Europe -- Shore excursions

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Thanks,

Joe Ramirez

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:44:05 -0400, wrote:

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Both, really, although much more the latter. I think "bait and
switch" is overstating it a bit, since you are not forced to take
excursions and are free to step off the ship and do whatever you want.
But yes, high excursion rates subsidize the cruise fares.

Paris on a cruise is a poor use of travel time and funds anyway. Yes,
you would be MUCH better off taking a land trip, to Paris or any other
interior destination.


Mason Barge

"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me some coffee."
-- Abraham Lincoln

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:44:05 -0400, wrote:

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Thanks,

Joe Ramirez

Er, sorry Joe, I usually try to be a bit more positive

1) Have you thought about a Baltic Sea cruise? We just did this on
the Celebrity Constellation and it was fabulous! I think it was the
first time I've been on a trip over two weeks and was not ready to
come home. We did not use a single cruise excursion, either, although
you really must get a tour guide for St. Petersburg (we used Red
October, and doubled up with another couple we met on the internet).
It is good for a cruise, since all of the cities are ports. You just
get on the free shuttle to the city and do what you want.

(Well, some people went to Berlin from Warnemunde, but that's their
problem. We hopped a $12 train to a town we had never heard of,
Schwerin, and it really was one of the best days in my entire
travelling life!)

2) The Mediterranean is also great for cruising, but I strongly
suggest you go in the spring or fall. It really gets hot. And
crowded.

3) I recommend that you NOT try to visit large inland cities on a
cruise, such as Paris, Rome, Florence, or Berlin. Pick a smaller,
closer destination.

4) If you have not been to Paris, by all means, fly to Paris, spend
four or five days, and take a trip (either a tour or just rent a car)
to Provence or the Loire Valley. Again, I would recommend spring or
fall, rather than summer. Under no circumstances go in August.

Mason Barge

"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me some coffee."
-- Abraham Lincoln

"Mason Barge" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:44:05 -0400, wrote:

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds
of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my
wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several
times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the
more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking
a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Both, really, although much more the latter. I think "bait and
switch" is overstating it a bit, since you are not forced to take
excursions and are free to step off the ship and do whatever you want.
But yes, high excursion rates subsidize the cruise fares.

Paris on a cruise is a poor use of travel time and funds anyway. Yes,
you would be MUCH better off taking a land trip, to Paris or any other
interior destination.

Yes, in many ways it seems so. It's just that my wife loves cruises, so I
was/am looking for a way to combine a cruise with visits to some of the
great cities that neither she nor our son has seen. When I visited Athens
and Istanbul on a cruise from Venice it was terrific, but perhaps Paris is
too far inland to make it practical.

Joe Ramirez

"Mason Barge" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:44:05 -0400, wrote:

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds
of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my
wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several
times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the
more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking
a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Thanks,

Joe Ramirez

Er, sorry Joe, I usually try to be a bit more positive

1) Have you thought about a Baltic Sea cruise? We just did this on
the Celebrity Constellation and it was fabulous! I think it was the
first time I've been on a trip over two weeks and was not ready to
come home. We did not use a single cruise excursion, either, although
you really must get a tour guide for St. Petersburg (we used Red
October, and doubled up with another couple we met on the internet).
It is good for a cruise, since all of the cities are ports. You just
get on the free shuttle to the city and do what you want.

"Free shuttle" -- now that makes sense. Of course Paris is further inland,
but it still seems incredibly avaricious to charge $100 per person for
nothing but a bus ride.

To answer your question: Yes, I have been considering the Baltic as well as
the Mediterranean. In fact, for me it would make more sense because I've
been to many of the key Mediterranean destinations, but I haven't visited
Scandinavia or northern Russia. I'd love to see St. Petersburg. My family
hasn't toured either area, so either way the trip would be a novel
experience for them.

(Well, some people went to Berlin from Warnemunde, but that's their
problem. We hopped a $12 train to a town we had never heard of,
Schwerin, and it really was one of the best days in my entire
travelling life!)

2) The Mediterranean is also great for cruising, but I strongly
suggest you go in the spring or fall. It really gets hot. And
crowded.

This is sensible advice, yet difficult to follow with a son in 8th grade.

3) I recommend that you NOT try to visit large inland cities on a
cruise, such as Paris, Rome, Florence, or Berlin. Pick a smaller,
closer destination.

See my previous post.

4) If you have not been to Paris, by all means, fly to Paris, spend
four or five days, and take a trip (either a tour or just rent a car)
to Provence or the Loire Valley. Again, I would recommend spring or
fall, rather than summer. Under no circumstances go in August.

I was in Paris in late June on a bus tour, and the weather was very fine,
but if future French summers are going to continue in the vein of the summer
of 2003, then I'd agree that the season must be avoided.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Joe Ramirez

I would also suggest that you consider the Norwegian Fjords on
Constellation. When we had the opportunity to meet Captain Ioannis on
Constellation last December, he told us that he felt that the Norwegian
Fjords itinerary was the best one he's seen. He preferred it to Alaska,
the Med, the Baltics or the Caribbean. He said it was just the most
incredible one of all.

