Until the 1950s, when international hotel companies began expanding beyond their domestic markets, almost all hotels were operated directly by their owners. The separation of hotel ownership from hotel operations was relatively uncommon, and formal hotel contracts between property investors and hotel operators had not yet developed as a feature of the industry. Most hotels functioned as owner-operated businesses, with operational control, financial responsibility and branding all held within a single entity.
As the hospitality industry globalised, however, large hotel groups began seeking ways to expand internationally without committing significant capital to property ownership. This shift led to the development of specialised hotel contracts and operating agreements that allowed investors to retain ownership of the real estate while professional operators managed the business and applied internationally recognised hotel brands. These hotel contracts became the foundation of modern hotel development, enabling the separation of ownership and operations and supporting the rapid global growth of the hospitality sector.
Today, although many small and independent hotels around the world remain owner-operated, the majority of large internationally branded hotels operate under some form of contractual arrangement between the property owner and a hotel brand or management company. In North America, Europe, and, increasingly, emerging tourism markets, hotel contracts now form the foundation of most modern hotel developments. Despite ongoing disruptions in the hospitality industry due to technology, online distribution, and changing travel patterns, the use of professional hotel operating contracts continues to grow.
The Structure of Hotel Contracts
Hotel brand and operational management contracts have evolved significantly over the past several decades. As the hospitality industry has become more complex and more globally interconnected, hotel operators and property investors have developed a range of contractual structures that allocate responsibilities, financial risk, and operational control in different ways.
At its simplest level, a hotel contract defines the relationship between the owner of the hotel property and the organisation responsible for operating the hotel business. In some structures the operator provides both brand affiliation and operational management, while in others the owner retains operational responsibility and simply licenses a brand name and access to distribution systems.
In practical terms, the principal forms of hotel operating agreements used within the industry today include:
- Hotel Management Agreements (HMA) – operational management combined with brand affiliation
- Hotel Franchise/License Agreements (HFA/HLA) – brand franchise agreements
- Manchise Agreements – management agreements with a future conversion to franchise
- Referral or Affiliate Brand Memberships – marketing and distribution affiliation
- Soft Brand Affiliation – flexible brand integration with reduced standardisation
- White Label Operators – operational management without brand identity
- Lease Agreements – operator assumes business risk and operates the property
- Hybrid Lease Agreements – shared operational and financial risk structures
In emerging hotel markets, the most common structures are hotel management agreements and franchise agreements, in which the property owner retains ownership of the asset while a professional operator or brand supports the hotel’s commercial performance. By contrast, lease agreements are more common in mature European markets, particularly in countries such as Germany and the Scandinavian region, where institutional property investors prefer predictable rental income rather than operational exposure.
Hotel Contract Types
Hotel Management Agreement (HMA)
A Hotel Management Agreement (HMA) is a contractual service agreement between a hotel owner and a professional hotel management company under which the operator is appointed to manage and operate the hotel on the owner’s behalf.
Within this structure, the hotel operator is responsible for the day-to-day running of the property. This typically includes overseeing hotel staff, managing marketing and sales activities, implementing revenue management strategies and supervising guest services. The operator, therefore, controls the operational aspects of the hotel business.
The property owner, however, retains ownership of the real estate asset. The owner is normally responsible for financing the hotel development or acquisition, funding capital expenditure and maintaining the physical asset. In other words, the owner provides the property and capital investment while the operator provides hospitality expertise, operational systems and brand identity.
Hotel management agreements are typically long-term arrangements. Depending on the market, brand positioning, and the strategic relationship between the parties, agreements frequently extend for twenty or twenty-five years, and in the case of upper-upscale and luxury properties, sometimes longer.
→ Explore Hotel Management Agreement
Key Features of a Hotel Management Agreement
One of the defining characteristics of an HMA is the separation between the ownership of the hotel property and the management of the hotel business. The property owner retains ownership of the real estate asset and remains responsible for financing the development or acquisition of the hotel. The operator, however, manages the hotel’s daily operations on behalf of the owner. This structure allows investors to participate in the hospitality sector without needing to manage the operational complexity of running a hotel.
