Best of Europe Tour - What would you do???

Do what? First or second option?

Wow,, thats a tough one, I think I would fly into London, spend the three days there , recover from jet lag etc, see the Tower of London and visit a museum or two, then Eurostar to Paris the day the tour starts . There are many departures each day, the trip is only 2.5 hours long, and trip can be cheap IF you book well in advance. The actual tour day doesn't start till late afternoon, like 4 or 5 pm, so you have the morning to get to Paris, get to hotel, check in etc , first meeting is usually in hotel lobby. One extra day would be nice for Paris, so you could even train in day before tour if you like. I don't think either choice is bad,, just figure why not get a peep at London, you won't have a chance like you will with PAris and Rome already on the tour. Arriving from a transalantic flight the day before the tour is a very very important thing,, everyone should build that in, so as I said, neither choice is wrong.

I say go for London! Get your Eurostar ticket to Paris ASAP when they become available to get the best price.

I'd do the extra days in Paris and Rome. You'll be traveling around a lot as it is so you will not add to your travel time, and there is so much to see in Paris and Rome that you won't regret the extra time. Hopefully you'll get to London another time.

Go for London... while it is not one of my all-time favorite cities, I would feel really cheated if I had never been there (I have been about 6 times and while I prefer the countryside, London is truly an adventure)

I think it would depend on your specific interests... Either choice will be good.. London is a very interesting place, and you can't go wrong adding it to your itinerary, but there will be some additional costs and the travel required between London and Paris.. If you have more interest in London history or sites, I'd lean that way, but if your interests are more in Paris, then go that way. I did the Best of Europe trip last summer, and really enjoyed it, but you do really only get a taste for all the cities, and there are definitely several sites in Paris that aren't included in the Best of Europe itinerary; so having an extra day or two on your own in Paris might be a good thing. I had two extra days in Paris before the start of the tour and I was able to see the Marmottan Museum, Sacre Couer, Pigalle, and the Arc D'Triomphe; which weren't part of the BestOfEurope itinerary. If your a fan of the Impressionist artists the Marmottan is VERY good.. Also if you want to go to the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris you will need to do that on your own.. One advantage to adding the extra days in Paris, is that you could probably arrange to stay at the same hotel where the tour will start, and that way you'll have to change hotels one less time. Bottom line, whichever way you go they're both good choices and have similar advantages and dis-advantages, so you can't go wrong.. Maybe just to simplify the decision making process, let the airfare/hotel deals make the decision, go which ever way is the cheapest or best schedule. If it was me I think I'd add an extra day in Paris and Rome. In Paris do the Marmottan and Sacre Couer; in Rome maybe take a day trip out to Osta Antica.

I think Matt, above, nailed it exactly. You can't go wrong either way, and you won't know what places you do and don't like until you see them for yourself. So, the decision should be made by your interests (will you feel cheated if you don't see London? Is there a lot more stuff in Paris or Rome that interests you than is on the tour?). If you're still not sure, you can use cost as the tie-breaker (see if it's much cheaper to do it one way or the other).