Would you like to see a book on the cities Rick doesn’t include?

No.
Happy New Decade!

Why would anyone be interested in reading a book on why cities are excluded. Strange rant that makes little sense. If you want reviews of other cities -- it is called --- other guide books.

I’d be quite interested in knowing why Rick didn’t pick certain cities to include. Unlike most other guide books, you know from page one it’s what he thinks you should see in that country and makes no attempt to cover the whole country like other guidebooks. That’s why common advice on here is to get Rick’s guidebook plus one other.

Dale, I am so thankful that there’s many cities that are not included in the RS books! First, they would be such heavy books with such small print that I wouldn’t even bother to buy them. Secondly, and most importantly, I love exploring maps and the internet to find the places that are less known to American tourists and have some sites or activities that appeal to me. I’m no longer interested in the Cinque Terre or Hallstatt tourist environment and thankfully saw them many years ago on RS tours when they were still quaint.

1. “Cities that are hard to get to with public transit and require a fairly long drive and aren’t near anything else of interest.”. That’s a huge advantage of taking a RS tour. They can get you to the out-of-way places by bus.

2. “A city with a bunch of second tier museums that also happen to be fairly expensive.” I’ve found second tier museums to be a wonderful way to enjoy an afternoon in a less crowded museum. Many of them are free or a very fair price.

Very few people really understand what Rick Steves does. He is in the tour business. The largest part of his "empire" is running tours. Originally, the guidebooks were meant for people taking his tours. That's why there are not a lot of places in his guidebooks that his tours don't go to.

Look at the itineraries he suggests. They mimic his tours. He's hoping you'll get a guidebook, start planning your trip and then realize you can do the exact same thing on one of his tours. And they make all the arrangements for you. He suggests staying in the type of hotels his tours stay in. He suggests sightseeing activities that are the same his tours visit.

Look at this forum. Some European countries aren't listed...the ones his tours don't go to.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this. Rick is a brilliant marketer. He runs an ethical company. And yes, he now sells around 1 million guidebooks a year.

But again his main business is trying to get people to take his tours. And he must be doing something right because many of his tours are sold out. (By the way, he has stated this himself. I am not making it up.)

So why would he start writing about places that wouldn't benefit him. That's what other guidebooks are for.

By the way.....there are no RS tours to Iceland........yet.

Dale,

It would be impossible for Rick (or anyone else) to include every city in Europe. His publisher has limits on how many pages he can include in each guidebook, which Rick has mentioned in the past at his travel events. I suspect he chooses locations with historic and interesting sights which will most appeal most to his target group, including his PBS audience.

BTW, the annual Rick Steves Europe 2020 travel event will be taking place in a few weeks in Edmonds.

I would be interested in knowing if Rick left off a city because he actively disliked it or found it boring. But it’s impossible to include everything so I bet most omissions are for space, or due to tour logistics.

So why would he start writing about places that wouldn't benefit him. That's what other guidebooks are for.

Well said. His guidebooks are great for practical information about the cities and attractions that are the most popular with Americans - the people who buy most of his books - I'm guessing.

Maybe I wouldn't have loved Turin as much if RS talked it up like Rue Cler and the Cinque Terre.

Dale poses an interesting question that I think Frank II answered in regards to RS Guidebooks, tours and marketing strategies. Always keep in mind RS Travel is a business. I think because of this forum enrollment we overestimate the general population's interest of "backdoor locations". Most people want to go to Rome, Florence, Paris, London, Munich, etc., especially on their first few trips to Europe.

I regards to guidebooks, I think what people should do is pay attention to the word "guide" in guidebooks and not assume they are definitive answers to travel. They are at most suggestions and highlights of cities and countries.

I personally gave up on guidebooks many, many years ago with all the internet search capabilities that exist. All the travel sights that exist has made researching, planning and booking a trip much easier and faster. There is more information at your finger tips on a keyboard than in a 1,000 guidebooks. Travel forums for tips such as this forum also helps with trusted insight into the specifics of travel. The Search capability of Google puts answers to almost any question you ask about a country, city, transportation, sights, etc. right in front of you.

Threadwear, I think one of the major advantages of a guidebook over just lots of internet searching is that it answers many topics of questions upfront that people don’t even know they should be asking. One example is the repeated question numerous times on this forum, “I traveled to Italy six months ago and am receiving traffic tickets, and I don’t know why.” Another is the knowledge of when train tickets need to be validated.

Nope.

Dale, I see travel books like that ALL OF THE TIME when planning a trip. This is why I look at Fodors & Lonely Planet in addition to RS. The biases that RS has make no sense to me especially when I have loved places, recommended by other travel guides, that he completely ignores.

