I worked with a GM once who kept a laminated card in his office that listed every single thing the hotel needed from outside vendors just to open its doors each morning. Gas for the kitchen. Linens from the laundry service. Bread from the bakery. Chemicals for the pool. It was 47 items long. He'd point at it whenever someone from corporate talked about "controlling costs" and say, "I control maybe twelve of these. The rest of the world controls the other thirty-five." He wasn't being dramatic. He was being honest.

Right now, across Himachal Pradesh... one of India's most tourism-dependent states... hotel and restaurant operators are learning that lesson the hard way. The Israel-Iran conflict disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which handles roughly 60% of India's gas supply. The central government responded by suspending commercial LPG refilling to prioritize domestic households. Logical from a policy standpoint. Devastating if you run a kitchen. Properties that were getting 10 commercial cylinders every two or three days suddenly went five, six days with nothing. Eateries that couldn't pivot started trimming menus or closing entirely. About 50% of advance bookings in Shimla... the region's marquee destination... canceled. Wedding venues lost Rs 10-20 lakh per event (that's roughly $12,000-$24,000 USD). One resort reported a single wedding cancellation cost them nearly Rs 10 lakh. The iconic Indian Coffee House saw daily revenue drop from Rs 1.35 lakh to Rs 70,000. Cut nearly in half. Not because demand dried up. Because they couldn't cook.

Here's what bothers me about stories like this. Everybody reads it and thinks, "Well, that's India. That's a regional issue." And they go back to worrying about their OTA commissions. But the mechanism here is universal. A geopolitical event you have zero control over disrupts a supply chain you depend on completely, and within 72 hours your operation is compromised. We saw versions of this during COVID with cleaning chemicals. We saw it with food supply disruptions during port slowdowns. We've seen it with linen shortages when regional laundry facilities couldn't staff up. The specific commodity changes. The vulnerability doesn't. Your kitchen, your laundry, your HVAC maintenance, your breakfast program... every one of them depends on a supply chain that extends well beyond your loading dock. And most operators couldn't tell you today where their top ten consumables actually originate.

What's happening in Himachal Pradesh also shows you how fast the financial damage cascades. The properties that switched to electric induction saw power costs jump 20-30%. Induction stove prices themselves spiked from Rs 2,500 to Rs 3,000 or more as demand surged. Some kitchens went to coal and firewood... which creates a guest experience problem on top of the operational one. Nobody's booking a destination resort to smell wood smoke from a makeshift cooking setup. As of mid-April, commercial supply is reportedly back to about 70% of pre-crisis levels, but that's not 100%, and the government is pushing a longer-term pivot to piped natural gas infrastructure. Which is smart policy. But "smart policy" with a multi-year implementation timeline doesn't help the operator who needs to serve breakfast tomorrow morning.

The operators who survived this best had two things: relationships with alternative suppliers they'd already identified (not scrambled for during the crisis), and the financial cushion to absorb higher costs for substitute energy sources without passing the full hit to the guest. The ones who got crushed were running lean on both. Look... I've been through enough supply disruptions to know that the operators who come out the other side are never the ones who were the most optimized before the shock. They're the ones who had a little bit of slack in the system. A backup vendor. A reserve fund that wasn't already earmarked. A menu that could flex. Optimization is great until the world hiccups, and then resilience is the only thing that matters.

Let me tell you what I heard when I read this announcement: the sound of a franchise machine doing what franchise machines do best. Hilton currently operates 70 hotels across Africa. They want to nearly triple that to over 180. They signed 29 deals in 15 African countries last year alone. And the way they're doing it... management and franchise agreements with local development partners... means Hilton gets the flags, the fees, and the Honors enrollment data, and someone else gets the construction risk, the currency exposure, and the 3 AM phone call when the generator fails in a market where replacement parts take six weeks to arrive. This is asset-light expansion at its most textbook, and I say that as someone who spent 15 years on the brand side watching this exact playbook get deployed in every "emerging market" that made it onto a strategy deck.

The growth thesis isn't wrong, by the way. International tourist arrivals across Africa were up 9% year-over-year in early 2025 and have surpassed 2019 levels by 16%. There's a rising middle class. Governments are investing in tourism infrastructure and loosening visa requirements. Business travel corridors are expanding. The demand signal is real. But here's the part the press release left out (and they never include this part): demand signal and operational feasibility are two completely different conversations. I've read hundreds of FDDs. I've sat across the table from developers who took on millions in debt because the franchise sales team showed them a projection that assumed best-case loyalty contribution in a mature market... and then delivered those projections in a market that was anything but mature. The question I'd be asking every single one of those development partners listed... FB Group in Gabon, Net Worth Properties in South Africa, Zebra Manufacturing in Zambia, all of them... is this: what loyalty contribution number did they show you, and what happens to your debt service when the actual number comes in 30% below the projection?

