Data ownership in hotel franchising: something we don’t talk about (but really should)

The age of the hotel brand is ending. For decades, franchises have scaled by selling sameness, consistency over individuality. AI breaks that logic. 

AI reshapes the vectors of discovery. Instead of guests defaulting to familiar logos or loyalty programs, intelligent systems surface the properties that best match a traveler's needs, preferences, and context. Discovery shifts from brand-driven to data-driven. 

That flips modern hospitality on its head. Independent hotels, once invisible in a brand-dominated landscape, become the stars. Thousands of unique properties, each with its own point of view, can now compete on a level playing field. 

My prediction: the next decade belongs not to fewer, bigger brands, but to a flourishing of independents. AI will reorder travel around individuality, not conformity. And one truth will become undeniable: you can't own the future on somebody else's rented rails. 

This is part of a bigger question, I think. As a marketing guy, let me explain it through distribution, using Booking.com as the example.

Booking spends billions on advertising, dominates search, builds the user experience that has become the industry template, and runs a multilingual customer service that often outperforms independent hotels. If they generate the demand, shape it, convert it, and support it, is it really so outrageous to suggest the customer belongs more to them than to you? A provocation, yes, but is it?

Franchising works in a similar way, albeit under a different guise. We complain when brands strip us of guest data at the end of a contract, yet we signed knowing exactly what we were giving away. They built the systems, dictated the stack, locked the flows, while we focused on bricks and logos. We owned the walls, they owned the data.

And the truth is simple: within five years every company will either be a data company or no company at all.

Hotels are no exception. The real question is not who owns the guest today, but whether the industry can survive tomorrow if it keeps surrendering its memory...

Yes. It's not limited to franchises and is a pretty long standing clause in agreements. There largely because it was not as prominent a consideration back in the day from a data and technology perspective - harder to get data out of a peice of on premise technology that the owner paid for.

From my experience, at the end of the day both parties retain the data in the spirit of good business relations.

However, it is something to be aware of.

This shines a spotlight on an issue that has long lingered in the shadows of the hospitality industry. Traditionally agreements prioritize central brand control over that data, rather than granting ownership to those who invest in and operate the properties - the franchisees themselves. Hoteliers allocate significant resources creating memorable guest experiences, only to find that when contracts end, they are cut off from the very relationships they fostered. This issue becomes even more significant when hotel ownership changes hands.

Contrast this with other industries, where core business assets transfer to new owners, preserving continuity and operational excellence. Yet, hospitality franchisees often lose access to invaluable data, including guest profiles, sales histories, and local marketing insights.

A balanced approach would grant hotel owners access to data generated through their operations and guest engagement, while brand-contributed information, such as loyalty program and global sales account details, remains with the franchisor. This distinction recognizes the contributions of both parties: owners keep the data earned through their investments and local relationships, while the brand protects proprietary network-wide assets. Contractually defining these boundaries would promote innovation, empower franchisees, and protect business value during ownership transitions - a needed change as hospitality embraces the data-driven era.

Franchised and Data-Blind

Hoteliers invest millions into building properties and running operations—yet in many franchise agreements, they don’t own their most valuable asset: guest data. Profiles, booking history, preferences—all of it often sits with the franchisor.

When the franchise ends, the situation worsens. Hoteliers frequently lose access to past guest profiles, future reservations, and even the right to market to their own guests. Meanwhile, the brand continues to profit from data built on someone else’s investment.

In today’s AI-powered world, this is more than outdated—it’s dangerous. Guest data should stay with the hotel owner and be shared during the franchise term, not taken entirely.

Because when the tech stack powers down with the brand sign, it’s not just the logo that disappears—it’s the hotel’s ability to engage past guests, build loyalty, and drive future revenue.

The real problem? Many hoteliers still haven’t grasped how radically the game has changed. Guest data is the true currency of modern hospitality—yet asset valuation models ignore it completely. Where are the benchmarks to measure its worth? Still missing. Until that shifts, hoteliers will continue to underestimate the value they’re losing. It’s time to wake up—and renegotiate the rules.

It is time we revisit outdated data accessibility rules, especially if they are counterproductive to emerging technology like agentic AI, which relies on functional data to work. And this goes beyond just guest data, but any other information needed by AI tools to execute tasks. So the real issue now goes beyond data ownership and towards accessibility and usability of the data.

With AI, data needs to be more than readable; systems must be able to act on it. And that's only possible if hotel systems, both franchisors and franchisees, run on platforms that can offer full, permissioned access to both the data and its underlying functionality.

Data locked in siloed systems is data wasted. This is where an API-first, open platform model comes in. It enables franchisees – and franchisors – to build tailored tech stacks and exchange data to automate workflows, or deploy AI agents to take real-time action, like triggering personalised messages or adjusting rates.

We need to think beyond who "owns" the data, but who can do the most with it. That means shifting the conversation from control to collaboration: creating open ecosystems where data flows freely (and safely), and where both asset owners and brand partners benefit.

Who owns the customer data: the franchisee or franchisor? This question is not unique to hospitality and has been debated ever since the first franchisee agreement to operate a printing shop was signed back in 1731 between Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Whitmarsh in Charleston, South Carolina. 

Typically, the franchisor owns the customer data and this issue is clearly stated in the franchise agreement. Franchisees may have access to and collect customer and other data, but the data is considered the franchisor's intellectual property (IP) to ensure a consistent brand experience. Franchisees may be required to return customer data upon termination of the agreement. 

In hospitality, the guest data, including customer lists and "Guest Profile Data" (personal profiles, guest preferences, loyalty data), is treated as part of the franchisor's IP, not the franchisee's. IP is defined as including all software, data processed or stored, customer lists and proprietary marks.

Since IP ownership has been at the core of the franchisor-franchisee relationship for centuries, I do not believe this question could ever be solved in favor of the franchisees. This is the nature of the beast - if hoteliers want to own guest and other data, there is an obvious option - remain independent.

It is all a matter of contractual agreement. If the franchisee has agreed on a package that includes data ownership by the brand, so be it. In exchange for the data (and the fees!), the franchisee receives many benefits (bookings, brand awareness). If, however, the franchisee does not want the brand to control the data, they should not sign a contract with it, enter into an agreement with a more data-friendly franchisor or remain independent. 

The solution is co-owning the data so both the franchisor and the franchisee can use the data as they see appropriate during and after their relationship. Anyway, they both contribute to its collection.