When Royal fans claim Royals bring in world tourists who fill London hotels, pubs and restaurants, are they suggesting these don't fill anyway?
46-50
ArishMell · 70-79, M
It does sound like that, I agree!
Though with the ways prices are rising they all struggle to fill now.
I am a Royalist but I have always been sceptical about the tourism claim. There is some truth in it but there is far more to the country than the public ceremonies; and I think the majority of the visitors do want more than just the Royal trappings. Even if herded around on tightly-organised packages.
Just as for British tourists journeying abroad: we don't go to France just for the Eiffel Tower, Italy only for the Sistine Chapel or the USA to see only the Niagara Falls, for example.
(Though the trades' own advertising suggests cruises are very much of that countries-in-nutshells nature: there is far more to Norway than the fjords, spectacular though they are, and the Flåm Railway, for instance.)
Though with the ways prices are rising they all struggle to fill now.
I am a Royalist but I have always been sceptical about the tourism claim. There is some truth in it but there is far more to the country than the public ceremonies; and I think the majority of the visitors do want more than just the Royal trappings. Even if herded around on tightly-organised packages.
Just as for British tourists journeying abroad: we don't go to France just for the Eiffel Tower, Italy only for the Sistine Chapel or the USA to see only the Niagara Falls, for example.
(Though the trades' own advertising suggests cruises are very much of that countries-in-nutshells nature: there is far more to Norway than the fjords, spectacular though they are, and the Flåm Railway, for instance.)