Do Tours Cost Less?
 

While most of us on this forum are sworn independent travelers, I've frequently noticed that people signing up for tours mention that they cost less than independent travel. I know this isn't always the case-- we once got a self-catering rental unit in an 18th century manor house for $75 per person per WEEK-- but there must be some situations under which tours do cost less, or people wouldn't keep saying so. Has anyone tried to do a fair assessment of the relative costs? Under what conditions is suggesting independent travel unfair to the traveler on a budget?

Tours may cost less depending on how many travel, the style of travel and the locations. Independent driving gives the greatest flexibility but can be costly due to car rental, gas, tolls, fees and parking. If a group of 4 are sharing the costs, it is not so bad. There is also a lot of time and energy that goes into research and planning an independent trip. Although this is half the fun for some of us, for others short of time or lack of desire, it may not be. The locations also influence price, staying in the old city centers or within Venice say, is more expensive than staying outside the cities. Many tours can give better prices by doing that. Alot has to do with being in control, for better or worse, of where you stay of what you want to eat, or how long you pause in that sidewald cafe. I have friends that love independent travel and those that are disappointed in it, regardless of the price. It all boils down to what you want out of the trip!

Some persons would never travel were it not for organized tours. They hesitate to travel independently for many reasons. These would include: fear of getting lost, lack of experience, age, fear of going alone into a strange place, hesitation about going to places where they have no command of the local language, physical disabilities, etc. To make a judgment about independent vs. organized travel on the basis of cost alone would be to overlook other factors that influence the decision of going one way or another. My wife and I have traveled both ways. Both have been enjoyable. But we respect that the decision-making process for many persons goes beyond the dollar sign alone.

I have not done a detailed comparison, but have evaluated enough to develop an impression which I believe. My impression is that for two weeks in Europe, similar accommodations, locations, etc. -- tours cost less by somewhere in the ballpark of $100 - $300 per person. However, you give up virtually all control and absorb a good bit of financial risk for that $100 - $300 benefit. We do not consider that cost benefit to be worthwhile for us -- but to each his/her own. Also, as an independent traveler, you can often get upgrades or take benefit of good fortune which you cannot do with a tour.

There are so many variables that it would be hard to compare. You would really have to compare independent travel to a tour that is just like you would plan for yourself. It would be hard for me because I tend to stay in places that are $30 to $75 a night but will go to $120 if I need to. I have a feeling that most tours start with a higher price range for lodgings than this. I guess the closest for me may be Rick Steves. I would probably never make the decision based on price, unless somebody offered an incredibly low priced tour.

My first trip to Europe was a college graduation gift from Gram, and it was a Thomas Cook tour. We stayed in Hilton-type hotels, ate in restaurants geared toward busloads, had our bags loaded and unloaded withour worry, and an air-conditioned bus (coach) that was always ready to pick us up and drop us off. For the above privileges, Gram paid a pretty penny (ok so what's an ugly penny?). To price out a trip like that would cost substantially more than through a tour. <BR>On my own, I would NEVER stay in a Hilton hotel, eat in a restaurant that catered to tour busses, nor pay someone to haul my luggage (tempting though it has been at times). Consequently, I can travel a lot cheaper than any tour charges, simply because I'm doing less 'extravagant' things. <BR>I used to get brochures from a company called Go Ahead that seemed to be more reasonable in prices, as they pretty much booked your hotel and air fare, and the rest was up to you. Haven't gotten anything from them in a year or two; anybody know if they still exist? They also had a pretty good deal; if you booked so many people on a tour, you got a free trip yourself.

Just a thought - tours have a wide range of costs too. For instance, a top of the line Maupintour where you stay at exclusive hotels versus Globus. I find that my independent travel is far more expensive than Globus, but less than Maupintour, and I do like to stay in really nice hotels.

I wonder how much of the savings come from hotel costs? I can't imagine that a tour would be cheaper than the mode of travel I used as a college student with a backpack--bathroom down the hall, no travel to places I couldn't reach with my rail pass, and the safety of Europe, where in general there are limits to how wrong things can go. If I were travelling elsewhere, a tour would certainly have advantages. If I valued nice hotel rooms or easy transportation to places without train stations, a tour might save me money. I don't think it's unfair to suggest independent travel to a person on a budget, but it does reflect a belief that the tradeoffs you make to keep to the budget (bare-bones hotel rooms in the center of town, taking buses, buying groceries for a picnic) are worth it. I think that's just being opinionated, however--not unfair.