Management Fee Structure
Hotel operators are compensated through a management fee structure designed to align their incentives with the hotel’s financial performance. This typically consists of two main components:
- Base Management Fee – usually calculated as a percentage of total hotel revenue, commonly between two and four percent.
- Incentive Management Fee – calculated as a percentage of hotel profitability, often based on Gross Operating Profit (GOP) or Net Operating Income (NOI).
Additional fees also apply for marketing programmes, central reservation systems, loyalty programme participation and technology platforms.
Operational Responsibilities of the Operator
Under a hotel management agreement, the operator is responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the hotel. This generally includes recruiting and managing staff, implementing brand standards, overseeing guest services, managing marketing and sales activities and operating revenue management systems. The operator also typically integrates the hotel into the brand’s global reservation systems and loyalty programmes, giving the property access to international distribution networks.
Responsibilities of the Owner
While the operator manages the hotel business, the property owner remains responsible for the physical asset and its long-term investment value. The owner normally provides the hotel property, finances construction or acquisition, funds capital expenditure programmes and working capital, and ensures that the property complies with local regulations.
Performance Benchmarks
Many hotel management agreements include performance tests that require the operator to achieve certain operational benchmarks. These may be based on metrics such as Revenue per Available Room (RevPAR), occupancy rates or performance relative to a defined competitive set. If the operator consistently fails to meet these performance standards, the owner may have the right to terminate the agreement.
Duration of the Agreement
Hotel management agreements are typically long-term contracts. Depending on the brand, market, and the parties’ strategic relationship, agreements commonly extend for 20 to 25 years, and sometimes longer. The long duration reflects the time required for operators to establish brand presence and recover the investment made in marketing, operational systems and brand integration.
Advantages of a Hotel Management Agreement
Expertise & Systems: From the hotel owner’s perspective, the principal advantage of an HMA is access to a professional hotel operator’s expertise and systems. International hotel companies bring established operational procedures, global marketing infrastructure and recognised brand identities that can significantly improve a hotel’s commercial performance.
The operator’s global distribution systems, loyalty programmes and corporate sales relationships can generate substantial demand for the property. For many owners, particularly those entering the hospitality sector for the first time, partnering with an experienced operator can therefore reduce the operational complexity of running a hotel.
Core Focus: Another advantage is that the owner can focus primarily on the real estate investment and the property’s long-term asset value while leaving day-to-day hotel operations to specialists with industry expertise.
Asset Light Growth: For hotel operators, the HMA structure is an extremely attractive expansion model. It allows hotel companies to grow their brand presence across multiple markets without investing capital in property ownership. Revenue is generated through management fees, while strong operational performance increases incentive fee income.
Disadvantages of a Hotel Management Agreement
Despite these advantages, the HMA structure also has several potential drawbacks, particularly from the property owner’s perspective.
High Risk & Low Influence: One of the most significant issues is that the owner bears most of the financial risk of the hotel’s operations while having relatively limited influence over day-to-day management decisions. Because the operator controls staffing, pricing strategy, marketing activities and operational procedures, the owner’s direct control over the business may be limited.
Long-term Limited Flexibility: Another potential drawback is the long-term nature of hotel management agreements. These contracts are often legally complex and may include provisions that make early termination difficult or costly. Even if an operator underperforms, exiting the agreement can involve lengthy negotiations or significant financial penalties.
From the operator’s perspective, the primary disadvantages relate to performance pressure and operational accountability. HMAs frequently include performance tests tied to metrics such as RevPAR or occupancy rates. If these benchmarks are not achieved, the owner may gain the right to terminate the contract.
In addition, the operator’s incentive fee income depends on the hotel’s profitability, which may fluctuate with market conditions, economic cycles, or unexpected operational challenges.
Hotel Franchise / License Agreement (HFA / HLA)
A Hotel Franchise Agreement, sometimes referred to as a Hotel License Agreement, is a contractual arrangement between a hotel owner and a hotel brand that allows the owner to operate the hotel under the brand’s established name, systems and standards.
