JFK is got to be the worst airport in the world after LaGuardia. It's small and crammed and the general winter weather in NY doesn't help to keep any flights on time.
I have not flown Emirates, but have flown Etihad. It was good, but I hear Emirates is even better in services.
As for JFK, I haven't flown in and out of there in ages, but I find it hard to believe any airport in the US being worse than LAX, which is antiquated, inefficient, and just a nightmare overall. They just spent $1.9 billion to renovate the International terminal (yes, just ONE terminal) a year ago and the roof leaked after some rain a month ago.
Okay - I'll be the nub. Is it $799pp or is it $799 for both (~400 ea?)
It appears the price is for both people. Unfortunately, Milan doesn't look like a great place to visit.
It depends on what you're wanting to see in a city. Furthermore, when you go to Italy, it's not just about the city you're traveling to, it's about what cities are close enough that you can visit that you may want to see while you're in Italy. For example, Venice is very doable.
Okay - I'll be the nub. Is it $799pp or is it $799 for both (~400 ea?)
It appears the price is for both people. Unfortunately, Milan doesn't look like a great place to visit.
It depends on what you're wanting to see in a city. Furthermore, when you go to Italy, it's not just about the city you're traveling to, it's about what cities are close enough that you can visit that you may want to see while you're in Italy. For example, Venice is very doable.
I agree but having never been to Italy the thought of landing in Milan, visiting the city for a day (w/jet lag), jumping on a railcar/bus or rental and heading 5+ hours to Rome, Florence or Venice. Then have to get back to Milan, to fly back to JFK, to catch a flight to (insert home city) seems like a pain in the *ss.
I'd rather pay a few bucks more and fly into the city I want to visit, Rome. It is a great deal but Milan doesn't hold any appeal to me. If you are retired and plan on spending a month in the county this is a great deal. If you are looking for a weekend getaway it doesn't work, for me.
Fares for TWO people for $800-850 were widely available on most dates until late last night and I'm glad I didn't wait to book it. Out of curiosity, I just checked the prices again for the same itinerary and it seems like the availability of this special price is extremely limited now to very few dates.
Okay - I'll be the nub. Is it $799pp or is it $799 for both (~400 ea?)
It appears the price is for both people. Unfortunately, Milan doesn't look like a great place to visit.
It depends on what you're wanting to see in a city. Furthermore, when you go to Italy, it's not just about the city you're traveling to, it's about what cities are close enough that you can visit that you may want to see while you're in Italy. For example, Venice is very doable.
I agree but having never been to Italy the thought of landing in Milan, visiting the city for a day (w/jet lag), jumping on a railcar/bus or rental and heading 5+ hours to Rome, Florence or Venice. Then have to get back to Milan, to fly back to JFK, to catch a flight to (insert home city) seems like a pain in the *ss. I'd rather pay a few bucks more and fly into the city I want to visit, Rome. It is a great deal but Milan doesn't hold any appeal to me. If you are retired and plan on spending a month in the county this is a great deal. If you are looking for a weekend getaway it doesn't work, for me.
I was surprised by how much I loved Milan. It had a great urban feel to it (not so touristy). Il Duomo is spectacular and IMHO much more beautiful that of Florence. Further, Milan is close to the Alps (45 min), Lake Como & Bellagio (Driving the peninsula to Bellagio was fun). It's also just a few hours from Venice.
Comments & Reviews (17)
I have not flown Emirates, but have flown Etihad. It was good, but I hear Emirates is even better in services.
As for JFK, I haven't flown in and out of there in ages, but I find it hard to believe any airport in the US being worse than LAX, which is antiquated, inefficient, and just a nightmare overall. They just spent $1.9 billion to renovate the International terminal (yes, just ONE terminal) a year ago and the roof leaked after some rain a month ago.
Rain in LA has got to be the bigger news here.
It appears the price is for both people. Unfortunately, Milan doesn't look like a great place to visit.
It depends on what you're wanting to see in a city. Furthermore, when you go to Italy, it's not just about the city you're traveling to, it's about what cities are close enough that you can visit that you may want to see while you're in Italy. For example, Venice is very doable.
I agree but having never been to Italy the thought of landing in Milan, visiting the city for a day (w/jet lag), jumping on a railcar/bus or rental and heading 5+ hours to Rome, Florence or Venice. Then have to get back to Milan, to fly back to JFK, to catch a flight to (insert home city) seems like a pain in the *ss.
I'd rather pay a few bucks more and fly into the city I want to visit, Rome. It is a great deal but Milan doesn't hold any appeal to me. If you are retired and plan on spending a month in the county this is a great deal. If you are looking for a weekend getaway it doesn't work, for me.
I was surprised by how much I loved Milan. It had a great urban feel to it (not so touristy). Il Duomo is spectacular and IMHO much more beautiful that of Florence. Further, Milan is close to the Alps (45 min), Lake Como & Bellagio (Driving the peninsula to Bellagio was fun). It's also just a few hours from Venice.
Thank you!