| ▲ | Louvre to hike ticket prices for most non-EU tourists by 45%(bbc.com) |
| 20 points by geox an hour ago | 20 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | TazeTSchnitzel a minute ago | parent | next [-] |
| The article does not comment on it, but the non-EEA scoping here is almost certainly because of EU law outlawing discrimination between EU member states (and which is extended to the EEA also). They probably would have made it discriminate against non-French tourists if that were not illegal. |
|
| ▲ | kibwen 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The fact that the price is being dramatically raised to the grand total of $37 says more about how fantastically cheap it is to visit the Louvre currently. They could easily double that and not see any noticeable decrease in ticket sales from tourists. |
| |
| ▲ | philipwhiuk 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Depends on your point of comparison - the British Museum is free. | | | |
| ▲ | deadbabe 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I’d wager that you could 10x for non-EU tourists and still make more money and have way less crowds leading to a better experience for all. | |
| ▲ | troupo 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's impossible to overstate how cheap this is, but I think you have to actually go The Louvre to understand that. It's enormous. (In comparison Versaille is absolute bullshit that everyone should just skip. IMO). | | |
| ▲ | throw-the-towel 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | As far as French palaces go, I liked Fontainebleau way more. | |
| ▲ | ebiester 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I really enjoyed the garden there - we spent hours happily. And we don't have a lot of palaces where I'm from. And I didn't really enjoy the Louvre, especially compared to Musée d'Orsay and Centre Pompidou. | | |
| ▲ | karmakurtisaani 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Louvre get sort of boring, since the time period they cover stops at the time when art gets more and more interesting (mid 1800s). Before that every painting is basically Jesus or boobs. Still well worth a visit definitely. |
| |
| ▲ | kccqzy 7 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yeah I made that mistake when visiting Paris for the first time: budgeted half a day for the Louvre and an entire day for Versailles. Should the other way around or as you say, skip the Versailles. |
| |
| ▲ | rjh29 21 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Assuming you're American you may be missing just how strong the USD is and how expensive $37 is for much of Europe. -You- consider it cheap and that's the whole point of the price rise. |
|
|
| ▲ | vintagedave 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > ...expected to raise millions of euros annually to fund an overhaul of the famous gallery. Jokes aside (eg, 'guess they have to be able to buy back those stolen jewels somehow!') they have been strongly criticized ('inadequate security systems and ageing infrastructure') and it sounds like an overhaul is well past due. Honestly, $40 to enter the Louvre is not too bad. Expensive, but it is the _Louvre_ and is probably the most amazing museum in the world. |
| |
| ▲ | dylan604 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd expect to see this type of fee for non-citizens a lot more. The US is saying a $100 fee for non-citizens to enter national parks will start next year. For the Louvre, I'd be willing to give benefit of the doubt that it's a budgetary decision. For the US though with the current administration, there's always a bit of question if the budgetary reason isn't just a mask for the true intention | | |
| ▲ | kccqzy 3 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Non-residents not non-citizens. See, the administration still cares about the green card holders and H1B workers, who can still visit the national parks at the lower price. | |
| ▲ | philipwhiuk 17 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | For parks I expect the best approach is to charge for parking. Charging actual entry is tedious. |
| |
| ▲ | lionkor 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I would gladly pay 40 bucks to enter, but I think student tickets etc. must exist to ensure people can afford to go to learn. |
|
