Robert and I are trying to decide what to do with our two weeks of time share trades. My first choice is to save them and go to Scotland for two weeks in the spring of 2008. It would cost a chunk, depending on the exchange rate (dollars to pounds). Robert would like to take a week this spring and go to Canada, to the Banff National Park, plus two days in Yellowstone on the way home. It would be late April - early May, so still snowy, but probably really good for seeing wildlife and we both enjoy driving through that landscape that time of year.
And then to take the second week next year and fly to Orlando in January. These two trips together would run almost as much as the one to Scotland, but would be two trips (still just 2 weeks, but 2 trips to 2 different places). Plus no surprises on foreign money, and not quite as expensive, which is good since we have to be saving money for the big family Disneyland trip in 2010! And our last two big trips were to Europe. But on the other hand, Canada and Orlando aren't Scotland!
So - what opinions do you have on the matter - I'm interested!
3 comments:
Even though it'd be only one trip instead of two, I'd take Scotland in a heartbeat. For one thing, Scotland sounds neater than either Banff or Orlando, but also I prefer longer, slower vacations.
I honestly couldn't say. If it were Ireland, no question--I'd be there. I'd probably take Scotland too, however two trips and no exchange-rate surprises is very very very appealing. And, of course, roasted turkey legs is a big incentive...
Scotland. Florida and Yellowstone are places you have been and will go to again but Scotland is a once in a lifetime trip.
Post a Comment