Nov 16, 2007
Not all the so-called "pod-hotels" are suitable for cost-conscious travelers
Many of the internet travel sites are alive with discussion of pod hotels, which take as their inspiration the no-frills cubes favored by Japanese businessmen. But the coverage almost always lumps them together as good values.They aren't. Here are the big new players and the wildly-different markets they serve:
EasyHotel (www.easyhotel.co.uk). With three properties now open in west London, plus one in Switzerland and one in Budapest, it's one of the most reliable budget pod names. A Zurich property opens on Nov. 20. These orange, mostly windowless cabins are the limit in simplicity (bed on the floor, no closet, kiosk bathroom), and they cost from $52 a night as long as you book far in advance, although $80 or $90 is more commonly quoted. Still, that's not a bad price for central London, where a standard family-run B&B can cost $150 a night.
But that latter value comes with a warning: When an easyHotel is nearly full, its prices can sometimes surpass those of nearby B&Bs, so make sure you compare the price you're quoted.
YOtel (www.yotel.co.uk). After many delays, U.K. millionaire Simon Woodroffe opened his pod hotel brand, designed to within an inch of its life, at Gatwick Airport, an hour south of London (a Heathrow outpost opens soon). First of all, that's much too far from town to be useful to tourists, since you'll have to pay another $25 round-trip each time you want to reach the city by train. Worse, YOtel charges about $50 to $80 for every four hours of use. If you want a full night's sleep, then, you'll be paying at least three times that.
That clinches it: YOtel may be a conversation piece, but to proclaim it a value for tourists is just lazy. The fact that the word "hotel" is part of its name doesn't help clarify the fact that it's actually just a fancy rent-a-couch for naps, yet the big travel magazines won't stop pretending it's more than that.
A new Dutch brand, Qbic (www.qbichotels.com), charges about $65 a night in Amsterdam (Antwerp and Maastricht will open early next year). Room pods, designed in part by Philippe Starck, contain combined work-or-eat desks, and can be lit in various neon-hued colors. Check-in is by self-service kiosk, and vending machines take the place of minibars or a cafe. Rooms are cleverly designed and simple indeed, and staff leaves you alone, which is why prices are so low -- and a good value.
Metronaps (www.metronaps.com). Like YOtel, this concept (currently based inside the Empire State Building) is really geared toward business people who need quick shuteye. Unlike YOtel, its name is honest: One uses it for naps, not overnight lodging. But at $14 for just 20 minutes, it's hardly something a money-scrimping tourist can realistically rely upon.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: accommodations
Crystal Cruises pushes a $1,000 plus meal (for one) with the help of a wealth-loving travel section
Would you believe a single meal -- one meal -- costing $1,000 per person? It’s being offered aboard Crystal Cruises (on intermittent, widely-spaced sailings, mainly because of the inclusion of ultra-costly wines), probably in an effort to attract hedge fund managers to its pretentious vacations. And whom do we have to thank for revealing this information? Why, the travel section of the New York Times, of course, advising us without commentary or criticism (in last weekend's travel section) that Crystal "recently began offering intimate $1,000-a-head dinners with hard-to-get wines and extravagant meals."
Elsewhere, in the same edition of the Times' wealth-worshiping travel coverage, the weekly review of new hotels ("Check In/Check Out") chooses to write up the Carlton on Madison Avenue in New York, which charges "from $399 to $799" per night per room. Up forward, on page 2 of the same edition, column 3, the Times' travel section states that readers "might be interested" in the new Emirates Palace Hotel in Abu Dhabi of the United Arab Emirates and its "394 luxury rooms, which start at about $700 a person per night."
What a pity that Marie Antoinette did not lived to enjoy the current travel section of the New York Times!
Write and read comments about this post.
Elsewhere, in the same edition of the Times' wealth-worshiping travel coverage, the weekly review of new hotels ("Check In/Check Out") chooses to write up the Carlton on Madison Avenue in New York, which charges "from $399 to $799" per night per room. Up forward, on page 2 of the same edition, column 3, the Times' travel section states that readers "might be interested" in the new Emirates Palace Hotel in Abu Dhabi of the United Arab Emirates and its "394 luxury rooms, which start at about $700 a person per night."
What a pity that Marie Antoinette did not lived to enjoy the current travel section of the New York Times!
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: money
Add "SmartCityHostels" to the increasing list of enormous new lodgings for economical living
A few weeks ago, I told you about a selection of new-brew hostel chains that are aiming to become household names in high-quality backpacker digs. One of the best of the trend blooming Down Under is Base Backpackers (www.basebackpackers.com), a chain that provides perks that few other hostels do, including Egyptian cotton sheets, women-only floors, and in one property, a rock climbing wall. Base Backpackers began life a few years ago as a single outpost in St. Kilda, in Melbourne, Australia, and judging from its quick growth rate -- there are now eight properties in Australia and in New Zealand -- budget travelers are grateful to be treated with respect.
Well, in Europe, another smart new hostel chain has appeared. This one, too, is run by people eager to take the concept international. It's called SmartCityHostel (www.smartcityhostels.com ), and its first, enormous, 620-bed facility has opened in Edinburgh, Scotland. The location in peerless: in Old Town on a short street long known for its hostels and proximity to charming pubs.
Like Base Backpackers, SmartCity offers a women-only section for female travelers -- a new and welcome idea for hostels. It also promises one private bathroom per room, which each lodge between two and 12 people. Most of the year, Edinburgh's tourist traffic won't keep every bed full, but during the summer festival period, you can bet that reservations will be jammed for weeks.
Unlike many independent hostels, this one has been designed and built by people who know that even money-saving tourists want a stylish environment. Interior rock walls, Jetsons-inspired carpeting, free WiFi, a roof terrace done in woods and metals, and designer furniture are part of the deal, as is an in-house cafe (serving actual cooked food!) that puts the festering self-catering kitchens of its rivals to shame. Nightly rates start at £13.50 (about $25).
