Harmony of the Seas will have some new competition

We made no such claim as to knowing more than anyone else, but at least we have friends. :*

 

We value the opinions of people we know who have actual experience on actual ships, rather than blind internet posts. There are plenty of folks in MSC threads who echo those experiences.

I can say this much, my next RCI experience ought to be tip top if they are to win back a larger share of my business from MSC. My last two MSC cruises had both good food and good service, no issues there. I often wonder what people were expecting when they come back and say they had bad service. Did they expect crew to pretend to be their new best friend (as you find on many lines that base sailings from the US) or did they want actual prompt, polite, and effective service (what I have had on MSC without the fake best friend schtick).

The value proposition is heavily tilted in MSC favor and they make no bones about trying to steal marketshare by underselling.

Unfortunately, some on this forum, and this goes for any brand, are such devout loyalists that they will not step out of their comfort zone and try something different. I say unfortunately because they miss out on new experiences that way.

You can continue to listen to opinions of those who you trust and value, or you can find out for yourself. MSC is, I believe, unfairly maligned on these forums, as if it angers some to believe there is a cruise line comparable to RCI or Princess at much lower cost; that their decisions on spending money can not possibly be fallible.

Try it, you'd probably like it. Do a little research on the company and you'll find out why there is a near zero chance that they would be gone in 5 years. They have got money to burn and money to spare.

I know this isn't cool to say but I think Oasis is my favorite ship. There, I've said it.

Yea it's cool. Not our favorite but it ranks up near the top and you'd be hard pressed to find a positive post from the member you quoted.

The posts saying it's ugly are too funny. I guess Oasis class are SO beautiful, looking like a big floating hollow box.

I can say this much, my next RCI experience ought to be tip top if they are to win back a larger share of my business from MSC. My last two MSC cruises had both good food and good service, no issues there. I often wonder what people were expecting when they come back and say they had bad service. Did they expect crew to pretend to be their new best friend (as you find on many lines that base sailings from the US) or did they want actual prompt, polite, and effective service (what I have had on MSC without the fake best friend schtick).

 

The value proposition is heavily tilted in MSC favor and they make no bones about trying to steal marketshare by underselling.

 

Unfortunately, some on this forum, and this goes for any brand, are such devout loyalists that they will not step out of their comfort zone and try something different. I say unfortunately because they miss out on new experiences that way.

 

You can continue to listen to opinions of those who you trust and value, or you can find out for yourself. MSC is, I believe, unfairly maligned on these forums, as if it angers some to believe there is a cruise line comparable to RCI or Princess at much lower cost; that their decisions on spending money can not possibly be fallible.

 

Try it, you'd probably like it. Do a little research on the company and you'll find out why there is a near zero chance that they would be gone in 5 years. They have got money to burn and money to spare.

I respect your thoughtful and well-written post.

However, we cannot afford to waste our cruising dollars on an 'experiment" when we already have the direct experience testimony of 4 people we trust representing 3 different cruises on MSC. Getting that information independently from them at different times, but all providing remarkably similar feedback sufficed for us to understand expectations.

We also have family and friends who have sailed Carnival, Disney, Celebrity, and Princess. Based upon their testimonies, we would consider only 2 of those 4 cruise lines for our future cruise plans.

From our own direct observations of MSC ships in 3 cases, we were underwhelmed by both the condition and general features of those ships - they appeared aged and limited in deck activities. If they are now looking to advance from that kind of fleet - our hats are off to them.

As is the case with any website, this wonderful resource here provides tons of useful information to others. There is plenty of great and detailed information about ships, ports, service levels, food, entertainment, cabins, etc. That said, one has to normalize all the information to understand that reality is somewhere closer to the middle of experiences, and that even that doesn't guarantee the same experience when one books a cruise themselves.

We are fortunate to know some very informed and experience fellow cruisers as both friends and family. In addition, we have a very close friend who is extremely neutral towards specific cruise lines but also happens to own a substantial cruise travel agency. He has no incentive to steer us towards or away from any individual cruise or cruise line, but he will also provide experience-based knowledge IF AND WHEN requested.

Through all of these wonderful resources, we do extensive research prior to booking any cruise, as well as the various ancillary aspects (tours, port activities, entertainment, dining, etc). Taking shortcuts on this kind of "homework" adds the potential for a negative experience. Still, we also realize there are no guarantees. That said, we have yet to be disappointed on any cruise, any tour, or any dining experience...or else we would discontinue cruising and use our travel dollars in other ways.

In line with the thread title...our recent Harmony of the Seas cruise was excellent in every respect, and our Allure cruise in 2015 in the Western Mediterranean and Radiance of the Seas in Alaska remain our 3 most favorite to date.

The posts saying it's ugly are too funny. I guess Oasis class are SO beautiful, looking like a big floating hollow box.

No, I agree, the Oasis design is pushing it too.

And I'm the opposite. I'm very attracted to cruise ships that innovate away that old cruising motif and instead offer me with the view of the sea but a completely modern venue from which to have that view.

Cut your post just to save space...

I agree with what you had to say. I very much like the modern innovations that are appearing. I just prefer a ship that looks more like a ship on the outside. It isn't much different from when I buy a car. I love the latest gadgets but they have to be packaged inside of a car that I find visually appealing or I'm not buying.

As a kid I had a keen interest in the classic liners of the old Italian line. There wasn't much inside of them that would appeal to me to want to take a vacation on one these days but the packaging sure was beautiful.

I just prefer a ship that looks more like a ship on the outside. It isn't much different from when I buy a car.

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

I don't quite get why people trying to come up with new designs think that creating something that looks like anything but a ship is the way to go. I still like being on a ship that looks like a ship. If the actual build looks anything like that concept picture I wouldn't be likely to want to book it no matter what they put inside of it.

 

And I'm the opposite. I'm very attracted to cruise ships that innovate away that old cruising motif and instead offer me with the view of the sea but a completely modern venue from which to have that view.

I agree bUU.

Any craft design, be they air, ground or sea, are always going to be limited by the technology available at the time. I get the emotional attachment to inefficient, boxy designs out of nostalgia but from an engineering standpoint, it makes no sense to hold onto them, they weren't better because they're old, they're actually awful!

We live in a fluid world (no pun intended) and the only reason why we didn't have aerodynamic designs back then is because we didn't have computers that were powerful enough to do software simulations to test different designs against each other to find out which ones were the best. But, we have the tools now and will have even better tools tomorrow.

When humanity progresses to building spacecraft, then we can go back to the boxy designs all we want since space is mostly a vacuum.

I agree bUU.

 

Any craft design, be they air, ground or sea, are always going to be limited by the technology available at the time. I get the emotional attachment to inefficient, boxy designs out of nostalgia but from an engineering standpoint, it makes no sense to hold onto them, they weren't better because they're old, they're actually awful!

 

We live in a fluid world (no pun intended) and the only reason why we didn't have aerodynamic designs back then is because we didn't have computers that were powerful enough to do software simulations to test different designs against each other to find out which ones were the best. But, we have the tools now and will have even better tools tomorrow.

 

 

When humanity progresses to building spacecraft, then we can go back to the boxy designs all we want since space is mostly a vacuum.

You think the Ocean liners of the past were boxy? Then I have no clue what you would call many of the cruise ships that have been built over the past 15-20 years, especially some of those NCL ships.

I can say this much, my next RCI experience ought to be tip top if they are to win back a larger share of my business from MSC. My last two MSC cruises had both good food and good service, no issues there. I often wonder what people were expecting when they come back and say they had bad service. Did they expect crew to pretend to be their new best friend (as you find on many lines that base sailings from the US) or did they want actual prompt, polite, and effective service (what I have had on MSC without the fake best friend schtick).

 

The value proposition is heavily tilted in MSC favor and they make no bones about trying to steal marketshare by underselling.

 

Unfortunately, some on this forum, and this goes for any brand, are such devout loyalists that they will not step out of their comfort zone and try something different. I say unfortunately because they miss out on new experiences that way.

 

You can continue to listen to opinions of those who you trust and value, or you can find out for yourself. MSC is, I believe, unfairly maligned on these forums, as if it angers some to believe there is a cruise line comparable to RCI or Princess at much lower cost; that their decisions on spending money can not possibly be fallible.

 

Try it, you'd probably like it. Do a little research on the company and you'll find out why there is a near zero chance that they would be gone in 5 years. They have got money to burn and money to spare.

Agree with everything you have posted

We did our research and glad we did, then booked MSC Seaside for 2019

Long way out, but time for a change was in order.

Deposit for 3 of us is fully refundable and was only $198.00!

With the changes to the casino program on RC, we wanted to see if any other line wanted our business.

MSC seemed to be the right fit for us, 30% off future cruises for 1200pts in casino, easy for us we normally triple that on RC.

5% off all bookings for being Black card holders

Was easy to match our RC status.

Free wifi

$150.00 OBC per person

Ultimate Drink package per person, every bar, every restaurant and even in stateroom.

We booked one of the only two Royal Suites on Seaside, at an equivalent rate of a GS on any of the Oasis class ships.

So then this gives us.