As an author, he has that prerogative.

As a traveler, I am open to travel recommendations and thereby benefit from multiple travel sources.

I think Jean made a valid point that "one of the major advantages of a guidebook over just lots of internet searching is that it answers many topics of questions upfront that people don't even know they should be asking." For me, guidebooks are one tool I use in my research. I have also had good luck in gleaning information from my "go to" people on the RS Forum, friends, relatives, RS travel classes, just to name a few. Most of our travel experience is done independently, but we don't rule out an occasional organized tour.

I have had the privilege of taking 4 RS Tours. As far as lodging, accommodations have been varied. That said, I am not sure I would describe lodging as 'Ye Old Cute and Quaint." Hotels were comfortable, and most exceeded my expectations. I don't recall seeing a cat in the lobby, although we saw a lot of cats on the streets of Greece.

So, I respectfully say no to '"Would you like to see a book on the cities Rick doesn't include?" Due to the fact that RS sells thousands of tours, books, travel accessories, etc. I think he's meeting the needs of his customers.

Looking forward to the 2020 travel classes!

I usually buy a Lonely Planet (LP) guidebook (or purchase pdf copies of individual chapters) if I need some info on cities that RS guides don't cover. In my opinion, the LP guides also contain better hotel and restaurant info. They are not published annually, so I only buy them if they are recent (within the last year or the current year). However, I also buy a RS guide, which is second to none for info on how to get from point A to point B in a city. I also like the maps better than the LP guides. The bottom line is that no one guidebook is best for everything or contains info on every city.

Strange rant tht makes little sense.

I disagree, while maybe not an entire book I'd love to hear the process of elimination he goes through to determine what stays and what goes. Is it his decision alone or how much input does he actually take from others? Even how he puts together his tours or the suggested itineraries in his book.

There you go Rick, some more ideas on how to get me to give you more of my money!

A very good and pertinent suggestion. I would be interested in seeing reviews on cities/towns omitted by RS. which is one major reason I don't go by his suggestions

I was a little surprised when I checked in his guidebook and couldn't find any information on Cornwall. I was quite happy that I had simply checked it out from the library and not paid money to find out it didn't cover the area I was most interested in!

If you need a more comprehensive country guide, look to Lonely Planet and Rough Guides. But even these two cannot cover all of the small villages and rural areas.

The RS guidebooks are more oriented for seeing the more popular tourist attractions. Off the beaten path, backdoor or not, go with LP and/or RG, or a more specialized area/activity specific travel guide.

From Rick’s blog and some of his TV shows, he’s definitely been places that haven’t made his books. He’s said that India is his favorite place on Earth, aside from his home in Washington. Maybe he’s letting his books get people to “dip their toe in the water” of travel, and as inspiration to venture forth, making new discoveries, if so inclined.

But his guidebook focus is Europe, and his picks for the “Best of Europe.” Exactly what didn’t make the cut as among the “best” may vary from country to country . . . Maybe too far away from his “best” places to make the extra journey worthwhile, boring (so he says), not what he perceives as a good travel value, etc. It might be interesting to hear precisely what caused something to miss the cutoff - maybe asking at his ETTBD company will produce a forthright answer.

He’s added locations to his “best of” list over the years. His books, formerly deliberately thinner than many other guidebooks, have gotten thicker, as recommendations increase. Córdoba, Spain, for example - once never in his Spain book, now a real must-see location!

When we took Rick's Switzerland tour a few years back, the tour went to Engelberg and rode the gondola to Mt. Titlis - breathtaking.
The last I checked, the RS Guide book does not include Engelberg !

@Frank II - Rick Steves' Iceland book is now in its 2nd edition.

We’ve usually got 1 big trip on the radar screen, in the planning stages, but for 2020, we’ve got 3!

In March, two weeks in London. Here’s hoping it doesn’t rain the entire time!

July, England some more, then Scotland for an extended time. From there, flying to Copenhagen for a week, then overnight ferry to Norway for a long visit.

This fall, Rome, as it’s been 8 years. Maybe they’ve fixed up some of those old buildings that were crumbling, and looked like they’d been around for 2,000 years, without any remodeling! 😉

There are those strange comments in his books, like don't bother visiting Mainz, Wiesbaden, or Heidelberg. No one knows why. If you don't like a city, that is fine but to tell other people to not bother going to a beautiful, historic city for no apparent reason is odd.

Exactly, and that’s why I thought it would be interesting to have a new book about why he doesn’t cover certain places. It’s fine to have opinions and you know from page one that his books are opinion based. Sure, we know why he won’t suggest a city that’s only known for a smelly oil refinery. And no one wants his books to be the size of an old fashioned phone book.

