On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:46:56 +0100
Phil Cook wrote:
So the whole of london is going to go away on holiday in the same 2 weeks
as the Olympics? Someone better tell the airports and ferry ports or there'll
be chaos!

It's OK the outgoings will be balanced by incoming. And last time I
looked the Olympics lasted nearer three weeks.

Is it 3? Shows how much interest I have in it. 12 billion quid so a bunch of
egos can run around in circles and chuck sticks and balls around for a few
weeks. A brilliant use of taxpayers money. If its so amazing why isn't it
self financing like almost all other large scale sporting events?

Meanwhile back in the real world , unless you're a teacher then you don't
get the option of having the whole of the summer off and most people don't
take 2 week holidays anymore anyway. 1 week is the norm these days.

Really? Perhaps in your strange world but folk with children will have

Not all "folk" (are you american?) have children and given the recession many
of the ones who do will be struggling to pay the bills, never mind being able
to afford to go away on a 2 week break at the most expensive time of the year.

to take some time off during the summer to fit in with the school
holidays and if you are going any distance it is best to take at least
two weeks off otherwise the travelling time takes a disproportionate
amount out of your holiday.

Sure , if you're going to the far east or australia. You think they'll be the
top destinations then?

B2003

Not all "folk" (are you american?) have children and given the
recession many of the ones who do will be struggling to pay the
bills, never mind being able to afford to go away on a 2 week break
at the most expensive time of the year.


I know evidence tends to spoil a good Usenet argument but FWIW
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/c/pr...-2012/0012997/
reported that in 2011 the same proporiton of people took breaks of 4-7
and 8-14 days; and that the proportions were forecast to tilt towards
longer breaks in 2012.

Would you please share your evidence that 1 week is the "norm"?

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

Not all "folk" (are you american?) have children and given the
recession many of the ones who do will be struggling to pay the
bills, never mind being able to afford to go away on a 2 week break
at the most expensive time of the year.


I know evidence tends to spoil a good Usenet argument but FWIW
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/c/pr...-2012/0012997/
reported that in 2011 the same proporiton of people took breaks of 4-7
and 8-14 days; and that the proportions were forecast to tilt towards
longer breaks in 2012.

Would you please share your evidence that 1 week is the "norm"?

Sorry - I misread the PR. The actual figures were 42% 4-7 nights and 36%
8-14 in 2011 with a forecast of 36% and 41% for 2012.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:24:45 +0100
"Robin" wrote:
Not all "folk" (are you american?) have children and given the
recession many of the ones who do will be struggling to pay the
bills, never mind being able to afford to go away on a 2 week break
at the most expensive time of the year.


I know evidence tends to spoil a good Usenet argument but FWIW
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/c/pr...ravel-in-2012/
012997/

Sorry , but some dodgy survey by an online travel agent who have a vested
interest in selling longer holidays counts for nothing.

Would you please share your evidence that 1 week is the "norm"?

The fact that in the office of about 40 people I work in only 1 has taken
a holiday of longer than 10 days in the last year. None of my friends or
family have taken 2 weeks either and last year I didn't notice an appreciable
drop in commuter traffic levels in london last summer either.

So other than first hand experience I don't have any evidence.

B2003

The fact that in the office of about 40 people I work in only 1 has
taken
a holiday of longer than 10 days in the last year. None of my friends
or family have taken 2 weeks either and last year I didn't notice an
appreciable drop in commuter traffic levels in london last summer
either.

So other than first hand experience I don't have any evidence.

No risk of sampling bias then? And no contradiction between your
conclusion and the ONS who reported in "Travel Trends 2010" the average
over all overseas holiday trips in 2010 was 10 nights?



--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:03:46 +0100
"Robin" wrote:
The fact that in the office of about 40 people I work in only 1 has
taken
a holiday of longer than 10 days in the last year. None of my friends
or family have taken 2 weeks either and last year I didn't notice an
appreciable drop in commuter traffic levels in london last summer
either.

