RM67

List of the ten cheapest places for a European city break, according to the Telegraph, and based on hotel costs, evening meals with wine, sightseeing tour and travel cards.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/de...ty-breaks.html

dulciusexasperis

And your point is?

Any list is only relevant if the criteria used in making it up are the criteria of interest to you as an individual.

If what you want is the 'cheapest' cities to visit without regard for example to where you are interested in visiting, the list might interest you. But if you want to visit Rome there is no point in saying Brussels is cheaper.

It also assumes how you will define 'cheapest'. Which city for example has the cheapest hostels (not hotels); supermarket food (not restaurants); beer by the bottle (not a decent bottle of wine); has widely available bicycle rentals throughout the city (not sightseeing tours). That will no doubt get you an entirely different list.

While the 10 cities listed are all worth visiting at some point in your life I suppose, quite frankly not one of them would make my 'top ten' list of cities in Europe to visit FIRST.

The price of a 'city break' as defined by the writer and as taken by many people because it's 'cheap', will never factor in to my choice of destination.

dwdvagamundo

I thought it was an interesting article, and the point seems to be exactly what the OP said. Nothing in the OP or in the article claims this is a list of European cities to visit on first trip.

Price is a factor in my choice of destinations as I am not independently wealthy, and the list is helpful to me. The Euro and the Pound are very high right now and a colleague of mine is going to Prague and Budapest (as well as Vienna) this year partly for that reason. Made me think that a trip to Budapest and Istanbul, which is something I've wanted to do for a while, may be timely.

So thanks RM67.

RM67

I think it's interesting to see which cities rate as best value for common items of expenditure, Of course, somewhere may not turn out to be that cheap if it's the opposite side of the continent to you and the flight cancels out the savings on hotels and food. And it can also be a bit misleading in that some of the more expensive cities for accomodation eg London which for that reason does not figure anywhere on the list have a lot of free museums and galleries which saves a ton on day to day expenditure. But I think its nice to have a guide to budget options.

Whilst the demographic of Fodors is weighted heavily toward the more affluent, and people using airmiles or hotel loyalty schemes, there are also people doing it entirely at their own cost who might appreciate the heads up.

rialtogrl

Many of these places are on my list - thanks RM67!
They should have included one place from Romania though

nukesafe

I also thought the article was interesting and helpful, and that dulci's diatribe was mean spirited.

The article was certainly as helpful as other "indexes" such as the Big Mac Index in making generic judgements of travel cost. I, for example, have been vaguely considering a trip to the Baltic states to look for my Wife's family members in Estonia. Not having researched the area, I had thought those three countries would be expensive, as are their Scandinavian neighbors. Now I know differently.

Bedar

The article was about the cheapest places for European city breaks, going someplace on the WEEKEND. We just got back from Holland, Belgium, and France yesterday. It's our opinion that many, many Europeans are now taking weekend breaks on the cheap airlines so this article is timely. We're now calling Europe the continent of the little suitcases - the tiny ones that can be taken as carry-ons for free on these airlines.

thursdaysd

What Bedar said. This was a UK newspaper article, written for UK readers. I am however, sorry to see some places I really like on this list, as I would just as soon they did NOT attract a bunch of partying weekenders. Budapest in particular, as it already seemed to be firmly on the tourist circuit the last time I was there. (For the record, I've been to all of the places on the list, and would be happy to revisit all but Brussels and Warsaw, rather boring, and Prague, already overwhelmed with visitors in 2004.

dulciusexasperis

I'm responding to the article and 'indexes' in general, no offense to the OP is intended.

PalenQ

Brussels a cheap destination - maybe for Brits because they can get there on Eurostar so cheap but overall it is one of the more expensive (and boring IMO and many others) cities in Europe - the rest in eastern Europe, Turkey and Portugal have always been cheaper than western Europe.

Brits on a vacation may want to chose a place to go drink and party because it is cheaper but most tourists from non-European countries use other criteria.

StCirq

Portugal is IN western Europe. I have always loved Brussels and don't understand why it gets a bad rap. It has the best food in western Europe, IMO, among other things. I thought the article was very timely and useful, especially for weekenders.

PalenQ

that Brussels cannot be mesmerizing ain't the issue - the issue is it one of Europe's cheapest places?

No way Jose!