Aspire Travel Club Blog

Once upon a time someone sat down somewhere other than on the floor or in a tree for the first time.

The chair was born.

A little while later someone invented a machine that could fly through the sky.

The plane was born.

And when the plane people got round to creating passenger versions they quickly realised that the aforementioned invention would be well suited to their invention so popped some seats in.

Chairs on planes. Marvellous. The end.

No no no. Really really far from the end.

In all the time that life has existed there is no place where more thought has gone into a chair than on a plane. The most ambitious and slow-moving carpenter in history would not be able to take as long building a chair as the sky seat folk.

This is not down to laziness. It is due to the extraordinary value of every inch of space on a plane.
When the design team at Virgin Atlantic were given the task of designing a new Upper Class chair (Dream Suite is the official title) the instructions must have been met predominantly with abject terror. And perhaps a dash of professional excitement.

Their mission, whether they chose to accept it or not, was to build a better chair, a roomier chair, a more comfortable chair, a more useful and passenger friendly chair (marvellous so far) but fit more of them into the same amount of space.

This is the moment that I would have backed slowly and stealthily out of the room before entering run and hide mode.

Impossible. Ridiculous. Silly. A child with a round peg and square hole could tell you this.
But, it turns out, it isn't silly or impossible. I know this because the airline kindly invited me and a fellow journalist from the Sunday Times to have the first peek at these magic seats on the new A330 aircraft (Miss Sunshine) before its first trip to New York JFK International Airport on Saturday (21).

It's important before I tell you more to take into account that the people who designed the current Upper Class seat weren't given free rein (or reign, both are fine) to throw the chairs around the cabin willy nilly without a care in the world. There were no gaping holes of space left empty in the pursuit great Fung Shui lines.

They were given the same instructions as the people behind the chair I'm unveiling today. As many chairs as possible, but make them super duper. It was those folk who invented the fishbone formation that the airline patented and owns. Clever folk - so trumping their work is a spectacularly difficult task.

And that is why is has taken four years. Four years. And lordy knows how many people hours. There was a shortlist of six concepts, slowly whittled down over time and alterations and finessing have been thorough.

It's also worth knowing that these design folk don't lock themselves away and emerge one day with the perfect chair. Endless interviews of everyone involved to get opinions and perspectives from as many places as possible take place. Right through to the maintenance men who have to fix the chairs when something goes wrong that led to the chair being built in four sections and therefore easier to maintain.

And then when a prototype was ready the airline's most frequent Upper Class flyers were invited to spend the night on one of the chairs in a large shed. An invitation that is rarely refused by the way such is the excitement around new chairs on planes.

It took about 30 seconds for the first issue to arise and it goes to show that however clever a designer is and no matter how hard they work to get into the mindset of a customer, there is simply nothing more useful than sticking a frequent flyer in the chair for the night.

The troublemaker was a woman with a Mulberry bag. The issue was the foot rest. When testing took place it was a thin solid base with a larger head. Imagine a mushroom. It is now a hollow ottoman with a fold up lid. The reason for the change is that the lady in question went to put her handbag down and could find nowhere she liked the look of to pop it. Out with the mushroom, in with the hollow ottoman. 

When the chair had been tested and retested and retested again it finally made its way onto a plane.

Walking onto the plane the first thing everyone will see, irrespective of whether they are turning left or right, is the bar. A beautiful bar that doubles as a 'welcome to the plane' area and looks like it's made of solid stone (it's actually a thin stone coating).

This is the view that will greet everyone who gets on the plane. Time to cry if you're not turning left.

It is the longest in the sky at 2.7m and is framed by light. Before explaining the light mood system one of the designers turned to me and said he'd read a blog post in which I'd been dismissive of lighting mood menus and asked me to bear with him while he demonstrated what a moron I am (my words, not his, he was very polite).

I did bear with him and he successfully convinced me that lighting mood menus are actually a marvellous idea on board (still not keen on them in hotel rooms though). Whether you are dining, snoozing, partying or in full pyjamas and duvet mode there is a lighting mood to suit. And it's extraordinary how different the cabin looks at the flick of a switch.

