NCL's Haven vs. Oceania

we get the best value for our hard-earned (worthless Canadian) dollars and have a great trip that suits all of our needs and preferences.

I will gladly pick up your worthless Canadian dollars ;p

Check if the cruise line will quote in CAD we did get a bit of a break when booking on O maybe NCL also have a deal

All good :) In fairness we're splitting the cost with dad to take mom but he'll be picking up the heftier portion, given that I'm the one spending hours (and hours and hours) perusing message boards and researching ships and lines and itineraries and shore excursions and restaurants and activities and flights and hotels to make sure we get the best value for our hard-earned (worthless Canadian) dollars and have a great trip that suits all of our needs and preferences.

You are doing a wonderful job with your due diligence to find the right fit fo all involved. I hope your family has a wonderful cruise.

BTW my next booked cruise is on NCL ...it was the right itinerary, perfect cruise length, at the right time of year, at the right price for PH suite. :)

We have done all of the O ships except Sirena plus several NCL ships (including the Getaway in an aft Haven Suite).

The space (unless you are in an owners on O) is definitely better on NCL. Nespresso coffee maker also in the suite

Service -- better on O but in the Haven area you do get perks. Like escorting on/off ship first and best seats for shows. They do this as a group -- so it still has the crowded feel and less personal. Butler service -- hardly ever saw the guy on NCL(except at the end of the cruise when it was time for a tip). Much better B-service on O.

Restaurants. O definitely by far is better. Yes you have a private Haven dining areas but food was just OK. The public venues on NCL are very crowded and you feel it.

Restaurants are all crowded on NCL - and you still have to pay for any specialty dining venues. Since you are doing an R ship with NCL you do have more variety. The Sushi venue on NCL was good --rest were so-so.

Entertainment -- definitely NCL is better but some stuff was kinda tacky (like the magicians). For us the ports are the entertainment.

Because you are doing two different itins -- pick the best suited for your parents and yourself.

You might want to do some research and look into the "Yacht Club" on MSC. One person described the experience as the Haven on steroids....for less money.

Hank

These are all interesting to me. I am always open to any cruise line. I am thinking that new Celebrity ship coming out is over the top!

Regarding the butlers, I had a different experience on NCL. There was also a concierge and she was MOST helpful.

Right about the restaurants.

I know NCL is a mass market line and Oceania is a luxury line and overall it's like comparing apples and pitaya.

Actually, Seabourn, Silversea, Regent and Crystal are considered luxury lines. Oceania bills itself in the premium line range.

My main focus would be on itinerary. Where do you want to go? Oceania is nice because it will take you some places that other lines will not go to. I saw Kotor on the list and it is one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen. The food and service on Oceania are better than NCL, although the Haven will provide excellent service.

You might want to do some research and look into the "Yacht Club" on MSC. One person described the experience as the Haven on steroids....for less money.

 

 

 

Hank

Perhaps. But the minute you walk away from those "havens," you are amidst a thundering herd of humanity (note that I am referring only to the size of the population rather than its socio-cultural demography). And, after all, isn't offering experiences named "havens" and "yacht clubs" an admission by a cruise line that the rest of the passengers are getting a less-than-quality-infused product?

Many people are fine with these "wannabe" experiences on mass market lines. Some others would rather spend the money for the real thing (and that includes folks who are cost conscious but temper their calculations with quality non-negotiables).

To each his/her own.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Actually, Seabourn, Silversea, Regent and Crystal are considered luxury lines.

You are correct about the designation of cruise lines but to me that is correct in name only.

FWIW, Seabourn does not have butlers (which you would expect on a luxury line).

Having sailed on all those other lines except Crystal, I think the food is best on Oceania (although service is probably more personal on Seabourn and Silversea). So for me personally the designation of luxury vs premium is of little value.

Perhaps. But the minute you walk away from those "havens," you are amidst a thundering herd of humanity (note that I am referring only to the size of the population rather than its socio-cultural demography). And, after all, isn't offering experiences named "havens" and "yacht clubs" an admission by a cruise line that the rest of the passengers are getting a less-than-quality-infused product?

 

Many people are fine with these "wannabe" experiences on mass market lines. Some others would rather spend the money for the real thing (and that includes folks who are cost conscious but temper their calculations with quality non-negotiables).

