Antwerp hotels and entrepreneurs want Winter in Antwerp to start two weeks earlier: winter wonderland or urban pressure cooker?

Few urban phenomena capture the contradictions of contemporary city life as clearly as the modern Christmas market. Branded as cosy, convivial and tradition-laden, winter events such as Winter in Antwerp (Winter in Antwerpen) attract hundreds of thousands of visitors, fill hotel rooms and dominate city-centre calendars for weeks on end. Yet behind the fairy lights and mulled wine lies an increasingly sharp debate about who truly benefits, who bears the costs, and what kind of city residents and policymakers ultimately want.

That debate has resurfaced forcefully in Antwerp in December 2025, where hoteliers and entrepreneurs are calling for Winter in Antwerp to start up to two weeks earlier. Their argument is straightforward: in a highly competitive Christmas market landscape, timing is everything.

The economic argument: competition, visitors and hotel beds

According to entrepreneurs’ representatives such as Nico Volckeryck of the Neutral Syndicate of the Self-Employed (Neutraal Syndicaat voor Zelfstandigen, NSZ), Antwerp risks losing visitors — and revenue — if it clings too tightly to tradition.

At present, Winter in Antwerp typically starts only after, or just around, St Nicholas Day on 6 December. The city authorities are reluctant to let the festivities begin earlier, citing folklore: St Nicholas and Santa Claus are, historically speaking, two manifestations of the same figure, and should not ‘clash’. This season’s edition ends a month later, on 4 January 2026.

For Volckeryck, that reasoning is out of touch with economic reality. Speaking on regional broadcaster ATV, he points to what he calls “hard-core Christmas market fans”: visitors who travel across Belgium and beyond to visit multiple markets over the course of the season. “If Brussels starts a week or two earlier, Antwerp loses visitors”, he argues, “and that means lower sales volumes for vendors and fewer hotel bookings”.

From a hospitality perspective, the logic is compelling. Large winter events boost hotel occupancy, extend the tourism season and generate international visibility. In an era where cities compete fiercely for short city breaks, Christmas markets are a proven draw.

For hoteliers and event organisers, starting earlier is less about Christmas spirit than about market share.

Crowds without customers?

Yet the equation becomes more complicated when looking beyond visitor numbers. Recent figures from Mode Unie (Fashion Union), the federation for independent fashion retailers, and UNIZO, the Union of Independent Enterprises, aint a more nuanced picture.

Despite extremely busy weekends in Antwerp – with packed streets, full car parks and police closing roads – many independent clothing shops report disappointing sales.

Retailers describe a city centre overflowing with people who come “for the atmosphere”, the Christmas market and the experience, but not necessarily to shop.

Consumers, they say, are cautious, informed and increasingly deliberate. Impulse purchases are down. Spending is spread across experiences, hospitality and leisure rather than traditional retail.

Warm autumn and early winter weather has compounded the issue. With temperatures hovering around 15 degrees well into December, consumers postponed buying winter coats and boots. As a result, independent fashion retailers sold on average 4% less than last year’s winter season. Even Christmas – traditionally a strong retail moment – failed to fully compensate, with shoppers spending less on gifts in local shops.

The paradox is striking: city centres are busier than ever, yet established small retailers struggle to translate footfall into revenue.

The spectacle city versus the living city

This tension sits at the heart of a broader critique voiced by urban planners and residents. Architect and urban planner Maarten Gheysen describes in De Standaard Christmas markets as emblematic of a deeper clash between the ‘residential city’ and the ‘spectacle city’.

From this perspective, large winter events are not neutral. They reshape public space, prioritising consumption and entertainment over everyday urban life. Noise, crowds and late-night music disrupt residents’ sleep. Streets designed for multiple users – pedestrians, cyclists, public transport – become congested ‘shared spaces’ where nothing quite works anymore.

The issue is not merely nuisance. Gheysen argues that the ‘Disneyfication‘ of city centres strips urban space of its political and social meaning. When public squares are permanently programmed for commercial events, there is little room left for protest, spontaneity or non-commercial use.

In Antwerp, even recurring political gatherings have been displaced to make room for Christmas market infrastructure.

Winners and losers in the winter economy

The economic benefits of Christmas markets are also unevenly distributed. While hotels, bars and temporary market stalls often do well, the surrounding retail ecosystem tells a different story. Independent shopkeepers report that visitors gravitate towards mulled wine, food stalls and chain cafés rather than neighbourhood shops.

Over time, critics warn, this dynamic reshapes city centres. Local butchers, bakers and specialist shops give way to coffee bars, fast-casual chains and souvenir-oriented retail. Urban researchers increasingly speak of ‘food deserts’ – places where affordable, healthy everyday shopping disappears, even in historic city centres.

In that sense, Christmas markets may accelerate trends already driven by tourism, rising rents and online retail. The festive atmosphere masks deeper structural changes that make cities less liveable for residents and less viable for independent entrepreneurs.

Viability versus desirability

This brings the debate back to its core question: not whether Christmas markets are successful, but what kind of success cities are aiming for.

From a narrow economic standpoint, large winter events deliver visibility, visitors and short-term revenue. From a broader urban perspective, their long-term viability is less certain. Constant competition between cities leads to ever larger, longer and more expensive events, locking local authorities into an ‘events economy’ that is difficult to scale back.

The call to start Winter in Antwerp earlier fits squarely into that logic. Yet it also risks deepening the very tensions that already surround such events: pressure on public space, limited benefits for local retailers, and growing frustration among residents.

A city-wide conversation overdue

What emerges from Antwerp’s winter debate is not a simple clash between tradition and commerce, or between civil servants and entrepreneurs. It is a fundamental discussion about urban priorities.

Can cities design winter events that genuinely support local retail rather than compete with it? Can they balance tourism with liveability? And should success be measured in visitor numbers alone, or in the everyday quality of urban life?

As Christmas markets continue to expand in scale and ambition, these questions can no longer be postponed.

Otherwise, the risk is that the very events meant to celebrate urban conviviality end up eroding the social and economic fabric that makes cities worth visiting – and living in – in the first place.

Trip By Trip

Antwerp hotels and entrepreneurs want Winter in Antwerp to start two weeks earlier: winter wonderland or urban pressure cooker?