I'd say the more off the beaten track locations would seem to, not only attract the more open and intrepid minded travelers, but also have locals who are more interested in sharing their experiences.

In the established, high volume tourist destinations, it seems to me that all parties tend to fall into auto-pilot with their expectations and interactions.

I agree with suze. I have never travelled to meet people. Of course I have met people along the way, and these have included people on their own, coupled and friends travelling together.

Since I wasn't specifically looking to meet others, I never really noticed whether there were more solo's in certain places compared to others. But I suspect Ginger might be right about getting off the beaten track.

Tours seem to follow a list of "most famous sights" to attract as many punters as possible.

Saying that, I found myself surrounded at breakfast in my hotel in Padua by a large cycling tour.

I suppose Padua is not exactly unknown in tourist terms, but most of the fellow tourists I came across there were independent travellers.

I thought Bologna had mainly independent travellers. I don't know if many of them were solo.

Generally cites are more likely to have solo travellers and staying at hotels too small for an escorted tour will help.

Like others, I don't travel to meet people, but I have had some great encounters (and sometimes dinners) in Cadiz, in Toledo, in smaller towns in Japan, in Washington DC, on the City of New Orleans train between Memphis and New Orleans, in Palau. in Port Douglas, Australia, and other places that don't come immediately to mind.

Even major cities can have lesser known sights that tour groups don't bother with,

Welcome

for what its worth

> 62 y/o solo male traveler

> been doing solo travel every year since 2012.

> started off in Europe and then switched gears to S.America since everyone in europe said "hi/hello.." ect.

> my observations so far and the places i have been to so far, i really dont notice anyone place has more solo vs not... not that im paying that much attention. My endgame is not to meet others, but in my book that is a plus, but to see other things and places i cant in my own backyard.

> my endgame is not to meet people, but to see things i cant in my own backyard.

> also i havent seen anyone place - so far - that is advertising/catering to "solo" travelers other than some cruise. Since alot of the world runs off MONEY - i see that by catering to just 1 group of people will more or less cut your possible income. And while some places may cater to "couples only" im sure they are losing some income, but i can also see them doing so for specific reasons.

> I do know from previous topics/replies that there are also tours that cater to singles. If they offer what you want is the question.

> i also see meeting people as gambling. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I dont keep count. On my recent trip down to Brazil, i met a mechanical engineer from Brazil going back home. He works for a global company and now lives in the USA. he had to sell/rent his house near Atlanta and it came so fast, He and his wife had to think quick. Since both have nomadic jobs, they decided to buy a Dually (pickup truck) and 40 ft 5th wheeler and travel around the USA and work. More like the american dream but for retirement. But i didnt know i would be talking almost the whole flight to SP. Even though he was married, it didnt bother me and we had a great chat. we exchanged contacts and if he makes it up into the NW area, we will meet for lunch/coffee...ect.

> i was on a 8 day cruise in the Galapagos this past September. It was a mix of people/couples from all over the world. Some were for a 4 day cruise some werent. But everyone mingled. There was an older couple too, but they were only for a short 4 day stay. Everyone was traveling for different reasons and none were traveling - there - to meet other singles. They were there for the destination.

> personally i think that if you are looking for a destination that caters (more) to singles you are short changing yourself. I see that places all over the world cater to singles and have local singles in various forms/places, its just a matter of going out there and figuring out your endgame.

> also i believe that people think that travel will "fix" them and or their issues. Who knows, but i feel that travel fixes travel desires/needs. If it fixes other things, then great. I know i can find meet other singles alot cheaper and easier at home. Its just a matter of what i want.

YMMV

good luck

I'd say just the opposite. I think visiting cities is more attractive to solo travelers because you don't need a car, have more options for lodging in various price points, choosing somewhere centrally located can walk everywhere, more things to see and do (historic sites, museums, classes, etc.).

I can't imagine meeting tons of other solo travelers "off the beaten path".

"In the established, high volume tourist destinations"

I guess I'd need to know what that covers. Is that how you are referring to places like London, Paris, Amsterdam, Venice, Barcelona, etc. ???

For example, but not limited to the largest cities.

In my experience, people tend to come to these places with far more prepared itineraries and expectations and, thus, possibly, are not that open to engaging with others.

Maybe it is just me, but I have found it easier to make contact with other travelers and natives in less obvious locations. Very possibly due to the necessity of needing to do so.

I think solo travelers may gravitate towards some cities or countries over others mainly due to infrastructure and walkability. Personally, most of the places I seek out to visit need some form of effective transportation or walkability. Renting a car alone is not ideal for me, and I think others agree. That’s why major cities, especially in Europe have such a vibrant solo travel community.

I can't argue as I've never traveled "off the beaten path" as a solo female traveler. I love cities and always feel at home there, more than being off by myself on a deserted beach or mountain top alone (lol).

I think it is more about your goals for a trip, your general attitude, where you chose to go, what you choose to do, than about where precisely you are.

I have met plenty of locals on return trips to Mexico in a mid-sized town (I don't think "natives" is a very nice word although I guess technicall appropriate). I'd call them "locals" or "nationals". In Europe I'd call people "locals" maybe "citizens". I've never heard anyone in Switzerland call the people who live their "natives"... just an example :)