Finally I sat down. And lay down. And played with the onboard entertainment and tried to break things and find potential issues or c*ck ups. But I drew a blank. To quote a girl sat next to me on the tube this morning the seat is "totes amazeballs."

The chair, like the old one, is essentially two pieces of furniture with very high end leather upholstery on the chair and then when it is sleep time it folds over and a bed emerges. The research suggests people don't want to sleep where they eat or where someone else has slept so fresh bedding goes down and you don't have to worry about the personal hygiene of your predecessor.

It's the longest fully flat bed in the business class arena at 7ft 2inches and in chair mode the width has increased by 1.5inches and it reclines up to 50% more than the current seat, designed with shorter flight snoozes in mind.

Chair becomes the longest business class bed in the sky

All this and somehow there are four seats in each row (there were three before) and all still have isle access. This is thanks to an "asymmetric herring bone" and something else I don't fully (or even partially) understand to do with g forces and safety regulations and magic.

Asymetric herring bone and magic combine

Below are a list of other features the Virgin Atlantic people are rightly proud of.
But before I sign off I must make a conclusion or three.

The first is BRAVO! Marvellous chair.

The second is that the people who designed this chair are a lot cleverer than I am.

And third is a suggestion/warning. If you find yourself sat anywhere near me on a Virgin Atlantic flight do everything in your power to avoid eye contact and refuse point blank to engage in conversation with me or else I will bore you to self harm with chair chat.

Virgin Upper Class Dream Suite facts:

• A new window has been built into the wall of each suite, giving them more light and space but its opaque design offers the same levels of privacy.

• Each suite has a 12.1 inch touchscreen monitor with a touchscreen handset loaded with a brand new entertainment system called JAM. It's been consistently rated excellent by more than 80% of passengers.

• Each suite with a handy new flip down cocktail table and push panel armrest, plus a new fully adjustable reading light and a much more conveniently located headphone jack.

• The new passenger control unit still has lumbar support plus clever firm touch buttons to prevent accidental activation.

• There's more storage than ever, with a new literature pocket and two ottoman storage solutions.

• Laptops can be powered throughout the flight with in-seat power supply compatible with most international plug types.

• All of the A330 aircraft have the AeroMobile system installed so that mobile phones work on board.

• With the new technology hub, passengers can connect their smart phone, USB stick or tablet to JAM, watch, read or listen to their own content, plus charge their device. .

More destinations will be added as the rest of the A330 aircraft join the fleet throughout 2012, and new 787 aircraft from 2014. 

To learn more about the new chair go to http://www.vsflyinghub.com

When we created Aspire I was part of a one-man campaign group whose sole purpose was to try to avoid mentioning the word luxury.

I felt it at best a little dull, at worst redundant, pointless and deeply unhelpful.

Telling someone something is luxury is as banal as telling them something is fun, I argued.

I think it is fun to lie on the ground, squeal the opening bars of the Disney animation The Lion King and watch my mother's bichon frise Hugo go mental before leaping on my face to make it stop.

Hugo: Doesn't share my sense of fun

You might not think that sounds like fun. I'm not convinced Hugo enjoys it and I know my mother finds it a little irritating. But few things amuse me more.

Some people think it's fun to keep allotments. Others enjoy wearing skinny jeans and staying up late. My younger brother (thespian, 26) enjoys Billy Ellioting around the house while wearing Pokemon pyjamas. I do not. But I am more than content for everyone to pick their own fun and crack on.

Luxury is the same kind of word. When I'm told something is luxurious my first reaction is to scoff. Internally scoff of course. Externally I nod and appear agreeable like the two-faced, spineless kowtowing panda I am. I like to save my venom for the internet where nobody can find me.

Here are some examples of 'luxuries' I don't like:

Hot stones on my back. This treatment sits between Chinese water torture and flaying on my list of things not to do. And yet many 'luxury' hotels offer it and many 'luxury' consumers want it. Good for them, I genuinely hope they and the stones will be very happy together. You may as well hurl them at my head.