Anytime a budget accommodation choice gives its guests more than hand-me-down furniture and bored service, I'm in full support. Backpackers deserve respect, too, and as long as new ideas such as SmartCity do well, budget travelers will be well served.
Write and read comments about this post.
Well, in Europe, another smart new hostel chain has appeared. This one, too, is run by people eager to take the concept international. It's called SmartCityHostel (www.smartcityhostels.com ), and its first, enormous, 620-bed facility has opened in Edinburgh, Scotland. The location in peerless: in Old Town on a short street long known for its hostels and proximity to charming pubs.
Like Base Backpackers, SmartCity offers a women-only section for female travelers -- a new and welcome idea for hostels. It also promises one private bathroom per room, which each lodge between two and 12 people. Most of the year, Edinburgh's tourist traffic won't keep every bed full, but during the summer festival period, you can bet that reservations will be jammed for weeks.
Unlike many independent hostels, this one has been designed and built by people who know that even money-saving tourists want a stylish environment. Interior rock walls, Jetsons-inspired carpeting, free WiFi, a roof terrace done in woods and metals, and designer furniture are part of the deal, as is an in-house cafe (serving actual cooked food!) that puts the festering self-catering kitchens of its rivals to shame. Nightly rates start at £13.50 (about $25).
Anytime a budget accommodation choice gives its guests more than hand-me-down furniture and bored service, I'm in full support. Backpackers deserve respect, too, and as long as new ideas such as SmartCity do well, budget travelers will be well served.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: accommodations, budget
Nov 15, 2007
In 2008, self-skippered boats will now be added to the waterways of Poland, Freisland (in Holland) and Brittany
Just as European river cruises are now finding favor with Americans, a similar enthusiasm seems to be growing for the rental of self-drive boats for trips along the canal waterways (not the rivers) of Europe. Three months ago, I wrote that a British firm known as European Boating Holidays has now established an office in Lake Placid, New York, to accept reservations for self-skippered boats sailing in Ireland, Italy, France, Germany and Spain. You receive an hour-or-so of instruction (which is all that's needed) and thereafter steer the boats at four or five miles an hour down a vast pattern of waterways built as early as the 1600s. You stop wherever you wish, buy groceries as you float along or else dart into village restaurants for your meals, sleep aboard the boat, and generally enjoy a unique vacation at a marvelously-reasonable cost (as little as $1,100 a week in spring and autumn, a bit more in summer, for a boat housing as many as four persons).
European Boating Holidays' business has apparently grown so rapidly that it is already announcing additional new itineraries for 2008 -- and they are novel, budget-priced vacations.
Write and read comments about this post.
European Boating Holidays' business has apparently grown so rapidly that it is already announcing additional new itineraries for 2008 -- and they are novel, budget-priced vacations.
- First, EBH will be inaugurating a new base facility at Mikolajki, Poland, between two major lakes in the northeastern part of that country -- an untouched and spectacular natural area -- for self-skippered journeys in an historic land that is only lightly touristed.
- EBH will be opening a base in Terherne, Holland, for boating holidays on an extensive network of canals and lakes in the Friesland province of northern Holland.
- And EBH will inaugurate a new base at Redon, France, in Brittany, to sail between ancient and historic towns.
Write and read comments about this post.
Buy a European rail pass in the next several weeks, and you'll pay the dollar amount that was chosen prior to the recent rise in the value of the Euro
The dollar has recently sunk to appalling depths -- but all is not lost. Remember that for some European services, the prices charged to the American market were set as much as a year ago. So even though the greenback has weakened, the price of some items hasn't changed all year.
Take rail passes. As long as you buy over the next few weeks, you'll be able to secure the earlier-2007 rates, despite the fact the dollar has slid dramatically downward all year. Wait too long, though, and price levels will be re-adjusted.
For example, a four-day Britrail (www.britrail.com) pass, which buys you four days of unlimited train travel over two months, costs $293 for an adult right now. Bought without a railpass, a one-way ticket from London to Scotland can cost as much as £100 (US$210) if you walk up to the ticket counter on the day of travel, so it's clear that as long as you're traveling substantial distances on your vacation, a railpass can save you money. But when the sellers of these passes re-adjust their prices to make sure they maintain the old profit margins, you can bet the price of a railpass will soar higher. The same math applies to Eurail passes (www.raileurope.com).
Many hotels, too, re-adjust their dollar rates as of the first of the year. So for the next month or so, you can still secure the lower prices set an earlier date in 2007.
It may seem obvious, but in this brutal economic climate, every little thing helps.
Write and read comments about this post.
If you thought the recently-launched, 3,000- and 4,000-passenger cruiseships were a bit over the top, you ain't seen nuthin' yet!
The cruiselines are starting to disclose the "innovative" features of the giant new ships coming on stream in 2008. In addition to rock-climbing, ice-skating, bowling alleys, boxing rings, and the like, we can expect the following:
So why must they ever leave the dock? Shouldn't they simply remain immobile and thus save the considerable expense of going to sea? In these replicas of a "city at sea", as Susan J. Young of the magazine Southern Cruising recently put it, "you might go surfing, watch an ice show, climb a rock wall, take computer classes, or dance the night away at a pulsating disco with lots of new friends".
I'll pass.
Write and read comments about this post.
- From MSC Cruises launching the new MSC Poesia, a tennis court and cigar room.
- From Royal Caribbean International launching the new Independence of the Seas, a "well-being center with thermal caves."
- From Princess Cruises launching the new Ruby Princess, a "dramatic piazza-style atrium with performing street entertainers."
- From Holland America Line launching the new Eurodam, "elegant luxury jewelry boutiques, a new photographic and imaging center, and a youth facility with teens-only loft."