Martha, here's what I paid for my trip to France in May with my Mother (14 days to Paris, Dijon, Reims, Bayeux, D-Day beaches, and Mont St Michel): <BR> <BR>Hotels: $900 (small, comfortable, clean hotels, in excellent locations) <BR>Transportation: $1,841 (included flying my Mother RT from FL to MD; train, bus, car rental, parking, gas, metro). <BR>Museums/sights: $134 (included 2 3-day museum passes) <BR>Meals: $820 (typical meals were three courses and small bottle of wine) <BR>Total: $3,695.00. Divide that by two and you have $1,848 per person. This does not include shopping. I think that's a great price! <BR> <BR>I don't know what tours cost, but I personally wouldn't give up my freedom while traveling, unless I had to travel alone in certain countries. I walk every where, so I see a lot more than those on the tour busses. I choose my own restaurants and enjoyed all my meals. <BR> <BR>Eveyone has to decide how they wish to travel. I'm completely independent while others go on tours. It's their own decision. <BR> <BR>

Martha, there are a wealth of good answers to your question above, but I'll add my own reflection on the subject. <BR> <BR>No, I don't think tours are ever less expensive in dollar terms than independent travel, unless "less expensive" is compared to an airline's non-discounted economy-class fare or a hotel's "rack rate." It takes a stretch of imagination to believe that someone couldn't put together the components of a vacation for less money by doing some careful shopping. <BR> <BR>But there are times when a tour is a logical choice. I've finally convinced my 83-year-old aunt to take a cruise to Scandanavia. For her, physical infirmity makes an escorted tour the only choice, and the premium for such a tour is a reasonable and necessary expense. For my aunt, tours are also a means of socializing. She still corresponds with people she met on tours in the mid-1950s. <BR> <BR>I think there's also a comfort factor if you are a first-time traveler. If you've never had to find the right bus to get you to the RER blue line to get to to the Gare du Nord to connect to the... (you get the idea), then seeing someone else do it for you that first time has a distinct advantage. I think there are a lot of people on this forum who, like Elvira, made that first voyage abroad as part of a group, kept their eyes open, and did it on their own afterwards. <BR> <BR>We've taken a tour only once, to Egypt, two years ago. We did so because of both a language and a culture barrier. Along the way, we noted what we could and could not have done for ourselves. On the whole, we determined that even Egypt could be done by a couple on non-Arabic-speaking tourists (and for 25-35% less), and so we're planning a trip to India without the services of a tour firm. <BR> <BR>So, I guess people who say tours are less expensive mostly are comparing such costs to largely fictitious fares. And I'd love to know where that $75 per person per week rental unit was...

If you read the 'included' list on tours, you'll see something like "16 meals included"...on a 10 day trip. I figure that's 30 meals (more or less) so there are at least 10 meals you must pay for. Figure $25 per meal, so there's another $250. "optional excursion" means another $10-30 for a sightseeing tour. When I priced out our trip to France this year (no profit, it's what I do for the Loons), I included EVERYTHING (all meals, all transportation, every boat ride, canoe rental, museum admission, etc.) and it came to about what the tours were charging...but there were no extras that will crop up later. <BR>

Another thing to keep in mind is the "spending money" that you will need that is not added into the price of a tour. This post got me wondering, so I priced out our recent weeklong trip to Florence and Venice. Transportation was $1250, hotels $550 (we found a great deal in Florence), meals $400, and major museum costs (the ones that might be included on a tour) about $100. That comes out to about $1150 per person, which is much less than tours I have seen. We also stayed right in the heart of both cities, which tour groups rarely do, especially inexpensive tours, and we ate in wonderful restaurants of our own choosing, including Cibreo in Florence. However, we spent another $300 on things like admission fees to things that wouldn't be included in a tour package, cafes, snacks, etc. These are things that people on a tour will also have, and they need to be added to the price of a tour to make a fair comparison to independent travel. I've noticed that when people compare a tour price to independent travel they often forget to add in all these extras, and they certainly do add up.

Neal brought up a good point (intentionally or otherwise): he asked about the $75 per week per person accommodations. We are staying in a 14th century manor house this fall...everything included (linens, heat, electricity, pool, etc) for about $600 a week...the place sleeps TEN. That's right, folks, TEN...do the math. It is in the Dordogne Valley, a very inexpensive part of France. On a tour, this area probably wouldn't even be included (though the whole area is castles, fortresses, bastides, vineyards, underground caves, prehistoric drawings...huuuh big inhale ...canoeing, horseback riding, labyrinths, parks, gardens, cave dwellings....huuuh big inhale). You get the picture. Independent travelers tend to get off the beaten path for a portion of their trips, so costs begin to go down. A three-week tour is Rome, Florence, Venice, Geneva, Paris...vs a house outside of Rome for $700 that sleeps 8, a b&b in Popiglio, a small inn in Padua, an apartment in Leysin and a Climat in Fontainebleu....

Thanks to everyone for such thoughtful and balanced responses. And thanks, Elvira, for confirming that those $75 pp/pw rentals are out there. Ours was a rural gite in the Lot, adjacent to the Dordogne, which we rented in late August, 1997, through Gites de France. For a family group of 8, we paid a basic fee of 3500 FF, plus a modest charge for linens (often not supplied in rural gites.) It was supposed to be for 7 nights, but since no one was booked the week after us, they threw in an 8th night for free. Earlier the same summer we rented an apartment for three people in the Queyras region of the French Alps. The bill was 1500 FF. These rentals aren't feasible without an automobile. On the other hand, we used the cooking facilities for all breakfasts, and about a third of our lunches and dinners, so the cost of food, compared to eating every meal in a restaurant, was considerably reduced.

