Hotels vs. Hostels

The romantic image of young travelers—especially young travelers in Europe—is of people riding the rails and sleeping in crowded, lively hostels. Because Laura and I are about to travel to Europe (and Brazil), and because we're trying to do the trip as cheaply as possible, I figured that meant we'd be staying in a lot of hostels. What I've been surprised to discover, however, is that hostels are not always the cheapest way to go.

Before I mention what I've learned about booking hostels and hotels, though, it's worth mentioning that hostels offer a one-of-a-kind travel experience. You're in the midst of other travelers—who likely also share a similar travel philosophy—and my experience is that interacting with hostel staff is more personal/local than interacting with hotel staff. So, even if they aren't always the most economic option, they're worth experiencing. On the other hand, hostels can be loud and chaotic (which means poor sleep), dirty, and cramped. (The first night I stayed in a hostel I was shocked to hear a veritable symphony of snoring. I did not sleep that night.) So while they provide an interesting experience, that experience can become a drag after awhile.

So, are hostels really the best budget option? Can a hotel really beat their prices?

The answer varies from location to location, of course, but for single travelers, hostels are almost always going to be the cheapest choice. When booking our London portion of the trip, for example, Laura and I were initially going to stay in the St. Paul's Hostel. It's centrally located, and in a cool old building. For a bed on the dates we needed, the price was 22 pounds. That can't be beat, and if Laura and I weren't married (and, in our case, drawing money from the same bank account), we definitely would have stayed in the hostel.

In reality, however, and because we're married, the night would have cost us 44 pounds. That's still a great bargain, but after researching a bit I discovered that we could stay in the easyHotel Victoria for 45 pounds. That means that for one extra pound we'd have a private room (and bathroom). We'd probably sleep better, and our stuff would be safer. And because we'll be flying directly from Brazil to England, I wanted to make sure that we could sleep in a place that was relatively quiet. Also, many hostels are segregated by gender, so in general hotels will allow us to avoid the annoyance of having to sleep in separate rooms.

To be sure, easyHotel Victoria probably has less character than the hostel. It's a chain (albeit a European one), it's also not in as prime a location. Still, I feel comfortable getting around London and I suspect we'll sleep better in the hotel.

What has surprised me is how often this booking/research experience has been repeated. As we've planned out our trip, city by city, we've discovered that for two people paying together, hostels are almost never the most economic option. In many cases (and in the most expensive cities), there are actually hotels that cost less than two beds in a hostel. The disparity is also exacerbated when looking at private rooms in hostels, which many offer.

Of course, when booking a hotel that's cheaper than a hostel it's essential to be careful. Before we book anything, Laura and I read travelers' reviews on multiple sites. We also usually get recommendations out of guide books like Lonely Planet and Rick Steves' Europe. Still, for travelers going in pairs or groups, and who can pay together, hotels can sometimes be the most economic option.