So why must they ever leave the dock? Shouldn't they simply remain immobile and thus save the considerable expense of going to sea? In these replicas of a "city at sea", as Susan J. Young of the magazine Southern Cruising recently put it, "you might go surfing, watch an ice show, climb a rock wall, take computer classes, or dance the night away at a pulsating disco with lots of new friends".
I'll pass.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: cruises
Along comes a website for the selection of live guides to show you around a foreign city
The web is clogged with travel sites that purport to introduce travelers with like-minded individuals willing and ready to host them on their vacations. As of this month, there's yet another entrant, this one dedicated to matchmaking guides with travelers.
The site is called VIAmigo (www.viamigo.com), and it's designed to be a place where tourists can find guides in the cities they're about to visit. Currently, it lists about 1,500 such people. Probably because the website has no method for vetting the quality or experience of the guides who post upon it, it advertises itself, rather murkily, more as a place to meet locals than as a way to connect with guaranteed top-notch guides. In fact, its rubric is "Be local."
Still, one might assume that anyone who goes through the effort of creating and posting a guiding profile online will be serious about providing a quality experience to anyone who happens to contact them. There is also a rating system by which those who have used a guide can come back to the site and review and rate them, although at this early point, the system is little-used.
Some of the guides require payment, and some simply want to meet interesting foreigners and show them what's so great about their hometowns.
If anyone has used VIAmigo and has feedback about its services, I'd be eager to receive and reprint your reports.
Write and read comments about this post.
The site is called VIAmigo (www.viamigo.com), and it's designed to be a place where tourists can find guides in the cities they're about to visit. Currently, it lists about 1,500 such people. Probably because the website has no method for vetting the quality or experience of the guides who post upon it, it advertises itself, rather murkily, more as a place to meet locals than as a way to connect with guaranteed top-notch guides. In fact, its rubric is "Be local."
Still, one might assume that anyone who goes through the effort of creating and posting a guiding profile online will be serious about providing a quality experience to anyone who happens to contact them. There is also a rating system by which those who have used a guide can come back to the site and review and rate them, although at this early point, the system is little-used.
Some of the guides require payment, and some simply want to meet interesting foreigners and show them what's so great about their hometowns.
If anyone has used VIAmigo and has feedback about its services, I'd be eager to receive and reprint your reports.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: travel guides, websites
Nov 14, 2007
You can continue to enjoy Europe cheaply by extending your city stays to one week and spending that time in apartments obtained from VRBO.com
Reeling and disheartened from the continued drop in the value of the dollar against the Euro (you now pay, effectively, more than $1.50 for a single Euro because of commissions added to the normal exchange rate), a great many Americans have overlooked a highly effective way to reduce the cost of a European stay to what it used to be, by staying in an apartment, not a hotel, for a week at a time. If you will go to Vacation Rentals By Owner (www.vrbo.com), and click on various European cities, you will find dozens of fully-furnished, spacious, kitchen-equipped apartments in the center of European capitals, that rent for as little as $800 a week. Even when you pay slightly more than that, you enjoy the added economy of being able to cook an occasional meal in that apartment.
Because www.vrbo.com is used so often for obtaining vacation homes in the United States, we sometimes overlook that it contains plentiful foreign listings (it also list mouth-watering opportunities in Buenos Aires, among dozens of other Central and South American cities). And it is especially useful for Europe. VRBO stands for "Vacation Rental by Owner," and it is being successfully used by many thousands of smart travelers.
I recently posted a blog about the experience of a friend whose family (a party of four) rented a two-bedroom apartment in London for their week there, and enjoyed an economical stay costing far less than two hotel rooms would have cost. Because of the dramatic news of the past week (the continued plunge of the U.S. dollar), I thought I would revive this subject, because the availability of apartments for our stays abroad permit us all to continue enjoying the rewards of that unequaled travel experience: Europe.
Write and read comments about this post.
Because www.vrbo.com is used so often for obtaining vacation homes in the United States, we sometimes overlook that it contains plentiful foreign listings (it also list mouth-watering opportunities in Buenos Aires, among dozens of other Central and South American cities). And it is especially useful for Europe. VRBO stands for "Vacation Rental by Owner," and it is being successfully used by many thousands of smart travelers.
I recently posted a blog about the experience of a friend whose family (a party of four) rented a two-bedroom apartment in London for their week there, and enjoyed an economical stay costing far less than two hotel rooms would have cost. Because of the dramatic news of the past week (the continued plunge of the U.S. dollar), I thought I would revive this subject, because the availability of apartments for our stays abroad permit us all to continue enjoying the rewards of that unequaled travel experience: Europe.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: accommodations
For a highly comfortable, safe, cheap and interesting vacation in Mexico, consider a condo in the heart of Puerto Vallarta or Playa del Carmen
If you're still reeling from news of the plummeting value of the U.S. dollar against the Euro and the British Pound, replenish your high spirits with thoughts of Mexico. The dollar still does quite well south of the border, and every week brings news of remarkable vacations there.
At a recent conference in Panama, I met Sarah Booth, a perky young American woman who regaled me with talk of condo vacations in the big Mexican resort cities. Condos? They rarely existed in Mexico in previous years, and developers seemingly knew nothing except hotels. But that's all changed, and futuristic, balcony-equipped, high-rise apartment houses are springing up immediately alongside the beach in the very center of key Mexican resort cities. And Sarah Booth, an American, has built a thriving business by acting as a rental agent for Americans looking for a short-term (as little as a week, but more often two-to-four weeks) vacation rental.
Her websites are three: www.stayinmexicocondos.com, www.stayinpv.com, and www.stayinpdc.com. There you'll find enticing photos of the condos she represents, all in busy seaside areas dotted with restaurants, shops -- and groceries (where you can pick up the ingredients for your own home-cooked meals). Her condos are either one or two-bedrooms, with full kitchen and living room, plus other features depending on the specific property, and rates in high season (like January through April) average $700 a week for a one-bedroom condo (that's per condo, not per person) and $1100 a week for a two-bedroom condo (large enough to house four). You book by sending an e-mail to Sarah.
