"Gianni Rondinini" wrote in message
news:3sehv01q5qld1s1qnb4vcd56ojbe7shkab@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:53:46 -0800, "PTravel"
> wrote:
>
> >> http://www.circuscircus.com
> >> http://www.excalibur.com
> >
> >Without question, among the worst properties on the strip (particularly
>
> it's not the bellagio, but it didn't seem me that bad.
> what's *so* wrong with circus circus? we spent 7 days there in 2
> different travels to usa --4+3 nights-- and we're still alive and
> happy. we had no problems of any kind with that hotel: the only pity
> is that it's so far from the "center" of the strip --and we had to
> walk quite a bit--.
There are a number of problems with Circus Circus. It's one of the older
properties on the strip. If you go over to alt.vacation.las-vegas, you'll
see that, though the new tower rooms are considered adequate, the rest of
the property is dirty (not just shabby, but dirty). The property makes a
conscious effort to attract the family crowd and, as a consequence, it is
over-run by children. The buffet is considered to be one of the worst on
the Strip, if not actually one of the worst in Vegas. It's location, at the
north end of the Strip, is inconvenient to all the other "mainline" casinos,
except, perhaps Treasure Island, the Mirage and the Venetian.
Overall, Circus Circus has the reputation of being a bargain-seeker,
families-with-children, trailer-park kind of place. Excalibur is only
slightly above Circus Circus.
For those who need budget accomodation on the Strip, there are far better
alternatives. Many people like the Imperial, though it's not one I would
consider staying at. When I want inexpensive digs in Las Vegas, I stay at
the Flamingo or Ballys, both of which are vastly superior to Circus
Circus -- cleaner, nicer rooms, reasonable eating options, only the usual
number of familes with small kids, etc. Both of them are smack in the
middle of the strip, putting all the other casinos (except, perhaps,
Mandalay Bay) in relatively easy walking distance. A step up from the
Flamingo and Ballys would be Monte Carlo, which is only a little more
expensive and quite a nice hotel casino.
>
> i'm asking just to learn and understand, since we planned to spend 6
> nights in excalibur this summer.
Excalibur, like Circus Circus (and they're both owned by the same company)
focuses on the family crowd, meaning there are far more young kids than
usual. Most people agree that children and Las Vegas are not a particularly
good combination, not just from the standpoint of the kids, but also from
the perspective of the adults who travel to Las Vegas to enjoy an adult
(which does not necessarily mean x-rated) experience.
Excalibur is also reported as being shabby and dirty, though not to the
extent of Circus Circus. It's location isn't horrible, but it is down at
the southern end of the strip. You'll have easy access to New York New
York, the Luxor, MGM and Mandalay Bay. However, it will be quite a long
hike to Caesars, the Mirage, and the Venetian.
Seriously, I'd recommend you consider either the Flamingo or Ballys. I
really think you'll enjoy your stay more. Prices will be comparable, the
properties are much nicer, you won't be dodging tantrum-throwing toddlers
and strollers to the extent you would at Excalibur, and you'll have better
access to the rest of the Strip.
Take a look at alt.vacation.las-vegas. You'll see that, though there are a
few defenders of Circus Circus and Excalibur (who do so primarily by
stating, "the room was clean and all I do is sleep there, so I don't care
about the rest of the property), my description of these hotels represents
the orthodox view.
>
> >Circus Circus). The OP would do much better staying at a decent
off-strip
>
> OP = ?
Newsgroup-speak for "original poster," i.e. the person who started the
thread.
> regards!
> --
> Gianni Rondinini
> Icem s.r.l. - http://www.icem.it
> Tel: +39 0545 78036
> Fax: +39 0545 78727
|