The Weasley's vacation (was: Ron, Molly and Those Robes)

[Tammy Rizzo]

No: HPFGUIDX 59401

On 5 Jun 2003 at 11:32, Fred Waldrop wrote:

> Why spend an entire month in Egypt? Wouldn't it seem more prudent, not
> to mention smarter to stay, oh, 2 weeks? That way you have a nice
> vaction and still have half the money left to buy school supplies and
> robes.
> 
> Fred

A month stay with relatives costs almost the same as a two-week stay with relatives 
-- most of the cost is getting there and back, after all.  I don't know if Bill is 
connected to the Floo Network or not, or if they used a Portkey, or what, but I still 
imagine that it wouldn't have cost much more to stay the whole month rather than 
just two weeks.  

So, they'd need money for food, right?  Well, they'd be eating in Egypt or at The 
Burrow, so what's the difference?  They'd need money for lodging?  Not if Bill or 
Arthur or someone 'expanded' Bill's place to make room for them all, like those 
tents Arthur borrowed for the QWC.  They have bills to pay back home?  What 
would they have to pay, except possibly a mortgage?  They don't use fellytones or 
ekeltricity, they probably have the WW equivalent of a well and a leach-field 
(precursor to the septic tank), so they don't pay for water or sewage, so they don't 
have to worry about services being cut off for missing a month.  I figure that Bill 
would have been taking them on their tours of the pyramids and whatnot, unless 
there is a WW tour business there.  There might be.

Staying half the time doesn't mean half the cost, unless they're staying in some 
swanky hotel or something, and I just don't see Ron not at least mentioning that, if 
they did stay somewhere posh.  I'm convinced that the 'expense' was for travelling 
there and back, in which case, if this is the only time you're gonna be able to do it, 
you might as well do it right and stay as long as you can.  

***
Tammy
tammy at mauswerks.net




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]