A condo in Mexico is a new kind of vacation, that doesn't involve the relative solitude of a vacation home rental; you're in a large, modern apartment house with a lobby staff and numerous neighbors. And you can't beat the rates, which reflect the continued strength of the U.S. dollar against the Mexican peso.
Write and read comments about this post.
At a recent conference in Panama, I met Sarah Booth, a perky young American woman who regaled me with talk of condo vacations in the big Mexican resort cities. Condos? They rarely existed in Mexico in previous years, and developers seemingly knew nothing except hotels. But that's all changed, and futuristic, balcony-equipped, high-rise apartment houses are springing up immediately alongside the beach in the very center of key Mexican resort cities. And Sarah Booth, an American, has built a thriving business by acting as a rental agent for Americans looking for a short-term (as little as a week, but more often two-to-four weeks) vacation rental.
Her websites are three: www.stayinmexicocondos.com, www.stayinpv.com, and www.stayinpdc.com. There you'll find enticing photos of the condos she represents, all in busy seaside areas dotted with restaurants, shops -- and groceries (where you can pick up the ingredients for your own home-cooked meals). Her condos are either one or two-bedrooms, with full kitchen and living room, plus other features depending on the specific property, and rates in high season (like January through April) average $700 a week for a one-bedroom condo (that's per condo, not per person) and $1100 a week for a two-bedroom condo (large enough to house four). You book by sending an e-mail to Sarah.
A condo in Mexico is a new kind of vacation, that doesn't involve the relative solitude of a vacation home rental; you're in a large, modern apartment house with a lobby staff and numerous neighbors. And you can't beat the rates, which reflect the continued strength of the U.S. dollar against the Mexican peso.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: accommodations, mexico
The opponents of Amtrak have responded to my defense of the national railway system with wholly ideological arguments hard to understand
I am constantly surprised by the responses to my pleas for support of Amtrak. At a time when we are all so painfully aware of the need to limit the use of oil and reduce emissions of hothouse gases, I would have thought it self-evident that expansion of our railroads -- the single most energy-efficient form of transportation -- would receive broad approval.
At a time, too, when our air transport system is literally falling apart -- when planes wait for hours on airport runways and airports are crowded beyond belief -- I would have thought it self-evident that we should expand the capacity of our railroads. If the tens of thousands of people who use Amtrak each day were forced instead to fly by air, their numbers would add chaos to our airports.
And yet whenever I write a post about the need to support Amtrak, I provoke angry dissents that are wholly ideological in nature. Most of them cite, as their chief argument, that Amtrak makes no money. Without explaining why that argument is relevant to the operation of a public utility -- and Amtrak is an essential, increasingly important public utility -- they repeat almost endlessly and without supporting explanation that Amtrak must be profit-making -- or else abandoned.
A recent response from one of these Amtrak-must-run-at-a-profit folk reads: "I personally believe this should not be funded with taxpayer money. We've been down this road before and the results are not promising."
What's strange about these responses is that none of them make the same argument with respect to cars and planes. The interstate highway system does not run at a profit. Yet every two years, Congress appropriates literally tens of billions of dollars for the maintenance and expansion of our interstate highways, so that more people can make long-distance trips by car. (Is it possible the oil industry has something to do with that funding?) Operating those highways at a profit would require that each U.S. Interstate become a toll road, demanding ruinous fees from motorists, and not one of the responders to my blog would be in favor of that.
The air traffic control system does not operate at a profit. Each year, Congress appropriates at least three billion dollars for air traffic controls, air traffic towers, and FAA safety operations. If the airlines themselves had to pay for the immense cost of air traffic control not covered by taxes and fees, most of those airlines would be forced to shut down. Yet none of my responders would deny the need to keep funding the air traffic control system.
And there are countless other government functions that do not operate at a profit. Our fire departments do not operate at a profit. When fire fighters put out a blaze in a private home, they do not send a bill to the home owner. Our police departments, public schools, municipal hospitals, sanitation departments, downtown streets, do not operate at a profit.
And neither should Amtrak. Fares on Amtrak should enable low-income and middle-income Americans to travel affordably to their work or to meetings and for many other purposes vital to our economy and society.
All over the world, major national railway systems, like those in France, Germany, Spain, Scandinavia, the Baltic states, others, are subsidized from general tax revenues and do not operate at a profit. They perform brilliantly for their public. In the few instances where passenger rail has been privatized, fares have often skyrocketed in price and grave safety concerns arisen; and even the private railway companies (like Eurostar) depend, to a considerable extent, on partial government funding.
If you have recently traveled on Amtrak's high-speed, comfortable Acela trains, you have had a glimpse of what we as a nation could enjoy. The U.S. Senate last month took the first steps towards properly funding Amtrak, beating back violent attacks on Amtrak by Senator John E. Sununu of New Hampshire, and supporting an enhanced appropriation by a vote of 70 to 22. The 22 dissenters are undoubtedly those who share the ideological beliefs reflected in responses to this blog, or are beholden to the oil and automotive industries.Write and read comments about this post.
At a time, too, when our air transport system is literally falling apart -- when planes wait for hours on airport runways and airports are crowded beyond belief -- I would have thought it self-evident that we should expand the capacity of our railroads. If the tens of thousands of people who use Amtrak each day were forced instead to fly by air, their numbers would add chaos to our airports.
And yet whenever I write a post about the need to support Amtrak, I provoke angry dissents that are wholly ideological in nature. Most of them cite, as their chief argument, that Amtrak makes no money. Without explaining why that argument is relevant to the operation of a public utility -- and Amtrak is an essential, increasingly important public utility -- they repeat almost endlessly and without supporting explanation that Amtrak must be profit-making -- or else abandoned.