No locks on the room door. A charming boast from some hotels that demonstrates friendliness, community spirit, safety, and an attitude that says: "we're too luxurious for crime." This announcement at check in always threatens to blow my thin and fragile veneer of cool. Will I go along with this new-age luxury hippy trust vibe and spend my stay secretly worrying? Or will I be the one square, key-obsessed, paranoid fuddy-duddy with trust issues who ruins everyone's fun by demanding a lock. I've heard people rave about this feature. They consider it a genuine luxury. It makes me feel a little unwell.

No televisions. I hate not having a TV in my hotel room. I hate it almost as much as I hate people who announce at dinner parties that they don't have a television because they just read books and meditate. Television is not crack. As an adult with a brain I can decide whether or not to turn it on. It may be that I don't watch it at all while away in which case it does very little harm sitting quietly in the corner. Equally it may be that it rains for two hours and I'm tired and I want to watch a film or sporting occasion.
But. Some people like not having one and it is a luxury USP I have seen successfully waved around by hotels plenty of times.

 Of course context is important. Those same keyless, high-end hippies would have an aneurysm if presented with an open-door policy in some destinations.

And there are occasions when I would delight in not having a television:

"Sorry Mr Murray, you can't watch television because we are in the middle of the rainforest sleeping in tents and there is no electricity." Hurrah.

"Sorry Mr Murray, we do have plug sockets but decided to not fill one of them with a television because we think watching television is an evil holiday pastime." Boo, hiss. 

A television free accomodation option

Since joining the world of high end travel I've been talked to about luxurious spas, rooms, restaurants, meals, drinks, decor, smells, loos, pools, kids clubs, chalets, villas, planes, chairs, tables, grass, televisions, walks... etc etc.

Who decides? Is there a stamp-wielding committee somewhere slowly working its way through a pile of things looking for luxury status? Or can anyone, anywhere, at any time just decide that something is luxurious and voila.

I wish it were a little more scientific. I wish luxury was a little more like a 25 metre swimming badge. A 25 metre swimming badge doesn't cause confusion and debate. If you've got one sewn proudly onto your Speedos then everyone knows the score.

David Hasselhoff wears Speedos and was once awarded a 25m swim badge

So where is the luxury badge? Is there such a thing and if not then why not? As a youngster I put faith in the star rating system for hotels but having travelled a bit now I know it to be a nonsense that really ought to be scrapped.

In truth, there isn't one. And there never can be for the same reason that there can never be a fun badge. It's all a matter of opinion. And in different contexts the same thing could be deemed a luxury or an absolute disgrace by the same person.

I didn't win the fight to have the word luxury nowhere near Aspire and that was the right decision. There isn't another word that quickly and sensibly gives you a ball park idea of what kind of travel we are talking about. It is useful but I believe it is good practice to be a little more imaginative when talking about travel.

Simply sticking the word in front of 'hotel', 'ship', 'chalet', 'resort' etc doesn't make it so.
Tell the punter you have no locks, no TVs and hot stones. And let them decide if those are luxuries.

I have a bone to pick.

It's a words-based bone. The three words in question are 'unique', 'authentic' and 'experience'.

The reason I am picking said bone is that I can't move without reading or hearing these words and I want it to stop. I want it to stop because there's a danger that I might become angry and the last time anger temporarily replaced my famous joviality I was mean to a puppy.

Mean to a puppy. Words mean, not sticks and stones mean, but the puppy looked hurt.

A puppy, hurt by mean words

Rather than register this bone without evidence of just cause I conducted a brief inbox experiment.
Earlier this month, in a rare moment of common-sense fuelled creativity, I created a sub-folder entitled luxury news in which I file luxury news.

There are, at present, 842 emails in this folder and thanks to the wonders of search I quickly ascertained that 101 contain the word authentic, 276 contain unique and 473 experience. 48 contain all three in one sentence.

Incidentally the word 'irrigation' appears in three, 'pineapple' in six and 'nestle' in 37. And, extraordinarily, 'the' is present 833 times meaning nine entire press releases managed to get the desired message across without using 'the' at all.

Sadly I cannot search my phone and face to face conversations for numbers of mentions with such ease but if you are willing to take my anecdotal word for it then read the next sentence, if not then skip it.  All three are mentioned a lot.

The last thing I want to do here is sound like a word snob, I'm really not.

Exhibit A: A recent visit to a Swiss fondue restaurant. One person (let's call him Jeremy), said to another person (let's call her Dorothy): "how are you?" Dorothy replied: "good, thank you Jeremy," and Jeremy re-replied with a patronising lecture on the meaning of the words 'good' and 'well'.

Were it not for me introducing my molten cheese to Jeremy's arm the lecture may well still be going.

I burned Jeremy to halt his pedanticness so you see I cannot possibly be a word snob. Plus I don't spell good or understand apostrophe's'. 

I am, however, displeased by word murder.

My fear is that these three wonderful words may go the way of 'fantastic', 'nice' and 'Nick Knowles' into pointless purgatory when they should be living in the lovely literary Elysian Fields of such greats as 'pomp' and 'calamity'.

The fantastic and nice Nick Knowles

'A hand-picked collection of unique hotels' is as useful a sentence as 'a hand-picked collection of unique fingerprints'.

'Fulfilling travellers' desire for authentic and enriching luxury' is as useful a sentence as 'fulfilling dogs' desire for authentic and enriching pig's ears'.

And 'a truly natural opportunity to enhance one's sense of wellbeing with a unique, authentic experience' is as useful a sentence as 'Blah blah blah nonsense vomit'.

Below I have copied and pasted the three words and their Oxford English Dictionary definitions. I'm going to print it, jazz it up with stickers and glitter and affix it to my cork board to remind myself not to ruin them.

My hope is that agents, hoteliers, marketers, pr specialists, operators and anyone else who uses words to tell other people about holidays will follow my attempted lead, use words sparingly and try to make each sentence useful. If I was buying a holiday I'd buy it off the simple wordsmith not the hyperbole bludgeoner.

In a previous blog post I lauded the simplicity of a room with a view. Not an enriching abode with an authentic sense of place offering the unrivalled experience of regarding unique vistas.

Let's not stick knives in all the good words until they are dead.

Unique: being the only one of its kind; unlike anything else.

Authentic: of undisputed origin and not a copy; genuine.

Experience: practical contact with and observation of facts or events.

Henry Ford once famously said: "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse."

Instead of a faster horse he gave them the Model T and the rest is stuff that happened in the past.

Although the bill for the broken power steering on my Ford Focus isn't in the past Henry, it's very much in the present and I really don't think it should have broken on a three year old, very carefully driven, automobile.

But anyway, the Model T thing was clever so we'll focus on that for now.

Mr Ford's point was that the customer is not always right and he/she does not always know what he/she wants.

A lot of customers are stupid, unreasonable, ill-informed or a little bonkers.

Many more are perfectly nice but haven't got the imagination to look at a horse and wish it had four wheels, an engine, a pair of headlamps and room for a couple of pals and a picnic hamper in the back.

Mr Ford's quote popped into my head while reading the coverage of the sad death of Apple founder Steve Jobs.

When asked by a reporter what market research went into the development of the iPad he replied: "It's not the consumer's job to know what they want."

This is the kind of sentence I wish politicians would come out with rather than the panda-inspired affliction of asking people to follow them then enquiring as to where they might like to go.

And one day I'd like to hear a hotelier say it.

Hotels love speaking to their customers to ask them what they want then proudly boast that they have responded to their guests' desires.

And occasionally something 'innovative' is announced.

Much of my time is spent talking about, writing about or having a look at ever so slightly different permutations of expensive places to stay that aren't your own house.

The elephant in almost every room discussed or viewed is that essentially they are the same.

There is a bed, there is a bathroom and there is a roof. The rest is square footage, light switches, thread count and marketing.

Game-changing innovation seems to be thin on the ground.

To avoid discussing said elephant, the phd in talking s h 1 t e was developed in order to allow reasonable human beings to meander around such things at length without running out of words to say.

This manufactured breeding ground begats phrases such as 'sense of place' and 'elegant sanctuary' and the need to select a lighting mood rather than make simple decisions about which bulbs to illuminate.

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, and it was good."
God knew we didn't want lighting mood menus ages ago.

But eventually the bespoke furniture chat runs out and hotels must differentiate or die (according to many, although i thoroughly disagree).

This leads to weird conversations such as one I had while exploring a hotel in Dubai not long ago.

Upon entering the spa the marketing manager volunteered a USP.

I hadn't asked for one but she clearly felt like she wouldn't be doing her job unless she had a go so rather grandiosely announced that after a treatment the guests had the option of showering inside OR outside.

As you can imagine I took a seat to process the information.

The other popular way to 'differentiate' is customer service.

Naturally hoteliers are enormously proud of their staff and therefore believe they have the best people working in their hotel.

And more often than not within this sub chat comes the claim of unique clairvoyant ability of the humans working that hotelier's particular pile of five star bricks to anticipate a guests every desire.

No doubt many of these hotels do have excellent people. But to attempt to differentiate in this way is comparable to an X Factor contestant trying to differentiate themselves by stating that singing is their life and winning would be a dream come true.

My rather laboured point is that hotels do not need to be different for the sake of it. Affluent travellers expect their rooms to be marvellous but free of irritatingly over-orchestrated technology and style at the expense of practicality (which maniac invented glass bathroom walls for example).

Guests expect the staff to be brilliant so there's no point boasting about it. You may as well boast about your chairs having four legs.

A FOUR LEGGED CHAIR!!!

If the hotel is naturally different thanks to being set in an old monastery or on top of a tree then that's wonderful.

If a member of staff can actually read people's minds then by all means stick that on the marketing material.

But if it's just a lovely hotel with super art, great food and well decorated rooms in a great location then be content, chill out and let the guests enjoy themselves.

This isn't to say that I don't want a Henry Ford or a Steve Jobs to think of something extraordinary that never would have occurred to me because I'm not particularly bright.

I can't wait for it. I can't wait for the day I look at people whose hotel rooms have a bed, four walls and a light switch as if they are Sony Walkman carrying, typewriter tapping, horse-riding lunatics.

Until then if you need me I'll be on a four legged chair in a room with a view.

I did something for the first time last week. It was unplanned but I couldn't help myself. The urge took me and before I had time to stop and have a little think about what this would mean it was done.

I left a comment on a website.

The website in question is one of my favourites, the Huffington Post, and if you don't already look at it every day then start now. Unless you would rather not. This is just a suggestion. 

It is my first port of e-call in the morning and on the morning in question I saw a blog post from a man called Paul Carr who describes himself as 'a British author and columnist, currently living in exile in hotels around the world'.

This particular post was entitled The Ten Most Annoying Mistakes Made By Luxury Hotels.

As a regular in such hotels this struck me as something I should read. If you would like to follow in my eyeball footsteps then pressing here will do the trick.

While reading the piece I, predictably, agreed with some points and felt less annoyed by others.

The newish fad of glass being used as walls in preference to non see through materials between bed area and bath/loo area is one of the most silly and unhelpful uses of glass ever.

And I'm a fan of glass, a big fan. I can't get enough of it. I drink out of it almost every day, often I survey landscapes through it while being unaffected by the weather and as a special treat I'll watch You've Been Framed snippets of people running into it

An excellent example of glass being used sensibly

Poor plug placement also makes me angrier than it should. In fact, if any hoteliers read this and are considering building a hotel then please, pretty please, for the love of whatever you love, place a couple of easily accessible plugs by your bedside tables.

However, it was not these that caused me to rant in the comments section. It wasn't any of the top 10. It was the comments section itself.

This poor chap was subjected to a torrent of abuse for daring to write anything critical about luxury hotels when more important things are happening in the world.

An example comment comes from someone called 'farmerlady' who is 'really a blonde - so there'.

I'm not sure what the blonde thing is about but my powers of deduction tell me she is almost certainly female and works within the farming industry.

Here are her thoughts: "I am sure with unemployment and poverty at record highs, we all appreciate a cunning article by a really wealthy British guy on how $300 a night luxury hotels fail to please him. Most tone deaf article evah."

I'm not an enormous fan of that particular spelling of ever but I barely noticed it such were my irritation levels. And these levels grew and grew as I read on - scores of people made similar points and all seemed to think their point was valid.

It isn't valid. It's idiotic.

This article was in the travel section of the site and was labelled very clearly. Anyone not interested could easily have avoided it.

To complain about its content is comparable to walking straight past a 'WARNING - BIG HOLE AHEAD' sign, jumping into the hole and then whinging about being in a hole.

By all means tell Paul he writes badly or that his 10 points are silly or even that you don't much like his haircut. 

But to chastise him for writing about something other than poverty or unemployment is to chastise everyone who ever does anything that falls outside that which is vitally important.

Of course this piece doesn't tackle a vital issue but if everyone only wrote about the really important stuff then oh me oh my would reading become dull.

And what of those people who like to travel to nice hotels, must we not write for them? Should all reviews of posh hotels simply tell readers just to be pleased to have a roof over their head?

Should travel agents, hoteliers and tour operators throw away their brochures, forget their expertise and opinions and instead offer clients 'somewhere to stay that costs a lot of money, you lucky people, so if you complain about anything it means you don't care about starving Africans'?

There's a comments section on here which you are very welcome to use farmerlady. But if you must be mean please be mean in a constructive fashion.

At the risk of sounding like a stoned teenager deja vu is really, like, weird man.

Especially if that déjà vu lasts four days and three nights.

Avid Aspire readers will know I spent eight days on Seabourn Sojourn's inaugural Caribbean voyage late last year during which I gave the crew a thorough testing by deliberately becoming so seasick that I needed 24 hour love and attention.

Last week I hopped onto Sojourn's identical twin sister, Quest, which was officially named on Monday by Blythe Danner (Gwyneth Paltrow's mum). An altogether more purposefully named vessel this one. Quest evokes StarTrekian images of exploration, Sojourn more of a gentle pootle, perhaps sporting a Panama hat.

And then there's the third of the identical triplets, boasting the grandest of all the names - Odyssey.

Line these three up and forget for a moment that cruise ships do not begat one another and even their own mother would fail to tell them apart.

Granted a geek of epic proportions could find a mildly altered door arch or a slightly different sized 17th flippityjibbit in suite 706, but for those of us who enjoy such pastimes as having friends or leaving the house - identical.

The déjà vu was incessant, and at least a dozen times my befuddled brain decided it was still cruising round the Caribbean rather than the Med.

Seabourn Seabourn Square on board Seabourn Quest. Or Sojourn, or perhaps Odyssey.

The question this raised, readers, is - is it a good thing that the ships are the same?

I can't decide..

Seabourn's president Rick Meadows told me it is a good thing. Apparently customers enjoy the familiarity of the ship while exploring unfamiliar destinations. And for agents it makes it easier to learn the product.

But, as pleasant and as trustworthy as the finely moustached American is, he's bound to think it's a brilliant idea.

One must assume a clever person, aided by lots of other clever people, decided to take the Dolly the sheep approach to ship-building back in 2005 when the sisters were announced.

In fact faith in the concept is even longer standing - the lines other three ships are identical to one another too.

But there's a nagging pixie sat on my shoulder poking me with a small stick while whispering words like 'unique', 'bespoke' and 'tailored'.

And the pixie has a point - luxury clientele and cookie cutter product do not traditionally go hand in hand irrespective of how beautiful those cookies are.

And they are beautiful. And impressive, and well designed, and brimming with quality features, and so and so forth. But explore one and you've explored them all.
However. And this is a sizeable however. This big: HOWEVER.

