By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


London is the second most expensive option for an Airbnb in Europe

With short trips to European capital cities an increasingly more popular option, a growing number of people are turning to Airbnb for a short-term holiday let. 

Millions of people use Airbnb when travelling, which is why so many more homeowners and landlords are listing rooms and properties with the online home rental platform.

A recent report from ARLA Propertymark, in partnership with leading research consultancy Capital Economics, revealing that the number of active listings on Airbnb in the UK rose by 33% to 223,000 in 2018 from 168,000 in 2017. 


Unsurprisingly, London has the largest market in the UK, with the number of active listings rising four-fold from 18,000 in 2015 to 77,000 in 2019. 

Short-let letting is generally significantly more lucrative than long-term rentals, with new research from sellhousefast.uk revealing that London is currently the second most expensive choice for an Airbnb within a one-mile radius of the central point at £188.00/€222.00 per night. 

Monaco has the most expensive option for an Airbnb within a one-mile radius at a whopping £296.00/€349.00 per night.

The rise of short-term lets has affected areas across London and has been blamed for driving up property prices in some parts of the capital, while also opening up some neighbourhoods to more tourists, which has sometimes proved unpopular with existing residents. 

The growth in short-term lets is particularly concerning for the traditional private rented sector. 

David Cox, ARLA Propertymark chief executive, commented: “As landlords are continuously faced with increased levels of legislation, it’s no surprise they are considering short-term lets as a chance to escape this. 
“Unless the sector is made more attractive, landlords will continue to exit the market resulting in less available properties and increased rent costs.”

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • icon

    I got into FHL in 1989; long before it became a phenomenon. Why? After years of being a great landlord I got one evil tenant who knew how to use the system. The council was there to kiss his arse no matter how bad he was. I sold the property to an evil landlord. Result: good landlord gone: crap landlord gets bigger.
    Simply: councils don’t want the cost of B&Bing scum tenants any sooner than they have to. So it takes an age to get them out.
    Lots of good landlords are fed up. It’s the sanctimonious rule makers who will actually increase homelessness! Idiots!

    • 07 March 2020 17:43 PM

    Indeed it the fundamentally dysfunctional eviction process which causes LL to give up.
    Few LL ever appreciate that their viability is underpinned by such a dysfunctional process.

    Without RGI on the tenant or a guarantor the LL is pretty much defenceless.

    This was certainly something in my initial very naive days of being a LL that I failed to appreciate.
    I know I would have done things differently to the point of possibly not even bothering to be an AST LL.
    The PRS would be transformed for the better if in cases of rent default a LL could legally WITHOUT recourse to County Courts boot out a tenant after 2 months rent default which in most cases is 1 month and one day as rent is paid in advance.
    Such a change to the eviction process would enable LL to take on almost any type of tenant knowing they could quickly get rid of them if they defaulted on their rent.
    It would make things far easier for tenants to obtain tenancies.
    But of course such a policy change will NEVER occur as Govt and Councils know they would be faced with millions of homeless tenants as a result of their rent defaulting.
    It currently costs LL about £9 billion a year in losses mostly caused by rent defaulting tenants.

    Can you imagine the costs that Councils would incur for TA for all those evicted rent defaulting tenants!!!??

    Nope Govt prefers that LL suffer the losses by forcing LL to let tenants occupy property for free until they can be evicted.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up