Under this structure, the brand owner (the franchisor) grants the property owner (the franchisee) the right to use the brand’s intellectual property. This normally includes the brand name, trademarks, marketing platforms, reservation systems and operational procedures associated with the hotel chain.
Unlike a hotel management agreement, however, the franchisor does not operate the hotel directly. Instead, the hotel owner retains responsibility for the day-to-day management of the property. The owner may either operate the hotel independently or appoint a third-party management company to run the property on their behalf.
This model is widely used throughout the hospitality industry, particularly in markets such as North America, where franchise structures dominate the hotel sector. The franchise model allows hotel brands to expand their global presence without directly managing each property, while owners benefit from the marketing power and distribution networks of an established brand.
In many cases, franchise agreements are particularly common in mid-scale and limited-service hotel segments, where operational complexity is lower, and property owners are more comfortable managing operations themselves.
Key Features of a Hotel Franchise / License Agreement
Although the exact terms of franchise agreements may vary by hotel brand and market, several fundamental characteristics are common across most franchise structures. The principal features of a hotel franchise or license agreement typically include the following.
Use of Brand and Intellectual Property
The core feature of a franchise agreement is the franchisor granting the hotel owner the right to use the brand’s name, trademarks and intellectual property. The property is marketed as part of the brand’s global portfolio and benefits from the brand’s reputation and market recognition. Through this affiliation, the hotel can access international distribution channels and benefit from the trust that travellers often associate with well-known hotel brands.
Operational Responsibility of the Owner
Under a franchise structure, the hotel owner retains responsibility for operating the hotel. Unlike a hotel management agreement, a franchise agreement does not require the franchisor to directly manage the property. The owner may either operate the hotel themselves through their own management team or appoint an independent third-party operator to manage the property. This gives the owner greater operational control compared with a management agreement.
Brand Support Systems
Although the franchisor does not operate the hotel, the brand typically provides a wide range of support systems to assist the property’s commercial performance. These may include access to global distribution systems, central reservation platforms, marketing campaigns, loyalty programmes and corporate sales relationships. The franchisor may also provide operational guidelines, staff training programmes and standardised procedures designed to maintain brand consistency.
Franchise Fee Structure
Franchise agreements normally involve several categories of fees payable by the hotel owner to the franchisor. These usually include an initial franchise fee, paid when the agreement is signed, and ongoing royalty fees, which are generally calculated as a percentage of the hotel’s gross revenue. Royalty fees commonly range between 4% and 8%, depending on the brand and market segment. Additional fees are also payable for marketing contributions, reservation systems and participation in loyalty programmes.
Brand Standards and Quality Control
To maintain consistency across the brand portfolio, franchise agreements require the property to comply with brand standards for design, service levels, and operational procedures. The franchisor may conduct periodic inspections or audits to ensure that the hotel continues to meet these standards. Failure to comply with brand requirements can result in penalties or, in extreme cases, termination of the franchise agreement.
Contract Term and Renewal
Franchise agreements are typically long-term contracts, often lasting between fifteen and twenty years. Many agreements also include renewal options, subject to the hotel continuing to meet brand standards and performance expectations.
Advantages of a Hotel Franchise / License Agreement
For hotel owners, the primary advantage of a franchise agreement is the ability to operate under a recognised global brand while retaining operational control of the property.
Brand affiliation can significantly improve a hotel’s visibility within the market and provide access to established reservation systems, loyalty programmes and marketing networks. These systems can generate demand for the hotel and reduce customer acquisition costs.
Operational flexibility: The owner retains responsibility for managing the hotel; they can make operational decisions that respond to local market conditions. Owners may also choose to appoint specialised third-party operators if they prefer not to manage the hotel themselves.
From a commercial perspective, partnering with an established brand can also reduce some of the risks of operating an independent hotel. Guests are often more willing to book a property affiliated with a recognised brand because they associate the brand with certain service standards and quality expectations.
Asset Light Growth: For hotel brands, the franchise model provides an efficient mechanism for global expansion. The brand can increase its market presence and generate recurring revenue through franchise fees without committing capital to property ownership or direct operational management.
