"Australia and New Zealand"
Nov 13th 2004, 7:28 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
"Australia and New Zealand"
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
country on their list of places they have been.
If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
a huge country with much to see.
I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
appendage to your trip.
When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as
well. But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a
fun yet shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and
money getting to know London in more depth.
Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
country on their list of places they have been.
If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
a huge country with much to see.
I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
appendage to your trip.
When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as
well. But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a
fun yet shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and
money getting to know London in more depth.
Nov 13th 2004, 8:32 pm
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
They're far, far away from most Northern Hemisphere residents - so likely to
be visited just the once in most lifetimes!! Go for both!!
Sound thinking IMHO!
"windsor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ...
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the extra
> time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is a huge
> country with much to see.
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors have
> really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would you go to
> NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is "yes" should
> you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow appendage to
> your trip.
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as well.
> But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a fun yet
> shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and money
> getting to know London in more depth.
>
be visited just the once in most lifetimes!! Go for both!!
Sound thinking IMHO!
"windsor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ...
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the extra
> time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is a huge
> country with much to see.
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors have
> really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would you go to
> NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is "yes" should
> you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow appendage to
> your trip.
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as well.
> But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a fun yet
> shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and money
> getting to know London in more depth.
>
Nov 13th 2004, 9:56 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
windsor <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
I think this is not the typical case. We have been on four trips to Oz
and met many other overseas tourists. Hardly any of them were also
visiting NZ. Same story for other Dutch people travelling to Oz.
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
I think this is not the typical case. We have been on four trips to Oz
and met many other overseas tourists. Hardly any of them were also
visiting NZ. Same story for other Dutch people travelling to Oz.
Nov 14th 2004, 4:27 am
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
I did 2 seperate visits and I live in Canada but agree that if you only have
one chance you might be tempted to do the Oz/Kiwi combo
I saw more of NZ than Oz so plan to go back to Oz
"windsor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ...
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the extra
> time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is a huge
> country with much to see.
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors have
> really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would you go to
> NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is "yes" should
> you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow appendage to
> your trip.
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as well.
> But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a fun yet
> shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and money
> getting to know London in more depth.
>
one chance you might be tempted to do the Oz/Kiwi combo
I saw more of NZ than Oz so plan to go back to Oz
"windsor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ...
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the extra
> time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is a huge
> country with much to see.
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors have
> really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would you go to
> NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is "yes" should
> you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow appendage to
> your trip.
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as well.
> But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a fun yet
> shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and money
> getting to know London in more depth.
>
Nov 14th 2004, 4:57 am
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:28:46 +1000, windsor <[email protected]> wrote:
>Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
>Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
>I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
>country on their list of places they have been.
>If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
>extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
>a huge country with much to see.
>I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
>have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
>you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
>"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
>appendage to your trip.
I have spent a total of 8 weeks visiting New Zealand and have yet to
spend a day in Australia. I could spend another 8 weeks in NZ, with
little duplication of places visited, and still not feel it necessary
to spend time in Australia. I prefer New Zealand, but I also do not
care to take trips that are little more than "bragging" visits (Oh,
yes I passed through there in '99). I prefer to get to know a place a
bit and spend time meeting people, walking around and taking it easy.
Australia is a very large place that I feel would take up to a year to
fully experience properly. I also prefer green to brown, mountains
instead of hills, not having to worry about snakes and a cooler
climate. Frankly, although I have had pleasant enough short visits
with Australians, I prefer the company of New Zealanders. Different
Strokes, etc.
Charles
nzvideos.org
>Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
>Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
>I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
>country on their list of places they have been.
>If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
>extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
>a huge country with much to see.
>I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
>have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
>you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
>"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
>appendage to your trip.
I have spent a total of 8 weeks visiting New Zealand and have yet to
spend a day in Australia. I could spend another 8 weeks in NZ, with
little duplication of places visited, and still not feel it necessary
to spend time in Australia. I prefer New Zealand, but I also do not
care to take trips that are little more than "bragging" visits (Oh,
yes I passed through there in '99). I prefer to get to know a place a
bit and spend time meeting people, walking around and taking it easy.
Australia is a very large place that I feel would take up to a year to
fully experience properly. I also prefer green to brown, mountains
instead of hills, not having to worry about snakes and a cooler
climate. Frankly, although I have had pleasant enough short visits
with Australians, I prefer the company of New Zealanders. Different
Strokes, etc.
Charles
nzvideos.org
Nov 14th 2004, 5:02 am
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
windsor wrote:
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
>
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
>
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
> extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
> a huge country with much to see.
>
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
> have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
> you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
> "yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
> appendage to your trip.
>
>
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as
> well. But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a
> fun yet shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and
> money getting to know London in more depth.
>
>
>
>
For people who are making a once in a lifetime trip and who have time to
visit both, then making a combined vacation to both New Zealand and
Australia makes sense if you are going to travel all that distance
across the Pacific for North Americans. Or the ever farther flight to
the far side of the globe for Europeans.