So often in the land of luxury, marketing messages and those people tasked with spraying those messages bang on about the uniqueness of their product and how it is shaped to fit round each individual client.

Nonsense of course (excluding uber uber luxury for the super rich that tends not to be marketed out loud anyway) but for as long as I can remember the marketers needed to say it and customers needed to hear it.

The bulk of luxury holidays and experiences are often special, but rarely unique.

Seabourn has placed this marketing merry go round elephant in the middle of room, painted it pink and wrapped it in fairy lights.

The ship is so good they made it three times. And they make no apologies for it - the huge variety of itineraries offers quite enough choice and tailoring in their view. 

A companion on board upon whom I bestowed my tale of déjà vu nodded, told me to look out the window whenever confusion hit then sauntered off in the direction of the cookie-cutter spa with a glass of cookie-cutter Champagne in hand.

And conveniently she also had a cookie. I don't know if it was a cookie-cutter cut cookie though.

It could be my companion is right and I'm worrying about nothing - it has happened before.

But do take advantage of the convenient comments spot below to share your thoughts on the triplets please.

Unless you're a stoned teenager - the comments section is not for you.

This week I selected the cynic hat from my French shabby chic hat stand in preparation for a meeting with ITC Classics about its new brand ITC Giving.

The strapline for the voluntourism arm of the luxury operator is 'A service of integrity to thinking people who want to use their skills and experience to make a difference in the world'.

In my mind sentences like this generate an image of Michael Jackson dressed in white pyjamas gyrating while bound loosely to a crucifix imploring me to stop destroying the planet, take a look in the mirror and make that change. Shammon. 

This is not because it's a bad sentence: it's because sentences like this have historically been insincere or full of false promise. 

The desire to 'make a difference' is far from new. And just seconds younger is the desire to appear to be making a difference.

The little black public relations dress has desperately taken on a variety of shades of green as companies kowtow to the Bono brigade with their fingers crossed behind their back. 

Just over a decade ago while considering the concept of a 'Gap Yah' the cookie cutter approach to finding oneself did not appeal.

A round the world ticket, a stint building a well or helping some animals in Africa, six weeks in a Kibbutz and a bungee jump.

At 18 I could barely mow the lawn or keep the Bichon Frise alive - why on earth would these Africans want me to build their wells or look after their animals? 

That was going to be question one.

Unfortunately Sallie Grayson, founder of ITC's partner for this brand People and Places, ruined question one.

"This is not about building wells." she said. "We would never allow volunteers to do work a local person could do," she said.

The ins and outs are detailed on the website so I shall let you read about it in depth there.

But to summarise Sallie told me the tourists who take part are vetted and must have skills that will be of some use to a particular community.

Unless you can be of genuine use you don't get to go. And if the community doesn't want or need you, you don't get to go. You can't simply buy these trips, you have to earn them.

But Sallie is excited about ITC's clientele - and not because they can write big cheques.

Apparently, as welcome as big cheques are, it is last on the list of things the projects People and Places work with want.

"These wealthy clientele tend to be driven and talented business leaders or very successful in their chosen field and therefore can inspire the children and more importantly their teachers," Sallie added.

"And by spending time at a project an emotional bond is formed and they become long term supporters."

This is not about making a museum of poverty and it tears apart the idea that spending the day in a community project and the night in a beautiful hotel is hypocritical or crass.

"Who said you have to be poor to help the poor?" was Sallie's parting point and one with which I agree wholeheartedly.

Luxury travellers have the potential to become more powerful than any NGO but they need to be told how to do it effectively, correctly and within the confines of busy lives and the desire to combine it with a decent holiday.

Equally, travel agents need to be able to rely on the likes of ITC and in turn People and Places to get this right for their customers.

The undertaking is a challenge to say the least but I implore you leave the cynic hat on the hat stand for a few minutes and give this brave move by ITC a closer look - it's the start of something that could spark a wave of change in the way luxury travellers approach voluntourism.

In a move away from my traditional posts about my own luxury travel experiences today I thought I would share this piece of news from Silversea.