Disadvantages of a Hotel Franchise / License Agreement
Despite its advantages, the franchise model also presents several potential drawbacks, particularly from the perspective of hotel owners.
Fees: One of the main disadvantages is the cost of franchise fees. Royalty payments, marketing contributions, and reservation system fees can represent significant ongoing expenses that reduce the hotel’s profitability.
Strict adherence to brand standards: These standards may limit the owner’s ability to customise the property’s design, service concept, or operational procedures. For some owners, particularly those seeking to create highly distinctive hotels, this level of standardisation can be restrictive.
Management expertise: Another consideration is that the owner retains full responsibility for operating the hotel. This requires operational expertise and management resources that some property investors may not possess internally. In such cases, the owner may need to appoint a third-party management company, which introduces additional costs and complexity.
Brand consistency: From the franchisor’s perspective, the primary risk lies in maintaining brand consistency across a portfolio of independently operated properties. Because the franchisor does not control day-to-day operations, poor management at one property can negatively affect the brand’s overall reputation.
Manchise Agreement
A Manchise Agreement is a hybrid hotel contract structure that combines elements of both a hotel management agreement and a franchise agreement. It is typically structured as a two-stage arrangement, beginning with a management phase and transitioning into a franchise model after a defined period.
Under this approach, the hotel is initially operated by the brand or operator under a traditional management agreement. During this phase, the operator assumes responsibility for all operational aspects of the hotel, including staffing, systems implementation, brand positioning and market entry strategy. The objective of this phase is to stabilise the hotel’s operations, establish brand standards and train the owner’s team.
After this initial period, the agreement transitions into a franchise structure. At this stage, operational responsibility shifts to the owner (or a third-party operator), while the hotel continues to operate under the brand’s name, systems and distribution platforms.
The manchise model is particularly common in new-build hotels, emerging markets and owner-driven markets, where investors require initial operational support but ultimately wish to retain long-term control of the asset.
Key Features of a Manchise Agreement
A manchise agreement is defined by its transitional structure and dual operational phases.
Two-Phase Contract Structure
The agreement is divided into two distinct stages: an initial management phase, followed by a franchise phase. The transition typically occurs after a fixed number of years, once the hotel has reached operational stability.
Management Phase (Stabilisation Period)
During the initial phase, the operator manages the hotel directly. This includes overseeing operations, implementing brand standards, recruiting and training staff, and positioning the hotel within the market. This phase is critical for ensuring that the hotel meets brand expectations from the outset.
Franchise Phase (Owner-Controlled Operations)
Following the transition, the hotel operates under a franchise model. The owner assumes operational responsibility while continuing to benefit from the brand’s systems, distribution channels and loyalty programmes.
Knowledge Transfer and Training
A key feature of the manchise model is the transfer of operational knowledge from the operator to the owner’s team. The management phase effectively serves as a training period, allowing the owner to build internal operational capability.
Fee Structure Evolution
During the management phase, the operator typically receives management fees similar to an HMA. After the transition, these are replaced by franchise fees, which are based primarily on revenue rather than profitability.
Market-Specific Application
Manchise agreements are often used in markets where owners prefer long-term operational control but recognise the need for professional expertise during the early years of operation, particularly in emerging hospitality markets.
Advantages of a Manchise Agreement
From the owner’s perspective, the principal advantage of a manchise agreement is the ability to benefit from professional hotel management during the most critical phase of a hotel’s lifecycle, while retaining the option to take operational control at a later stage.
Reduced operational risk: The initial management phase reduces operational risk during the opening and stabilisation period, ensuring that the hotel is positioned correctly in the market and aligned with brand standards. This can significantly improve early performance and reduce costly operational mistakes.
Reduced fees and control: Over time, the transition to a franchise model allows the owner to reduce long-term fees associated with full management agreements, thereby improving overall profitability while maintaining brand affiliation and access to global distribution systems.
Balanced expansion: For hotel brands, the manchise model provides a balanced approach to expansion. It allows the brand to ensure quality and consistency during the early years of operation, while ultimately reducing long-term operational involvement. This supports scalable growth while protecting brand integrity.
