‘First published on Lexology’
By: Safir Anand and Arpita Mukherjee
When WeWork faced turmoil globally, leading its U.S. parent company to file for bankruptcy protection in 2023, few expected its Indian affiliate to become a case study in strength and discipline. Once seen as a symbol of the “new economy,” WeWork’s downfall illustrated the dangers of excessive growth, inflated valuations, and weak governance where the promise of change often exceeded execution. In this context, WeWork India operated under a brand license and was supported by the Embassy Group, taking a different route. The Indian branch not only avoided the financial troubles of its parent but also achieved profitability and investor confidence, leading to its listing on the National Stock Exchange (NSE) in 2025. Its success contrasts sharply with the global narrative of cutbacks and restructuring, making WeWork India an example of how local governance, operational independence, and tailored business strategies can redefine a brand’s path.
The contrast is notable: a global company struggling for survival and its Indian franchise attracting renewed interest from investors. This difference highlights a crucial point: the lasting importance of legal structure, operational independence, and market responsiveness in franchise and licensing models, especially when global uncertainty meets local chances. Trust remains the foundation allowing these elements to function freely.
The Global Collapse and the Indian Exception
Globally, WeWork became a symbol of the excesses seen in the venture capital era: rapid expansion with inadequate profitability, long-term lease commitments backed by short-term hopes, and governance failures that undermined investor trust. In November 2023, the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States, marking the end of one of the most celebrated startup stories from the last decade.
In contrast, WeWork India was not a subsidiary of the U.S. parent company. Instead, it is a separately managed entity, primarily owned by the Embassy Group, operating under a brand license from the global entity. This structural difference protected it from the parent’s debt and governance issues while allowing it the operational flexibility necessary for the Indian market. By focusing on real estate fundamentals instead of speculative valuation trends, WeWork India stabilized its revenues, kept occupancy rates high, and reached profitability even as the global brand struggled. Its recent listing, primarily through an Offer for Sale (OFS) and not fresh equity, indicated market approval and promoter confidence in the company’s operational strength.
Lessons for Franchise and License-Driven Enterprises
The WeWork India story provides valuable insights on how international brands can effectively localize without sacrificing coherence or credibility. Choosing the right partner, maintaining structural independence as a form of protection, and ensuring operational freedom are crucial. Often seen as a weaker market entry option, the franchise or license model can actually create a protective framework supported by these three elements. WeWork India’s limited exposure to its parent’s liabilities shows how a legally distinct entity can keep brand continuity while steering clear of global financial troubles.
Local Leadership and Market Logic
In WeWork India’s case, the leadership from the Embassy Group ensured that business decisions followed Indian real estate and workspace conditions instead of global expansion pressures. The selection of a local partner is critical. Flexible lease options, a varied client base, and cost-sensitive strategies grounded the business in reality. Having the freedom to execute is not a shift away from global alignment; it is necessary for sustainable localization.
The WeWork story demonstrates that localization can bring transformation, not just mimicry. India’s co-working space operates on a different logic. Hybrid work models, demand from startups and small entrepreneurs, and cost-efficient space use are its three foundations. WeWork India’s growth within this environment shows that localization requires rethinking business models rather than just replicating global templates.
Brand Equity versus Financial Fundamentals
While the WeWork name provided instant recognition, investor confidence was built on governance, transparency, and financial responsibility. In a competitive market, the message is clear: brand reputation may open doors, but financial discipline keeps them open. The IPO process, which emphasized governance as market capital, led to increased scrutiny of disclosures, related-party transactions, and promoter behaviour. Before its successful NSE listing in October 2025, WeWork India faced increased attention from advisory firms, analysts, and market experts regarding governance and financial transparency. Issues included ongoing legal investigations involving key Embassy Group promoters, high levels of pledged shares, and questions about the company’s actual financial strength. The IPO’s structure as a full Offer for Sale (OFS) without fresh capital further added to investor caution since the proceeds did not directly benefit the company. Regulatory filings did reveal pending legal issues and histories of pledged shares, but some observers questioned the thoroughness of these disclosures and pointed out risks from promoter dependence, the reversible nature of its 99-year WeWork brand license, and possible instability if promoter control was weakened. These challenges and how they were managed highlighted the significance of governance discipline and clear communication in keeping investor trust, especially during listing amid global brand instability. Even when governance advisory firm InGovern raised pre-listing concerns about financial transparency, the company successfully completed its listing without major controversy. This case illustrates that transparent governance is now a form of competitive capital.
Other Global Brands in India: Contrasting Trajectories
WeWork India’s success fits into a larger pattern of experiences that global brands encounter in India:
McDonald’s India: McDonald’s entered India through a master franchise model in the mid-1990s. While it initially struggled with menu adjustments and cultural mismatches, it thrived after localizing efforts such as offering vegetarian options, sourcing regionally, and innovating its supply chain. This success highlights the crucial need for local adaptation within a global framework.
Starbucks India: In a competitive coffee-shop market, by partnering with Tata Global Beverages, Starbucks successfully used local market insights and the trust associated with the Tata name while maintaining global brand standards. Its growth shows that strategic local partnerships can protect international brands from operational and regulatory challenges in emerging markets.
Tesco India (Now Tesco Express / Exit): Initially, Tesco sought a wholly owned subsidiary model in India but struggled with supply chain problems and regulatory issues. Eventually, it merged its operations with Tata’s retail subsidiary, emphasizing the difficulties foreign brands encounter without a local partner and flexible structure.
KFC and Pizza Hut: Yum! Brands’ franchises in India have thrived by localizing menus, delivery, and pricing. Unlike WeWork India, these brands faced regulatory challenges and had to localize their supply chains, illustrating that even well-established global brands require ongoing local operational creativity.
Uber India: In contrast to the others, Uber India continues to operate through its wholly owned subsidiary, Uber India Systems Private Limited (UISPL), which is incorporated under Indian law and remains a subsidiary of Uber Technologies Inc. Since consolidating its Indian operations under UISPL in 2019, Uber has kept a centralized subsidiary model to meet local regulations. Although the company has faced regulatory hurdles, including scrutiny from state transport authorities, it has not transitioned to partnerships with local firms or fully localized operational models. The Uber India experience shows the complexities of managing a global platform within India’s regulatory framework while sticking to a centralized, subsidiary-based approach instead of complete market integration.
Beyond the IPO: Broader Implications
WeWork India’s path suggests that franchise and license arrangements can serve as supports for resilience, especially in unstable global conditions. This model enables brands to expand while spreading risk and empowering local expertise. However, the structure won’t work on its own. It only succeeds when governance, transparency, and market alignment work together.
The WeWork India experience demonstrates that legal design and commercial responsibility can convert a global brand’s fragility into local strength. Its listing doesn’t contradict the global collapse; it instead comments on it. For global businesses, policymakers, and investors, the lesson is clear: in a connected world, brand value crosses borders, but business resilience is still built locally.
etc. whilst wrongfully claiming to be part of our firm and making false claims and allegations.