A recent response from one of these Amtrak-must-run-at-a-profit folk reads: "I personally believe this should not be funded with taxpayer money. We've been down this road before and the results are not promising."
What's strange about these responses is that none of them make the same argument with respect to cars and planes. The interstate highway system does not run at a profit. Yet every two years, Congress appropriates literally tens of billions of dollars for the maintenance and expansion of our interstate highways, so that more people can make long-distance trips by car. (Is it possible the oil industry has something to do with that funding?) Operating those highways at a profit would require that each U.S. Interstate become a toll road, demanding ruinous fees from motorists, and not one of the responders to my blog would be in favor of that.
The air traffic control system does not operate at a profit. Each year, Congress appropriates at least three billion dollars for air traffic controls, air traffic towers, and FAA safety operations. If the airlines themselves had to pay for the immense cost of air traffic control not covered by taxes and fees, most of those airlines would be forced to shut down. Yet none of my responders would deny the need to keep funding the air traffic control system.
And there are countless other government functions that do not operate at a profit. Our fire departments do not operate at a profit. When fire fighters put out a blaze in a private home, they do not send a bill to the home owner. Our police departments, public schools, municipal hospitals, sanitation departments, downtown streets, do not operate at a profit.
And neither should Amtrak. Fares on Amtrak should enable low-income and middle-income Americans to travel affordably to their work or to meetings and for many other purposes vital to our economy and society.
All over the world, major national railway systems, like those in France, Germany, Spain, Scandinavia, the Baltic states, others, are subsidized from general tax revenues and do not operate at a profit. They perform brilliantly for their public. In the few instances where passenger rail has been privatized, fares have often skyrocketed in price and grave safety concerns arisen; and even the private railway companies (like Eurostar) depend, to a considerable extent, on partial government funding.
If you have recently traveled on Amtrak's high-speed, comfortable Acela trains, you have had a glimpse of what we as a nation could enjoy. The U.S. Senate last month took the first steps towards properly funding Amtrak, beating back violent attacks on Amtrak by Senator John E. Sununu of New Hampshire, and supporting an enhanced appropriation by a vote of 70 to 22. The 22 dissenters are undoubtedly those who share the ideological beliefs reflected in responses to this blog, or are beholden to the oil and automotive industries.Write and read comments about this post.
You don't always receive value (or luxurious attentions) by paying to enter an airport lounge
Traveling on business last week, a cousin of mine had the opportunity to stop in at the "Admirals Club" business class lounge of American Airlines' glittering new terminal at New York City's JFK airport.
Common peasants must pay $50 for the privilege of entering the Admirals Club, of which there are two in the terminal, but passengers in business class are permitted to enter as a perk. Some perk!
There was a time, not so long ago, when entry to a business class lounge was a true treat. Soft drinks and snacks were generously dispensed for free, and there were plenty of newspapers and magazines to help pass the time. But my cousin reports that these days, those of us who can't afford entry to American Airlines' business class lounge aren't missing a thing.
American has spent a reported $1.1 billion in expanding its terminal and operations at JFK. Yet that largesse has not been extended to its valued customers in its lounges. The only free food was a pile of carrot sticks and a jar of ranch dressing with a spoon stuck in it. There were no complimentary Cokes or, in fact, anything else free to drink. The only newspapers were brought in by traveling passengers and left for others to read. If he had wanted to use his laptop to surf the web, he'd have to pay $10 for the privilege (despite the fact that just two terminals away, JetBlue provides free access to everyone using its terminal). Even a basic sandwich, should he have wanted one, would cost $8.50. This is how an airline treats its most valued customers?
In fact, it seems as if the only reason to covet a spot inside American's schmancy lounge is to be able to sit in a comfortable leather seat and avoid having to endure the less comfortable seating in the terminal proper. American designed and built that, too, so if the airline's masters consider their lounge as a place to escape a miserable wait by the gate, it bears pointing out they designed the seating at the gate as well.
So, budget travelers, you should no longer feel bad that you never qualify to enter the business class lounge. This onetime benefit of wealth is nowadays simply not all it was once cracked up to be. It's no party in there. Unless you're one of American's accountants, that is.
Write and read comments about this post.
Common peasants must pay $50 for the privilege of entering the Admirals Club, of which there are two in the terminal, but passengers in business class are permitted to enter as a perk. Some perk!
There was a time, not so long ago, when entry to a business class lounge was a true treat. Soft drinks and snacks were generously dispensed for free, and there were plenty of newspapers and magazines to help pass the time. But my cousin reports that these days, those of us who can't afford entry to American Airlines' business class lounge aren't missing a thing.
American has spent a reported $1.1 billion in expanding its terminal and operations at JFK. Yet that largesse has not been extended to its valued customers in its lounges. The only free food was a pile of carrot sticks and a jar of ranch dressing with a spoon stuck in it. There were no complimentary Cokes or, in fact, anything else free to drink. The only newspapers were brought in by traveling passengers and left for others to read. If he had wanted to use his laptop to surf the web, he'd have to pay $10 for the privilege (despite the fact that just two terminals away, JetBlue provides free access to everyone using its terminal). Even a basic sandwich, should he have wanted one, would cost $8.50. This is how an airline treats its most valued customers?
In fact, it seems as if the only reason to covet a spot inside American's schmancy lounge is to be able to sit in a comfortable leather seat and avoid having to endure the less comfortable seating in the terminal proper. American designed and built that, too, so if the airline's masters consider their lounge as a place to escape a miserable wait by the gate, it bears pointing out they designed the seating at the gate as well.
So, budget travelers, you should no longer feel bad that you never qualify to enter the business class lounge. This onetime benefit of wealth is nowadays simply not all it was once cracked up to be. It's no party in there. Unless you're one of American's accountants, that is.
Write and read comments about this post.
Nov 13, 2007
Going to London? Consider flying to Stansted -- and save!
