Go Back  Fodor's Travel Talk Forums > Destinations > Europe
Reload this Page >

Shorter trips vs going twice--idly wondering what you think

Shorter trips vs going twice--idly wondering what you think

Old Feb 26th, 2004, 11:51 AM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shorter trips vs going twice--idly wondering what you think

Hi
Just today's travel musings, and the given is that I hope to be fortunate enough this year to be able to consider these options:

I ache to go back to Rome, Venice, and Paris.
It has been more than 3 years since my last trip to Paris, that's a long time for me. I have been there most frequently of all.
By the fall of this year, it will be 3 years since last time in Rome and Venice.

Anyway, if I can work out a 10 days or so vacation later this year, do you think I should do one ten day vacation and split the time among the three cities, or do a week in Italy and then perhaps an extended weekend in Paris separately? When it comes to Paris and Venice especially, I will always be planning a return.

Obviously the air fares are the major consideration, as is being away for a longer stretch all at once, (as opposed to two shorter periods) And as I always say, you always lose a good part of one day going from one place to another. Just wondering how any of you might weigh the choices.
elaine is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:02 PM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As someone who cannot be away from the office for an extended period of time, I take a lot of long weekend trips to Europe each year (well I consider 4 or 5 a lot). If you can get non-stop flights and travel in the shoulder or off-season, you can really get a lot of value for your time and your money.

I prefer to spend all my time in one place such as London or Paris. The best part of this type of travel is that if you join a frequent flyer program, you can get a free ticket to the 48 contiguous states and Alaska just by flying two trips to Europe plus bonus miles for charging your tickets, booking on-line, and other promotions.

Fly like this often enough and you will get elite status and get even more benefits from your airline of choice.
Dorothy01 is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:07 PM
  #3  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
thanks for the insight.
Do you feel that the FF points you get are worth paying for 4-5 separate airfares? I've found that with some FF restrictions (especially on Delta, the airline which I frequently use domestically) I can't get free tickets or upgrades when I want them. So I seldom let FF issues determine which airline I use. Maybe that's one of my problems.
elaine is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:10 PM
  #4  
SRS
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts


Hi elaine,

I think I would split it in half, although it would make me sad to have to pick which one to skip. But with about 5 and 5, you could really relax and enjoy yourself.

That's my vote. But you can't lose no matter how you split it!
SRS is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:28 PM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would do the 10 days all together. I live on the west coast and to me it doesn't make sense from an expense and time spent traveling point of view to break it up. But then again, I wouldn't go to 3 cities in 10 days either. I'd more likely opt for just 2.

I find that if you use credit cards for most of your personal or business expenses, the miles add up quickly even if you don't concentrate all of your flying on one airline. We used our DL miles to fly to London last November and will again be using our miles to fly to Ecuador and Jamaica this spring. Without these "freebies" we couldn't afford to travel as much.
Patty is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:42 PM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 34,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I always have this problem, also, and it gets worse when I find a new favorite city--I don't get that much vacation, which is really the problem rather than the money for me. I usually do one trip to Europe which can last from 10-21 days (I can't do the latter every year). Some years I split that into two trips of maybe 7-10 days each.

I would rather do the thing of 10 days in Italy and a long weekend to Paris separately later. If they were in the same country or close together, I might say do them together. But with two trips, I think you can focus and enjoy each place more and that way you get to stretch it out. I do hate flying, however, so spending 7-10 hours in transit on a plane is a real problem for me and one reason why I don't go some places.

If you choose off-peak season, some of those air fares don't have to be huge, and you'd have to pay to get between the cities, anyway.

I don't get many FF miles either, at least they add up slowly. Some I have had were difficult to use, anyway, so I just search for cheap tickets. It don't have that many expenses and don't charge much, so there isn't any way I can get a lot of FF miles--I don't have business expenses.

In fact, I was going to post this question on here but it seemed too trivial so I didn't, but -- I just had AAA VISA raise my late/bounced check fees because they didn't like it that I wasn't using their credit card enough and not charging enough. They raised the late fee from $29 to $39 and said they did it because of my low volume of transactions. Now, on one hand, it doesn't really matter because I always pay my bill in full each month so never pay interest or a late fee, but I have never heard of having fees raised because you aren't in debt enough. It isn't a very good way to get more money out of me either.
Christina is online now  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:49 PM
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 49,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would do one 10-day trip. Five days is just not long enough for me, especially given the fairly long travel times involved - I leave feeling unfulfilled and desperate to prolong the vacation. It's also not enough time for me to relax and sink into the feeling of being in Europe. In fact, these days, I only start to really relax after about 10 days.