So other than first hand experience I don't have any evidence.

No risk of sampling bias then? And no contradiction between your

And 5000 people out of 60 million no doubt with loaded questions to get the
result they wanted isn't biased either?

conclusion and the ONS who reported in "Travel Trends 2010" the average
over all overseas holiday trips in 2010 was 10 nights?

Did their survey have a time cutoff or was it a simple average that
included students off on a 6 month backback around the world?

B2003

wrote:

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:03:46 +0100
"Robin" wrote:
The fact that in the office of about 40 people I work in only 1 has
taken
a holiday of longer than 10 days in the last year. None of my friends
or family have taken 2 weeks either and last year I didn't notice an
appreciable drop in commuter traffic levels in london last summer
either.

So other than first hand experience I don't have any evidence.

No risk of sampling bias then? And no contradiction between your

And 5000 people out of 60 million no doubt with loaded questions to get the
result they wanted isn't biased either?

conclusion and the ONS who reported in "Travel Trends 2010" the average
over all overseas holiday trips in 2010 was 10 nights?

Did their survey have a time cutoff or was it a simple average that
included students off on a 6 month backback around the world?



It probably included people from financial institutions who have to take
off two weeks (for me I think it was for libaility insturance reasons
but other financiual institutions just to check for fraud ) c.f.
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Law/Question627526.html also see this
article implying two holidays were common
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/ma...acing-two-week
-break - also fits in with my experience

Also the volume of commuters will be lower in the summer due to no
school journeys,


--
Mark

On 30/03/2012 12:03, Robin wrote:
The fact that in the office of about 40 people I work in only 1 has
taken
a holiday of longer than 10 days in the last year. None of my friends
or family have taken 2 weeks either and last year I didn't notice an
appreciable drop in commuter traffic levels in london last summer
either.

So other than first hand experience I don't have any evidence.

No risk of sampling bias then? And no contradiction between your
conclusion and the ONS who reported in "Travel Trends 2010" the average
over all overseas holiday trips in 2010 was 10 nights?

Could it be that short trips are increasingly popular (being in real
terms more affordable and practical than in the past), but people don't
count shorter trips as "holiday"?

If someone happened to ask where I went on holiday last year I might
well say I had fortnight trip to Russia. But I also had a long weekend
in France, week+weekend Portugal, week+weekend in Germany and managed to
tag a couple of days on a business trip to the USA.

Admittedly I probably do more travel than typical, I don't have kids to
worry about, and see Benidorm as a place to have lunch before catching a
narrow gauge train rather than than somewhere to fester for a fortnight.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Mar 30, 12:24*pm, "Robin" wrote:

Would you please share your evidence that 1 week is the "norm"?

It doesn't matter that individuals won't take 3 weeks. What does
matter is that some people will be on holiday (more than, say, in
March or October) for each of the 3 weeks. Thus there will be a
reduction in demand.

Anyone who's a regular rail commuter will have realised that the
trains are *noticeably* less busy in July and August because of this
effect. Yet almost nobody is taking all of July *and* all of August
off.

Neil

In message
, at
05:58:22 on Fri, 30 Mar 2012, Neil Williams
remarked:
On Mar 30, 12:24*pm, "Robin" wrote:

Would you please share your evidence that 1 week is the "norm"?

It doesn't matter that individuals won't take 3 weeks. What does
matter is that some people will be on holiday (more than, say, in
March or October) for each of the 3 weeks. Thus there will be a
reduction in demand.

Anyone who's a regular rail commuter will have realised that the
trains are *noticeably* less busy in July and August because of this
effect. Yet almost nobody is taking all of July *and* all of August
off.

Doesn't this depend on which trains we think are going to be affected by
the "Olympic Rush"? It's quite possible that a lot of Intercity trains
are going to be emptier than usual, but local trains in the East of
London are going to be rammed.
--
Roland Perry