London has five major airports, and three of them accept standard coach flights from the United States. Heathrow and Gatwick are well-known; Heathrow, however, has acquired a dismal reputation as overwhelmed and falling apart, with dreadful rates of luggage loss, and Gatwick is hardly state-of-the-art. But shiny new Stansted (www.stanstedairport.com), located in the green countryside north of the city, is gaining traction as a popular landing field. Last week, American Airlines (www.aa.com) kicked off daily flights from America (New York-JFK) to Stansted.
The bright side of AA's Stansted flights is that they are often slightly cheaper than flights to Heathrow. But even with all things being equal, and assuming your quoted base fare is the same between a flight to Heathrow and one to Stansted, the flight to Stansted currently comes with lower mandatory fees: £75 versus £81 at Heathrow.
Add to that the fact that American Airlines will likely, over the coming months, periodically slash fares even further for its Stansted route in order to drum up business, and you may be able to score a deal on flights to the United Kingdom.
Stansted is also a much easier airport to navigate than is Heathrow. Lacking the size and import of Heathrow, its security clearances are much quicker. It's not uncommon to go from airplane to front curb (or vice-versa) within 30 minutes, whereas Heathrow is plagued with delays, long walks, and interminable lines. Four of London's five airports have rail links directly to the city, and Stansted's station goes from underneath the terminal to Liverpool Street station. The trip takes about 45 minutes on a commuter train (£15) or about 75 minutes using the discount easyBus (www.easybus.co.uk) service (as little as £2 with pre-booking).
When pricing flights to London by Internet search engines, make sure you include Stansted (code: STN) in your searches, or else you may never be shown the prices to that less crowded and potentially less expensive airport.
Write and read comments about this post.
The bright side of AA's Stansted flights is that they are often slightly cheaper than flights to Heathrow. But even with all things being equal, and assuming your quoted base fare is the same between a flight to Heathrow and one to Stansted, the flight to Stansted currently comes with lower mandatory fees: £75 versus £81 at Heathrow.
Add to that the fact that American Airlines will likely, over the coming months, periodically slash fares even further for its Stansted route in order to drum up business, and you may be able to score a deal on flights to the United Kingdom.
Stansted is also a much easier airport to navigate than is Heathrow. Lacking the size and import of Heathrow, its security clearances are much quicker. It's not uncommon to go from airplane to front curb (or vice-versa) within 30 minutes, whereas Heathrow is plagued with delays, long walks, and interminable lines. Four of London's five airports have rail links directly to the city, and Stansted's station goes from underneath the terminal to Liverpool Street station. The trip takes about 45 minutes on a commuter train (£15) or about 75 minutes using the discount easyBus (www.easybus.co.uk) service (as little as £2 with pre-booking).
When pricing flights to London by Internet search engines, make sure you include Stansted (code: STN) in your searches, or else you may never be shown the prices to that less crowded and potentially less expensive airport.
Write and read comments about this post.
Flash! A three-day airfare sale just announced by Virgin America, is good for some (but not all) of the flights around Thanksgiving
The hottest new airline in America, the controversial (because it's claimed that Richard Branson controls it) Virgin America, has just announced a three-day sale commencing immediately and continuing through November 15, for all flights until December 18 except those on November 21 and 25. And the opportunities are rather spectacular for that sometimes-heavy travel period.
One great advantage of Virgin America: sockets to power your laptop at every seat -- even in economy -- on the plane.
And remember that November 15 is your last day to book at these rates.
Write and read comments about this post.
- $39 one-way between San Francisco and Los Angeles
- $39 one-way between San Francisco and Las Vegas
- $119 one-way between Washington, D.C. and San Francisco
- $39 one-way between San Francisco and San Diego
- $109 one-way between Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles
- $129 one-way between New York and San Francisco
One great advantage of Virgin America: sockets to power your laptop at every seat -- even in economy -- on the plane.
And remember that November 15 is your last day to book at these rates.
Write and read comments about this post.
Backpackers of America, rejoice! You can stay up to a year (and work) in Australia
Because backpackers don't have the fat wallets of business travelers or luxury vacationeers, the big glossy travel magazines don't pay much attention to them. However, the country of Australia has caught wise to the value of the backpackers' market. It has calculated that more than half a million visited their country in the year preceding March 2007, and that during that period, they spent some $2.8 billion of their dollars.
Some 48,000 of those backpackers were American. Cleverly, Australia's enlightened immigration authorities have decided, based mostly on these impressive figures, to give American backpackers a better opportunity to explore Down Under. As of the start of November, Australia introduced a new visa that will allow Americans aged 18 to 30 to legally spend up to a year in the country, working and travelling. The previous cut-off for American visitors was three months, after which they had to leave the country, and working was out of the question.
Anything that helps young Americans fund -- and therefore prolong -- their exploration of other cultures can only benefit our own country. As more and more countries, including our own, lock up their borders and turn their backs on even visitors from their allies, this new visa is now one of the few that can be enjoyed by young Americans.
To my mind, these news rules are a positive development not just for American youth who'd like to spend some time exploring a sister nation, but also for Australian industry, which now has access to a temporary work force that's willing to do jobs (picking fruit, waiting tables) that locals may not be keen to do themselves.
One of the directors of the Australian Tourism Export Council put a fringe benefit this way: "We will have a whole new generation of Americans who will have a first-hand love for and understanding of Australia, who will have friends and roots here, and who will hopefully return to visit again and again throughout their lives."
And, by the way, what are the immigration authorities of our own country doing to ensure a whole new generation comes to love America, and what are we doing to encourage peaceful and mutually beneficial visitation? The gloomy answer: Nothing, which is why our international visitor numbers and our reputation abroad have been taking dramatic plunges over the past few years.
Write and read comments about this post.
Some 48,000 of those backpackers were American. Cleverly, Australia's enlightened immigration authorities have decided, based mostly on these impressive figures, to give American backpackers a better opportunity to explore Down Under. As of the start of November, Australia introduced a new visa that will allow Americans aged 18 to 30 to legally spend up to a year in the country, working and travelling. The previous cut-off for American visitors was three months, after which they had to leave the country, and working was out of the question.
