Is all-inclusive worth it in Sri Lanka, or is breakfast-only better?
From messages by 4 participants in 1 source · Last activity: 52 days ago
From messages by 4 participants in 1 source · Last activity: 52 days ago
TL;DR
Most travelers say Sri Lanka isn't really an all-inclusive destination — the food quality is mediocre and there are plenty of cafes and restaurants nearby for every budget. Breakfast-only at the hotel plus eating out is usually the smarter choice.
A traveler stayed at Taj Bentota Resort & SPA on all-inclusive in February and was disappointed with the food — ended up going out for lunch and dinner and only using the hotel for breakfast. Conclusion: Sri Lanka isn't built for all-inclusive, since there are plenty of cafes and restaurants nearby for any taste and budget.
One community member argues breakfast-only is the optimal choice: the food infrastructure in Sri Lanka is well developed (e.g. Unawatuna area), so you won't go hungry, but all-inclusive rarely actually saves money on the island.
An example all-inclusive hotel for comparing prices and conditions is Riu Sri Lanka All Inclusive in Bentota (Booking.com listing).
Another traveler suggests budgeting separately for food and drinks as you go rather than overpaying for all-inclusive: beachfront restaurants are expensive, but moving just a bit further from the shore can cut prices by half and offer much more variety.
Another comment based on past experience (from Thailand trips): choosing breakfast-only sometimes led to overpaying for drinks and dinners elsewhere — so the right choice really depends on your eating habits and willingness to explore places outside the hotel.