Venice or London pros and cons

Well, if cost is a factor, those are both expensive cities. I went to London at the time of year and never had any trouble occupying myself. It was already done up for Christmas, which was a plus. On the other hand, what appeals so much to me about Venice is the outdoors, and it gets light much earlier that time of year. I'm sure you'll have a great time either way!

My husband and I have been to London, four of the last five years. London is stupendous. Even though we spent a minimum of 10 days each time and up to two weeks, we still didn't run out of things to do. We even went to York and Bath (twice), for the day. There is an abundance of things to see and do in London. We have only been to Venice once and that was more than enough time. I don't know what somebody would do with more than three days in Venice. I think two would have been enough time.

Hi Lisa, I visited Venice in November ten years ago (and London a month earlier), and was surprised at how cold it was. I was in Paris for a semester and thought that I was heading south and to the sea, and therefore, it would be warmer than it was in Paris. It was definitely not. It poured rain and was freezing for several days, and warmed up a little, but we were still bundled in sweatshirts and scarves. Now, it might be warmer than London, and as the previous poster mentioned, you might have longer days, but don't go to Venice over London thinking it will be tremendously warmer. I think both cities are so different that it's hard to know what to recommend without knowing more of your interests. If you like art and museums, I'd opt for London. If you are more into the romantic ideas of Europe and Italy, do Venice. That's not to say that Venice doesn't have art and London doesn't fill that romantic notion of Europe, they're just different. And, both cities are expensive, but since Venice is on the euro, it might be marginally cheaper. London was shockingly expensive to me when I was there, but, many top-notch museums are free which helps temper the other traveling expenses.

As already mentioned, it is not an apple to apple question. If you wanted equal comparison it would be London/Paris or Amsterdam but just totally two different cities. At that time of year, I would vote for London simply because of greater options. If a winter storm moved in, it can be pretty brutal in Venice. Even in bad weather you can move around London with the Tube. Save Venice for the Spring or Fall.

We're tied to the school schedule so spring/fall time is limited. One of the reasons we liked Venice is that there are fewer cruise ships stops in Winter. Going to a port city when thousands of tourists are unloaded for the day is no fun.Weather is a concern, though. And can't seem to find a decent place for 3 in either city that's centrally located and affordable.

London, Pros: You don't have to put up with the summer crowds at museums and attractions. The department stores will be decorated for Christmas, which is really lovely. You can buy Christmas presents in London for friends and family back home, and they will be thrilled. The weather will be pleasantly cool, so you can take walks with just a jacket and a scarf. If it snows, it will just add to the beauty of the city. Some restaurants and pubs will have special holiday menus, with drinks like eggnog or mulled wine to drink by the fireside. London, Cons:
Fewer hours of daylight per day in the wintertime to go sightseeing. I cannot comment on Venice; haven't been there yet. You said, "can't seem to find a decent place for 3 in either city that's centrally located and affordable." If you would post this as a new question, reasonable London hotels, I think you'd get a lot of answers. Also, have you searched recent threads for reasonable hotels in London? Use the search box in the upper right of this page.

November is the wettest month in Venice. I vote for London in November. Not that it's less rainy, but Venice is more of an outdoor city, whereas London has many indoor activities to keep you busy and is easier to navigate in winter.
But if you want suggestions for inexpensive hotels in Venice, I can help you with that.

For more than 20 years we went to London (and sometimes one other city such as Innsbruck) for the week after Thanksgiving. I LOVE London at that time. Markets are wonderful with craftsmen gearing up for Christmas shoppers. The weather has never been awful- sometimes coldish (no worse than here in the Carolinas) and once or twice we had very light snow- just enough to make it really pretty. Theatre is great, and there are concerts (sometimes the Proms had started when we were there). Kew Gardens is lovely even in the winter- and they sometimes have an ice skating rink set up there. When we stayed in London for the whole week, we'd usually go to Windsor one day (usually on the day we when we had theatre ticket that night) and at least one other day trip by train (Canterbury, Cardiff and York have really nice Christmas markets, and there are other, easy day trips to do, too).