Anything that helps young Americans fund -- and therefore prolong -- their exploration of other cultures can only benefit our own country. As more and more countries, including our own, lock up their borders and turn their backs on even visitors from their allies, this new visa is now one of the few that can be enjoyed by young Americans.
To my mind, these news rules are a positive development not just for American youth who'd like to spend some time exploring a sister nation, but also for Australian industry, which now has access to a temporary work force that's willing to do jobs (picking fruit, waiting tables) that locals may not be keen to do themselves.
One of the directors of the Australian Tourism Export Council put a fringe benefit this way: "We will have a whole new generation of Americans who will have a first-hand love for and understanding of Australia, who will have friends and roots here, and who will hopefully return to visit again and again throughout their lives."
And, by the way, what are the immigration authorities of our own country doing to ensure a whole new generation comes to love America, and what are we doing to encourage peaceful and mutually beneficial visitation? The gloomy answer: Nothing, which is why our international visitor numbers and our reputation abroad have been taking dramatic plunges over the past few years.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: australia, red tape, student travel
A "modest proposal" to operate an ultra-cheap cruise by never leaving the dock
Imagine the savings. By keeping one of those new 4,000-passenger ships tied to the dock, the fuel cost would approach zero. The highly skilled personnel needed to navigate the vessel and attend to its motors, would no longer be needed. There would be no fees assessed by foreign ports, no charges for radio transmissions, no wear and tear on the engines. With the money that could be saved, the cruiselines could lower their fares to, say, $25 a day per passenger. A seven-day cruise would cost $175 -- affordable to nearly every American.
And could anyone tell the difference? With their boxing rings and multi-lane bowling alleys, their theaters resembling the Radio City Music Hall, their classes in flower-arranging and better investments, and their Vegas-size casinos, the 4,000-passenger ships are already a largely-indoor experience. You seldom leave the gym, the multiple dining facilities, or even venture onto the two outdoor decks so filled with crowds that you will quickly retreat indoors. On these new Titans of the Ocean Blue, these Carnival Megaliths, these Norwegian Paul Bunyans, you no longer know you are at sea..
So why keep up the pretense? A cruise is no longer a cruise. It retains no semblance of the travel experience. Its thousands of passengers descending to shore immediately cancel out the foreign flavor and charm of the ports at which it stops. So why stop at any port? Why not remain permanently moored, enjoying the giant economies of immobility and thereby pricing the experience for much less than we Americans spend at home?
I am only partly joking.
Write and read comments about this post.
And could anyone tell the difference? With their boxing rings and multi-lane bowling alleys, their theaters resembling the Radio City Music Hall, their classes in flower-arranging and better investments, and their Vegas-size casinos, the 4,000-passenger ships are already a largely-indoor experience. You seldom leave the gym, the multiple dining facilities, or even venture onto the two outdoor decks so filled with crowds that you will quickly retreat indoors. On these new Titans of the Ocean Blue, these Carnival Megaliths, these Norwegian Paul Bunyans, you no longer know you are at sea..
So why keep up the pretense? A cruise is no longer a cruise. It retains no semblance of the travel experience. Its thousands of passengers descending to shore immediately cancel out the foreign flavor and charm of the ports at which it stops. So why stop at any port? Why not remain permanently moored, enjoying the giant economies of immobility and thereby pricing the experience for much less than we Americans spend at home?
I am only partly joking.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: cruises
Nov 12, 2007
Take a look at www.thedutyfreepriceguide.com, and you'll never again go shopping at any airline's duty-free stores
Because it would obviously be so difficult to do comparison pricing on all the vast array of goods sold in so-called "duty-free" airport shops, a website called the Duty Free Price Guide (www.thedutyfreepriceguide.com) devotes most of its attention simply to cigarettes, perfume and liquor. But the huge price variations for those products are obviously representative of similar variations for electronic products and clothing. They show that certain airport shops or airlines mark up the initial cost of the property to such an extent as to cast doubt on whether the public receives any real benefit out of buying those goods from them.
Take the product identified as "Marlboro 200 packs Cigarettes." From various exotic airlines or remote airports (Ethiopian Airlines, Middle East Airlines, Qatar Airport), you can buy a 200-cigarette carton of Marlboros for $10 to $12, according to the website. Yet the very same carton is being sold for $24 to $26 by Northwest Airlines, American Airlines, and United Airlines; for $27 at the Los Angeles Airport; and for $41 by British Midland Airways and at Vienna Airport.
The same giant gaps between prices from airlines and airports are reported for perfume and liquor. A 50ML bottle of Dior Perfume ranges in price from $26 to $77, depending on the airline or airport selling it.
It's a crazy world out there. On several recent trips, I haven't seen a single product selling for much less than I would pay at Best Buy or Circuit City in New York, or at the perfume wholesalers on lower Broadway. And I haven't any present plans to fly to Qatar or Dubai to pick up a cigarette bargain.
Write and read comments about this post.
Take the product identified as "Marlboro 200 packs Cigarettes." From various exotic airlines or remote airports (Ethiopian Airlines, Middle East Airlines, Qatar Airport), you can buy a 200-cigarette carton of Marlboros for $10 to $12, according to the website. Yet the very same carton is being sold for $24 to $26 by Northwest Airlines, American Airlines, and United Airlines; for $27 at the Los Angeles Airport; and for $41 by British Midland Airways and at Vienna Airport.
The same giant gaps between prices from airlines and airports are reported for perfume and liquor. A 50ML bottle of Dior Perfume ranges in price from $26 to $77, depending on the airline or airport selling it.
