For all the noise about cost pressures, labour shortages and macroeconomic uncertainty, London remains one of the most sought-after restaurant markets in the world.

 

The evidence is not anecdotal. Earlier this week, Propel reported on Shaftesbury’s latest results, and the numbers are instructive. Nearly 400 food and beverage units are trading across its West End estates, with limited space available. In 2025 alone, 37 food and beverage lettings and renewals were completed at a rental value of £8.7m, 15.7% ahead of December 2024 estimated rental value and 27.3% ahead of previous passing rents.

 

Thirty rent reviews concluded at an average uplift of 6.1%. Vacancy sits at just 0.5%. Soho continues to perform strongly. Chinatown continues to attract international entrants. This is not a distressed landlord narrative. It is sustained demand. Just this week, I was in London with two of the fastest growing contemporary operators, both struggling to secure the right Central London real estate.

 

At Think Hospitality, we work across Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas, and what we see consistently is appetite for London. A week rarely passes without a referral or inbound enquiry about UK market entry. In the Middle East particularly, London is not simply an entry point to Europe; it is a coming-of-age moment. Opening here signals maturity, credibility and readiness to compete in a more established market. It is about legitimacy as much as geography. We see similar sentiment emerging from the US.

 

London and New York are often framed head-to-head for the title of best restaurant city in the world. Tokyo and Paris deliver extraordinary culinary depth, but their strong national food identities can, at times, result in narrower innovation and a more concentrated expression of cuisine. The dominance of a deeply rooted culinary culture creates brilliance, but it can also shape the boundaries of experimentation.

 

London and New York, by contrast, operate as global canvases. Without a singular national cuisine defining expectation, they have become platforms for cross cultural fusion, global reinterpretation and accelerated concept evolution. It is no coincidence that many Indian operators argue some of the best Indian food in the world is now in London, or that Peruvian cuisine cemented its global reputation through success here. London is where cuisines become global brands.

 

Beyond culinary credibility, London functions as an amplification engine. British media continues to dominate global online publishing, and coverage here quickly translates into international visibility. Launch successfully in Soho or Mayfair and you are not simply opening a restaurant; you are stepping on to a global stage. Influencer reach, press coverage and brand theatre are magnified here in a way few other cities can replicate.

 

There is also a capital markets dimension that cannot be ignored. The recent investment into Covent Garden by NBIM reinforces sovereign level confidence in the long-term appeal of London’s prime real estate. While the UK mid-market has faced significant pressure, certain prime assets now present relative value compared with New York.

 

Currency dynamics matter. Repositioning opportunities are emerging as weaker operators fall away. International capital tends to take a longer view than headlines, and there remains a widely held belief among investors that the UK will bounce back, as it has before.

 

London’s structural advantage lies in its experience density. Within a short walk in Soho, you can access Michelin-starred dining, neo bistro formats, wellness led cafés, experimental cocktail bars and a breadth of global cuisines at credible quality. That density drives innovation. Operators sharpen their propositions here because competition demands it. Concepts evolve faster. Consumer expectations are higher. In many cities, excellence is dispersed. In London, it clusters.

 

It is also important to look beyond tourism. London was the most visited city in the world in 2025, but the city also benefits from a globally minded domestic population with high culinary literacy and significant spending power. London is not reliant solely on transient footfall. It trades to residents who travel widely, understand quality and seek freshness of offer.

 

In recent work for a Middle Eastern government evaluating six major global food cities, London did not always lead on pure financial metrics. Average revenues in New York were stronger and profitability benchmarks in nearly all other markets looked more attractive. The UK remains challenging.

 

And yet, demand for London among operators remained disproportionately high. London is incredibly competitive and unforgiving, but it is also culturally magnetic. For many brands, particularly those from the Middle East, a London opening is about positioning as much as profit. It signals arrival on a global stage.

 

There is also a human dimension to this story. For many ultra-high net worth Middle Eastern families, London is not a foreign market; it is a second home. Children are educated here. Property is owned here. Summers are spent here. When founders and family offices spend meaningful time in a city, they develop confidence in it. They understand neighbourhoods. They build networks. They dine repeatedly in the same districts.

 

The spending power of Middle Eastern visitors and residents in prime London is significant and concentrated across the West End, Knightsbridge and Mayfair. That continuity creates resilience and reinforces London’s role as both cultural anchor and capital hub.