But I do question whether you can do justice to Paris, Rome, and Venice in 10 days, even though you already know them. Sadly, I'd say you might want to leave out Paris, or go to Paris and somewhere else in France and plan to go back to Italy another time.
StCirq is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 12:59 PM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My style is similar to Dorothy01's: I take more trips of shorter duration. It is far less disruptive and I appreciate the breaks coming more often. Miles add up quickly and status is more easily gained using long hauls. With elite bonuses and added promotions that are common in the slower travel months, the net cost of flying can be incredibly low. (Acquiring and making good use of FF miles is a whole different type of travel hobby in itself.)
Flyboy is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 01:01 PM
  #9  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
StCirq, it's an interesting question, about needing a few days just to settle into the idea of a European visit.
I recently went to London for just 4 full days. It was a great little low-budget jaunt and I'd been there several times before, but by the second day I was already thinking that I only had 2 days left!

As I read the responses to this nice civilized exchange (thank you all) I'm starting to agree with the advice I usually give other people, which is that 3 places in 10 or so days, even for return visits, will end up being unsatisfying, at least for me. I think I'll have to bite the bullet and pick two, for perhaps 7-8 days. And then as always, start planning the next one.
elaine is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 01:19 PM
  #10  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think that the answer will depend on ease of travel too. I live in NYC, so transatlantic trips work out well, in the sense that I can leave after work and arrive in the morning and leave Europe in the evening and come back in the early evening.

This year I was in Paris and London for long weekends. They worked out well, though I admit that I was tired when I first arrived in Europe. Still going this way is better than not going at all. I do plan to take longer breaks later in the year but I want to use those to explore places I haven't yet seen.

Further, I think that 10 days can be enough for 3 places. The split doesn't have to be even -- you could have 5-3-2 split or even a 5-4-1 split, if you see what I mean. I've visited Paris and Berlin in five days, for example. And I've spent minimal time (like one night) in places like Geneva and Brussels while en route to other places. It just depends on whether you can cope with it. Personally, I'd rather see things in a rushed pace than not see things at all. And I find that having a taste of things gives me an idea as to what I want to see more of in a future trip. As with a lot of things, it's really a matter of personal taste too.
111op is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 01:40 PM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Elaine, I don't know where you live so that might make a difference. But one thing that I would think is that a trip to all three cities in 10 days would take away from each city in that I couldn't just concentrate on the place I was. If I was in Paris I think I'd start thinking about Venice (where presumably I would be in a few days), and so on.

I travel from the west coast and even with the 10 or 11 hour flight, I like doing several trips a year. Once you achieve elite milage status (and earning that status has made it WELL worth loyalty to one airline) not only earns me double miles (enough for a free domestic trip with each international trip) plus a guaranteed window bulkhead seat, which allows me to sleep.

Plus like someone else said, you have more to look forward to through the year.
Grasshopper is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 02:46 PM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Christina,
I know what you mean about flying. I find myself hating it more and more too. 10 years ago I wouldn't have hesitated to take a weekend trip to Paris, but now I really have to stay long enough to justify sitting on a plane for 10 hours or more each way. Takes me an extra day just to recover. Or I have to be willing to part with enough money and/or miles to fly in a premium class. I often see those great off-peak deals and am very tempted to getaway for a quick jaunt, but haven't been able to bring myself to do it.
Patty is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 03:53 PM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 12,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Disadvantage of a short trip to Europe:
Long flight
Cost of flight
Having to adjust to the new time zone (8 or 9 hours in my case)
Use of vacation days to travel to and from the city

By saving the cost of the extra flight and the extra vacation days, I can afford more time in Europe if I go only once instead of twice.