Disadvantages of a Manchise Agreement
Despite its flexibility, the manchise model introduces additional complexity compared to traditional hotel contracts.
Preparation for transition: From the owner’s perspective, the transition from management to franchising requires developing operational expertise. If the owner is not adequately prepared to assume operational control, the hotel’s quality and performance may decline after the transition.
Alignment of interests: There is also a risk that the operator’s interests during the management phase may not fully align with the owner’s long-term interests, particularly if the operator’s involvement is time-limited. During the latter phase of the management agreement, the operator may place greater emphasis on revenue growth, for example, by supporting occupancy through broader pricing strategies or participation in brand-led programmes, which may not always optimise short-term profitability.
Contractual complexity: From a contractual perspective, manchise agreements can be more complex to structure and negotiate, as they must clearly define the transition process, performance expectations and operational handover.
Post-transition quality: For operators, the primary risk lies in the post-transition period. Once operational control is transferred to the owner, maintaining brand standards becomes more challenging, increasing the risk of brand dilution.
Referral / Affiliate Brand Membership
A Referral or Affiliate Brand Membership is a form of hotel contract in which an independent hotel joins a brand network or distribution platform without fully adopting the brand’s identity, operational standards or management structure. Under this model, the hotel remains operationally independent but gains access to the brand’s marketing channels, reservation systems and customer base. The property is typically positioned as an affiliated or associated hotel rather than a fully branded property.
This type of arrangement is commonly used by boutique hotels and independent properties that wish to benefit from global visibility and distribution without sacrificing their identity or operational autonomy. Referral agreements are often positioned as a light-touch affiliation model, sitting below franchise and soft-brand structures in terms of integration and compliance requirements. Well-known examples of referral and affiliate networks include Preferred Hotels & Resorts, The Leading Hotels of the World, and Small Luxury Hotels of the World, all of which provide global distribution, marketing support and brand association without requiring full brand standardisation or operational control.
Key Features of a Referral / Affiliate Model
Referral agreements are characterised by minimal operational integration and a focus on marketing and distribution support.
Access to Distribution Systems
The hotel gains access to global distribution systems (GDS), reservation platforms and booking channels associated with the brand network. This increases visibility to international travellers and travel agents.
Marketing and Brand Association
The property benefits from inclusion in the brand’s marketing activities, promotional campaigns and, in some cases, loyalty programmes. However, branding is typically limited to an “affiliate” or “member of” designation rather than full brand integration.
Operational Independence
Unlike franchise or management agreements, the hotel retains full control over operations, staffing, service standards and guest experience. The brand does not impose strict operational requirements.
Limited Brand Standards
Referral models generally involve minimal compliance requirements compared to franchise or soft brand agreements. Hotels are not required to conform to rigid design or operational standards.
Fee Structure
The hotel typically pays a membership or referral fee, often structured as a percentage of room revenue or as a fixed annual fee. These fees are generally lower than franchise fees.
Target Market Positioning
This model is particularly suited to independent, boutique or luxury properties seeking enhanced distribution while maintaining a distinct identity.
Advantages of a Referral / Affiliate Model
The primary advantage of a referral agreement is the ability for independent hotels to access global distribution networks without relinquishing operational control or brand identity.
Unique identity & increased visibility: For many boutique and luxury properties, maintaining a unique identity is a key part of their market positioning. Referral models allow these hotels to benefit from increased visibility and booking channels while preserving their individuality.
Lower cost: The cost structure is also significantly lower than franchise or management agreements, making it an attractive option for owners seeking improved commercial performance without high fee burdens.
From a strategic perspective, referral affiliations can serve as a stepping stone toward deeper brand integration, allowing owners to test the benefits of brand association before committing to a franchise or management agreement.
Disadvantages of a Referral / Affiliate Model
The main limitation of referral agreements is the relatively limited level of support compared to more integrated hotel contracts.
Property-driven: Because the brand does not impose operational standards or provide direct management, the hotel must rely on its own capabilities to deliver guest experience and operational performance. This places greater responsibility on the owner.
