Expensive cities

Major European cities are generally more expensive, however, not so much in the MED (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece).

Don't avoid cities like this because of the cost, most are MUST SEE places/

Use TripAdvisor, Kayak and do the research to find more modest accommodations. One thing about a city like Paris is that there are many choices for accommodation.

Having been to London, Paris, Copenhagen in the past four years, as well as New York City, I feel that I could find more reasonable accommodations in those cities than in NYC.

Is that report based on cost of Living for locals or is it most expensive cities to visit?
The most expensive hotel scene I have come across is NYC as well. Wine and beer was also way more expensive there than I had expected.

I did not find Paris to be more expensive than let's say NYC, London or Moscow.

And your point is?

That article was talking about the cost to live there:

The EIU's annual ranking compares the prices of over 150 items in 133
cities around the world, such as bread, wine, cigarettes and petrol.
It is designed to help hiring managers calculate fair salaries when
relocating their employees overseas.

Has nothing to do with visiting there. And even if it is, so what? You budget accordingly. I'll be visiting both Singapore and Hong Kong (both on the list) next winter. We've already factored the costs into our planning. Moving on..

Given the prices I have seen recently for hotel prices in New York and San Francisco, , I would guess the rankings for tourist travel might include some US cities.

Yes it can be expensive. Go anyway.

Joe, this just reminds me of a moment in 2011. I was sitting at a conference in Geneva, waiting for a session to begin. I turned to the woman next to me, a Norwegian, and I said: “Wow, Geneva certainly is expensive, don’t you think?” She responded: “You think Geneva is expensive, you need to visit Oslo! It’s the most expensive city in the world!”

I've always found London to be more expensive than Paris in regards to accommodations. At a 2 star hotel in Paris I would pay for a single 80 to 95 Euro, in London at a B&B or small hotel for the same price, I could expect for a single the room size of a shoe box.
Regardless of price in both cities for comparable accommodations, the square footage is the big difference between Paris and London.

London is to me the most expensive city. Still, on a discount flight from SFO or OAK and B&B combination for a single as was the case last October, it is cheaper than flying to and staying in New York. London wins over New York.

Joe, is there any reason you didn't share link the of this CNBC report since you thought the topic interesting enough to start a thread?

Without the citation link, exactly how do we discern the means in which the results were calculated?

I saw that on CNN, Tel Aviv is #9 - go figure. I can live here on my retirement income and travel to Europe 3 times a year. I couldn't afford to do that in the San Francisco Bay Area. I wonder how they price in housing costs.

Has nothing to do with visiting there. And even if it is, so what? You
budget accordingly.

geee, someone sees something interesting and thinks to share it and they get crucified. "Budget accordingly"? Some folks have financial limitations. Lucky you dont.

Here, fight over this":
http://www.hopper.com/articles/298/the-ten-most-expensive-travel-destinations-in-the-world

and this
https://www.priceoftravel.com/1979/european-backpacker-index/

For those who asked, here is the link

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/singapore-named-the-worlds-most-expensive-city-to-live-in.html

Had not posted it originally as I see so many comments by members who say "I do not click links here", I just didnt bother. Figured those who were interested could easily find it.

Do not know there was a 'point', just something I found interesting and shared it.

To address some of the questions/comments about how it applies to tourists vs. residents.
If housing is expensive, hotels etc are likely to be so as well. Everyone is competing for the same limited land.

Cost of power and fuel figures into 'cost of living', so those costs are going to be passed on by merchants and businesses of all sizes. If taxes are high to support healthcare and other social services, those costs have to be passed on, so they do affect tourists, even if they are just passing through.

From the tone of some of the responses , i went back to read my original post to see if I had put forward the proposition that only wimps, sissies, and the decrepit used roller bags and had IDPs and 'real' travelers used backpacks and avoided an IDP as useless dead weight on their shoulders.

Lesson learned.

geee, someone sees something interesting and thinks to share it and
they get crucified. "Budget accordingly"? Some folks have financial
limitations. Lucky you dont.

