Riu says no to Paris and Amsterdam: the numbers didn't work
Riu has turned down two cities any chain would sign for in a heartbeat. According to Preferente, the company received projects to open in Paris and Amsterdam, two major European capitals where it still has no presence, and dismissed them because they didn't fit its investment criteria. Naomi Riu, the group's chief financial officer, explained as much.
The reason isn't whim. Riu keeps a mostly holiday-led model with tightly defined return standards. An urban hotel in Paris or Amsterdam demands a different cost structure, a different revenue strategy and a different relationship with the owner. If the project doesn't fit that template, it doesn't fit. And the company would rather not force it.
Note the detail Naomi Riu drops in the same conversation: the chain does long for Barcelona, Rome or Amsterdam. The door isn't fully shut. What it rejected was the concrete project, not the city. My read is that Riu plays the long game and would rather wait for the asset that fits than sign one that forces it to rewrite the playbook.
Quick questions
Why did Riu refuse to open hotels in Paris and Amsterdam?
Has Riu ruled out entering Paris or Amsterdam for good?
What criteria does Riu use to decide where to open a hotel?
Does Riu lose market share by staying out of Paris or Amsterdam?
What does this mean for the European hotel sector?
Was this article useful?
The daily brief
Notitur in your inbox
One sharp travel-industry brief a day. Free.
Editorial content by Notitur. It may contain errors. Verify anything important with the original source.
This article may mention third-party products, companies or services for informational purposes. Notitur does not endorse them and is not responsible for them or for what they offer. Editorial content curated by the Notitur team.