If this isn't an once in a life time vacation for you, then you might as
well break it up and visit each country on separate trips.
ALV
> Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
>
> I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> country on their list of places they have been.
>
> If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
> extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
> a huge country with much to see.
>
> I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
> have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
> you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
> "yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
> appendage to your trip.
>
>
> When I go to London, I can see how easy it would be to see Paris as
> well. But I don't... why? Because I am not a Francophile. It would be a
> fun yet shallow experience. Better for me to spend the extra time and
> money getting to know London in more depth.
>
>
>
>
For people who are making a once in a lifetime trip and who have time to
visit both, then making a combined vacation to both New Zealand and
Australia makes sense if you are going to travel all that distance
across the Pacific for North Americans. Or the ever farther flight to
the far side of the globe for Europeans.
If this isn't an once in a life time vacation for you, then you might as
well break it up and visit each country on separate trips.
ALV
Nov 14th 2004, 8:11 am
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
Just to say re NZ there's a brand new series about the country from Billy
Connely next week on BBC 1. If it's anything like his World Tour of
Australia it's definatly a must see minus the pointless stand up routine
which has nothing to do with the tour
Connely next week on BBC 1. If it's anything like his World Tour of
Australia it's definatly a must see minus the pointless stand up routine
which has nothing to do with the tour
Nov 14th 2004, 1:25 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
What a lot of arrogant bs!
You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays. As
for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays. As
for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
Nov 14th 2004, 3:37 pm
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:25:11 +1300, "Elizabeth" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>What a lot of arrogant bs!
>You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays. As
>for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
>"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
>just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
Hi Elizabeth
I'm glad I waited. You said it so much more diplomatically than I would
have :-)
Cheers, Alan
--
wrote:
>What a lot of arrogant bs!
>You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays. As
>for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
>"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
>just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
Hi Elizabeth
I'm glad I waited. You said it so much more diplomatically than I would
have :-)
Cheers, Alan
--
Nov 14th 2004, 3:39 pm
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
Charles Eggen <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:28:46 +1000, windsor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> >Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> >
> >I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> >country on their list of places they have been.
> >
> >If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
> >extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
> >a huge country with much to see.
> >
> >I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
> >have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
> >you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
> >"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
> >appendage to your trip.
> >
>
> I have spent a total of 8 weeks visiting New Zealand and have yet to
> spend a day in Australia. I could spend another 8 weeks in NZ, with
> little duplication of places visited, and still not feel it necessary
> to spend time in Australia. I prefer New Zealand, but I also do not
> care to take trips that are little more than "bragging" visits (Oh,
> yes I passed through there in '99). I prefer to get to know a place a
> bit and spend time meeting people, walking around and taking it easy.
> Australia is a very large place that I feel would take up to a year to
> fully experience properly. I also prefer green to brown, mountains
> instead of hills, not having to worry about snakes and a cooler
> climate. Frankly, although I have had pleasant enough short visits
> with Australians, I prefer the company of New Zealanders. Different
> Strokes, etc.
>
> Charles
> nzvideos.org
Charles
Wow! Um, I think you should check out Australia. We have more green,
more mountains (green or brown), a cool climate in the southern areas,
and personally I dont worry about snakes all that much (although Crocs
and sharks do bother me a bit). As if that wasn't good enough, we
probably have more New Zealanders than they have in New Zealand -
you'd love it!
Darren G
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:28:46 +1000, windsor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
> >Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
> >
> >I think people look at a map and see an opportunity to tick off another
> >country on their list of places they have been.
> >
> >If you have always dreamed of visiting Australia, why not spend the
> >extra time and money there instead of going to NZ as well? Australia is
> >a huge country with much to see.
> >
> >I'm not against going to NZ at all... but I wonder how many visitors
> >have really haboured a real desire to go there. Ask yourself... would
> >you go to NZ if you weren't going to Australia? Only if the answer is
> >"yes" should you go to NZ. Otherwise it will just be a stupid, shallow
> >appendage to your trip.
> >
>
> I have spent a total of 8 weeks visiting New Zealand and have yet to
> spend a day in Australia. I could spend another 8 weeks in NZ, with
> little duplication of places visited, and still not feel it necessary
> to spend time in Australia. I prefer New Zealand, but I also do not
> care to take trips that are little more than "bragging" visits (Oh,
> yes I passed through there in '99). I prefer to get to know a place a
> bit and spend time meeting people, walking around and taking it easy.
> Australia is a very large place that I feel would take up to a year to
> fully experience properly. I also prefer green to brown, mountains
> instead of hills, not having to worry about snakes and a cooler
> climate. Frankly, although I have had pleasant enough short visits
> with Australians, I prefer the company of New Zealanders. Different
> Strokes, etc.
