The New York Times' Frugal Traveler recently wrote about the costs of traveling with two different sets of people. A couple of high school friends. And his parents. During separate trips in Colombia and Nicaragua.
He thought traveling with his friends would be cheap, while having to provide his parents with creature comforts would take a bite out of his budget.
Turns out it was the other way around. It's a good read about the different things people like to do when they travel.
And their different needs.
And it reminds me yet again why solo travel can be so much more relaxing in many ways.
For instance, he says that it's easy to skip meals when you travel alone. But when you travel with people and one of you is hungry, usually all of you stop and eat, he points out.
On the other hand, I often like to snack all day and love to try out bakery items and street foods in other countries. That can mean I may not sit down to a meal but I will be stopping a lot to chow down.
Sometimes I don't want to go in some place and be served because there are so many things I want to see and being served takes time.
That's not always going to sit well with people who don't feel the need to pack so many things in a day. Who want to relax more on vacation. ("But I'll never be back here," I'm thinking. Need to see, go, do.)
There are many pluses to traveling with people, if you have the right companions. But as the writer says, traveling in a group also means pleasing people with "diverse breaking points." His example: if hot water is a must, everyone must pay to upgrade to that luxury.
That example is extreme, but this IS the New York Times' frugal traveler. Still, there are all levels. If someone must have air conditioning. If someone must have a nice hotel, not a motel or hostel. Whatever the minimum necessities are.
When traveling solo? So much freedom. So much choice. So little pushback
Photo: Luis H Ledezma
Boldly Go Solo 
Leave a comment