But, as he gets older and we see fewer new books from him, I thought it might be interesting to get his perspective as to why he doesn’t recommend it.

I don't think I'd like a book like that. Since the cities he doesn't cover run into the hundreds (maybe thousands) it would be a heck of a tome. That's why there are lots of other guide books out there and the internet for researching cities (or sites, or areas) that I might be interested in that RS doesn't cover in his books. I never have used RS books exclusively to plan my travels - I used them in conjunction with others. I do much of my own research and make my decisions based on that so I don't really care why he doesn't cover certain cities. When creating guidebooks you need to be selective to avoid the size getting out of hand and thus the relevancy getting lost.

I think many are quick to assume a negative, when it may be a case of a lack of a positive, or a null condition.

One can pick 10 cities in a Country using various criteria without "hating on" excluded cities, just finding 10 positive choices. Some cities are obligatory (France book without Paris?), others due to one or a few major sights, and some just because they represent quaint, historic, rural, or some other aspect to balance the mix of other cities. Sometimes the group of locales picked are as much for what they say as a group, rather than as individual places.

Maybe a bit more explanation as to why a group of sights may be picked would be helpful, maybe mention, but not detail, on other similar places would also allow some direction for exploring on your own.

It might be interesting, and I think there is from time to time such a thing, to have something akin to a Blog post on a not yet covered place, giving an impression from Rick's eyes, or a well experienced staffer, mentioning sights, restaurants, hotels, history, etc. in the style of the guidebooks...with a clear disclaimer that the information is dated.

If you want more details on other cities/areas I recommend the green Michelin books -- then YOU can select the items and places of interest. No helpful information on WC locations, laundromats, supermarkets though.

Searching for other guidebook resources? RIck Steves showcases his picks on his website. "Comparing Guidebook Series" and "Researching Your Trip." This is exactly why I use multiple resources. BTW, I am currently using the RS Sicily Guidebook (co-written with Sarah. Murdoch), Lonely Planet, DK Eyewitness, RS Forum, and RS Classes at headquarters.

Interesting theme. I think R.S.is purposefully choosing cities and towns he thinks are the cream of that particular country. Most Americans don't have long vacation and don't want to devote a lot of time sifting through Lonely Planet, Fodors, Frommers etc. So R.S.guidebooks are ideal in that aspect. Otherwise they would be like the above mentioned guidebooks. I noticed that especially with a big country like Germany some people think that R.S. should include also their favorite cities. For example, I am very familiar with the Czech Republic and I must agree that R.S. did an excellent job with choosing the cream of the C.R. Once I said - I would put there also Karlovy Vary - and bingo! now it's there. Now I am saying I would put there also Brno - and it is not there yet.

If someone had some vague interest in visiting cities in Germany, say, Heidelberg, Mainz, or Wiesbaden, be it a newbie or "veteran," I would absolutely advise those visits to be done, well worth spending one's time in all three of these cities, historically and culturally. Wiesbaden is more than an administrative center.

If a newbie were researching on going to Germany and asked for my suggestions, my answers would to use Rough Guide and others, redirect the research to North Germany and the eastern area, use RS sparingly or forget it. Look at the cities , not only small towns, omitted by him.

Read, read, read from lots of sources, and look at plenty of photos. Nine people out of ten will love Dordogne or Venice, one won't - read why they did not like it, their reasons may be something you have in common. I have not read RS's thoughts on Heidelberg etc but if he does not think it worth visiting then he should at least explain why.

On the flip side, I agree with just about all his comments in his best and worst of Europe article - the places I've visted, at least.

I can't imagine traveling based on one person's opinion unless it is my own. LOL. Other than the Italy book, I've always found Lonely Planet to be very thorough, but I review them all. RS books work well for highlights and how to negotiate train stations, airports, etc. in particular places. While his books for the locations he talks about are valuable, I don't plan where to go based on his books. I look at the entire area or country. Also, I don't plan what to do in a city based on just his book, because I'd be missing sights that are interesting to me.

Extremely pre-trip I go to the bookstore and review all the travel books for a particular area or country. I also peruse the internet a great deal. Rick and I often don't agree on the value of his sites or the lack of value of unmentioned sites. but I don't think he has any intention of being the be all and end all of travel in Europe. He wants to get people traveling for the first time, and train them to be able to manage travel on their own, and he wants to provide decisions and plans for those who don't have the time or interest to plan on their own, and/or travel for any length of time. At least, that is my impression of his goals. YMMV

I noticed that especially with a big country like Germany some people
think that R.S. should include also their favorite cities.

