Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-29-2013, 08:18 PM
 
6,143 posts, read 7,534,960 times
Reputation: 6617

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
I find it highly amusing that so many people don't like "tourist traps". Of course, everyone defines "tourist trap" differently. The reality is that most of the worlds attractions are where tourists go. If you want to see Stonehenge or Venice or Yellowstone or the Alamo, you will have to join lots of tourists. Why do some people think they can go where there are no tourists and see world class sites?

Amusing.
Agreed. If there were no attractions, why would people want to visit? I live in a tourist area. There's a difference between Mount Rushmore/Black Hills (attractions that may or may not appeal to someone, depending on their interests) and Wall Drug (ultimate tourist trap that really serves no purpose). There are area attractions that some people may enjoy but I consider overpriced and not worth it. However, if someone wants to visit them what business is it of mine?

At the same time, there are beautiful areas here that are worth visiting to see the sights. They are the places I would take visitors. They are popular for a reason, and well worth seeing.

Personally, when I go on vacation I enjoy the occasional tourist trap. I like a little of the cheese factor, especially on a road trip.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-29-2013, 08:28 PM
 
1,356 posts, read 1,936,967 times
Reputation: 1056
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
I find it highly amusing that so many people don't like "tourist traps". Of course, everyone defines "tourist trap" differently. The reality is that most of the worlds attractions are where tourists go. If you want to see Stonehenge or Venice or Yellowstone or the Alamo, you will have to join lots of tourists. Why do some people think they can go where there are no tourists and see world class sites?

Amusing.
Cancun is a lot different than Mexico City. Whether or not someone defines "tourist trap" differently, there is some degree to which people we can look at at place or location and see how likely it is to be one. I don't think a lot of people would argue that Richmond or Charlottesville in Virginia are as big on attracting tourist than Virginia Beach. When one walks the boardwalk at VB, one can see just how much it is catered towards tourist with generic and mediocre restaurants, shops selling cheaply made souvenirs, and outrageous parking expenses. Outside of some visitor centers and some historic spots, Richmond nor Charlottesville are as as big on tourism and a lot of the attractions are catered towards locals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Lahaina, Hi.
6,386 posts, read 4,771,905 times
Reputation: 11305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octa View Post
Cancun is a lot different than Mexico City. Whether or not someone defines "tourist trap" differently, there is some degree to which people we can look at at place or location and see how likely it is to be one. I don't think a lot of people would argue that Richmond or Charlottesville in Virginia are as big on attracting tourist than Virginia Beach. When one walks the boardwalk at VB, one can see just how much it is catered towards tourist with generic and mediocre restaurants, shops selling cheaply made souvenirs, and outrageous parking expenses. Outside of some visitor centers and some historic spots, Richmond nor Charlottesville are as as big on tourism and a lot of the attractions are catered towards locals.
Cancun and Mexico City both have their good points, and are each worth a visit. Expressing contempt for famous sites because of the "tourist trap" aspect of them sounds pretty much like the same snobbery you disdain in your friend. The world heritage sites that most people want to visit, are popular because they are unique, wonderful, or have historical significance. To avoid them because others clamor to see them is condescending and silly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 09:00 PM
 
Location: SoCal & Mid-TN
2,325 posts, read 2,639,563 times
Reputation: 2869
It's true that what is and isn't worth seeing in totally subjective. I grew up in Nashville, TN and worked in the tourist industry for many years. I currently live in Los Angeles. I read the posts on TripAdvisor quite a bit for both cities and sometimes shake my head at what people want to do. For example, it seems every Aussie who visits California must include Vegas in the US trip - and they want to stay for days and days (for me, a little Vegas goes a long way). It amazes me that people would fly half way around the world and, of all the things to see/do in the western US, use up a large part of their trip in Vegas (example 24 hours at the Grand Canyon and 4 days in Vegas). But that's just me.

Nashville is famous for country music of course, and the area around the Ryman (the original home of the Grand Ole Opry) has been revitalized with honky-tonks featuring live music and such catering to tourists. People flock down there. That's the only place a lot of folks go while in town. For me, it's the historical sites that are the main draw. But again, that's just me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 09:30 PM
 
18,073 posts, read 18,706,152 times
Reputation: 25191
There are tourist areas, then there are tourist traps. (subjective, I know)

As the example above shows; Mt. Rushmore would be a tourist area, Wall Drug would be a tourist trap.

Some people may not like a tourist trap, but like the "been there, done that" part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 09:32 PM
 
1,356 posts, read 1,936,967 times
Reputation: 1056
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuremauian View Post
Cancun and Mexico City both have their good points, and are each worth a visit. Expressing contempt for famous sites because of the "tourist trap" aspect of them sounds pretty much like the same snobbery you disdain in your friend. The world heritage sites that most people want to visit, are popular because they are unique, wonderful, or have historical significance. To avoid them because others clamor to see them is condescending and silly.
Where in my post did I express contempt for one over the other? I have my preference for one over the other, but I think it's silly to say that one isn't geared more towards tourism than the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Out there somewhere...a traveling man.
44,557 posts, read 61,296,927 times
Reputation: 125572
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
There are tourist areas, then there are tourist traps. (subjective, I know)

As the example above shows; Mt. Rushmore would be a tourist area, Wall Drug would be a tourist trap.

Some people may not like a tourist trap, but like the "been there, done that" part.
Agree^^^. Tourist traps are to me the vendors that trap you in their Chinese made junk souvenir shops next to the tourist attractions. You know you don't need to but you do anyway, buy that fridge magnet to add to your fridge collection at home to show everyone where you once were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Lahaina, Hi.
6,386 posts, read 4,771,905 times
Reputation: 11305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octa View Post
Where in my post did I express contempt for one over the other? I have my preference for one over the other, but I think it's silly to say that one isn't geared more towards tourism than the other.
Where in my post did I say that you did? I expressed my opinion about visiting these two cities and the fact that they both have their charms. The rest of my statement was directed toward your original post, and yeah, you do seem to express contempt for places like "Paris".
Peddlers catering to the tourist trade always gather at famous sites, because that is where tourists gather. That doesn't diminish the value of a famous site. If you are Catholic, would you ignore the Vatican in favor of some obscure church elsewhere, just because tourists go to the Vatican? If so, you will miss out on a lot of great things the world has to offer.
JMHO
Re-reading your OP, I was reminded of a conversation I once had with an African-American lady who told me that she avoids tourist places, "assimilates" into local culture, and is accordingly, mistaken for a "local". LOL! We were in Moscow, and she only spoke English. Really? A local?

Last edited by Futuremauian; 07-29-2013 at 10:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 11:09 PM
 
890 posts, read 1,843,791 times
Reputation: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
I find it highly amusing that so many people don't like "tourist traps". Of course, everyone defines "tourist trap" differently. The reality is that most of the worlds attractions are where tourists go. If you want to see Stonehenge or Venice or Yellowstone or the Alamo, you will have to join lots of tourists. Why do some people think they can go where there are no tourists and see world class sites?

Amusing.
I think there's a difference between a tourist attraction and a tourist trap. You mentioned the Alamo, which in itself is a very worthwhile thing to see if you happened to be in San Antonio. But, there are a lot of tourist traps around it...places designed to get your money for little trinkets and generic, overpriced food.

EDIT: So I read through the rest of the thread and see my point has been well covered. Carry on!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2013, 06:48 AM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,951 posts, read 17,189,998 times
Reputation: 7291
I can't stand tourist traps, and by tourist trap, I am thinking of things like Navy Pier in Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top