Limited impact: In addition, the absence of strong brand integration may make the commercial impact less significant than under a franchise or management agreement. The hotel benefits from visibility, but not necessarily from full brand recognition.
Brand consistency: From the brand’s perspective, maintaining quality consistency across loosely affiliated properties can be challenging, potentially affecting overall brand perception.
Soft Brand
A Soft Brand is a hotel contract structure in which an independent hotel affiliates with a global hotel group’s distribution, marketing and loyalty platforms while maintaining its own identity, design and operational character. This model represents a middle ground between full franchise integration and referral affiliation. The hotel benefits from the commercial advantages of a global brand while retaining a high degree of independence in design, concept, and guest experience.
Leading examples of soft-brand collections include Marriott International’s Autograph Collection and Tribute Portfolio, Hilton’s Curio Collection and Tapestry Collection, IHG’s Vignette Collection, Hyatt’s Unbound Collection, and Accor’s MGallery, all of which allow properties to retain their individuality while leveraging global systems and brand reach. Soft brands are particularly common in the boutique, lifestyle and luxury segments, where individuality and local character are key components of the guest experience.
Key Features of a Soft Brand
Soft brand agreements combine brand support with operational flexibility.
Retention of Hotel Identity
The hotel maintains its own name, design, architecture and service philosophy. Unlike traditional franchise models, the property is not required to adopt a standardised brand format.
Access to Global Distribution and Systems
The hotel gains access to the parent brand’s reservation systems, distribution platforms and online presence, improving visibility and booking performance.
Loyalty Programme Participation
Soft brand properties are typically integrated into the brand’s global loyalty programmes, providing access to repeat guests and corporate demand.
Marketing and Sales Support
Hotels benefit from inclusion in global marketing campaigns, sales initiatives and corporate account networks, enhancing their commercial reach.
Operational Flexibility
Soft brand agreements allow greater flexibility in operations compared to franchise models. While certain quality standards must be met, hotels are not required to adhere to rigid brand standards.
Moderate Fee Structure
Fees are generally lower than full franchise agreements, reflecting the reduced level of standardisation and oversight.
Advantages of a Soft Brand
For hotel owners, the key advantage of a soft brand is the ability to combine independence with global reach.
Unique identity: Owners can preserve their property’s unique identity and positioning while benefiting from the commercial strength of a global hotel group. This is particularly valuable for boutique and lifestyle hotels that rely on differentiation.
Distribution systems: Soft brands also provide access to powerful distribution systems and loyalty programmes, which can significantly increase demand and improve occupancy levels.
Flexibility: Compared to traditional franchise agreements, soft brands are often more flexible and cost-effective, making them an attractive option for owners seeking brand affiliation without full standardisation.
Disadvantages of a Soft Brand
Despite their flexibility, soft brand agreements still involve a degree of brand alignment and compliance, which may limit complete operational freedom.
Costs & standards: Owners must meet specific quality expectations and adhere to brand systems, which can introduce additional costs and operational requirements.
Brand recognition: In addition, while soft brands provide strong distribution benefits, they may not offer the same level of brand recognition as fully standardised “hard brands,” particularly in more price-sensitive segments.
Brand consistency: From the operator’s perspective, maintaining brand consistency across highly individual properties can be challenging, as each hotel operates with a distinct identity and operational approach.
White Label Operator
A White Label Operator is an independent hotel management company that operates a hotel on behalf of the owner without applying its own brand identity to the property. Under this structure, the operator provides full operational management services while remaining commercially invisible to the guest.
The hotel may operate under a third-party franchise brand, a soft brand, or as a completely independent property. The white-label operator sits behind the scenes, delivering operational expertise, systems, and management capabilities without influencing the hotel’s outward brand positioning.
This structure has become increasingly common as hotel ownership has become more institutionalised. Many owners seek professional operational expertise while retaining flexibility over branding decisions, allowing them to align the property with the most appropriate brand or positioning strategy. Well-known global white-label operators include Aimbridge Hospitality, Highgate, and Valor Hospitality Partners, all of which manage hotels across multiple brands and independent platforms without promoting their own consumer-facing identity.
