KOA - New York vs Staybridge Suites

Staybridge Suites is the sharper target right now because budget and timing hand it a decisive edge, despite KOA—New York’s larger unit count. The Staybridge investment range starts at $21M per property, meaning franchisees have serious capital and an acute need for full-stack technology (POS, marketing automation, scheduling, back-office) during protracted pre-opening phases. A 3.85% unit growth rate and a current FDD (2026) signal active franchise sales, so every quarter brings fresh greenfield projects that must be outfitted from scratch. KOA’s 443 franchised units create a bigger installed base, but its dormant FDD and sub-$500K low-end investment point to a population of small, budget-conscious operators who are more likely to have patched together legacy systems—and far less likely to rip and replace them.

The meaningful tradeoff is TAM versus deal velocity and deal size. KOA wins on raw addressable units, but selling into a static, capital-constrained base forces you into long displacement cycles with low average contract values. Staybridge’s pipeline flips that math: new construction means no incumbent to dislodge, and $20M+ builds correlate with franchisees who treat software as a line item, not a luxury. The 2.0% royalty at Staybridge also leaves more operating profit on the table for tech spend, whereas KOA’s 8.0% royalty squeezes operating margins and likely suppresses discretionary technology budgets.

Both brands operate an approved-supplier procurement model, which demands a franchisor relationship. Staybridge’s current FDD and active development team make that partnership attainable and operationally meaningful—you can get listed before the next wave of openings. With KOA dormant, corporate engagement is likely slow and your approved status yields no new-unit flow, only a fight for incumbent replacement.

Verdict: Staybridge Suites’ active, well-capitalized expansion pipeline overpowers KOA’s larger but stagnant base.