Latest news with #ViDiStudio
New York Post
2 days ago
- New York Post
‘Destination dupes' are this summer's hottest low-budget vacation hack, travel experts say — here's how it works
If you can't go with the flow, go with the faux. Rather than breaking the bank, visiting voguish vacation locations, a staggering 63% of pennywise sightseers are taking cost-friendly trips to 'destination dupes.' 'With travel prices soaring, many Americans are rethinking how and where they vacation,' explained study authors for CouponFollow, a discount travel hub, in a recent report. Advertisement 6 The 'destination dupes' movement is rising as a cost-cutting trend among travelers on a budget. ViDi Studio – 'Instead of chasing the usual bucket-list destinations, they're turning to designation dupes,' said the experts, 'affordable alternative locations that deliver similar charm without the hefty price tag or large crowds.' Insiders surveyed 1,000 U.S. adults, ranging in age from 18 to over 55. The poll revealed that frugal folks have saved an average of $2,262, exploring less popular lands, like Liverpool and Croatia, as reasonable substitutes to haute hotspots such as London and Italy, respectively. Advertisement So long, Lake Cuomo, hello Schitt's Creek. The money-saving movement is picking up steam among travel enthusiasts worldwide, as chichi cities like Venice have started hitting tourists with entry fees, and residents in Barcelona have begun attacking outsiders. So, to avoid the drama and the trauma, tightwads are doing the dupes. 6 Thrifty globetrotters are forgoing expensive trips to Italy for wallet-friendly alternatives. travnikovstudio – Advertisement 6 The study found that 63% of frequent trippers prefer destination dupes to luxury vacations. Pixel-Shot – 6 Croatia has been hailed as an affordable alternative to Italy. puhhha – The top knockoff spot of 2025 is the Azores. It's a group of volcanic islands belonging to Portugal that's become the next best thing to a costly escape to Hawaii, per CouponFollow. Taking the second-place slot for the best second-rate stay is Liverpool, England. Rather than blowing big bucks to visit London, jet-setters can soak in Liverpool's similarly rich cultural scene, historic landmarks and vibrant nightlife. Advertisement Third in the ranking is Croatia as a make-do swap for Italy. The humble country reportedly offers stunning coastlines, historic architecture and Mediterranean charm with fewer crowds and more cash-conscious accommodations — which is of utmost importance to globetrotters. 6 According to CouponFollow's report, travelers expect to spend 20% to 30% less on a destination dupe than the original hotspot. Andrii Iemelianenko – 'The biggest factor driving this trend was affordability, with 73% of travelers saying lower costs were the top reason why they chose a dupe,' said the researchers. 'Over half (53%) also went to these destinations to enjoy fewer crowds. More than 1 in 4 believed these swaps were trendier and cooler than traditional luxury trips.' But a destination dupe can't be a dud. 6 Destination dupe enthusiasts prefer taking low-cost trips over high-priced getaways. Guajillo studio – A whopping 61% of respondents preferred their cut-rate experiences over the oohs-and-ahhs they might have had on a pricier holiday. But to make the downgrade worthwhile, roughly 4 in 10 travelers said the bargain retreat needs to be at least 20% to 30% cheaper than the original location. 'For anyone looking to stretch their travel budget, the perfect trip might not be the most obvious one,' the travel masters advised. 'It could be a well-chosen alternative that offers more for less.'
