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.
I don't think that's true for European tourists, $37 per person is a lot and there are so many other cultural sites to see that paying twice that could definitely drop this off the list during a visit to Paris.
Makes total sense from a US point of view though, you are already committing to spend so much to get there.
I dunno... I really enjoyed walking through the Hall of Mirrors. Obviously that experience alone is no where near the entirety of the Louvre, and I wouldn't suggest heading out to Versailles if you're only in Paris for say a 5 day trip, but I'm glad I went on my 11 day trip a couple years back.
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.
> I’d wager that you could 10x for non-EU tourists
Except for normal people, where $400 a ticket is absolutely prohibitive. I can't imagine being able to take a family there at that sort of price. (To be honest, even at $40 that could add up quickly.)
I firmly believe institutions like museums should be accessible by everyone. I understand higher prices for non-EU people, on the logic that they need more income somehow and tourists are more likely to be able to afford it -- so long as they keep student prices, family/children prices etc.
I have a similar line of thought every time I go to a national park. I dont really like hanging out around a bunch of strangers’ kids, but this would prevent a lot of families from being able to afford to go do things like this, and it’s good to let kids be exposed to things like really amazing art and national parks. Poor people should be able to enjoy them too.
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.
Compared to the price of a round-trip plane ticket to Paris, hotel, and food for the whole trip, this ticket increase is immaterial for anyone who's already well-off enough to be a tourist. And the whole point of the article is that the price increase is only for non-EU citizens.
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.
> ...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.
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
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.
This was pretty common in Central Asia, and I don't object. It keeps things affordable for locals and available for visitors. I don't mind paying for free museums in other countries, since I'm not subsidising them with my taxes.
Much like the egalitarian individualism of other western cultures, the idea applies to “our culture” not “the entire world”. This system falls apart otherwise because bad faith participants can easily exploit it. And I’ll add, your argument omitting that key point is one of the common ways people exploit it.
The Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen was unusual at the time specifically because it was _universalist_; it was _not_ just about French people.
Now, granted, they didn't get around to banning slavery until five years after, so, y'know, this was always more an ideal than anything else.
Who else is doing it doesn't change the matter. Charging your guests more then your own? You don't think the morally correct thing is to charge them the same?
name one. I have traveled a lot and can’t say I can name one place where this is a thing. the closest I’ve seen is like tollroads that have different payments methods for residents vs non-residents :)
I actually keep the museum tickets and city passes as a trip souvenir. I have them for the Louvre, Musee D'Orsay, RijksMuseum, Mauritshuis, the MC Escher house, Vatican Museum, Uffizi Galleria, the Museums' Pass from Vienna, the Guggenheim in Venice, Vasa and Swedish History Museum, ...
Readit News
Makes total sense from a US point of view though, you are already committing to spend so much to get there.
(In comparison Versaille is absolute bullshit that everyone should just skip. IMO).
And I didn't really enjoy the Louvre, especially compared to Musée d'Orsay and Centre Pompidou.
for the well-off*
Except for normal people, where $400 a ticket is absolutely prohibitive. I can't imagine being able to take a family there at that sort of price. (To be honest, even at $40 that could add up quickly.)
I firmly believe institutions like museums should be accessible by everyone. I understand higher prices for non-EU people, on the logic that they need more income somehow and tourists are more likely to be able to afford it -- so long as they keep student prices, family/children prices etc.
Deleted Comment
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.
Much like the egalitarian individualism of other western cultures, the idea applies to “our culture” not “the entire world”. This system falls apart otherwise because bad faith participants can easily exploit it. And I’ll add, your argument omitting that key point is one of the common ways people exploit it.
Now, granted, they didn't get around to banning slavery until five years after, so, y'know, this was always more an ideal than anything else.
If it is not right, why every country on earth is doing it?
“Password to Louvre’s video surveillance system was 'Louvre', according to employee” [1]
1. https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/password-louvres-vi...
I actually keep the museum tickets and city passes as a trip souvenir. I have them for the Louvre, Musee D'Orsay, RijksMuseum, Mauritshuis, the MC Escher house, Vatican Museum, Uffizi Galleria, the Museums' Pass from Vienna, the Guggenheim in Venice, Vasa and Swedish History Museum, ...