White label operators are particularly prevalent in independent hotels, franchised hotels and asset-managed portfolios, where ownership groups require operational capability without committing to a single branded operator.
Key Features of a White Label Operator
White-label operating structures are defined by operational expertise combined with branding flexibility.
Independent Management Structure
The operator manages the hotel but does not attach its own brand name to the property. The hotel’s identity remains entirely separate from the management company.
Full Operational Responsibility
The operator is responsible for all day-to-day hotel operations, including staffing, guest services, marketing execution and revenue management. In practice, this mirrors a traditional hotel management agreement, but without brand affiliation.
Flexible Branding Options
The owner retains control over branding decisions. The hotel may operate under a franchise, a soft brand, or as a fully independent property, with the white-label operator adapting to the chosen structure.
Management Fee Structure
White label operators typically charge a base management fee calculated as a percentage of revenue, often combined with an incentive component linked to profitability, similar to an HMA.
Owner Strategic Control
Unlike traditional branded management agreements, the owner generally retains greater influence over strategic decisions, including brand selection, positioning and capital planning.
Advantages of a White Label Operator
For hotel owners, the primary advantage of a white-label operator is access to professional hotel management expertise while retaining flexibility in branding and strategic positioning.
Brand flexibility: This structure allows owners to align their property with the most appropriate brand or market positioning without being tied to a specific operator’s brand ecosystem. This is particularly valuable in complex markets or repositioning scenarios.
Cost efficiency: White-label operators can also be more cost-effective than large international hotel management companies, as they typically operate with leaner structures and fewer embedded brand costs.
Operational expertise: In addition, owners benefit from operational expertise without needing to build internal management teams, allowing them to focus on asset strategy, investment performance and portfolio management.
Disadvantages of a White Label Operator
Despite its flexibility, the white-label model requires the owner to take a more active role in strategic decision-making, particularly regarding branding, positioning, and long-term direction.
Dual structure: Because the operator does not provide brand affiliation, the hotel must rely on external branding solutions such as franchises or soft brands to achieve market visibility and distribution. In practice, this often leads to a dual-structure arrangement in which the owner engages both a franchise brand and a separate white-label operator. While the operator may assist in negotiating the franchise agreement and, in some cases, help secure more flexible or shorter-term terms, these agreements remain relatively long-term and will often extend beyond 10 years.
Cost duplication: This structure can also result in cost duplication. The owner is typically required to pay franchise fees to the brand alongside management fees to the white-label operator, which can make the overall operating structure more expensive than a fully integrated management agreement with a branded operator.
There is also a potential risk of misalignment between owner objectives and operator execution, particularly where governance structures are not clearly defined. From a commercial perspective, the absence of an embedded brand can make performance more dependent on the effectiveness of the chosen brand affiliation and overall market conditions.
Lease Agreement
A Lease Agreement is a hotel contract structure in which the property owner leases the hotel to an operator for a fixed period, with the operator assuming full operational control and business risk. Under this model, the operator runs the hotel as a tenant and pays rent to the owner. The owner does not participate in the day-to-day operations of the hotel and instead receives income under the agreed-upon rental structure.
Lease agreements are particularly common in European markets, especially in countries such as Germany and across the Nordic region, where institutional investors favour stable and predictable income streams over exposure to operational risk. This structure represents a fundamentally different allocation of risk from management or franchise agreements, as the operator assumes the full commercial risk of hotel performance.
Key Features of a Lease Agreement
Lease agreements are defined by a clear separation between property ownership and operational risk.
Fixed Tenancy Structure
The operator leases the hotel for a defined period, often ranging from 10 to 25 years or more, and assumes full responsibility for operating the business.
Rental Payment Structure
Rent may be structured in several ways, including fixed rent, variable rent based on revenue or profit, or a hybrid combination of both.
Operator Bears Financial Risk
The operator assumes the financial risk associated with hotel performance, including fluctuations in revenue, operating costs and market conditions.
Owner as Passive Investor
The owner has no operational involvement, focusing solely on property ownership and rental income. Responsibilities are typically limited to structural maintenance and asset-level obligations.
