Why Rostic’s is not selling new franchises in Russia

Unirest, the company that operates the Rostic’s restaurant chain, is not selling new franchises in Russia. It says its existing pool of partners is sufficient to meet its plans for now. Retail.ru reported this on 23 September 2026, citing statements made by company representatives to Forbes. For entrepreneurs considering joining the chain, the key news is the restriction on access to new franchises, not an announcement that existing restaurants will close.

Why Rostic’s is not selling new franchises

Unirest representatives attributed the decision to having enough partners already. This wording matters: the company is explaining its position in terms of its established partner network. The report does not cite a lack of demand from entrepreneurs, regulatory changes or a move away from franchising itself as reasons for the decision.

The phrase ‘for now’ also limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the statement. It describes the company’s current assessment but does not set a timeframe for the policy. The source material gives no date for a possible resumption of franchise sales, nor any conditions under which Unirest might reconsider its position. It would therefore be premature to interpret the announcement as an indefinite closure to new franchisees.

The plans that the company believes it can fulfil with its existing partners have not been disclosed either. The report provides no basis for specifying the number or locations of future openings, or the investment required. The confirmed fact is narrower: the company does not currently intend to sell new franchises in Russia because it considers its existing partner base sufficient.

The announcement and how long the policy has been in place

The report includes an important qualification about the timing of this policy. Alyona Ovchinnikova, an expert at the Association of Retail Property and Retail Experts, noted that Unirest has not sold new franchises for several years. In her assessment, the company has instead been consolidating the market by buying established businesses from its partners.

The publication date therefore cannot automatically be treated as the date when the restrictions began. The company representatives’ statement explains its position, while the expert’s comment suggests that the practice may have started much earlier. The source material does not give an exact date when franchise sales stopped.

It is important to distinguish between the sources of these two points. The explanation that the existing partner base is sufficient comes from Unirest representatives. The claim that the restriction has been in place for several years, and the information about purchases of established businesses, come from Ovchinnikova’s comments. The material contains no list of such transactions, their values, the number of restaurants acquired or the names of the sellers. This report alone therefore cannot establish the scale of any transfer of partner-operated restaurants into company management.

What this means for prospective partners

For entrepreneurs considering buying a new Rostic’s franchise in Russia, the report highlights an important planning constraint. A brand’s availability to consumers and the availability of its franchises are separate matters. Restaurants trading under a familiar name do not, in themselves, indicate that the operating company is accepting new partners.

At the same time, the decision not to sell new franchises should not be equated with a halt to the chain’s development as a whole. The source material does not establish that existing partners are barred from opening restaurants, that current agreements are being terminated or that restaurants must close. None of these decisions is announced in the material. The specific opportunities available to existing partners would need separate confirmation from the company.

The comment about purchases of established businesses also does not mean that prospective buyers have an alternative route into the network by acquiring an existing restaurant. It describes purchases by Unirest itself, not the terms on which a business could be transferred to an outside entrepreneur. Confusing these mechanisms when assessing an investment opportunity would be a mistake.

In practical terms, any offer to buy a new Rostic’s franchise should be checked directly with the operating company before discussing payments or commitments. This is a recommendation for entrepreneurs, not evidence that misleading offers exist: the source material reports no such cases.

What matters to the franchising community

For Russia’s franchising community, this case illustrates the distinction between recruiting new partners and working with an established partner base. Unirest’s explanation focuses specifically on the sufficiency of its existing partners. The company does not link its decision to stop new sales to any broader assessment of the appeal of franchising in Russia.

The decision of one chain should therefore not be generalised to the whole sector. The source material contains no comparative data on other brands, overall franchise sales trends or statistics on entrepreneurs’ interest in restaurant concepts. It supports conclusions about the position of a specific operating company, but not about a market-wide change in the conditions for entering franchising.

Practical takeaway: if you are considering Rostic’s, first ask Unirest what partnership opportunities are currently available. When assessing any other brand, check separately whether it is selling new franchises, which forms of partnership are actually available and whether the terms have been confirmed by the operating company itself.