East/South-East Asia Trip Suggestions

"Alfred Molon" kirjoitti
s.com...
In article , Chris Blunt
says...

I have to agree with Bob. If there was only one city in Asia he could
visit, it should be Hong Kong.

You are joking, right? There are zillions of cities in Asia which are
orders of magnitude more interesting than Hong Kong.
--

The beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I recall when it was most
fashionable to describe Singapore as "sterile" and "dull". In my opinion
neither of the two attributes were prevalent in town

In article , Markku Grönroos says...

"Alfred Molon" kirjoitti
s.com...
In article , Chris Blunt
says...

I have to agree with Bob. If there was only one city in Asia he could
visit, it should be Hong Kong.

You are joking, right? There are zillions of cities in Asia which are
orders of magnitude more interesting than Hong Kong.
--

The beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I recall when it was most
fashionable to describe Singapore as "sterile" and "dull". In my opinion
neither of the two attributes were prevalent in town

There are 47 UNESCO world heritage sites in China alone:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/cn

Hong Kong is not one of them. Even Macau is listed.
--

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

Markku Grönroos wrote:

The beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I recall when it was most
fashionable to describe Singapore as "sterile" and "dull". In my opinion
neither of the two attributes were prevalent in town

Hong Kong and Singapore are less of a shock to western visitors because
there are signs in english and there are enough people who speak english
that you can survive without too much of a strugle, yet, they still
provide quite the cultural shock.

One doesn't visit Hong Kong. One experiences Hong Kong. it is anarchy
that works. The harbour looks like a random assortment of large cargo
ships and sall boats, and yet, the superfast macau hydrofoil ferries
don't collide with other boats. Public transport is incredible, yet it
is all operated by different private companies, including the subway
system). Heck, some of the car tunnels under the harbour are private
enterprise.

"Bob Myers" wrote in message
...
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Bob Myers says...

Seoul more interesting than Hong Kong? You have to be kidding.
I like Seoul just fine, but Hong Kong is an experience not to be
missed.

There is not much to see in Hong Kong for what concerns historical
buildings. The only great thing is the skyline, the rest is relatively
unimpressive.

In any case, compare by yourself.

Been there, done that. I've visited both cities many times.
As I said, I like Seoul, but I would never tell someone that it is
"more interesting" than Hong Kong. The two experiences are
very, very different. There's a good deal more to a city than just
"historical buildings," at least for most visitors.

Bob M.
But Bob, how would you describe or compare HK Island if you'd taken the Star
Ferry and had tea at the Mandarin Oriental and taken the subway back to
Kowloon?

Steve Cain wrote:
But Bob, how would you describe or compare HK Island if you'd taken
the Star Ferry and had tea at the Mandarin Oriental and taken the
subway back to Kowloon?

Huh? Not sure I understand your question. I've done the above -
well, except for the tea at the Mandarin Oriental; I prefer to find
the small local places over five-star hotels, giventhe choice (not
when looking for a place to stay, but definitely for dining). The Star
Ferry is certainly an essential part of a "Hong Kong experience."
Hell, even walking past the tourist-trap stores lining Nathan Road
is fun in my book (just don't actually BUY anything there...:-)).
And there are certainly many other places on HK Island I'd rather
visit than just Central - maybe that was your point?

I guess Alfred judges a city solely on its "historical" content, and if
that's all that matters to you, then yes, HK comes up short compared
to some others (at least if you DON'T venture out much beyond
Central). But to me, there is just so much more to experience in
a city. And as I said right from the start, I do like Seoul as well, and
yes, it does have a number of places of historic significance. But I
certainly can't compare the overall experience of Seoul (which for the
most part strikes me as somewhat restrained compared to other major
Asian metropolitan areas) to, say, a Hong Kong or Tokyo.

Bob M.

"Steve" wrote in message
...
I'm based in the UK and I fancy a trip to East and/or South-East Asia. My
budget is around £2000 for the trip (plus spending money), I have up to 3
weeks holiday available and I'll be going sometime between August and
December.

I would like to visit some cities - plus potentially some historic sites
and possibly have some time on a beach. I would however be happy just
visiting interesting cities. The cities that interest me are Hong Kong,
Tokyo, Singapore and Beijing.