Operational and Branding Control
The operator retains full control over operations and, subject to lease terms, may choose to operate the hotel under its own brand, a third-party brand or as an independent property.
Asset Condition and FF&E / OS&E Responsibility
Lease agreements require clear definition of ownership, maintenance obligations and return condition of FF&E, OS&E and the physical asset, both during the term and at lease expiry or termination, as these areas can become commercially complex and contentious if not precisely documented.
Advantages of a Lease Agreement
For hotel owners, the primary advantage of a lease agreement is the ability to generate stable and predictable income without exposure to operational risk.
Fixed incomes: This structure is particularly attractive to institutional investors seeking long-term, bond-like income streams. The owner is insulated from fluctuations in hotel performance and avoids the complexity of managing hotel operations.
Distanced from operational risk: The absence of operational involvement also reduces management burden, allowing owners to focus purely on real estate investment strategy.
Operator upside: For operators, lease agreements offer full operational control and the ability to retain all upside from strong hotel performance. This can result in significantly higher returns compared to management fee structures when market conditions are favourable.
Disadvantages of a Lease Agreement
The main limitation for owners is the lack of participation in the hotel’s operational upside. Even if the hotel performs exceptionally well, the owner’s income is limited to the agreed rent.
Operator default: There is also counterparty risk, as the owner depends on the operator’s financial stability. If the operator underperforms or defaults, rental income may be disrupted.
Operator’s financial risk: The lease model carries substantial financial risk for operators. The operator is responsible for all operating costs and must continue to meet rental obligations regardless of market conditions.
This exposure can be particularly challenging during economic downturns or periods of reduced demand, where fixed rental commitments may become burdensome.
Hybrid Lease
A Hybrid Lease Agreement is a variation of a traditional lease structure that combines elements of fixed rent and performance-based income. It is designed to balance risk and reward between the hotel owner and the operator.
Under this model, the operator pays a combination of fixed rent and variable rent linked to the hotel’s financial performance. This allows the owner to secure a minimum guaranteed income while also participating in the upside of strong performance.
Hybrid lease structures have become increasingly popular in markets where both parties seek a more balanced allocation of risk, particularly in environments with uncertain or fluctuating demand.
Key Features of a Hybrid Lease Agreement
Hybrid lease agreements introduce flexibility into traditional lease structures.
Blended Rental Structure
The operator pays a combination of fixed rent and variable rent, typically linked to revenue, gross operating profit (GOP) or net operating income (NOI).
Minimum Income Protection
The fixed rent component provides the owner with a guaranteed baseline income, even during periods of weaker performance.
Performance-Based Upside
The variable component allows the owner to participate in the hotel’s financial success when performance exceeds expectations.
Risk Sharing Mechanism
Unlike traditional leases, risk is partially shared between owner and operator, aligning incentives more closely.
Customisable Structure
Hybrid leases can be tailored to specific market conditions, including rent adjustments, performance thresholds, caps and floors.
Advantages of a Hybrid Lease Agreement
For owners, hybrid leases provide a balance between income security and upside potential.
Upside & risk balance: The fixed rent ensures stability, while the variable component allows participation in strong market performance.
For operators, hybrid leases reduce the financial burden compared to fully fixed lease agreements. Lower fixed commitments provide greater flexibility during downturns, while the variable component allows operators to benefit from strong performance.
Alignment: This structure also enhances alignment between the owner and the operator, as both parties benefit from improved financial performance.
Disadvantages of a Hybrid Lease Agreement
The main drawback for owners is that income remains partially dependent on hotel performance, meaning returns may be lower during weaker market conditions.
Market exposure: There is also continued reliance on the operator’s ability to deliver strong operational performance, making operator selection critical.
For operators, hybrid leases introduce performance pressure, as variable rent components increase with revenue or profitability. This can create financial strain if targets are not achieved.
In addition, hybrid lease agreements are typically more complex to structure and negotiate than traditional lease agreements, requiring careful alignment of financial terms and performance metrics.
Further resources:
See HDG – Hotel Operator Links