It's a crazy world out there. On several recent trips, I haven't seen a single product selling for much less than I would pay at Best Buy or Circuit City in New York, or at the perfume wholesalers on lower Broadway. And I haven't any present plans to fly to Qatar or Dubai to pick up a cigarette bargain.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: airlines, airports, money, shopping
You needn't give too much credence to the current rumor that the Beijing Olympics will be postponed until October
I've heard several versions of that prediction this week, and tried hard to trace down the origin of them. Turns out that in August, the president of the International Olympics Committee, Jacques Rogge, said in Beijing that one or two high-endurance contests -- like cycling or marathon running -- might be postponed to a time of year when the city's pollution problem is less pronounced. He obviously issued that threat as a means of prodding the Beijing civic authorities to do something about the notorious emissions that so poison the air there.
Since that time, nothing further has been heard from Rogge on the subject. But last month, another IOC official expressed the same concern about the impact of the air on certain high-endurance events. Nobody at any time has suggested postponing the entire Olympics, and that really isn't a realistic step at this time, less than 10 months before the start of the Games. Yet some rumor-mongers have blown up those two statements to encompass the dramatic postponement of the entire Olympics.
It's not going to happen.
Write and read comments about this post.
Since that time, nothing further has been heard from Rogge on the subject. But last month, another IOC official expressed the same concern about the impact of the air on certain high-endurance events. Nobody at any time has suggested postponing the entire Olympics, and that really isn't a realistic step at this time, less than 10 months before the start of the Games. Yet some rumor-mongers have blown up those two statements to encompass the dramatic postponement of the entire Olympics.
It's not going to happen.
Write and read comments about this post.
Zip Car, renting autos by the hour, is a new service which you really might consider
There's a great car rental service available for urban dwellers who have given up their cars in exchange for public transport yet still relish the thought of a short-duration escapes, and for regular travelers who are tired of spending more on their rental cars than their hotels when they visit major North American cities. It's called Zip Car (www.zipcar.com) and it can end up costing you far, far less than a traditional car rental. Rates run $7 to $10 per hour, and incredibly that includes gas and all insurances. (If you do need to top off the tank, you do so using the fuel card provided at no charge to you.)
Unlike a traditional rental, you are not gong to be stuck with a "Pontiac Grand Prix or similar." There are dozens of makes and models available, and you get precisely the car you reserve, from a staid Honda Civic to a trendy Scion xB, from a Copper MINI to a BMW 328, or from an SUV to a hybrid Prius.
There's no rental counter, so you can pick up and drop off a car anywhere at any time. You simply sign in and reserve a car for a specific time and place -- the site gives you a Google map flagged with locations showing where parked Zipcars are available in the city of your choice (I typed in a zip code for Midtown Manhattan and there were nearly 300 vehicles between 23rd and 65th Streets alone; Minneapolis, on the other hand, had five).
When you join the service you are issued a personal Zipcard, which looks a bit like a credit card. Wave this card over a sensor on the car door and it will automatically unlock for you (and only you at your reserved time; even another Zipcar user couldn't take the car you have reserved.) The card also unlocks the ignition, allowing you to use the keys left hidden in the car.
This service is not really intended for the occasional traveler, but for people who either live in or regularly visit the big cities, and I say this because there is a one-time application fee of $25 and an annual fee of $50. However, once those costs are surmounted, the rates are remarkably low: $7 to $10 per hour, or $55 to $69 per day, depending on the city you choose and whether you'll drive just occasionally or several times a month (the latter is cheaper). When you consider that this cost also covers insurance and gasoline, the deal is truly phenomenal. There are other benefits as well, ranging from discounts at rock climbing gyms, bookstores, theme parks, and concert venues to free door-side parking spaces at some IKEA stores.
There is one limit no longer found on most traditional rentals: no unlimited mileage. You only get 180 miles on any reservation, whether it's for an hour or a full day. Still, 180 miles is enough to drive and town and anywhere about an hour away by highway. Drive farther than that and you'll pay 35¢ per mile (45¢ on premium cars like a BMW).
You sign up for a specific city, but once a member you can use a Zipcar in any city where the service is offered. That list currently includes: New York and northern New Jersey, the greater Washington, DC area, ten locations in New England (including Boston, Providence, New Haven, and Lewiston, ME), Chicago, Chapel Hill and Elon in North Carolina, Ann Arbor, Minneapolis, San Francisco and Santa Cruz in California, plus in Canada (Toronto and Vancouver), and even London, England.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: car rental
November 28 is the deadline for booking the year's finest sale of airfares to the ski slopes of Colorado
Though western skiing isn't my own thing, and is often a big bucks exercise in conspicuous consumption (prices in Aspen and Vail are staggering), I am nonetheless obligated to bring attention to the cheap ski-season airfares that are periodically offered to Americans willing to make their plans fairly far in advance. Today's example is the "Ski Sale" just announced by American Airlines for flights between December 13 and March 11 (except for the Christmas period, of course). Provided only that you make your booking before November 28, American will fly you round-trip at that time from Newark and other eastern gateways to Steamboat Springs, Colorado (one of the "cheaper" ski resorts) for only $287. It will fly you round-trip from Newark and other east coast cities to Vail, Colorado, for $321. And it will charge the same between New York-JFK and the chic Crested Butte.
It would be churlish to point out that you can go by train to Stowe, Vermont, and enjoy good skiing, for much less. But obviously, those mountains around Aspen, Vail and Steamboat are something else, and $287 to $321 are excellent round-trip airfares for peak season. Go to www.aa.com.
Write and read comments about this post.
It would be churlish to point out that you can go by train to Stowe, Vermont, and enjoy good skiing, for much less. But obviously, those mountains around Aspen, Vail and Steamboat are something else, and $287 to $321 are excellent round-trip airfares for peak season. Go to www.aa.com.
Write and read comments about this post.
Labels: colorado, skiing, winter sport
Fifty years ago, 
Arthur Frommer is generally acknowledged to be the nation's foremost travel authority. He is the founder of the
