London Pass looked interesting, Leela and I added up fees for many things we want to see in London and rapidly, the individual fees outweighed the cost of the LondonPass. We're surprised to read in RS London 08 that it is "not really worth the money" (RS L-2008 page 4) What are we missing here, when such an "obvious" money saver is not considered much of a great deal? Does the LP web-page exaggerate the cost of admissions or claim a fee when they're really free? confused in Seattle. Thanks, Steve S.
Posted by
London, UK
286 posts
I like to buy city passes when I know it is a good deal. For example, in Amsterdam I knew I could knock out many of the museums same with Paris... yeah, not with much leisure but a taster.
The thing about London is that most of the museums are free so why focus on the stuff that you have to pay for when so much else is free. Also, the distances between sites is enormous so it would be highly ambitious to see let's say the Tower of London, a museum and Windsor in a day.
What places are you interested in seeing and how many days would you purchase? Then we can give you a better idea if it is doable.
Posted by
Portland
5 posts
I have used both the London and the Great Britain Heritage passes. If you are planning on travelling around England and Scotland than I would recommend checking out the GBH pass as there are some London sights included.
The London pass is not really worth the money however. I am an avid sightseer and I came out even. Most of the sights included on the pass either take hours to see or are not really worth the money to see. Plus like was mentioned in the last post - museums are free as are sights such as Kensington Gardens, Hyde Park, Trafalger Square, etc. Also I have noticed that unless you are interested in a historic home/palace for a historical or personal reason, then most look the same so spending your time on these just to make the pass be a moneysaver is not worthwhile. Also, even though I was in London at high season I never saw lines longer than 10-15 minutes long which also defeats the purpose of the pass. I would suggest that you make a list of all the places you want to see, plot it out on a map of London and then estimate the time you think it will take (be generous with the time)and then see if you think the pass will be worth it. For me personally, I found it not to be.
Posted by
Edmonton, Canada
98 posts
It could be a good deal depending on what you want to focus on, but as the above poster said, take into account the travel times. You may want to stay within a certain area in the morning and some of the other sites nearby might not be covered by the pass, or they are free. In that case, you might feel obligated to rush across town to see an attraction which is included.
I went to London and Paris last year, and in Paris, I did buy the 3-day pass, since it included many attractions I wanted to see and they were relatively close to each other. I did not get the London Pass because many of the museums I wanted to visit were already free. Certain attractions like the Tower of London took me about half a day. So after mapping out my day-to-day itinerary, it ended up costing more to buy the pass for me.
Posted by
Anaheim, CA, USA
1455 posts
Steve On paper it seems to be a good deal. However, when you get there, most of the attractions are spread out. You'll be running like a headless chicken to get from place to place to "break even". Its about 3 attractions a day you need to visit to make it worth your money.
I did buy a 1 day pass, woke up early, and squeezed in 3 attractions. The positive part is you bypass lines. The negative is you feel you must visit these places to make your pass "count".
Posted by
Kalamazoo, MI, USA
100 posts
Hi Steve,
My husband and I chose against the London pass because we had already purchased the British Heritage Pass. Although, the London Pass covered a few of the sights that we plan to see that the BHP did not cover it was just not worth the overall money for us. Someone recommended the travel card that has many 2 for 1 deals on it. I don't have all of the details on that, but if you read through some of the past threads you should find info. I would say that if you are spending most of your time in London and already know that you are planning to see enough of the sights to get your money's worth out of the London Pass then you should definitely get it. I think it is not worth the money for people who do not plan to use it enough to get their money back out of it. If you do your research and plan well enough then only you can really know if it will save you money or not. Have a wonderful trip!