OK. Having experienced all these places I would suggest the following:

1. Fly to Hong Kong and spend about 5 days - Less of an immediate culture
shock and a place to definately experience. A wonderful, colourful and
vibrant (always busy) place and I think everyone should experience Hong Kong
at least once. Treat yourself to a new camera or something while there )

2. Fly on to Beijing and spend 7 days - A fascinating place only just
getting to grips with western ways. Loads of places to visit if you want to
experience the old chinese culture and way of life.

3. Fly onto Tokyo and spend 7 days - Well, Japan is Japan and can be a great
mix of ultra modern and ultra old. Would not stay in Tokyo though I would
use it as a base, maybe, for other trips in and around Japan.

Forget Singapore. A good transit city on your way to other places but only
good for 2 or 3 day stopovers IMO.

You will be spending at least 2 days at airports and in the air (11/12hrs to
Hong Kong from UK).

£2000 will not go very far I'm afraid taking into account airfares and
accomodation (especially Tokyo).

MC

In article , Bob Myers says...

I guess Alfred judges a city solely on its "historical" content,

No, I never said so.

But it is also true that HK is essentially a jungle of skyscrapers. It
has a breathtaking skyline, but everything else is very mediocre.

and if
that's all that matters to you, then yes, HK comes up short compared
to some others (at least if you DON'T venture out much beyond
Central). But to me, there is just so much more to experience in
a city. And as I said right from the start, I do like Seoul as well, and
yes, it does have a number of places of historic significance. But I
certainly can't compare the overall experience of Seoul (which for the
most part strikes me as somewhat restrained compared to other major
Asian metropolitan areas) to, say, a Hong Kong or Tokyo.

Hong Kong is not in the same league as Tokyio. Two or max. three days
are sufficient for Hong Kong, while after one week in Tokyo you have
barely scratched the surface.

If you want to make a comparison, compare Hong Kong with Kuala Lumpur.
Both will keep you busy for a couple of days, but not much more than
that.
--

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Bob Myers says...


If you want to make a comparison, compare Hong Kong with Kuala Lumpur.
Both will keep you busy for a couple of days, but not much more than
that.

How many times have you been to HK? Not many and not for long if you think
this. I have been many, many times and each time I find something new to
do, see or experience. Kuala Lumpur is not half as good IMO and not even in
the same league as HK so cannot be compared as such.

MC

In article , MC says...

How many times have you been to HK? Not many and not for long if you think
this. I have been many, many times and each time I find something new to
do, see or experience. Kuala Lumpur is not half as good IMO and not even in
the same league as HK so cannot be compared as such.

I've been two times in Hong Kong. It's one of the places to see once you
have seen all the other interesting places Asia has to offer.

Regarding your suggestion, five days in Hong Kong is a waste of time -
two to three are more than enough.

And between Singapore and Hong Kong, Singapore wins hands down. It is
more diverse ethnically, with Chinese, Indian and Malay population, lots
of historical buildings, local culture, a dynamic and vibrant economy,
not as cramped as Hong Kong + it's tropical. Nearby there are tropical
islands where to spend a few days on a beach.
--

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
...
In article , MC says...

How many times have you been to HK? Not many and not for long if you
think
this. I have been many, many times and each time I find something new to
do, see or experience. Kuala Lumpur is not half as good IMO and not even
in
the same league as HK so cannot be compared as such.

I've been two times in Hong Kong. It's one of the places to see once you
have seen all the other interesting places Asia has to offer.

Regarding your suggestion, five days in Hong Kong is a waste of time -
two to three are more than enough.


5 days is not nearly enough. I was merely trying to advise of an itinerary.

And between Singapore and Hong Kong, Singapore wins hands down. It is
more diverse ethnically, with Chinese, Indian and Malay population, lots
of historical buildings, local culture, a dynamic and vibrant economy,
not as cramped as Hong Kong + it's tropical. Nearby there are tropical
islands where to spend a few days on a beach.
--

Did not the OP want to visit the cities? I believe 2 or 3 days is plenty in
Singapore and thus I think you are very wrong in you conclusions but
everyone to their own tastes and opinions I suppose.

MC