This is what I call the Brand Reality Gap. The brand sells the promise at a conference (this one launched at the Future Hospitality Summit Africa in Nairobi, naturally), and the property delivers it shift by shift in markets where supply chains are unpredictable, where trained hospitality labor pools are thin, where infrastructure can be genuinely unreliable, and where the brand's operational support is an ocean away. Hilton is talking about creating 20,000 jobs across these properties. That's wonderful. But who's training those 20,000 people? At what cost? In how many languages and across how many regulatory frameworks? The brand standard manual that works in Orlando does not work in Libreville, and the distance between "we'll adapt our training for local markets" in a press release and actually doing it at property level is... vast. I grew up watching my dad deliver brand promises that were designed by people who had never set foot in his building. Scale that to a continent with 54 countries and wildly different operating conditions and you start to understand the gap I'm worried about.

And then there's Marriott, which announced plans to add 50 new sites in Africa by 2027. So now you've got the two biggest hotel companies in the world racing to plant flags across the same continent, targeting many of the same business hubs and tourism corridors. For the developers caught in the middle, this is a double-edged sword (and I've seen this movie in every emerging market expansion cycle). Competition for deals means franchise terms might be more favorable right now... brands want the signings, they want the pipeline numbers for their earnings calls, they'll negotiate. But competition for guests in markets where demand is still developing means the revenue projections that justified those franchise agreements might be optimistic. Possibly very optimistic. I keep annotated FDDs organized by year specifically for moments like this, because the projections from today are the actual performance data of 2029, and the variance between projected and actual is where families lose hotels.

None of this means Africa isn't a genuine growth opportunity. It is. The demographics are real, the infrastructure investment is real, and the demand trajectory is real. But I've watched too many brand expansions celebrate the signing and ignore the delivery. The 100-hotel headline is the easy part. The hard part is the Tuesday night in Lusaka when the PMS goes down and the closest Hilton regional support team is in Dubai. The hard part is the owner in Lagos who took on $6M in development costs and is waiting for that loyalty contribution to materialize. If Hilton is serious about Africa (and the history suggests they are... they've been on the continent since 1959), then the investment that matters isn't the hotel count. It's the operational infrastructure that makes those hotels actually work. And that part doesn't fit in a press release.

I sat in a franchise development meeting once where someone pitched expanding into a market of about 150,000 people. Two-hour drive from the nearest major airport. The development VP literally laughed. "Where's the demand generator?" he asked. Meeting moved on. The property that eventually got built there... by someone else... is running 74% occupancy and minting money because it's the only branded option within 40 miles.

H World just reported full-year 2025 revenue of RMB 25.3 billion (that's about $3.6 billion US) with net income up 66.7% year-over-year to $726 million. The adjusted EBITDA margin hit 33.5%. Those are numbers that would make any American hotel REIT sweat with envy. And they're doing it with 93% of their rooms under franchise and management agreements... asset-light to the extreme. But here's the part that should actually get your attention: 39% of their operating hotels and over 55% of their pipeline are in tier-3 and tier-4 cities. The small markets. The ones where 70% of China's population actually lives. They're targeting 20,000 hotels across 2,000 cities by 2030. Two thousand cities. Most American brands can't name 200 markets they'd consider developing in.

The playbook isn't complicated. Go where the competition isn't. Build a product that's good enough (not luxury, not aspirational... good enough) for a market that's underserved. Keep your model asset-light so the math works at lower rate points. H World just launched Hanting Inn specifically for these lower-tier markets. They're not trying to convince a tier-4 city traveler to pay tier-1 prices. They're meeting the customer where they are with a product designed for that price point from day one. Their manachised and franchised revenue grew 23.1% for the year and now contributes 69% of group profit. The franchise machine is the business. Everything else is a support structure.

Now... am I saying American operators should start developing in towns of 50,000 people? Not exactly. But I am saying the mentality is worth examining. We've spent the last decade watching major US brands chase the same 50 gateway markets, stack properties on top of each other, and then wonder why RevPAR growth flatlined. Meanwhile, secondary and tertiary US markets are underserved, under-branded, and generating demand that nobody's capturing because the development models assume you need 300 rooms and a convention center to make the math work. H World is proving that the math works differently when you design the product for the market instead of trying to shoehorn a big-city brand into a small-city reality. Their upper-midscale segment grew operating hotels by 36% year-over-year. They're not just going small... they're going small AND moving upmarket within those small markets. That's sophistication.

The other thing nobody's talking about: H World is returning $760 million to shareholders in 2025 while simultaneously planning to open 2,200 to 2,300 hotels in 2026. That's not either/or... that's both. They've built the flywheel. The franchise fees fund the growth. The growth funds the returns. And they did it by going exactly where conventional wisdom said not to go. I've seen this movie play out in the US before. The operators who figure out tertiary markets first... who design lean operating models for 80-key properties in towns nobody's heard of... are going to own the next decade of growth. The ones waiting for another Manhattan or Miami deal are going to keep fighting over the same shrinking pie.