 

There is a disconnect worth acknowledging. Despite right wing populist rhetoric suggesting decline, prime London remains extremely safe by global standards. The West End is vibrant, heavily footed and commercially resilient. The lived experience for operators and consumers does not align with more alarmist headlines.

 

This is not blind optimism. Labour remains constrained. Input costs are elevated. Business rates are structurally problematic. The mid-market is under pressure and weaker operators are falling away. Average London is difficult. Prime London, however, continues to demonstrate resilience.

 

It is not always the highest margin market. It is not the easiest market. But it remains one of the most powerful restaurant stages in the world. The data supports it. The capital supports it. The operators continue to support it. London is hard, but for ambitious brands, with the right research and market understanding, it remains worth the ticket.

 

And as for the assertion this week from a UK Treasury adviser that we do not need any more restaurants, I fundamentally disagree. That view misunderstands what restaurants represent in a global city like London. They are not surplus leisure units. They are engines of innovation, magnets for international talent, drivers of tourism spend and a genuine export platform for British and global brands alike. Strip that away, and you strip away one of London’s competitive advantages.

 

Restaurant innovation is not indulgence; it is infrastructure. It shapes how a city is experienced, perceived and valued internationally. If London is to remain a global capital, we should be doubling down on creativity and experience, not questioning its relevance.

 

This week marks Neurodiversity Celebration Week, an important time for us to recognise the extraordinary strength that a diverse workforce brings to hospitality – and to reflect on how we can create a more inclusive industry.

 

Hospitality is all about its people, and businesses that prioritise diversity and inclusion often see more cohesive, resilient teams. A total of 58% of people working in licensed hospitality identify as neurodiverse, and with their unique abilities to problem solve and challenge the status quo, they bring fresh and innovative perspectives to fast-paced environments. Additionally, customers come from all walks of life, so having a diverse team allows businesses to connect with customers in unique ways while showing that your business is an inclusive and welcoming environment.

 

But are we currently doing enough as an industry to make neurodivergent individuals feel welcome in our recruitment, onboarding, training, and day-to-day operations? Last year, we launched our Empowering Neurodiversity in the Workplace Support Guide; to give operators the practical tools they need to celebrate differences and address barriers that may exclude individuals from entering or thriving in hospitality. We are now preparing to release a 2026 edition, enriched with new data and insights, along with a stronger focus on leadership, senior‑level support and creating cultures where neurodivergent people can thrive at every level of an organisation.

 

Creating a neuroinclusive workforce requires time, alongside thoughtful recruitment, onboarding and retention strategies. Our guide outlines commitments and adjustments that licensed hospitality businesses can make to embed neuroinclusion into their policies. For recruitment, this includes exploring alternative application processes beyond traditional CV submissions, ensuring interviewers are trained on neuroinclusion and offering reasonable adjustments to minimise stress and anxiety, such as allowing more time for the interview and providing questions in advance.

 

When onboarding, managers may consider using visual aids for tasks and organisation, breaking processes down into clear, manageable steps, providing software to support with reading or writing and addressing noise sensitivity by supplying noise-cancelling earphones, offering flexible start times to allow for a quieter commute, or providing access to quiet spaces for team members to recharge from the hustle and bustle of hospitality throughout the day.

 

Ongoing support is key to ensure all, but particularly neurodiverse colleagues, continue to feel like valued members of the team. Managers can schedule regular check-ins, assign a mentor or work buddy for guidance and gradually expand responsibilities to build confidence, and because changes in routine can sometimes be more difficult for neurodivergent individuals to process, discuss upcoming adjustments to work processes well in advance to give people time to adapt.

 

What is key at all stages of an employee’s journey is communicating with them about their individual needs and understanding that the level of support and reasonable adjustments needed depends heavily on each person’s circumstances. Tailoring adjustments will empower every member of the team to excel in their role. Just as we all have unique personalities, strengths and challenges, we also have unique ways of thinking, learning and experiencing the world – and that’s the brilliance of a neurodiverse team. Every one of us is unique, and our sector wouldn’t and couldn’t be what it is without the differences that make us who we are. 