Linda and our kids went there this past summer, and said it was
incredible. She loved Flam, Geiranger and Bergen. But Flam was her
favorite of all.

--Tom

wrote:

"Mason Barge" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:44:05 -0400, wrote:

I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds
of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my
wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several
times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the
more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking
a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Thanks,

Joe Ramirez

Er, sorry Joe, I usually try to be a bit more positive

1) Have you thought about a Baltic Sea cruise? We just did this on
the Celebrity Constellation and it was fabulous! I think it was the
first time I've been on a trip over two weeks and was not ready to
come home. We did not use a single cruise excursion, either, although
you really must get a tour guide for St. Petersburg (we used Red
October, and doubled up with another couple we met on the internet).
It is good for a cruise, since all of the cities are ports. You just
get on the free shuttle to the city and do what you want.

"Free shuttle" -- now that makes sense. Of course Paris is further inland,
but it still seems incredibly avaricious to charge $100 per person for
nothing but a bus ride.

To answer your question: Yes, I have been considering the Baltic as well as
the Mediterranean. In fact, for me it would make more sense because I've
been to many of the key Mediterranean destinations, but I haven't visited
Scandinavia or northern Russia. I'd love to see St. Petersburg. My family
hasn't toured either area, so either way the trip would be a novel
experience for them.

(Well, some people went to Berlin from Warnemunde, but that's their
problem. We hopped a $12 train to a town we had never heard of,
Schwerin, and it really was one of the best days in my entire
travelling life!)

2) The Mediterranean is also great for cruising, but I strongly
suggest you go in the spring or fall. It really gets hot. And
crowded.

This is sensible advice, yet difficult to follow with a son in 8th grade.

3) I recommend that you NOT try to visit large inland cities on a
cruise, such as Paris, Rome, Florence, or Berlin. Pick a smaller,
closer destination.

See my previous post.

4) If you have not been to Paris, by all means, fly to Paris, spend
four or five days, and take a trip (either a tour or just rent a car)
to Provence or the Loire Valley. Again, I would recommend spring or
fall, rather than summer. Under no circumstances go in August.

I was in Paris in late June on a bus tour, and the weather was very fine,
but if future French summers are going to continue in the vein of the summer
of 2003, then I'd agree that the season must be avoided.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Joe Ramirez

Depending on the Ports on the itinerary that you are considering there are ways
to cut the cost of excursions. Our family of 4 did a 12 Med cruise in 2001 and
I agree - the price of the cruise can get out of hand quickly.
We utilized the train option to Rome, the cruise line transfer to Florence,
hired a driver in Naples to Pompeii, hired a driver again in Sicily to get to
Taormina, used the train again in Villefranche to go between Monoco, Nice and
Cannes.
Pick up a good guide book and do plenty of research - it adds to the adventure
and you will have a great time!

In article ,
wrote:

Yes, in many ways it seems so. It's just that my wife loves cruises, so I
was/am looking for a way to combine a cruise with visits to some of the
great cities that neither she nor our son has seen. When I visited Athens
and Istanbul on a cruise from Venice it was terrific, but perhaps Paris is
too far inland to make it practical.

I just came back from a Med. cruise - if it was the first time I had
ever been to these cities, I would feel very disappointed. Rome needs a
few days, not just one day - and not even a full day if you are late.
Transit from Civitaveccia to Rome was easy, we walked to the train
station, then took a train - about one hour each way, plus the 20 minute
walk to the train. So much of the time is taken up with travel to and
from Rome, and that was the easy day - Livorno to Florence would have
been a nightmare, and at the port there the taxi drivers wanted 50 Euro
to drive us just to the train station in Livorno! Crazy!

Hi there!

We are a tour operator in Lisbon that gives assistance to cruises also and
offers a very personalized service (tours with a maximum of 6 passengers).
Our prices are very different to those you refer. As you may know, Lisbon is
becoming a very visited port by the cruises.

If you want more information you could visit our website in
www.toursforyou.pt

Best Regards
Tours for you
Lisbon - Portugal


escreveu na mensagem
...
I've been thinking about a European cruise in the summer of 2004, so I've
visited the Princess and Celebrity Web sites to get an idea of the kinds
of
itineraries and shore excursions available. Something that I found very
surprising was the extremely high price of the excursions. Last year my
wife
and I took a cruise to Bermuda, and we've done the Caribbean several
times,
but the last time I took a cruise in Europe was 1973, when I was 12. So I
suppose I'm somewhat out of touch, but the apparent low value of the
excursions was appalling. For example, to take a "Paris on your own" tour
from either line would cost my family of three about $300 -- and all we'd
get would be a roundtrip bus ride from the port to Paris! Some of the more
elaborate tours of Rome or Athens were priced between $150 and $200 per
person. One could probably double the price of the cruise just by taking a
day-long excursion in every port.

Are these prices a function of the weak dollar, or are the lines simply
conducting a form of bait and switch by reducing the cabin fares and then
jacking up the excursion prices? I'm beginning to think that a land-based
tour would be a better bet than a cruise.

Thanks,

Joe Ramirez