Put to: Cindy Estis Green, Rob Blood and Greg Duff.
Why it matters to buyers: A published franchise document is a starting point for diligence, not a property-specific conclusion. Marriott’s 2026 Autograph Collection FDD is available for review; the buyer still needs the applicable agreement, schedules, required works and negotiated terms. (hotel-development.marriott.com)
Draft framing of a good answer: Require an independent counterfactual: what would the hotel earn with a properly funded independent commercial strategy? Then compare genuinely incremental demand, displacement, channel migration, ancillary contribution and all incremental obligations.
Separate bookings delivered through a brand system from bookings that would not otherwise have occurred. Ask how any proposed rate uplift has been isolated from renovation, market recovery and operator change.
Use both a full cash-flow comparison and a simple break-even check. For illustration only, if additional recurring costs were $180,000 and genuinely incremental revenue retained a 60% contribution after all incremental variable costs, recurring break-even revenue would be $300,000. Those are invented teaching assumptions, not brand benchmarks. Upfront works, transition losses and financing would remain separate in the full investment model.
Sharp follow-up: “How much of your claimed contribution is new demand, and how much is existing demand moving through a newly chargeable channel?”
Evidence to request: Property-specific fee schedule, required-work scope, comparable conversion evidence and independent/base/downside cases.
Interview status: No expert response has been recorded.