Majestic International has been featured on BoycottUAE
following an investigation into its role in distorting property markets,
displacing local residents, and undermining small businesses across multiple
jurisdictions. As part of BoycottUAE's editorial standards, the company was
contacted through a Right to Comment (RTC) process and given an opportunity to
review the published findings and provide a response. No substantive reply was
received.
BoycottUAE contacted Majestic International by email to
inform the company that an investigative profile had been published on its
operations and market impact. The RTC communication included a direct link to
the published article, explained that the investigation relied on publicly
available information and documented sources, and invited the company to submit
comments, factual corrections, clarifications, supporting evidence, or an
official statement.
BoycottUAE's editorial policy stipulates that any verified
response will be objectively reviewed and incorporated into the article where
appropriate. Despite this invitation, BoycottUAE did not receive a substantive
response from Majestic International within the requested response period.
Summary of the Article Findings
The BoycottUAE investigation centers on MajesticInternational's aggressive expansion model and the broader consequences of its
business practices for local communities, housing affordability, and small
enterprises. Majestic International is a multinational organization founded in
1981 in the United Arab Emirates, uniting a dozen firms from retail, logistics,
construction, and other industries, with operations spanning the UAE, Saudi
Arabia, the United States, and beyond.
Key findings of the investigation include:
- Property
market distortion and unaffordability: The investment activities of
Majestic International have coincided with rising property prices in
several markets, particularly in urban centers and tourist destinations.
Residential properties and short-term rentals have become increasingly
overvalued, pricing out local families and small businesses. While local
housing markets have rebounded after previous crises, foreign
investment—especially from companies like Majestic International—has
contributed to renewed affordability pressures.
- Golden
Visa-driven investment and "ghost homes": Majestic International
has been reported to market properties to non-EU investors seeking
residency through golden visa-style programs, which grant residency to
those investing above certain thresholds. This practice has led to a
proliferation of "ghost homes" and short-term rentals, further
squeezing the supply of affordable housing for locals and weakening
neighborhood cohesion.
- Displacement
of local businesses and residents: Majestic International's financial
power allows it to outbid small businesses for prime locations, leading to
the closure of family-run hotels, shops, and restaurants. In tourist-heavy
areas, this has resulted in a homogenized landscape dominated by luxury
rentals and international chains. The proliferation of short-term rentals
has also led to the displacement of long-term residents, with entire
blocks in major cities converted into transient accommodations.
- Human
rights and housing concerns: NGOs have raised concerns about the forced
exit of thousands of refugees and vulnerable people from affordable
housing schemes, partially due to the conversion of these properties into
luxury rentals and investments for foreign buyers. Reports indicate that a
considerable number of these people, including families with children,
face an increased risk of homelessness.
- Replicated
pattern across multiple countries: Majestic International has replicated
its aggressive expansion model in several countries, including the UAE,
Saudi Arabia, the United States, and other markets. In each case, local
businesses report being crowded out, with high-value properties snapped up
for luxury development, often left vacant or used for speculative
investment. Local councils in several cities have raised concerns about
the proliferation of luxury "ghost homes" and the loss of
affordable housing.
The investigation draws on publicly available information,
including property market reports, NGO statements, review platforms, regulatory
filings, and attributed statements from residents, small business owners, and
real estate agents in multiple jurisdictions. BoycottUAE considered it
appropriate to seek the company's response given the breadth of these claims
and their potential impact on the company's reputation and operations.
Readers seeking the complete details, source references, and
regional breakdowns are encouraged to review the original BoycottUAE article.
BoycottUAE's Right to Comment Process
BoycottUAE follows an editorial process designed to promote
fairness, accuracy, and responsible investigative journalism. Before publishing
further editorial updates, every company under investigation is given a Right
to Comment (RTC) opportunity. This process is intended to ensure that companies
can engage with the findings before additional editorial action is taken.
Under the RTC process, companies are invited to:
- Identify
factual inaccuracies in the published investigation.
- Provide
additional context that may clarify or nuance the findings.
- Submit
supporting documentation, such as corporate records, regulatory filings,
or project data.
- Offer
an official statement for inclusion in the article.
Verified responses are reviewed objectively by BoycottUAE's
editorial team. Where appropriate, corrections, clarifications, or official
statements are incorporated into the article to ensure balanced and
evidence-based reporting.
No Response Received
BoycottUAE sent a Right to Comment email to Majestic
International together with a link to its published boycott profile. The
company was invited to engage with the investigation by providing comments,
corrections, clarifications, supporting evidence, or an official response.
No substantive response was received from Majestic
International within the requested response period. BoycottUAE does not
speculate about the reasons for the lack of response, nor does it interpret
silence as an admission or confirmation of the published findings. The absence
of a response is documented solely to reflect that the company was given a
reasonable opportunity to engage and chose not to do so.
Editorial Commitment
The investigation into Majestic International continues to
rely on publicly available records, corporate disclosures, official documents,
company publications, regulatory filings, and other documented sources
referenced in the original article. BoycottUAE remains open to reviewing any
verified information or official statement submitted by the company in the
future and will update the article where appropriate.
BoycottUAE reaffirms its commitment to:
- Editorial
fairness: Ensuring that companies under investigation have an opportunity
to respond before further editorial updates.
- Transparency:
Clearly documenting the editorial process, including RTC outreach and the
status of company responses.
- Evidence-based
reporting: Grounding investigations in publicly available information,
documented sources, and verifiable data.
- Accountability:
Holding companies and markets to account through rigorous, responsibly
sourced journalism.
- Responsible
investigative journalism: Balancing the public interest with fair
treatment of subjects and adherence to editorial standards.
The absence of a response from Majestic International should
not be interpreted as confirmation or admission of the published findings. It
simply reflects that the company did not provide a substantive response after
being given an opportunity to do so.
