- 8 March 2011
- 2:00pm
- Filed under
Other
Travel debates: budget travel vs luxury
Jane OrmondLonely Planet author
What kind of traveller are you? Do you like to keep the bottom line lean or are you a bit of a Good Time Charlie when it comes to hitting the road? Luxury vs budget – which is the way to go? Let’s debate it.
Budget
'Nope, out of my budget...'
In the budget corner, we have Mark, Lonely Planet’s research librarian:
Of what value is staying at expensive hotels on your vacation when travellers spend 95% of their waking hours outside it experiencing a foreign culture? A clean bed, a window and bathroom are more than enough. Furthermore, if you do choose to spend 5% of your waking time at a cloned five-star international hotel chain or a trendy boutique hotel, it isn’t going to help you experience a destination. Instead, try a locally owned guesthouse where you’ll meet people who’ve lived in the neighbourhood all their lives and can recommend the best eating options and sights.
On eating options…expensive restaurants are not only painful to your wallet, they rarely have the best food. More than likely, most of the cost of the meal is in the decor or the clean table cloth, not the chef or the ingredients. Small, cheap eateries will frequently specialise in doing one thing extremely well. It could be a simple bowl of noodles or tandoori chicken. Whatever the meal, they do it all day, and customers flock to them because the food is great, not because their cutlery is solid silver and the waiter is obsequious. Also, while eating your tandoori, you’re more likely to be sitting next to a local, not another tourist looking for steak and chips in Mumbai.
On sightseeing…one of the most ridiculous excesses of travel is a cruise ship. You spend most of your time with other ‘travellers’, disembark for an afternoon of shopping for souvenirs every few days, and get fat on the all-you-can-eat buffet every four hours. This is not travel…it is an expensive screensaver.
We all like to spoil ourselves now and again. And we are more inclined to spoil ourselves when we are on vacation. However, spoiling ourselves too much can ruin the primary reason for travelling: experiencing the real texture of a place.
Luxury
'Is that all they could send? Guess we can squish up...'
And fighting the fight for luxury, we have Jane, Lonely Planet’s digital copywriter:
I do not like pressing my nose up against the bakery window. I like to get in there and breathe in.
That’s what luxury travel means to me. It doesn’t mean lounging in ermine in the penthouse suite of the Plaza. It means hopping a cab to get straight into a city rather than waiting, waiting, waiting for a bone-rattling bus to get me to the train station to wait amidst the wafts of urine and boredom for a train to get me eight blocks from the freezing hostel I’ll be sleeping in with my valuables under my pillow.
Dutch painter Willem de Kooning once said ‘The trouble with being poor is that it takes up all your time.’ I hate eking out an existence. I’ve been there and it bored the hell out of me. So it’s the last thing I want to do when I’m diving into a new city. I just want to get stuck in.
It’s about quality over quantity – wouldn’t you rather have a week of kick-your-heels-up good times drinking martinis with local eccentrics and seeing amazing off-Broadway shows than two weeks of canned tuna and thinking ‘if only’? Plus it’s about knowing what works for you. Drum circles in hostel courtyards send me homicidal. Hotel toiletries do not.
Some people think a luxury approach will give you a less authentic, less educational travel experience. Well I learnt more about the history of Los Angeles from the tour guide who drove me all over town in a ’66 open-topped cherry-red Cadillac, and I learnt more about the spirit of the place from the old-school waiters I met in restaurants.
Luxury doesn’t mean ivory tower travel – it just means travel with options. It takes the drag factor out of your journey – cos sucking it up gets pretty boring when you’re hungry, jetlagged and as fragrant as a wet sock.
Rebuttal:
Mark: A taxi drove me around all night in LA with three girls from my hostel who the cabbie was trying to hit on. He showed us Beverly Hills, including Sharon Tate’s house, ‘Nakatomi Plaza’ from Die Hard (Fox Plaza), and many other sights. Cost: zero. A lot of money doesn’t make a trip special.
Jane: Hey I’m not into cheesy cruises or pulling a Greta Garbo in a 5-star hotel. A bit of luxury means you can still experience the real texture of a place – it’s just that after you’ve experienced it you can have a decent shower without some dodgy fire-twirler called BamBam stealing your towel from the communal bathroom.
So what do you think? Get in the ring and take a swing!
So true. I’ve taken the mickey out of this, and created my 10 Commandments of Tight Travel
I guess luxury could also mean greater safety. I love eating at roadside stalls but I know there are so many chances of getting diarrhoea when food has been prepared with water of dubious sources (such as a river next to the stall) so there are times when I am tempted to try a local delight but will only do so in a restaurant that promises good hygiene.
Totally agree with Jane on this. But of course budget travelling does not mean that you ruin all the fun by staying in shabby hotel rooms or hostels and eat dirty food. As Jane has rightly put it, a clean bed, a window and a clean bathroom is all you need. And if you are a foodie, you can always spend more in a good restaurant. But I always prefer a substantial breakfast and lunch on the go and a quiet dinner after a hectic sightseeing day! For the commuting part, its true that availing local transport is not always a good option, especially in cities where they are mostly crowded and not well maintained. In such scenarios I believe hiring a cab is the best option. However in cities like London and New York, the hop on / hop off buses themselves are so comfortable and are on time that you actually don’t feel the need to take a cab. The idea is to get a feel of the place so it is always good to spend as much time as possible exploring and if you can save a few bucks on stay and travel, then you can spend more buying souvenirs, tasting the local cusine and have a great travel experience…
For me, it’s less about luxury vs budget, and more about value. I don’t mind paying for the expensive hotels, and yes I prefer them, but only if the value I feel I receive in return is worth it. I’m just as happy staying in a Hilton Garden Inn, if that’s what suits my needs more in a given destination. When it comes to food, well that’s a different story, as I’m always going to choose the Michelin stars of the world over anything else.