>
> Charles
> nzvideos.org
Charles
Wow! Um, I think you should check out Australia. We have more green,
more mountains (green or brown), a cool climate in the southern areas,
and personally I dont worry about snakes all that much (although Crocs
and sharks do bother me a bit). As if that wasn't good enough, we
probably have more New Zealanders than they have in New Zealand -
you'd love it!
Darren G
Nov 14th 2004, 4:45 pm
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:28:46 +1000, windsor <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
>Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both Sydney and Melbourne? As if Sydney and Melbourne were in one
state.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both the CBD of Sydney and the harbour areas? As if the CBD of
Sydney and the harbour areas were all part of the same milieu.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both George Street and Pitt Street in the CBD? As if George Street
and Pitt street didn't each offer enough for the discerning visitor.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both the interior of their hotel and the street outside? As if the
hotel did not offer enough sights, sounds and pleasures for a solid
two week holiday.
I don't know about you, but I prefer to study the interior of my
hotel *in depth*, and not adopt your superficial approach of going
outside and diluting your knowledge.
--
Craig
wrote:
>Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit both
>Australia and NZ? As if Australia&NZ is one country.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both Sydney and Melbourne? As if Sydney and Melbourne were in one
state.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both the CBD of Sydney and the harbour areas? As if the CBD of
Sydney and the harbour areas were all part of the same milieu.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both George Street and Pitt Street in the CBD? As if George Street
and Pitt street didn't each offer enough for the discerning visitor.
Why do European and American travellers feel it necessary to visit
both the interior of their hotel and the street outside? As if the
hotel did not offer enough sights, sounds and pleasures for a solid
two week holiday.
I don't know about you, but I prefer to study the interior of my
hotel *in depth*, and not adopt your superficial approach of going
outside and diluting your knowledge.
--
Craig
Nov 14th 2004, 5:46 pm
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
Thank you Alan... (a bad day at work helps me to express myself). ;)
Elizabeth
"Alan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:25:11 +1300, "Elizabeth" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >What a lot of arrogant bs!
> >
> >You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays.
As
> >for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
> >"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
> >just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
> >
> Hi Elizabeth
> I'm glad I waited. You said it so much more diplomatically than I would
> have :-)
> Cheers, Alan
> --
Elizabeth
"Alan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:25:11 +1300, "Elizabeth" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >What a lot of arrogant bs!
> >
> >You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays.
As
> >for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
> >"depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
> >just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
> >
> Hi Elizabeth
> I'm glad I waited. You said it so much more diplomatically than I would
> have :-)
> Cheers, Alan
> --
Nov 14th 2004, 8:24 pm
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
As soon as I saw that it was you responding, I chose to ignore the post.
I'm sure it just your usual bot-like shit.
I'm sure it just your usual bot-like shit.
Nov 14th 2004, 8:29 pm
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
> You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays. As
> for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
> "depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
> just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
If you mention the name Australia to a Euro or American person, they can
probably mention 10 images it evokes. The Opera house, Ayers Rock etc.
Even if they are just stereotypical images of Australia, at least it's
something.
Until Lord of the Rings, the average person in EU or America would not
have a single image of New Zealand. Not one. ZERO.
The desire to visit NZ is not strong within the hearts of most visitors
to this region. But Australia is Australia - it's very name evokes imagery.
> for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
> "depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
> just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
If you mention the name Australia to a Euro or American person, they can
probably mention 10 images it evokes. The Opera house, Ayers Rock etc.
Even if they are just stereotypical images of Australia, at least it's
something.
Until Lord of the Rings, the average person in EU or America would not
have a single image of New Zealand. Not one. ZERO.
The desire to visit NZ is not strong within the hearts of most visitors
to this region. But Australia is Australia - it's very name evokes imagery.
Nov 15th 2004, 6:49 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: "Australia and New Zealand"
"windsor" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] u...
>> You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays.
>> As
>> for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
>> "depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
>> just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
> If you mention the name Australia to a Euro or American person, they can
> probably mention 10 images it evokes. The Opera house, Ayers Rock etc.
> Even if they are just stereotypical images of Australia, at least it's
> something.
> Until Lord of the Rings, the average person in EU or America would not
> have a single image of New Zealand. Not one. ZERO.
As a european I beg to differ.
The all blacks in full cry and a Maori Haka both spring
to mind.
Keith
news:[email protected] u...
>> You dare to say what people should or should not do on their holidays.
>> As
>> for "shallow experiences". Not everyone desires to know a country in
>> "depth" . And it's fairly obvious why people like to see both countries
>> just as it's common knowledge that travellers do NOT always visit both.
> If you mention the name Australia to a Euro or American person, they can
> probably mention 10 images it evokes. The Opera house, Ayers Rock etc.
> Even if they are just stereotypical images of Australia, at least it's
> something.
> Until Lord of the Rings, the average person in EU or America would not
> have a single image of New Zealand. Not one. ZERO.
As a european I beg to differ.
The all blacks in full cry and a Maori Haka both spring
to mind.
Keith