New York Post
16-06-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Post
Bride sparks dinner debate after charging no-show wedding guests for their missed meals: ‘So tacky'
From 'I do' to 'I due.' Ghosting a pair of lovebirds on their big day, especially after confirming your attendance, could cost you more than a friendship, one absentee invitee found out the hard way. The fair weather pal ignited a debate over the practice of charging for no-shows — the same way some popular restaurants do — after recently ranting on Reddit. Advertisement 3 An irked Reddit user labeled a bride 'tacky' for wanting no-show wedding guests to cover the cost of their reception dinners. ViDi Studio – 'So the bride asked for RSVPs to get a headcount for everybody and determine how many plates of food she's ordering,' the offender explained. 'I tell her my [boyfriend], my mom and I will be able to attend,' the complainer carped. 'Come wedding day, my [boyfriend] isn't able to make it due to work scheduling issues, and my mom was too sick to make it.' Advertisement The day-of cancellations had the gal all dressed in white seeing red. 'The bride gets upset saying she spent $50 per plate, and she cant believe they're not coming when we RSVP'd,' continued the Redditor. 'She told me she's tempted to ask them to pay $50 each for not coming!.' 'I was like, 'What the hell nobody knew you were spending per plate,'' added the faultfinder. 'They weren't the only ones to miss her wedding either, so maybe she was mad she lost out on the money.' 3 Folks online noted the high cost of wedding food, arguing that it's even more 'tacky' to RSVP for the celebration and then fail to attend. Lidia_Lo – Advertisement On the other hand, throwing one's cash in the trash due to wedding day dropouts is a reasonable reason to rage. Sweethearts tying the knot spend an average of $26,665 on their nuptials, with post-ceremonial food and drinks costing around $5,480. While some try to circumvent the expense by charging an admissions fee at the wedding chapel's doorstep, others have offered 'tiered' menus to their guests — exclusively presenting prime chops and top-shelf booze to wealthier folks, while serving subpar sustenance to the less fortunate in the crowd. 3 Couples typically spend over $26,000 on their weddings, leaving most pairs in major financial straits. metamorworks – Advertisement But the outraged Reddit user felt the bride's repayment request was way déclassé. 'She sounded so tacky,' said the grumbler. 'For reference, this was an out of town wedding in Minnesota where we all had to fly in. It cost a lot to even make her wedding…' While her frustrations may be valid, commenters were mostly on the bride's side. 'RSVPing 'yes' to a wedding and then flaking out is super rude[…]just not showing up because of poor planning is a d- -k move,' a virtual viewer wrote. 'I was out $700 because of no shows at my daughter's wedding. Legit reasons like illness or an emergency, OK, I understand,' added another. 'However, some of the excuses were flimsy and one was an out and out lie. I would never ask anyone for my money back, but guests ought to be aware that once they RSVP 'yes,' they ought to do their best to show up.' 'The [boyfriend] and mom should still send a gift even though they werent able to attend,' a separate social media arbitrator added. Advertisement 'You're the tacky one here, not the friend you're trying to call out,' another jabbed. 'If you RSVP and not show up for ANY reason, you should still send the monetary wedding gift money you would have given them in the first place.' 'You don't seem to be aware that they paid PER seat that you reserved,' the whistleblower said. 'So they paid $100 for your reserved empty seats.'
New York Post
12-06-2025
- New York Post
Ex-flight attendant warns not to pack these items in your carry-on: ‘Risking confiscation, fines or worse'
Jet-setting with these things is just not allowed in the clouds. To avoid the frustration of confiscation at the airport, an experienced cabin crew expert is warning frequent flyers against packing these peculiar possessions in their bags. 'As a former flight attendant, I've seen it all at 38,000 feet,' Barbiebac La Azafata, 32, a travel influencer, from Spain, told What's The Jam. 'But nothing prepared me for the day a man casually opened a plastic supermarket bag, full of US dollars, and asked if it was ok to keep it there.' 6 Barbiebac La Azafata, an ex-flight attendant, has virally revealed the wildest things that are banned on planes. Jam Press/@ The cyber siren, who boasts over 4.9 million social media followers, says hitting the friendly skies with loads of dough is an absolute no-go. 'I'll never forget it — this wasn't some discreet envelope or a money belt,' continued La Azafata. 'It was a wide-open, crinkly bag, filled with what looked like $20,000 in cash.' 'No declaration or security alert,' she ranted, 'just bills floating around with a neck pillow on top.' 'What most people don't realize is that there's a $10,000 limit, or equivalent in other currency, when flying internationally,' the in-flight insider revealed. 'If you're carrying more, you have to declare it.' 'Otherwise, you're risking confiscation, fines or worse.' 6 The former air hostess warns that attempting to fly with wads of undeclared cash could result in trouble for the passenger. ViDi Studio – And a sack full of money isn't the only funny item on the no-fly list. From apples to fireworks, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), alongside other federal powers that be, have placed travel bans and limitations on specific goods for the safety of domestic and international trippers. Still, some of the forbidden effects have left folks feeling like the governmental authorities are straight tripping. 6 La Azafata reminded travelers that TSA agents will likely discard any liquid toiletry that exceeds 3.4 fluid ounces. kinomaster – 'I once saw a woman burst into tears because she had to throw away a luxury face cream she'd just bought,' La Azafata recalled of a despondent sightseer, who couldn't see the value in trashing her valuable beauty products before takeoff. 