Twelve European cities × seven season weeks. Use this map to choose your week, sense the collision risk, and lock the date before the W4 crunch.
| City | W2 11–17 Jan | W3 18–24 Jan | W4 25–31 Jan | W5 1–7 Feb | W6 8–14 Feb | W7 15–21 Feb | W8 22–28 Feb |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| London | 2.4× | 4.8× | 9.2× | 7.1× | 4.2× | 3.1× | 2.0× |
| Munich | 1.9× | 3.9× | 8.1× | 6.5× | 3.4× | 2.4× | 1.6× |
| Berlin | 2.2× | 4.1× | 7.6× | 6.3× | 3.8× | 2.6× | 1.8× |
| Madrid | 1.7× | 4.5× | 6.8× | 5.2× | 3.1× | 2.2× | 1.5× |
| Barcelona | 1.8× | 4.7× | 6.4× | 4.9× | 3.0× | 2.1× | 1.6× |
| Amsterdam | 2.1× | 5.2× | 5.8× | 4.1× | 2.6× | 1.9× | 1.4× |
| Paris | 1.6× | 3.4× | 5.4× | 4.6× | 2.8× | 2.0× | 1.5× |
| Milan | 1.5× | 3.1× | 4.5× | 3.7× | 2.4× | 1.8× | 1.4× |
| Rome | 1.3× | 2.6× | 3.8× | 3.2× | 2.1× | 1.7× | 1.2× |
| Dublin | 1.4× | 2.4× | 3.6× | 3.0× | 2.0× | 1.6× | 1.2× |
| Lisbon | 1.2× | 2.1× | 2.8× | 2.4× | 1.8× | 1.5× | 1.2× |
| Porto | 1.0× | 1.6× | 2.2× | 1.9× | 1.4× | 1.2× | 1.1× |
Index of RFP volume per city × week, anchored to lowest cell in matrix (Porto W2 = 1.00). Cross-referenced against STR European Q1 occupancy public press releases. Source: Easy RFP corpus, 1,420 SKO RFPs, sent Oct 2025 – Apr 2026 for events landing W2–W8 2026.
For each event week, the table below gives the recommended RFP send date in 2026 to land in the "safe" lead-time band. Send later than this and you accept the collision risk in the right column.
| Event week (2027) | Calendar dates | Safe RFP send window (2026) | Late-send threshold | Collision risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W2 | 11–17 Jan | 5 Oct – 16 Nov | after 30 Nov | LOW |
| W3 | 18–24 Jan | 21 Sep – 2 Nov | after 16 Nov | HIGH (DACH+UK) |
| W4 | 25–31 Jan | 7 Sep – 19 Oct | after 2 Nov | PEAK · CRITICAL |
| W5 | 1–7 Feb | 14 Sep – 26 Oct | after 9 Nov | PEAK |
| W6 | 8–14 Feb | 5 Oct – 16 Nov | after 23 Nov | HIGH |
| W7 | 15–21 Feb | 19 Oct – 23 Nov | after 30 Nov | MODERATE |
| W8 | 22–28 Feb | 26 Oct – 30 Nov | after 7 Dec | LOW |
Below the late-send threshold for any peak week, expect priced-proposal rate to fall under 20% and rate inflation of 8–14% on the few hotels that can still hold space. The threshold is not a polite suggestion — it's the operational point below which the hotel triage process actively de-prioritises your RFP in favour of earlier-arriving requests for the same week.
| Lead time to event | Priced-proposal rate | Capacity-decline rate | Rate inflation vs 16-week benchmark |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16+ weeks | 52% | 8% | 0% (baseline) |
| 12–16 weeks | 44% | 14% | +2–4% |
| 8–12 weeks | 32% | 23% | +5–8% |
| 4–8 weeks | 18% | 38% | +8–14% |
| under 4 weeks | 9% | 51% | +15–25% (when held) |
Figures from the Easy RFP 1,420-RFP SKO cohort. Rate inflation measured on confirmed bookings vs the 16-week median benchmark for the same city × week × room-night band. Hotels excluded from inflation calc when no comparable confirmed booking existed at the 16-week mark.
European SKO attendee counts are bimodal — regional offsites cluster at 60–120, EMEA-wide rollups at 250–450. The right city shortlist is different for each band. Hotels lose deals when planners send to the wrong list.
Compact venue, single plenary, 4–8 breakouts. Single-hotel solution works.
Plenary + 8–12 breakouts + main dinner. Single anchor hotel + 1–2 overflow.
Plenary 400+ pax, 12–20 breakouts, main dinner off-site. Anchor hotel + 2–3 overflow + event-venue contract.
Convention-centre plenary, branded property anchor, multi-hotel rooming. DMC support recommended.
Convention-centre primary, four+ partner hotels, DMC mandatory, security review.
Below 250 attendees, direct sourcing via Easy RFP is typically the lowest-friction path. Above 250, a DMC's local relationships in peak weeks meaningfully improve the priced-proposal rate — especially in Iberia where coordinator-level rapport opens space the email queue does not.
Briefs that answer all eight questions before sending lift priced-proposal rate by 15–20 points in the Easy RFP cohort. The pattern is consistent across all 12 cities and all attendee bands.
Hotels with "movable" briefs in peak weeks routinely deprioritise behind locked-date competitors. Stating "W4 preferred, W6 acceptable" gives the hotel two paths to win the deal.
LIFT: +8 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATERevenue managers price differently for 200 single-occupancy than 100 share-occupancy. Vague "200 attendees, rooms TBC" lands in the slow queue.
LIFT: +5 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATEPlenary set-up + breakout count + meeting-room minimum determines whether the hotel's meeting-space inventory fits at all. Send the room shape, not just "8 breakouts".
LIFT: +4 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATEF&B revenue carries the SKO margin for the hotel. Confirming you will dine on-property two of three evenings dramatically improves the priced-proposal rate.
LIFT: +6 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATE"Decision by 30 November" gives the hotel a clear calendar to plan the priced proposal. Leaving the timeline open invites passive responses.
LIFT: +3 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATEGeneric mailboxes in peak weeks queue behind named-contact requests. Find the sales director on LinkedIn — replacing info@ with a named contact roughly doubles reply rate.
LIFT: +12 PTS REPLY RATESetting a clear acknowledgement window keeps your RFP visible inside the hotel's sales pipeline. It also signals professional buyer behaviour, which hotels reward.
LIFT: +3 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATE"Annual EMEA sales kickoff for a B2B SaaS company, 220 attendees, plenary + workshops" frames the deal. Hotels pricing into a known event type quote sharper than hotels guessing.
LIFT: +4 PTS PRICED-PROPOSAL RATEOne brief, routed to capacity-checked hotels in 12 European cities. Priced proposals side-by-side. Peak-week conflict flags inside the brief builder. Free 14-day Pro trial — no credit card. easyhotelrfp.com/pricing