Perhaps “Luxury” is not the best word. I think somewhere in between “dirt poor” and “luxury” would be the ideal traveling situation.
Lonely Planet travelers are not superficial travelers. They like to really experience a culture – get down to the local’s level to soak up the real feel of life at their destination.
Why not be able to do this but also be able to afford to splurge once in awhile when we need more than just used soap at a hostel or when the situation could be dicey (traveling at night in a not-so-great part of town).
I think those travelers who can have that option but who also like to get their hands-dirty with the locals might have the most well-rounded experience.
Budget all the way! I love going on a trip and staying in hostels or cheap hotels, shopping at local markets, grabbing some food there and exploring on foot. It doesn’t cost anything to chill on the beach! Just got back from a budget Costa Rica trip and wouldn’t have it any other way :)
I would be interested in how the opinions differ between men & women. I don’t require the Ritz, but I want to experience everything when I travel & try to save up so that can happen. I stay in reputable hotels in safe neighborhoods. I ask for restaurant recommendations from locals that I meet, but don’t want to worry if I can afford it. My husband enjoys camping & has slept in his car while traveling. He can exist on fast food. I see no point in eating if I don’t enjoy my food. His friends ask about cabin rentals in National Parks. Their wives ask if I can find Marriott nearby. My brother would disappear for weeks camping in a National Park with a buddy. Neither of their wives have joined them. I think maybe us girls like to be pampered and worry about safety a bit more than the guys, who want to save a buck where they can.
I have traveled both ways – and as a former flight attendant (4 years in the 80’s) – have experienced back pack to Luxury – and both are very rewarding for very different reasons. Luxury is the way to go on trips of a life time or traveling with multi generations in your family – Just spent 2 weeks in Tanzania on a luxury tour (with four children ages 8 – 12 and their father) the plus, the other travelers on the trip were great company and very like minded, the accommodations were more than welcome after a day in the dusty bush, and we were safe – even when lions slept under our “tented suites” and elephants were outside our windows in the morning eating the leaves off the trees. Also, if you are traveling with your children, the Luxury route for family travel is most wonderful – as there are built in companions for your children at meal times – and the activities provided by the tour companies are geared for entertainment and cultural experiences. Or perhaps my experience was with The Right Tour Company. Happy to share the name if you ask.
I have also traveled to London many times with a single girl friend – we often book everything our selves – my experience is in a large European or American city, when one of you knows the language is easier to do on the inexpensive self guided trip – if you do enough research and know the general idea of what you want to see, and remain flexible and open to going off the planned schedule and beaten path. I never would have learned how to drive on the other side of the road, with a stick shift through the British Isles on a Luxury tour.
I completely agree with Jane, she stated the facts beautifully regarding why people such as myself & my clients choose luxury travel over budget. It’s about quality not quantity & the experience to be had.
I’d much rather travel like a human than luggage! This is what I tell my existing/potential clients as I am a travel club rep. for the world’s largest travel & entertainment discount club. In the end they all tend to agree with me.
Luxury travel is great guys! No waiting, just comfort and style…
I’m a distributor for a well known global travel club and I’ve traveled both ways. From my experience luxury travel is the best way to go and all of our members highly agree.
If one travels like luggage, this will not encourage one to travel this way again or even possibly avoid that particular destination in the future.
I’m all for spending a little money when it will improve my experience — you’d really spend an extra four hours on the local bus to save ten bucks on the express? Really?
And I’m a few years past staying in the dorm rooms in the hostels. But I have a better time staying in the private rooms at nice hostels than I do staying at luxury chain hotels, even now that I can afford the chain hotels. I love meeting and talking with other budget travelers. I don’t obsess about every penny or brag about how cheaply I can exist on nothing but dry ramen noodles, and I’ll buy a plane ticket rather than lose days of travel time.
It’s all about the experience. You’ll never catch me on a cruise or being herded on and off a tour bus with a bunch of other tourists. I will pay for something amazing or unique, or for a hot shower and a private bathroom. But I’m not paying $300 for a hotel room in a country where I know I could get something perfectly comfortable for $30.
It is all about yourself. What are YOU comfortable with? I can be a minimalist, spend my time touring the streets, eating local, go home knowing I have experienced the culture, not the rip off tourist buzz.
I think the article misses a key point. Alot of people have no other option than to travel on a tight budget. I’m a student, and trust me it would be nice to have a trip spent in nice hotels, drinking cocktails and eating in the best resturants. but in order to see a country for an extended period of time I need to stick to a budget.
I would say that this also differentiates those travelling for short periods as opposed to longer periods. short periods can lend themselves to luxury much easier.
It all depends on what you want to get out of your experience. If you are looking to eat some good food, see some cool sights and relax, luxury travel is for you. If you are looking for something deeper, learning what it’s like to live as someone from a different nation then Budget travel is better. Eating the street food, taking locals transportation and sleeping in hostels will provide you with a whole different perspective on a place than luxury travel. I often find myself discussing the misadventures of travel more often than how beautiful the Eiffel Tower or how Plush my pillow was after I return from a journey. Luxury travel makes u more sad when you return because you miss the good life. Budget travel makes you happier upon return because you can better appreciate the luxury’s of home once you have given them up for awhile. Sorry to plug my blog but I recently wrote an interesting article about taking local transport in Vietnam…
Sign in or register to add your comment