'It was in a 150ml (5-ounce) container, even though it was half empty,' said La Azafata. '[But] airport security doesn't care how much product is left.' 'If the bottle says over 100ml (3.4 ounces), it goes straight in the bin,' she confirmed. Plane passengers should also forgo packing their most cherished technology necessities, too, according to the pro. 6 La Azafata says flight attendants are skilled in handling fires caused by lithium batteries in digital devices. Jam Press/@ 'The average passenger boards a plane with six lithium battery devices,' La Azafata noted. 'That includes phones, tablets, laptops, smartwatches, even wireless earbuds.' 'Lithium batteries are small, but they can catch fire easily, especially if damaged or overheated,' she added. 'In fact, they're now the leading cause of fires onboard.' The TSA has even barred portable chargers and power banks that use lithium batteries in checked bags, per a new advisory from the Federal Aviation Administration. La Azafata claims she and her fellow ex-coworkers are well-versed in extinguishing the flames of a defective device. However, she says the little troublemakers should be left behind by vacationers. 'As crew, we're trained to handle it, we have fire gloves, containment bags, the works,' said the skyway savant. 'But, honestly, no one wants to see smoke midair.' 6 In addition to cash, creams and certain electronics, La Azafata says travelings with knives is typically off-limits in the friendly skies. Angelov – Lastly, but certainly not the least egregious no-no when it comes to carry-ons, are knives. 'I get it, you're in Geneva and you spot a beautiful Swiss Army knife and you think, perfect souvenir,' La Azafata said. 'But I've watched passengers get those exact knives confiscated at the security checkpoint and it's brutal.' 'If the blade is over 6cm, it's banned in hand luggage, full stop,' she asserted. 'If you're going to buy one, put it in your checked bag, or prepare to say goodbye at the gate.' 6 La Azafata encourages plane passenger to do their research well before boarding. Jam Press/@ The mile-high know-it-all recommends that air commuters double check an airline's policies before loading up their luggage with vetoed must-haves. 'Some passengers think once they're past security, they're good to go, but not quite,' La Azafata advised. 'Airlines can ban items even if security allows them.' 'A ball, for example, might pass the scanner, but if it's inflated, the cabin crew can take it away,' she said. 'It could expand and pop midair, which isn't dangerous, but it's definitely disruptive. 'Check your airline's website before flying,' urged La Azafata. 'It's all there, and it could save you from a very expensive mistake.'
New York Post
12-05-2025
- General
- New York Post
The common things you should never say to a toxic in-law if you want a long-lasting marriage, relationship expert reveals
If your mother-in-law is giving you Livia Soprano or Bunny MacDougal vibes, take a beat before you snap back with a zinger you can't take back. Marriage and family therapist Sara M. Klein, LMFT, says the key to dealing with a meddling MIL is to bite your tongue — and when in doubt, play it like a National Geographic docuseries. 'One strategy I might use,' Klein recently told PureWow in an interview, 'is to pretend you are an anthropologist and just observe and describe. This will help with judgments.' Rather than rolling your eyes when she criticizes your holiday traditions — which will most likely happen — Klein suggests saying something like, 'It's interesting that your family does holidays this way,' or 'Their family has rituals that I never did growing up.' If you're tempted to drop a snarky 'That's your son's decision' when your mother-in-law keeps intruding in your marriage, Klein warns against deflecting responsibility. 'Blame and shame are not effective relationally. They shut people down, and there is no space in between,' Klein told the outlet. 3 If your mother-in-law is getting under your nerves, pause before unleashing a zinger you might regret. ViDi Studio – Instead, she suggests saying, 'We made a decision about this and we are happy to discuss our thought process with you.' When it comes to parenting, the expert explained that it's normal to want to parent differently from how your in-laws raised their children. And statements like 'We'll never do that with our children' can feel like a direct critique of how your in-laws raised your spouse. Instead, try: 'We're trying to limit screen time while the kids are little — it's just what's feeling right for us right now. But who knows, ask me again in six months,' Klein explained. 3 Klein told PureWow that blame and shame tactics are counterproductive in relationships, as they tend to shut people down and leave no room for open dialogue. motortion – According to a 2021 study published in 'Evolutionary Psychological Science,' the whole 'monster-in-law' stereotype may be a product of evolutionary wiring. Researchers found that 44% of people reported more conflict with their mothers-in-law than with their own mothers, largely over financial resources and child care. 'This genetic conflict may cause affines (in-laws) to disagree about the distribution of resources and investment, just as we see mothers and fathers disagreeing in these domains,' the study authors wrote. They also noted that these conflicts are likely heightened because in-laws 'do not choose to have relationships with one another' but are thrown together as 'unintended consequences' of their children's romantic entanglements. 3 A 2021 study published in Evolutionary Psychological Science suggests that the classic 'monster-in-law' trope might actually be rooted in our evolutionary instincts. Elnur – Meanwhile, Dr. Terri Apter, a Cambridge University psychologist and author of 'What Do You Want From Me?' believes that much of the conflict between wives and mothers-in-law is fueled by both women striving to be the 'primary woman' in their respective families. 'Each tries to establish or protect their status. Each feels threatened by the other,' Apter wrote in her book.
