with franchisees (per FDD Item 12)
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
4 current owners across 2 states.
- CA 3
- GA 1
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
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?
The auditor flagged going-concern doubt (Item 21) — the single biggest risk here.
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
⚠ Grade capped at C: the auditor disclosed a going-concern note (FDD Item 21). The verdict score reflects the underlying financials before that cap.
Two litigation matters including a 2020 California DBO consent order for offering unregistered franchises ($15,000 penalty paid) plus a settled franchisee arbitration. No Item 19 disclosure and only 5 units with flat growth. No bankruptcy or going-concern, but the regulatory consent order plus missing earnings disclosure stack multiple concerns for a very small system.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
Mormukut Inn Pvt. Ltd. (Franchisee) v. S.K. Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (Franchisor): Three cases filed in 2015-2016 (Arbitration Case No. 400/2015 at District Court Agra; Arbitration Case No. 99/2015 at High Court Allahabad; Case No. 1101/2016 at Court of CJM Agra) alleging unfair acts in franchise offer/sale. Settled November 14, 2016 with franchise termination, withdrawal of all cases, and Rs. 1,00,00,000 payment to Franchisee. California Department of Business Oversight administrative action (Consent Order ID: 213620, May 7, 2020): Franchisor offered franchises in California via 'Letter of Intent' and 'Interim Franchise Agreement' documents (Feb 2016-Jan 2018) to three entities without proper franchise registration or FDD disclosure in violation of California Corporations Code sections 31110 and 31119. Resolved via Consent Order with $15,000 penalty and requirement to serve updated FDD and rescission offer to affected franchisees; all three declined rescission.
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · Stalwart CPA Services LLC⚠ Going-concern note flagged
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Item 21 states audited financial statements of SK Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (Indian private limited company, Mumbai) for FY ended March 31, 2025/2024/2023 are attached as Exhibit F. The exhibit's actual financial statement figures are not present in the extracted FDD text, so no balance-sheet or income figures could be captured.
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: No
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 49 / 100 verdict
- 01MINORCalifornia DBO consent order (2020), unregistered franchises
- 02MINORSettled franchisee arbitration (Rs.1 crore paid 2016)
- 03MINORNo Item 19 disclosure
- 04MINORSmall system: 5 units, flat growth
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 7.0% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 10 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 10 years |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 1 |
| Protected territory | No |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Restricted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Required |
| Non-compete (years)ℹ | 2 years |
| Non-compete (miles)ℹ | 20 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 30 days |
| Curable defaultsℹ | 2 |
| Mandatory arbitration | Yes |
| Arbitration location | Mumbai, India |
| Jury trial waiver | Yes |
| Governing law | Republic of India |
| Litigation count | 2 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
Mormukut Inn Pvt. Ltd. (Franchisee) v. S.K. Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (Franchisor): Three cases filed in 2015-2016 (Arbitration Case No. 400/2015 at District Court Agra; Arbitration Case No. 99/2015 at High Court Allahabad; Case No. 1101/2016 at Court of CJM Agra) alleging unfair acts in franchise offer/sale. Settled November 14, 2016 with franchise termination, withdrawal of all cases, and Rs. 1,00,00,000 payment to Franchisee. California Department of Business Oversight administrative action (Consent Order ID: 213620, May 7, 2020): Franchisor offered franchises in California via 'Letter of Intent' and 'Interim Franchise Agreement' documents (Feb 2016-Jan 2018) to three entities without proper franchise registration or FDD disclosure in violation of California Corporations Code sections 31110 and 31119. Resolved via Consent Order with $15,000 penalty and requirement to serve updated FDD and rescission offer to affected franchisees; all three declined rescission.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 24 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 96 hrs
- Training location
- At your restaurant and/or virtual
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Field support
- 96 hrs/yr
- On-site visits per year
- Site selection
- franchisor approval required within Site Selection Area
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- approved POS system
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: approved POS system
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
4 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 The Yellow Chilli franchise?
The total investment to open a The Yellow Chilli franchise ranges from $238K – $977K, with an initial franchise fee of $75K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do The Yellow Chilli franchise owners earn?
The Yellow Chilli 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 The Yellow Chilli?
The Yellow Chilli is franchised by SK Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.. Source: FDD Item 1, 2025 filing.
What is Item 19 in the The Yellow Chilli 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 The Yellow Chilli FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is The Yellow Chilli's franchise failure rate?
SBA 7(a) loan charge-off data is not available for The Yellow Chilli (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 The Yellow Chilli franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, The Yellow Chilli has 5 total units in the United States, including 5 franchised units and 0 company-owned units.
Is The Yellow Chilli a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates The Yellow Chilli as a C-grade franchise with a verdict score of 49 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 The Yellow Chilli, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Full-Service Restaurants franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Full-Service Restaurants 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.