But for people on the east coast, the equation of time and money might be entirely different. I never get super-cheap fares, being in Vancouver.
WillTravel is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 04:28 PM
  #14  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would go to Rome and Venice and do Paris on another trip! Have fun!
WanderingTexan is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 06:03 PM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have the same issue as others with the amount of travel time. I live in New Orleans, so my next trip is NO to Atlanta to JFK to Venice...I spend most of the day just getting to NY! I'm doing 12 days this time, but only doing 2 places...Venice and somewhere else, flying back out of Munich (which, thankfully, is a direct flight back to Atlanta, so only one change!). With only 3 weeks of vacation a year, this is about the longest trip I can manage. If I could fly direct from the East Coast, leave after work, I would be more tempted to go for just a few days.

Anne
AnneO is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 06:12 PM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 12,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I always try to get nonstop vacation flights leaving Friday night to help maximize my time on the ground, and then return 16 or 17 days later.
WillTravel is offline  
Old Feb 26th, 2004, 09:17 PM
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My choice is to stay as long as possible, so I would do the 10 day trip. You could take the night train from Venice to Paris to maximize your time. I suppose if you live on the east coast you can consider an extended weekend in Paris, but living in the west even 10 days seems short to me.
39Steps is offline  
Old Feb 27th, 2004, 03:55 AM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hello Elaine. I've gotten so much out of your posts I felt compelled to respond, even though I'm pretty sure you 'll come up with the most astute analysis of us all.

I've been musing over the other answers - everyone has very good points.

Breaking down your problem into three parts:
1) * Do you take a) 2 * 5 day trips per year or b) 1 * 10 day trip per year;
2) * Do you visit 1, 2, 3 or more places;
3) * What should be those places visited;

Re 1 - number of trips:

Given that you do not seem to be a high mileage business flyer, your instincts are probably correct that FF points are not a consideration. As it stands, it's not a question of needing just 5000 more points per year to qualify for elite status or whatever. I always remember that FF point programs are principally designed to encourage spending on air travel, i.e. make the airlines profitable, so unless you're flying for business anyway (and in which case the business is footing the bill) I'd not consider them a factor. Also, I agree the inconvenience of actually booking a FF flight if you are not elite status is a factor.

Also re 1) every flight you take is subject to the risks of the modern era with respect to scheduling: delays due to weather, or mechanical problems, or security, or overbooking, not to mention the unfortunate reality that 4 to 8 to 24 hour strikes affecting air travel in Italy have been occuring almost once per month recently. Given a short duration of trip, such delays would have a significantly greater impact.

Although I like flyboy's point about having more to look forward to with more trips per year, St. Cirq's point about having enough decompression time trumps the former point. As well, short trips limit the available ways you can use your time.

Regarding II) about the number of places visited: visiting all three isn't impossible or even undesirable if you want badly to say hello to each place again. My own preference if doing it this way would be: Rome (3), Venice (2), leave Venice on a late afternoon train for Milan (1); head for Geneva or similarly convenient Swiss stopover (1); Paris (3). I confess though that that is a bit tight even for a nomad such as myself: each of your major cities cries out for at least 1 more night, especially since you don't have time to head to a small town/village to decompress before you head to the cities. Alas, you have but 10 nights. So I think I'd cast my vote for 2 places max.

As to III - which two places - I think only you can decide that. The practical choice is Rome and Venice, but the thought of having both French and Italian experiences in your holiday might be too hard to resist.

Good luck with your choice.
Sue_xx_yy is offline  
Old Feb 27th, 2004, 05:31 AM
  #19  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lovely analyses from all, thanks.

For those who asked, I do live in NYC.

In some ways it is more difficult to be away for longer at one time: work, pet guilt, having a companion who can join me or not, other issues. On the other hand, to spend a week on one vacation, and then (hope for) a long weekend later on, is a nice way to indulge myself twice. Also, repeating my London experience, the long weekend, for me, is conducive to being very strictly budget minded--I can handle just four nights in a very basic hotel.

I'll look into air fares for various times of year, and consider further.

thanks everyone for your time and thoughts
elaine is offline  
Old Feb 27th, 2004, 11:32 AM
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,974
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
If it helps you at all Grasshopper, I'm in a similar situation. I have 9 vacation days left, will use 6 for a week long trip to Italy, then later in the fall use the remaining 3 for a long weekend (combine it with either Columbus Day or Veteran's Day for a longer trip!) to go to Paris. In my case, I feel like any time at all revisiting Paris will be enough to satisfy that craving, but personally I need at least a week away from home at least once a year to feel refreshed.
amyb is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -