A useful best-of/worst-of travel list

I usually don't like to report on those "best" or "least expensive" city or airport stories. I figure that if you really want to visit the Louvre, the fact that Albuquerque is less expensive or Seoul has a better airport is irrelevant. But once in a while, a "best" list comes along that might actually be useful to you.

The latest comes from TripAdvisor.com; it ranks cities by nine categories based on a survey of the website's users. And it ranks both the three best and the three lowest in each category.

If you're considering visiting these cities, some of the rankings can provide a good guide to how easy the visit might be:

Ease of getting around Zurich, Vienna, Singapore

Most difficult Mumbai, Punta Cana, Moscow

Best public transportation Tokyo, Zurich, Munich

Worst Hanoi, Sharm el Sheikh, Marrakech

Best taxi services Tokyo, Singapore, Dubai

Worst Moscow, Beijing, Kuala Lumpur

Best value for money Lisbon, Budapest, Bangkok

Worst Oslo, Moscow, Zurich.

Safest Tokyo, Singapore, Dubrovnik

Least safe not listed

Three other rankings provide some idea of how welcome you might feel:

Friendliest locals Cancun, Tokyo, Lisbon

Least friendly Moscow, London, Hong Kong

Friendliest taxi drivers Tokyo, Cancun, Singapore

Least friendly Moscow, Beijing, Brussels

Cleanest streets Tokyo, Singapore, Zurich

Least clean Mumbai, Marrakech, Punta Cana.

And one category that matters for some:

Best for shopping New York, Bangkok, Dubai

Worst Moscow, Oslo and Punta Cana

Although I've been to only 12 of those cities, I find myself agreeing with many of the rankings. Certainly, most of the "best" results appear reasonable. But I have a bit more of a problem with some of the "worst" results. I found navigating Moscow's subways to be relatively easy, for example, haven't found locals unfriendly in Moscow, London or Hong Kong, and don't recall any problems with Brussels taxi drivers.

On the other hand, Oslo, Moscow and Zurich definitely are very expensive, but in Zurich, at least, the high prices provide some really great hotels and restaurants. I haven't visited Dubrovnik, Hanoi, Kuala Lumpur, Marrakech or Punta Cana.

From a broader perspective, I've found that most major cities outside of the United States and Canada offer good public transport and, in general, are easy to navigate. Even countries that use different alphabets almost always post metro stops and other such vital information in recognizable words -- often the sort-of English "Globish" that you see almost everywhere.

And the only place I encountered unfriendly locals in my recent round-the-world trip was Krakow.

Most other surveys I've seen lately support the findings here about the most and least value for the money. All of Scandinavia and the big Russian cities are expensive, as are the main cities of Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Fortunately, at least in the UK, Scandinavia and Switzerland, you can go down-market in hotels and restaurants without any great hardship.

And, on the other hand, a quick browse of Booking.com or some other online travel agency will display really good hotel prices, even at the four-star properties, in Bangkok and Budapest. Also, although Germany has had a high-cost reputation, Berlin still appears to be a good value destination.

For now, the main areas where I would worry about daily costs are those this survey highlights as poor value for the money. Even then, however, if you really want to see Westminster Abbey, the Alps, the fjords, or the Kremlin, careful planning can make your visit reasonable.

Ed Perkins writes the "Seniors on the Go" column for Tribune Media Services.