 

To each his/her own.

 

Perhaps you are correct. But perhaps not :). Think about the Golden Age of Cruise Liners when the magnificent vessels had 3-4 classes. Those in the higher classes could mix with the "masses" if they pleased...but the "masses" could not access the facilities of the higher classes of cruising. A watered down version of this exists today on some ships...such as the so-called "Grill" suites on Cunard (where they get their own dining venue and sun deck). On MSC it is a similar concept. Sure, if a Yacht Club cruiser wants to leave the Yacht Club area and enjoy the rest of the ship...they are going to encounter more folks. On the other hand, because the ship is large and has lots of passengers, it can afford to have more entertainment venues, many food venues, etc. If we go on a line like Seabourn we will have a very nice cabin/suite and darn good food. But because of the small size of the ship, there are many limitations on the type of entertainment, number of food venues, etc.

 

I will also confess to have previously cruised on 14 cruise lines...ranging from higher end (like Crystal) to budget lines...and many that fall between the two extremes. We have actually enjoyed all of our cruises (which number well over 100) over the past forty+ years. The first time we braved a Carnival Cruise (this happened because the line with which we had booked went bankrupt and Carnival was a last minute substitute) we had an absolute great time. It was a Christmas Cruise and the first folks we met (at a bar) turned out to be regular and frequent Seabourn cruisers. They told us they loved Carnival at holiday time (they brought their Grandchildren) because it was a lot of fun and everyone enjoyed the entertainment. Perhaps there was a lesson to be learned (and we did listen) which was to explore many options and not be quick to jump to conclusions. We still like the luxury lines, some mass market lines...and would probably do a budget line given the right circumstances. I think that being a "cruise snob" is just not in our DNA :). The new "ship within a ship" concept is something we find intriguing...so we will check it out. Perhaps it sucks,,, but most reviews are very positive. And despite being among the older generation...we still love to try new ideas...

 

And we have no problems with O. Given the right itinerary, price, and timing we would quickly be on any O ship. But we just like variety. DW recently pointed out to me that we currently have 4 cruises booked (for the next 16 months) and they are on 4 different cruise lines! And we will likely add 1 or 2 more cruises to that mix. Those 4 bookings vary from 21 days to 38 days in length and involve Europe, Asia and the Caribbean. We just love variety :). Having cruised extensively since the 70's....we have never been bored with any cruise...and think that variety of cruise lines, itineraries, and ships..just makes it all the more exciting.

 

Hank

Those in the higher classes could mix with the "masses" if they pleased...but the "masses" could not access the facilities of the higher classes of cruising

The romantic ruminations of the Titanic movie aside, mingling between the Classes (even mingling down) was always likely to engender problems and was seldom permitted.

Doing so was also considered incredibly déclassé at the time.

Perhaps. But the minute you walk away from those "havens," you are amidst a thundering herd of humanity (note that I am referring only to the size of the population rather than its socio-cultural demography). And, after all, isn't offering experiences named "havens" and "yacht clubs" an admission by a cruise line that the rest of the passengers are getting a less-than-quality-infused product?

 

 

 

Many people are fine with these "wannabe" experiences on mass market lines. Some others would rather spend the money for the real thing (and that includes folks who are cost conscious but temper their calculations with quality non-negotiables).

 

 

 

To each his/her own.

 

 

 

Perhaps you are correct. But perhaps not :). Think about the Golden Age of Cruise Liners when the magnificent vessels had 3-4 classes. Those in the higher classes could mix with the "masses" if they pleased...but the "masses" could not access the facilities of the higher classes of cruising. A watered down version of this exists today on some ships...such as the so-called "Grill" suites on Cunard (where they get their own dining venue and sun deck). On MSC it is a similar concept. Sure, if a Yacht Club cruiser wants to leave the Yacht Club area and enjoy the rest of the ship...they are going to encounter more folks. On the other hand, because the ship is large and has lots of passengers, it can afford to have more entertainment venues, many food venues, etc. If we go on a line like Seabourn we will have a very nice cabin/suite and darn good food. But because of the small size of the ship, there are many limitations on the type of entertainment, number of food venues, etc.

 

 

 

I will also confess to have previously cruised on 14 cruise lines...ranging from higher end (like Crystal) to budget lines...and many that fall between the two extremes. We have actually enjoyed all of our cruises (which number well over 100) over the past forty+ years. The first time we braved a Carnival Cruise (this happened because the line with which we had booked went bankrupt and Carnival was a last minute substitute) we had an absolute great time. It was a Christmas Cruise and the first folks we met (at a bar) turned out to be regular and frequent Seabourn cruisers. They told us they loved Carnival at holiday time (they brought their Grandchildren) because it was a lot of fun and everyone enjoyed the entertainment. Perhaps there was a lesson to be learned (and we did listen) which was to explore many options and not be quick to jump to conclusions. We still like the luxury lines, some mass market lines...and would probably do a budget line given the right circumstances. I think that being a "cruise snob" is just not in our DNA :). The new "ship within a ship" concept is something we find intriguing...so we will check it out. Perhaps it sucks,,, but most reviews are very positive. And despite being among the older generation...we still love to try new ideas...

 

 

 

And we have no problems with O. Given the right itinerary, price, and timing we would quickly be on any O ship. But we just like variety. DW recently pointed out to me that we currently have 4 cruises booked (for the next 16 months) and they are on 4 different cruise lines! And we will likely add 1 or 2 more cruises to that mix. Those 4 bookings vary from 21 days to 38 days in length and involve Europe, Asia and the Caribbean. We just love variety :). Having cruised extensively since the 70's....we have never been bored with any cruise...and think that variety of cruise lines, itineraries, and ships..just makes it all the more exciting.

 

 

 

Hank

 

 

 

As I said previously: "to each his own."

When it comes to itinerary, I can buy the "variety" argument. But when it comes to the quality of food, service, cabin amenities, socio-cultural passenger demographics, etc., the last thing I would ever want is the inconsistency that often comes with a "variety" of providers (mass market or otherwise) offering a "variety" of shipboard accommodations/experiences, even if I could get it "dirt cheap."

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Hello,

 

We are looking to book a family vacation - a European cruise, my brother and I are late 20s and my parents are both 60 and fairly active.

 

I sailed on Norwegian last year with a friend and we got to take a quick peek at The Haven on the Getaway, and thought it was incredible.

 

Has anyone here had any experience with NCL's Haven and can provide a comparison between Oceania and The Haven, in terms of cabins, service, food, entertainment, amenities, etc? I'm a bit concerned we might be bored on a small ship, given that we're looking at possibly sailing in October. We are looking at the 2-br family villa and honestly the bathroom itself is enough to sell me on it (:hearteyes::hearteyes::hearteyes:) but I'd love to hear what others have to say who have experienced both!

 

Thanks!

We have cruised in a Haven 2 bed, 2 bath suite once, and we have also cruised on some small ships, Oceania, Silversea, Azamara.. The Haven experience was fantastic. It should be a great fit for you and your parents, as you and your friend will have plenty to do, and you have a peaceful private place to escape to when you want to get away from the crowds! In the Haven we had butler that brought us a hot breakfast every morning, concierge service to escort us down the employee elevator to be the first on the tender, and more. We also had the sundeck on the very top of the ship with incredible views, and a small workout area next to the private pool.

You're right, the bathroom was INCREDIBLE! For this trip, go on NCL, you'll have plenty of time to enjoy the food and service and peace and quiet on the small ships when you're old like us, lol. Have a great trip!

Haven. Period.

Sent from my XT1254 using Forums mobile app

Our experience on NCL was on GEM in April 2010 (a Transatlantic) when we were in a Family Penthouse, not the Haven. For *us* the Family Penthouse was a better bet because when I searched the Haven rooms, even though they were larger than our suite, we liked having the two bedrooms and two baths. But the second bedroom/bath were clearly meant for children, not for four adults. For four adults, I'd say that the Haven is a better bet.

Your parents might prefer O ... but I think you younger ones probably would not. (This is not to say that all younger folks who have sailed on O and been unhappy ... but if shows are important to you, if you prefer late night venues ... you probably aren't one of those!)

Since "R" ships on Azamara are basically the same as those on Oceania, I doubt that with your family component Azamara would be any better for you than Oceania. At least NCL has the Haven which is geared for larger groups of occupants in a cabin.

Mura