 

While recruiting, onboarding and retaining a more neurodiverse workforce may require a bit more conscious effort, with guidance and practice, it can become part of routine thinking and behaviour across the hospitality sector. And by recruiting and retaining neurodivergent talent, businesses gain colleagues who bring fresh problem‑solving abilities, innovative thinking and a deeper connection to the diverse customers they serve. The Licensed Trade Charity’s work supporting thousands of people in the sector each year shows that when team members feel understood and included, they thrive. And when people thrive, businesses perform better.

 

When the story of the sale of independent brewer Innis & Gunn in a pre-pack administration to C&C Group landed in my in-tray recently, it was a surprise to say the least. It came while the drinks industry was still very much digesting the sale of BrewDog to US-based Tilray.

 

In reality, I had long written off my investment in BrewDog – which was made in two fundraising rounds in 2011 and 2013 – because the major shareholder, TSG, was owed such a significant sum that all other shareholders (me and the 220,000 other “Equity Punks”) would invariably be wiped out following an acquisition.

 

I was, however, a little more comfortable about the prospects of fellow Scottish brewer Innis & Gunn, which had seemingly been going along fine – with its three taprooms, brewery and listings in various retailers – judging by the communications received as a shareholder.

 

Its surprise sale for a mere £4.5m to C&C represents a serious climbdown from the £150m valuation it achieved when it raised £3.3m from more than 2,400 investors in a crowdfunding deal in 2020. But even this pales when compared with the £33m BrewDog was sold for versus the £2bn valuation it supposedly attained when it was last touting for money from equity punks through its myriad crowdfunding rounds.

 

Investing in beer-related ventures via crowdfunding has been a rather sobering experience for me personally. My record has been Innis & Gunn 100% loss, BrewDog 100% loss, Wild Beer Co 100% loss, West Berkshire Brewery 100% loss, The Bottle Shop 100% loss, and then, drum roll please, Camden Town Brewery achieved a 65% gain for me and other investors when in December 2015 it was sold to AB InBev.

 

I’d be the first to admit it doesn’t look great, but I’d like to add that I’m not a total rank amateur investor. I spent almost a decade working in fund management in the City of London for major UK and US banks, and my friends will vouch for the fact I never leave the house without a copy of the Financial Times tucked under my arm.

 

Part of the problem with much of the crowdfunding that has taken place in the food and drink sectors is that it has not really been seen as a proper investment by the stakeholders involved. The limited due diligence required by the crowdfunding platforms encouraged companies to issue shares at the most ludicrous valuations. And many buyers of these shares regarded them as nothing more than a loyalty-type arrangement that provides discounted beers and other perks.

 

This scenario can be seen in the letter BrewDog sent to me and other equity punks after the Tilray sale. “We would love to continue our relationship with this incredible community – to treat you as ambassadors for the brand and to honour the spirit of Equity for Punks. We intend to continue your key benefits, including bar and online discounts, tattoo discounts, and a free beer on your birthday.” Great, thanks. 

 

This is all well and good, but not every investor was in it wholly for the perks – myself included – and the reality is that crowdfunding has been like the Wild West. As well as the Willy Wonka valuations, the way the crowdfunded (easy) money has been spent has been highly questionable. All too often, it was used as merely working capital rather than the promised investment in new pubs and taprooms. 

 

I’m not overlooking the fact there have absolutely been many tough challenges faced by the sector over recent years, but there have also been some questionable management practices/decisions in evidence too. This is probably why many businesses returned multiple times to the crowdfunding well and each time diluted down existing shareholders.

 

On top of this, the supposed equity that companies have issued has invariably been of a variation with fewer rights than the full-fat equity owned by the founders. Even if BrewDog and Innis & Gunn had been sold for even half-decent sums, we rights-lite investors would have been right at the back of the queue during any payday.

 

So, what exactly have I learned from investing in crowdfunding businesses? It’s been a very clear lesson. I’d never do it again, unless it was for only modest sums that deliver a good return on investment on a philanthropic basis and the perks offered. I’ve recently stuck a very modest sum in Lost Cause Brewing Co because I wanted to help co-founder Colin Stronge, who is one of the best brewers in the country, build a new brewery, and I’ll hopefully get a chunk of my money back in free beer.

 

Yes, I understand that investing in any business has a flashing “buyer beware” sign above it. But like many other people, it feels like my crowdfunding commitments have merely contributed to elongating the life span of over-promising businesses in an over-supplied sector. The result has been that some individuals have made out like bandits while many suppliers have been forced to the edge by hefty unpaid bills – and a whole group of people have ultimately lost their jobs.