Aspen on $250 a day? It's Doable"

That's the headline that appeared over a "Frugal Traveler" column in The New York Times recently.

I know we're not in Kansas anymore when it comes to the cost of travel, but neither are we in Japan. If that's a budget traveler's idea of making do, I'd think about going somewhere else.

Europe, for instance.

"Europe on $125 a day."

Sound doable?

I'm about to find out as I begin a two-week swing through London, Paris, Krakow and Amsterdam.

The dollar's fall against the euro, British pound and other currencies has turned affordable travel into a challenge. With the spring-summer-fall travel season approaching, many of you are eager to find out just what to expect.

Consider me your advance woman.

The reason behind the plan

Why these cities and why $125 per day?

The budget's tight at The Seattle Times and my editor's a cheapskate ... only kidding about the last part.

Whatever the costs, London, Paris and Amsterdam are three cities that top most travelers' lists. Sure you could save money by visiting only small towns, but that would be like going to Olympia when you really wanted to experience Seattle.

Big cities do come at a big price. The dollar's value has fallen nearly 50 percent since the euro was introduced as the common currency in a dozen countries three years ago, and it's down 30 percent against the British pound.

This means that a 6-pound Travelcard good for all day on the London Underground and bus system is now $11.40, based on the current exchange rate of $1.90; a 100-euro hotel room costs $130 at today's rate of $1.30, compared with $88 when the euro was first introduced.

Krakow fits into this itinerary for anyone interested in finding out what the dollar will buy in the less-expensive former Communist Bloc countries in Eastern and Central Europe.

Even though the dollar's fallen against the Polish zloty, too, Krakow remains an excellent travel value, and getting there from Western Europe isn't as hard or costly as it might seem. I snagged a Paris-Krakow, Krakow-Amsterdam airfare for $112 on Slovakia-based SkyEurope, one of the new European discount airlines that are making traveling between countries more affordable.

How did we come up with $125?

Budget-travel expert and public-television host Rick Steves estimates this is the minimum most people will need, and that's with two people sharing a room. My editor's personal travel tastes run more to first-class hotels, convertibles and martini bars, but he thought this would be fun (for anyone but him) to try.

My plan is to have a great time, sacrifice nothing and help you do the same. But since I'll be traveling alone, I'll have to be supersavvy about trolling for deals. "Discounts" like the "pound for dollar" rates offered to Americans at the Athenaeum Hotel & Apartments won't do me much good. A 315-pound ($590) room goes for $315, a 45 percent savings over the standard rate, but still beyond my budget, and, I suspect, yours.

Here are my ground rules:

• No youth hostels or fleabag hotels.

With the exception of three nights in London where I've booked a B&B room in a private home ($70 with breakfast), I'll stay in rooms with private bathrooms. Without exception, I'll stay in safe and convenient areas of town with good access to public transportation.

• No taxis. I'll travel with one carry-on-size bag so that I can more easily use inexpensive public transportation to get from airports and train stations into town.

• No skipping meals or eating at McDonald's. Local fast food (French street crêpes or British fish and chips) is fare game.

• No travel writers' discounts. Seattle Times travel writers always pay in full and don't take freebees or discounts.

The $125 will be for lodging, food, transportation and incidentals — not airfares or long-distance train tickets, and the amount will be based on current exchange rates. I'll stick to this budget for at least a couple of days in each city, but I'll also experiment with what a few more dollars will buy, such as bidding on Priceline for a four-star hotel, or buying a theater ticket instead of taking in a free concert.

For those of you with deeper pockets, I'll suggest the occasional splurge, because if you can afford more, you won't be wasting your money by cranking up the budget in any of these cities.

Why not Mexico?

Europe and the UK are among the most expensive destinations in the world right now for Americans. Why not just go where the dollars buys a lot more? Mexico, for instance, or Southeast Asia, South America or Africa?

It's certainly a fair question.

"If your travel budget is so tight, why go to London?" one person asked in an Internet posting I ran across recently. "It always makes more sense to spend strong travel dollars in Mexico or Canada rather than in the undervalued U.K. and Europe."

"Why shouldn't someone travel somewhere on a tight budget?" countered another. "I'm certainly not interested in paying top dollars but that surely won't mean I won't enjoy London."

"Go for it and enjoy," he advised. "It's a great city."

I agree. That's why I'm inviting you to come along with me — virtually — as I test my theories on how far our dollars will stretch.

Go to our Web site at www.seattletimes.com/travel where I'll be posting updates as I travel from city to city. Have a question? Ask while I'm there and I'll try to find the answer.

If you don't have Internet access, watch for upcoming reports in the Sunday Travel section.

Carol Pucci's Travel Wise column runs the last Sunday of the month in the Travel section. Comments are welcome. Contact her at 206-464-3701 or cpucci@seattletimes.com.