Vote! Choose what vacation option you would take.
Aug 21st, 2007, 02:23 PM
#42
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I am of the same mind of many other posters. Option A is just too, too much for me. I just don't need or want all of that. Heavens, if I was having so many massages and spa treatments, when would I have a chance to see anything at my destination? On the other hand, while not a snob, I do want more than Super 8 on vacation. I don't need to go completely bare bones...plus, fun boutique hotels and interesting restaurants are part of the fun. I really want an Option E but if no such thing exists, I would do either C or D just not quite so budget.
taitai
taitai
Aug 21st, 2007, 08:36 PM
#43
Count me in for Option E, or even F. $15,000 would buy me at least three months of budget travel in Europe, and longer in considerable comfort in Asia (option F). Flying has become such a pain I wouldn't do it for just a week, and I certainly don't want all that "luxury" getting in the way of my sightseeing and wandering around!
Aug 22nd, 2007, 01:53 PM
#45
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only scanned most of the responses, so this may have already been asked:
What's the point of Option A? You can go to any international destination you choose, but if you're having 3 massages a day and all the rest, you're pretty much a stuck at the hotel/spa. If all I want is a spa get-away (and that's something I would like), I would choose a more local location.
Since "none of the above" is not acceptable, I'd have to choose C or D. I think I'd get more out of travelling to an international destination with that option.
What's the point of Option A? You can go to any international destination you choose, but if you're having 3 massages a day and all the rest, you're pretty much a stuck at the hotel/spa. If all I want is a spa get-away (and that's something I would like), I would choose a more local location.
Since "none of the above" is not acceptable, I'd have to choose C or D. I think I'd get more out of travelling to an international destination with that option.
Aug 22nd, 2007, 05:41 PM
#47
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would do another option as well. It would be traveling through several countries within 1-2 hour flights from each other and with that type of money, I could confortably travel through Asia for at least 2 months, but most likely a lot longer. I like simple, but comfortable accomodations, not luxury needed. But in places like Asia, these things are much cheaper anyway. I'm doing 3 weeks there in $3K including the flight. If I wanted it to be a bit more luxurious, $5K would be PLENTY. So that takes me to 3 months in Asia comfortably actually.
Aug 22nd, 2007, 05:43 PM
#48
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the above posters too. Who wants to go abroad and do the exact same thing you can do at a Four Seasons down the street? Option A is pretty ridiculous, though I do realize and am very surprised that some people do that.
Aug 22nd, 2007, 08:16 PM
#50
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I say Option C
I agree that it is easy to take a moderately priced trip in Europe, so I take the option to economize there and splurge in Napa or Sonoma - or perhaps NYC - my favorite city in the world.
As for the European trip, there are many inexpensive choices in lesser developed areas like Eastern Europe or a B&B drive trip in Ireland.
Although....I would love to take the new flight option to Dubai that includes a private cabin with a real bed! Or any overnight train in a private compartment - love sleeping on the train!!
This was fun. Thanks.
I agree that it is easy to take a moderately priced trip in Europe, so I take the option to economize there and splurge in Napa or Sonoma - or perhaps NYC - my favorite city in the world.
As for the European trip, there are many inexpensive choices in lesser developed areas like Eastern Europe or a B&B drive trip in Ireland.
Although....I would love to take the new flight option to Dubai that includes a private cabin with a real bed! Or any overnight train in a private compartment - love sleeping on the train!!
This was fun. Thanks.
Aug 23rd, 2007, 04:41 AM
#53
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't like staying in hotels. Could I substitute this place for a hotel for my month in Hawaii?
http://www.kauaivacationrentals.com/...s&Avail=&Stay=
http://www.kauaivacationrentals.com/...s&Avail=&Stay=
Aug 23rd, 2007, 08:47 AM
#56
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would pick C. Not all out fancy but nice to be pampered a little. And go for a domestic trip that may be a little better than option B. This way, I'll have 2 trips and one of them will be a real treat.
Aug 23rd, 2007, 09:53 AM
#57
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although none would be my personal choice, I would choose your option C. Until my husband and I retire, we don't have a lot of time to travel right now and would love to take a couple of weeks and see some countries we haven't visited yet.
Aug 23rd, 2007, 05:45 PM
#59
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Option B: 15K spread across Europe for a full year. Instead of staying at buget hotels, I would rent apartments. Instead of eating out all the time, I would cook in my apt and choose local, reasonably priced food items at supermarkets and/or local eateries. But I would definitely be flexible...lodging and food would be secondary to the actual travel experience -- basically, I would make it work.