Here, fight over this":
http://www.hopper.com/articles/298/the-ten-most-expensive-travel-destinations-in-the-world

and this https://www.priceoftravel.com/1979/european-backpacker-index/

Um, most of us have financial limitations. Did I suggest otherwise? So we plan (budget) accordingly. Just because a city may be expensive doesn't mean someone on a limited budget shouldn't go there. There are ways of allocating your funds to make your stay there not only possible, but affordable. Stay at a 2 star instead of 4 star hotel. Eat at small cafes instead of fancy restaurants. Take public transportation instead of taxis. Aren't those all things that RS has taught since day 1? Sheesh.

If housing is expensive, hotels etc are likely to be so as well.
Everyone is competing for the same limited land.

Cost of power and fuel figures into 'cost of living', so those costs
are going to be passed on by merchants and businesses of all sizes. If
taxes are high to support healthcare and other social services, those
costs have to be passed on, so they do affect tourists, even if they
are just passing through.

Only to a limited extent. It's apples and oranges. In most cities, tourists are charged extra taxes on hotels and rental cars that locals do not incur. An overall tax rate on food and alcohol can also make a huge difference (making Scandinavia very expensive). Hotel prices can vary from city to city depending on total number of rooms, types of hotels and whether there are incentives for small, private pensions. London, New York and San Fransisco generally make lists of most expensive cities to visit.

Although people shouldn't jump all over you, your opening post didn't have a link and didn't mention that it was cost of living even though this is a travel site. Adding a few things to clarify would have avoided much of the responses.

Having been to London, Paris, Copenhagen in the past four years, as well as New York City, I feel that I could find more reasonable accommodations in those cities than in NYC.

Based on my most recent visit to NYC, that's certainly true. We stayed 2 nights in a hotel room, and even with sharing the room with our niece and her husband, it was far more than I'd ever spent in any European city, including Paris. In any high-priced European cities I've stayed in, you could find a simple, inexpensive hotel that was perfectly acceptable. That seems to be almost impossible in major US cities. That's probably why AirBnB has grown so much here.

Paris and London can be expensive or even super expensive. I'll continue to go there since I know that if it does indeed become too expensive (at the particular month/ time I'm going, etc), I can stay at hostels, which I've already checked out as regards to locations, price, acceptability, etc or in London in a university private dorm room available in the summer.

I've been to Paris and Zürich (and London and Brussels). It was a business trip for me so, they really were free. That's the only way I would go to any of them. Big cities interest me not in the least. They are definitely not "must sees" for me.

Fred, i never thought of Paris as being particularly expensive. Not cheap like Budapest by nothing like London.

@ James..."nothing like London."...very true, that's why I stay at B&Bs, which are not cheap either. The singles I've been in at the B&Bs give you the shoe box feeling, that one is staying in a shoe box, which is not the case in Central Europe based on experiences staying in singles in Austria, Germany and Poland. I would think that Budapest is the same as one would find in Poland, may even be better.

If one wants to blow money on accommodations, both Paris and London are places to do exactly that, if luxury is a paramount. Obviously, if one wants cheap and very good quality, it is Budapest in contrast to the two.

I also thought hotel prices in Paris were quite reasonable if you don't need to be smack in the middle of the most popular arrondissments. Plenty of budget hotel room supply there- seems like every neighborhood has an Ibis or three as well as the old school small hotels- and that helps keep prices down despite how popular a destination it is.

All large European cities are expensive. We are surprised to see Dublin hotel prices to be so expensive.
But all the Scandinavian countries are deathly expensive and best visited from a cruise ship. Two burgers, fries and Cokes at a TGI Friday is $60. A cup of coffee at a 7-11 or a Coke is $4.50.
We have found Budapest to be much less expensive to visit than most large European cities, and we are very comfortable there.

Had not posted it originally as I see so many comments by members who
say "I do not click links here", I just didnt bother. Figured those
who were interested could easily find it.

Those who don't want to click links won't do it. It's a courtesy to provide a link to to the topic to which you've started a thread. Thanks.

Rather intriguing that CNBC chose to index what they deem as expensive in comparison with NYC. Why NYC in particular and not SF for example?