For the previous 4 years the opening of dual-branded properties has been very talked-about amongst resort builders. The perceived advantages of constructing a property with two or extra manufacturers are many:• Two reservation methods to channel enterprise to the property• Two manufacturers that may attraction to completely different demand segments available in the market• Enhanced skill to maximise land density necessities• Efficiencies within the development of the power (ex. one laundry room for 2 motels)• Efficiencies within the operation of the motels (ex. shared staffing)Utilizing knowledge from CBRE’s annual Developments® within the Resort Business survey of working statements from 1000’s of motels throughout the U.S., we carried out an evaluation that examined the theoretical working efficiencies of a dual-branded property. The speculation is that working two motels inside one construction ought to enable administration to realize working efficiencies due to shared providers, labor, administration, and services.Throughout the Developments® database we recognized 25 working statements for dual-branded motels for the yr 2017. Two of the properties have been faraway from the pattern as outliers due to the big variety of mixed rooms, and concrete location inside a significant market. In mixture the remaining 23 properties averaged 309 rooms in measurement, a 2017 common day by day fee (ADR) of $171.69, and an annual occupancy stage of 75.9 p.c.Among the many survey pattern we noticed three completely different mixtures of property varieties:• Restricted-Service and Choose-Service: three properties• Choose-Service and Prolonged-Keep: 13 properties• Restricted-Service and Prolonged-Keep: 7 propertiesFor every of the property sort elements of every of the dual-branded motels we chosen 2017 working statements from the Developments® database for comparable properties that have been sole-branded motels. The statements for the comparable properties have been chosen primarily based on property sort, variety of rooms, occupancy and ADR. The comparable statements have been then added collectively to match the dimensions and efficiency of the respective dual-branded motels.The next paragraphs summarize the findings of our comparative evaluation.
When evaluating whole operated division bills as a p.c of whole working income we didn’t discover any efficiencies achieved by the dual-branded motels. Throughout all three classes, the operated division expense ratios for the dual-branded properties have been larger than the comparable groupings.Because the dual-branded properties in our evaluation have been both limited-service, select-service, or extended-stay motels, the rooms division includes nearly all of whole operated division bills. Additional, throughout the rooms division, labor prices common over half of the bills. Due to this fact, it’s affordable to imagine {that a} dual-branded resort would profit from sharing entrance desk, housekeeping, laundry, and bell staffs.Sadly, these labor efficiencies didn’t seem to materialize. Throughout the board, the rooms division ratios for the dual-branded motels averaged 22.eight p.c, in comparison with p.c on the comparable properties. Rooms division working efficiencies have been solely noticed on the Choose-Service/Restricted-Service dual-branded properties. From discussions with our shoppers we perceive that model requirements regularly require discrete check-in areas and worker uniforms inside dual-branded motels. Such necessities restrict the power of operators to profit from shared staffing.
Undistributed departments in motels are extra administrative in nature and fewer guest-facing than the operated departments. It’s in these overhead departments, the place we noticed the best working efficiencies for the dual-branded properties. Measured as a p.c of whole working income, the dual-branded motels achieved undistributed division expense ratios two to a few proportion factors lower than their respective comparable properties throughout all three property mixture classes.Much less incumbered by model requirements, it seems that motels are capable of share staffing for such back-of-the-house capabilities as common administration, accounting, safety, advertising and marketing, and upkeep. Additional, combining two properties below one roof permits for extra environment friendly power consumption.
Based mostly primarily on the power to realize working efficiencies throughout the undistributed departments, the dual-branded motels on common did obtain barely larger revenue margins in comparison with the comparable properties. This was true throughout all three dual-branded classes. Since we have been measuring working efficiencies, revenue for this evaluation was outlined as gross working revenue.This discovering of simply “barely higher” revenue margins is in keeping with an analogous evaluation carried out by CBRE in April of 2015. Since it’s broadly believed working efficiencies are a significant profit when growing a dual-branded resort, homeowners of those properties ought to be cautious to not base the monetary feasibility of their mission solely on expectations of larger revenue margins.As famous earlier, there are a number of different advantages that dual-branded motels present. These advantages assist to enhance revenues (two reservation methods) and cut back growth prices (shared facilities reminiscent of a pool, train room, and assembly area) . It’s these components which will find yourself being an important when figuring out if a dual-branded resort is the suitable property sort to develop.
Robert Mandelbaum and Gary McDade work within the Analysis Division of CBRE Inns’ Americas Analysis. Gary McDade is a Senior Analysis Analyst. To benchmark the efficiency of your dual-branded resort (current or proposed) please go to, or name (855) 223-1200. This text was printed within the October 2018 version of Lodging.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here