mollmatt

I need the advice of the many talented travellers on this board! Last night I was able to place on hold 2 FF tickets to London LHR, arriving June 2nd at 10am and returning June 15th at 10:20am for myself and my 14 year old daughter. We have found a 10 night cruise that leaves from Rome June 3rd for a pretty decent price. (I cannot get FF tickets into Rome, only LHR or possibly Gatwick.)

I like the itinerary of the cruise with stops in Naples, Genoa, Sicily, Nice and 2 Greek islands. It will cost $2800 for the two of us plus another $400 to get us to Rome and back once we land at LHR.

My dilema is should we do the cruise or should we stay in London for a few days, and build another European itinerary based on London as a starting and stopping point? We'd have 13 days.

Budget is a big consideration, and I'm wondering if the $2800 we'd spend on the cruise seeing the 7 cities would go as far if we did a London,Paris and maybe one other city trip. (I know there will be more expenses with the cruise to consider like the shore excursions and tips etc.)

I'm leaning towards the cruise because it seems "easier" but I'm wondering if it is the best thing to do for a first time trip to Europe for my daughter.

She also wants to see some of London if possible either at the beginning or the end of the trip. What advice to you have for us? Is it too ambitious to try to spend a day in London, fly to Rome for the cruise on June 3rd, return to London on the 13th and stay there until the 15th?

We probably won't be back to Europe again for 4-5 years....that's how long it'll take to build up the miles again!LOL.

What do you think?

janis

While the cruise sounds lovely -- I personally wouldn't want that to be my first experience in Europe. Your daughter would basically be limited to shore excursions into the ports and maybe a few nearby sights. Most of your time would be spen at sea -- and a Med cruise, West Indian cruise, Mexican cruise - they are all pretty much alike, mostly cruise vacations w/ shore visits. Of course there is a lot of differance between a shore trip to Nice and one to St Thomas. But I'd really prefer to see more of Europe and less of a cruise ship.

ira

Hi moll,

Do you want to visit Europe or take a cruise?

If the former, do a week in London and a week in Paris with one or two daytrips from each.

isabel

I agree with the other two. While the cruise does sound nice, you would only have a few hours really in each city which is not enough to get even a feel for them. I'm all for short overviews but I feel this is too short.

You should have no problem doing 13 days in Paris and London and other towns for the same money. There are places to stay for $100 a night so that would leave another $100 (approximately) for food and sightseeing. And also remember that even on the cruise you would probably be expected to pay for costs on the land excursions (at least lunch, etc) so that would increase the cost of the cruise. And the $400 would more than cover the cost of getting from Paris to London.

I think Paris and London are perfect for a first trip. You could easily add somewhere in Belgium (Brugge) or Holland (Amsterdam) if you want to add somewhere else for a few days.

degas

This is an easy one - skip the cruise and do Paris and London or do those two and add Amsterdam to the mix.

mamc

I absolutely agree you should do Paris and London and not the cruise. Keeping in mind that London is expensive and that you have plenty of time and that they are so charming, you may want to spend a few days in the English or French countryside as well.