thename1000

Hi!

8 day (leaving on 9th day) trip arriving in either Paris or London, and leaving from Amsterdam.

Choices are either London > Paris > Amsterdam OR Paris > Bruges > Amsterdam.

I have not been to Europe before, it'll be two people traveling. I really like what I can find about Bruges, but London is..London. Do you guys think London is missable or does it have so much to see that I just have to see it? I'm flexible and can be swayed either way, I know London should be more expensive, but ignore costs please.

If I go to London, then it would be two full days in London and Paris, one full day in Amsterdam. If I go to Bruges it'll be two full days in Paris, two full days in Amsterdam, and one full day in Bruges.

Thoughts?

sofarsogood

if you think London is missable then I wouldn't bother, it mustn't appeal to you

anyway, two days in London and Paris and one day in Amsterdam is really a waste of time and money so go for your other option

hetismij2

You could easily spend your 8 days in Paris or London, or perhaps both and skip Amsterdam.
If Amsterdam is a must then Paris and Amsterdam and skip Brugge. Give yourself more time in Paris and maybe 3 days in Amsterdam.

kja

With only 8 days, I agree that it would be best to pick AT MOST 2 locations. And either Paris or London could easily merit all of your time.

janisj

>>Do you guys think London is missable<<

I can honestly say I've never seen a question like that

Bruges is a 1 day or 1.5 day destination, London has hundreds more things to see/do (actually thousands)

BUT no matter what you decide - neither London or Paris can be 'done' in the 2 days you plan. And 1 day in Amsterdam is pretty much useless.

w/ just 8 days (probably 7.5 and the first day or you'll be dealing w/ jet lag) do London and Paris - or - Paris and Amsterdam - or London and A'dam.

kja

Oh -- I just realized we've already been giving you this and similar advice on your other thread:
http://www.fodors.com/community/euro...-in-9-days.cfm