In Germany he omits 2/3 of the country. But his book simply reflects American travel habits, which developed after the war, when military personnel + family spent their weekends in the American sector, i.e. the area between Heidelberg (yes, I know), Frankfurt, Nuremberg and Munich + the Alps. In this case he simply offers what the market demands. His target group isn't adventurous, they are first-timers, and they want to see the highlights they know.

Martin is right but another difference between R.S.guidebooks and all those others is that if you are using non R.S.guidebooks you have to sift through the books yourself and that takes time which Americans think they don't have. And simply - you cannot visit all those cities and destinations, they are too many. On the other hand R.S. does all that sifting for you and shrinks the number of cities and destinations to manageable size.

His target group isn't adventurous, they are first-timers, and they
want to see the highlights they know.

Interesting how two people can follow the same guy and have so different of an opinion. My take on him is just the opposite. It's because of his books and style of travel that I was able to learn to be adventurous in a foreign country and get off the beaten path.

Rick is the Mr Rogers of travel personalities (though Fred wouldn't smoke weed or take tours through red light districts like Rick does). He's good at encouraging the inexperienced or nervous traveler to move beyond the usual Trafalgar packaged holiday and see a different side to the usual popular city standards. I think it's a good niche to have and he does a lot of good in terms of encouraging people to look at the world through a different lens.

I get a lot from his books just like I do from Lonely Planet and Moon guides. None of them are a 'perfect fit' for me- I mean I'm a tea-totaling introvert who likes chain hotels- but I like being able to mix and match curated content as well as internet message board suggestions to come up with a plan that works best for my travel needs.

Where would you have him draw the line on what non-included cities to include? Maybe he should write a book explaining why he didn't write a book? OK.....

Frank II pretty much answered your question but let me add my two cents. I use Rick's books the way I think he meant them to be used. I use many of his recommendations for hotels, restaurants and sites to see. It turns out you end up feeling like you on on a tour (except for the part where you are on a bus with the same group of people). You meet people having a shared experience along the way and find a comradery that I really enjoy, it's similar to this forum but without some anonymous guy in the background making snarky comments. Like his tours, he can't stop in every city and town and he has to edit himself.

"...his book reflects American travel interests...." How true !

His target group isn't adventurous, they are first-timers, and they
want to see the highlights they know.
Interesting how two people can follow the same guy and have so different of an opinion. My take on him is just the opposite. It's because of his books and style of travel that I was able to learn to be adventurous in a foreign country and get off the beaten path.

I tend to sway towards Allan's perspective. I think the biggest misconception regarding Rick's guides, and apparently many on here do think this is so, is that the guide is the final word; "if it is not in the guide, it has no value" otherwise, why would you complain that a place is not covered?

I always interpreted his books and guides as teaching travel skills and having good examples of common or selected sights. The key is applying those skills learned to other locales. It has worked well for me, maybe some can't get past what is in a book, but I recall a number of passages talking about finding "your own back doors".

maybe some can't get past what is in a book, but I recall a number of passages talking about finding "your own back doors".

I can't imagine using one guidebook as a sole source to plan a trip. I usually start with Eyewitness or Insight guides at the very beginning and then move on to RS guides as I want more detailed information of where to stay and how to get there. Even then, I don't take any of the guides as the bible, I use it just as I do this forum or a friend's thoughts; it's friendly advice and gives me a good start to do my own research and make my own decisions. Just like I read the RS books and what he recommends, I'd love to read his thoughts on why something else doesn't make the cut, all information is valuable.

I believe getting there by public transportation has to be a major reason for Rick's choices. Why else would he choose Lucca, as an example, in a region with so many fantastic hill towns?

Being in a logical swath with other picks is another reason. I think Rick knows he caters to an audience who are generally limited to two-week vacations. Because of that, he picks his top choices - that can be seen in two weeks - and writes about only those. You need extra time and money to visit a more exhaustive list of worthy destinations. Rick's readers, especially beginner travelers, don't have time, money or motivation (probably in that order) to see everything.

I've considered writing current travel guides on budget travel - kind of an up to date "Europe on $5 a day" (but closer to $100 a day). I don't think it would sell though. Travelers today, even young travelers, have much more money and don't seem willing to travel with an uncomfortably tight budget for food, lodging or transportation.

In 1971 I met one American using "Europe on $5 a Day" This woman considered that book essential for traveling in England, Germany, Austria, France, etc. She was not the only person I saw carrying that book. In Germany If you knew how, it was very possible and easy to keep the budget under five-six dollars.

I enjoy reading RS guidebooks and then making my own decisions. I used the Scotland and Iceland ones and then upon reading the books expanded not only places to go but where I want to stay. I will be going to Asia in a few months and would love to have a RS type of book for that area. Viet Nam is baffling to me but I will continue to plug away.