Here's a link to a short article in today's New York Times about the savings on luxury hotels in five of Italy's beautiful coastal areas. Of course a ten day stay at one of these properties would easily cost more than going on a Rick Steves tour. Just a thought from a 14 tour vet as to what my fellow Ricksters (Stevians?) would prefer. Some of these discounted rates could pay for 2 tours!
Posted by
Sioux Falls, SD, USA
3100 posts
Yeah, I read that, and was appalled. First, the notion that ANY of those prices were "bargains" was ridiculous. The cheapest was $400. Second, I am appalled that anyone pays high-season prices. Click-bait ...
Posted by
Fort Lauderdale, FL
1241 posts
This is why I love my cheap little AirBnB's! I am definitely not rich.
Posted by
Washington DC Region, USA
7053 posts
The article is comparing the prices of luxury hotels between Spring and Summer - it's considered "a deal" because the delta between the two sets of prices is so large. I love the New York Times, but their lodging and travel recommendations are clearly for the Upper East Side/ Wall Street crowd. There is no pretense in being price-conscious. But it's all relative right? If you're making big bucks, then you don't need to scrimp on hotels (it may still be the same or lower percentage of one's travel budget than a middle-income person's hotel selection).