Here's my own case study: Out of curiosity, I took a look at Rick Steves' tours because I've seen them recommended several times on this website. <BR> <BR>I decided to consider the 20 day BB&B tour (Bus, Bed & Breakfast, no guide) of Britain since I've been there several times recently and on this tour "you act as your own sightseeing guide, paying your own admission fees". (The fully guided tour is $3200.) <BR> <BR>The cost for this tour is $2700 (plus airfare). I spent three weeks in the UK last summer (July - high season!), covering much of the same territory, staying in modest but clean and pleasant B&B's, for less than $2000 (plus airfare - $550). <BR> <BR>My trip included a railpass, several minibus day tours, and all the "extras" not included in the $2700 tour price (entrance fees, laundry, souveniers, etc). <BR> <BR>I suspect that my food and lodging requirements were somewhat less than those provided by the tour, but according to the website, the Rick Steves tour includes "double rooms at cozy, localstyle hotels" and "all your breakfasts, half of your lunches, and half of your dinners" so maybe not. <BR> <BR>I know there are some die-hard Rick Steves' fans out there, and I can't say the tours are not worth the money, since I haven't actually experienced one. However, given $2700 (plus fees, meals etc) I could really live it up on my own, even in the expensive UK. Even better, I could stay an extra week or two. <BR> <BR>Bottom line: similar itinerary, comparable (probably) accomodations and meals, and I would have paid at least $1000 to have someone else make my transport and lodging arrangements.

Here's another comparison: <BR> <BR>Evan Evans four-day "Gems of Britain" tour is L265 (~$450?). As far as I can tell from the website, this includes entrance fees. Since this does not include all meals and only 3 nights accomodation, say $450US for 3.5 days, or about $130US per day, compared to about $160US/day for the much longer (20 day), and probably more enjoyable, Rick Steves' Britain tour (the fully-guided tour, not the limited BB&B example from my previous posting). <BR> <BR>As I mentioned above, my personal experience is that I can easily tour Britain (a fairly expensive place!) for about $100/day on my own. <BR> <BR>So what have I learned? If my previously untraveled parents wanted to take a once-in-a-lifetime comprehensive tour of Europe, I would probably recommend paying the extra $60/day for the convenience and small size of a Rick Steves' type tour. If one of my 20-Something cousins wanted to visit Britain (or Italy, or the Alps) for the first time, I might suggest a short orientation tour plus some solo travel. For myself, unless I wanted to visit someplace truly exotic where English is just not spoken and public transportation is difficult, I don't think the added cost would be justified for more than a short tour, if that. <BR> <BR>(I was a bit worried about traveling in Turkey last summer, given the relative novelty of English-speaking tourists and the minimal rail system. But the unique overnight buses and incredibly friendly locals more than made up the difference - and these were things I would not have experienced on a tour. So I'm not really sure just how "exotic" a country would have to be to justify a tour for me.) <BR> <BR>Enough philosophizing - my point is that although this is all very anecdotal, I've convinced myself that tours ARE more expensive than solo travel, even for comparable accomodations and itineraries. Whether that extra cost is worthwhile is still subjective though. <BR> <BR> <BR>PS Martha, <BR>I've thought about taking a tour myself, someday. Thanks for making me finally sit down and consider the finances involved. I might still do it, but at least now I'll be able to make a more informed choice.

Her's my take based on personal experience. Six years ago my family took a fully guided tour of Israel. Several months ago my wife and I travelled to Italy and England on our own. From my experience, we got so much more being on a tour in Israel than trying to do it on our own. Knowing what our interests were and knowing exactly the nature of the tour made the tour work for us. I doubt if we would have been able to travel to the Golan Heights etc. on our own and have various sights pointed out and explained to us along the way. Italy, on the other hand, was a destination where we knew what we wanted to see and do (dine in street side cafes, drink wine, people watch, eat pasta, drink wine etc!) and most of all, it included being in the cities of Rome, Florence and Venice. The only time I missed not being on a tour was when we spent time in the Roman Forum...I could have spent a full day there with a good tour leader. Although, I guess it's impossible to know what we missed by not taking a tour, I do know that we are content in not being disappointed in what we saw and did. Also, and perhaps most importantly for us, the cost of going on our own was quite a bit less and we would not have gone if it was comparable to what a tour costs.

I took my first trip to Europe about a month ago. It was a group tour, with a company that specializes in student tours. I paid about 2,000 US ,which was 1,000 less than, say Perillo. Two main things I learned from that trip: 1.I want to go back and 2.I could have done it on my own. I wasn't sure because of language whether I'd be able to handle it, but now I know I can. I've had a taste, and that's the important thing. Also, I met some really nice people in our group. Will I do a tour again? Maybe. Especially if I find a specialized tour that appeals to me. But, I think I'd rather set my own pace next time. <BR>