It's not often that news gets me excited but this is a genuinely innovative stride from the ultra-luxury cruise line.

Silversea is introducing a series of 'backward' sailings after research suggested the ships would be more energy efficient if constantly in reverse.

The move comes after a research study conducted by the Institute of Backward Thinking revealed that a surprising combination of tides, aerodynamics and unintentional ship design had conspired to create this phenomenon.

A spokesman from the institute said: "This won't work on all routes, and on some it will have more of an impact than others.

"Through a series of calculations taking into account the distance of a particular section of the ocean from the moon at certain times of the year we can see where sailing in reverse will do the greatest good.

"When we discovered this we went straight to Silversea to ask for their help in testing the theory because their ships are best equipped to sail backwards - and we were proved correct."

The ultra luxury cruise line will be running a small number of backward cruises in 2012 to see how customers react but hopes to increase the number in 2013.

A Silversea spokesman said: "As you can imagine we were a little taken aback at first but couldn't ignore it when the facts were all there laid out in front of us.

"Our captains are so skilled that this isn't a problem for them and of course most sailing is not done with the eyes any more.

"We are going to install large wing mirrors on the side of the ship as a precaution but don't expect them to be used very often."

The initial reaction from past guests has been positive according to Silversea.

"Our repeat guests especially are looking forward to trying something a little different," the spokesman added.

Training on selling backward sailings will be conducted at the lines series of events taking place this year.

Calm down mother. You haven't lost a possible grandchild stream.

I'm simply using a potentially eye catching title to persuade some people to click on this post and read it.

My web editor Nathan told me to do it and he is something of a geek when it comes to these things. But he has a girlfriend so he's not a proper geek. Well, he knows a thing or two about html but he wasn't in the queue to get an ipad 2 or 3D Nintendo handheld thing this morning so you mustn't think ill of him.

Anyway. In actual fact Dorothy is more of an acquaintance. Well acquaintance is probably a little hyperbolic. I met her once.

Thanks to the wonders of Travel Weekly/Aspire duties and the wonder that is Superbreak I took a photo of her while she signed a card destined for the winners of some tickets to see Andrew Lloyd Webber's newest show The Wizard of Oz.

As those of you who have read my previous two posts will have picked up I am what you might call 'ice cool'.

If you haven't picked that up then it's because you aren't a very good reader. Ask someone who knows me and they'll tell you.

But with Dorothy aka Danielle Hope I lost my cool. Having watched her learn, grow and make songs her own throughout the hit television series Over The Rainbow and spent approximately £20 voting for her to be the winner during the epic finale I was a little starstruck.

For those of you who don't know the format lots of girls applied to be Dorothy, twelve made the final, and week by week they were voted off by the public and the girls have to give Andrew Lloyd-Webber their shoes. It sounds a little pervy but it's not. It's brilliant. And the format gave us the best Joseph since Philip Schofield - Lee Mead and girl who brought the hills to life once more - Connie Fisher.

To cut a long and perhaps sad story short I told Danielle I loved her and asked for a photo. She agreed on condition that I promise to leave immediately afterwards.

The reason I am sharing this is that the show has now opened and I had the treat of going to see it. Musical theatre breaks should be a staple of a luxury travel agent's repertoire and if you are selling them then add Wizard of Oz to the list of one's to sell.

I'm no theatre critic but for me it captured all the magic of the film and I was irritating the office with the songs for days after. Fun in its purest form.

If you think I have no idea what I am talking about, try reading what a real theatre critic thinks.

But if you don't care about real theatre critics then all you need to know is that Dorothy, Toto and the heartless, brainless, cowardly gang were a triumph and considering how well Danielle performed in the very early showing I witnessed she will be a truly wonderful watch before too long. Go go go. 

In another act of what some would argue is oversharing I am very excited, yes very excited, about two musicals shortly to arrive in London - Shrek and Ghost.

Sadly there won't be a search for Shrek on the BBC. If there was Nathan wouldn't be allowed to enter because he is too handsome and definitely not a geek.