After having been to both places multiple times I would say go to London. There is more to do and especially at night.

Been to London four times and Venice twice,no contest.. go to London. Eight days in rainy cold Venice would drive me insane. Eight days in London, even if rainy, I can fill with things to do and see. Venice is lovely, but not in November ( St Marks square floods often so you may in fact NEED to pack rubber boots) and frankly I think 8 days in Venice is about 3-4 days too long.

8 days is a long time to be in Venice any time, and especially when there's a likelihood of rain and cold. Just for that reason, London is more appealing. As noted, England starts to gear up for Christmas at the end of November, so I would choose then, rather than year-end, when the locals are in town for the after-Christmas sales. Hotels may be pricier around New Year's Day.

Only been to each city once, but would definitely vote for London for what you are describing. Both are pretty pricey. Try and rent an apartment, as it will be a bit more cost effective.
Were in London for a week, and have a long list of things we "missed" to see for the return trip. Lots to do.

While both cities are pricey, I found it was much easier to find some decent cheap eats in London, just size alone would make it easier, more choices etc.

I'm fond of both cities. For November or after Christmas, I'd opt for London...for reasons stated above and just for getting around. London has sidewalks, taxis, buses, and the Underground. Venice has sidewalks and bridges and water buses and water taxis. In cool to cold weather I'd like to be warm. Water buses and taxis are open in Venice; buses and taxis in London are closed. You will do a lot of walking outside in Venice; you don't have to in London. London's bigger and more modern...and your food choice will likely be greater in London.

While I definitely like Venice more than London at this time of year I would opt for London... actually I would only do a few days in London and the rest in the Cotswolds. I have been there a few times in Nov/Dec. and loved it. Had a number of warmish days and without a ton of tourists places like Warwick Castle, Anne Hathaway's Cottage, York and Bath can be delightful. The villages in the Cotswolds are also really enjoyable in the winter and always a place to stop for Cream Tea! Just dress in layers.

Thanks for all your input. We were thinking the whole 'go south in winter and north in summer' scenario. My husband was thinking we'd divide it up between Venice,Bologna and/or Florence, but to me that's a lot of moving around for such a short trip. Would that itinerary have made a difference to any of you?

We just spent a lovely week in Bologna making day trip to Venice, Ferrara, Lucca, Pisa, Modena and Florence. All of these places are within 1-2 hours driving - we had a rental car. Bologna made a great base for this area of Italy and there was plenty to keep us busy without feeling overwhelmed. To answer your original question - I think 8 days in London or Venice is like comparing apples and oranges. Such completely different places. London could keep you busy for months - but it is a big, hectic city. Venice is swimming with tourists and is beautiful, but I cannot imagine spending more than 1-2 days there. Consider Bologna (look at Hotel Porto San Mamolo).

Ah, 8 days and a willingness to change hotels, that puts Venice in a new light. It's only a couple of hours by train to Bologna, Florence, or Verona and all are worth at least two nights with one full day of sightseeing. Look at the train schedules on trenitalia.com to give you an idea. Now I'm leaning toward Italy.

hmm, have you seen the pictures of Venice this past week,, don't even think of not packing your hip waders.. lol Seriously google Venice floods 2013.

Acqua Alta is a regular occurrence is the tides and storms of Autumn are right. It passes off quickly, the city is prepared for it (I have 2 apps on my phone to warn me of Acqua Alta), affects certain well known areas of low lying city, and can be as much fun as trouble. Hip waders not needed unless you like wading in water. If you read the accounts found in the googlesphere you will see that the water while high was certainly nothing dramatically out of the ordinary. The Telegraph article makes that very clear. Makes for good headlines and photos though.

New scenario... Italy... hands down.