PRIVILEGES

* Dedicated priority check-in and check-out

* Dedicated concierge and butler service available 24-hours-a-day

* Room service available 24-hours-a-day (delivery is free)

* Relaxation amenities in each suite (including bathrobe and slippers)

* Unlimited drinks in all MSC Yacht Club venues, including the mini-bar in your suite, and complimentary beverage selection in all onboard bars and restaurants (according to the drink selection available in the different venues)

* Free Thermal Suite and direct private elevator to the MSC Aurea Spa

* MSC Voyagers Club points to earn discounts on next cruise and other benefits

*

EXCLUSIVITY

* Lavishly fitted suites with ergonomic mattresses, fine sheets, pillow menu, marble bathroom, interactive LCD TV, and ample mini-bar

* All-inclusive breakfasts, lunches and dinners in the private MSC Yacht Club restaurants

* Free time dining at dedicated restaurant

* Entry to exclusive areas: "The One Sun Deck" and "Top Sail Lounge"

*

WORLD OF CHOICE

* Access to all ship's amenities (bars and lounges, specialty restaurants, pools...)

* Premium 20-hours-a-day buffet (gourmet menu for every moment of the day)

* Varied program of Broadway-style theater shows available almost every day

* Entertainment activities for adults, children, and infants (dedicated Clubs)

* Recreational activities for children: foreign language learning games and Doremi Chef cooking sessions with our onboard staff (subject to availability)

* Open-air sports facilities (Power Walking track, Basketball...)

* Extremely well-equipped gym with panoramic view

Getting all of the above for less than $6k for 3 in an RS, with the full Yacht Club experience.

Looking to be very much on par with a Haven experience on NCL.

And to add, we as a family have not sailed MSC before, the DW did years ago with her parents though.

Forgot to add, own private island Ocean Cay, with free Cabanas and all drinks included for YC members.

Happy Days!

Looking very much forward to giving MSC a try.

The New designs look great.

Wonder also if many will scoff at Celebrity Edge.

That Magic Carpet

Looking forward to giving that a try as well in 2020!

According to the numbers posted, this MSC ship will have a space to passenger ratio of 29.

No thanks!

Seeing this rendering and seeing Carnival's similar rendering that goes even lower into the 20s, I gotta say, if these sardine cans are the future of cruising, it'll be without me.

That is a cool looking ship!

You think the Ocean liners of the past were boxy? Then I have no clue what you would call many of the cruise ships that have been built over the past 15-20 years, especially some of those NCL ships.

I didn't mean to just single out ocean liners. Most manner of all craft design during the industrial age was "boxy." We didn't have the technology to model anything better than that.

Engineering and design progress aren't always on a linear scale. There may have been a recent breakthrough in modeling or simulation software allowing ship designers to more accurately design efficient ships? Just like the recent breakthroughs in artificial intelligence have recently enabled us to have self driving cars by next year.

According to the numbers posted, this MSC ship will have a space to passenger ratio of 29.

 

No thanks!

 

Seeing this rendering and seeing Carnival's similar rendering that goes even lower into the 20s, I gotta say, if these sardine cans are the future of cruising, it'll be without me.

Just curious, what's Harmony of the Seas' space to passenger ratio?

How do you calculate this ratio? You'd need access to square footage of all passenger accessible spaces, right?

I love how sleek MSC's new ships look but it doesn't look like there's much in way of ship activities like the Oasis Class ships. But, it might be fun to try something different.

I've been on the Divina and loved it. Never felt crowded even though it was full. Perfect, no, but neither is Royal.The food was good, as was the service. We are booked on the Seaside next April, and are looking forward to it. If you look at my signature, you'll see that Royal is still my go to line, but there are others out there that give a good product for a lot less. I'm also booked on the Symphony for March,2019.

Just curious, what's Harmony of the Seas' space to passenger ratio?

 

How do you calculate this ratio? You'd need access to square footage of all passenger accessible spaces, right?

36.

GT divided by max capacity of passengers.

Just curious, what's Harmony of the Seas' space to passenger ratio?

 

How do you calculate this ratio? You'd need access to square footage of all passenger accessible spaces, right?

It's a simple equation actually. Just take the gross tonnage and divide it by the number of passengers.

Edit...Sorry, I see Biker also answered. :)

36.

 

GT divided by max capacity of passengers.

Gross Tonnage: Gross tonnage is a measurement of total capacity expressed in volumetric tons of 100 cubic feet; it is calculated by adding the underdeck tonnage and the internal volume of tween-decks and deck space used for cargo.

This doesn't seem accurate because a good chunk of that space isn't accessible by guests?

Gross Tonnage: Gross tonnage is a measurement of total capacity expressed in volumetric tons of 100 cubic feet; it is calculated by adding the underdeck tonnage and the internal volume of tween-decks and deck space used for cargo.

 

This doesn't seem accurate because a good chunk of that space isn't accessible by guests?

The definition you gave is actually the definition of "Gross Registered Tonnage", which is a term that is no longer in use since the '80's. Gross tonnage is a unitless number that is a factor of the total internal volume of the ship. A multiplier "k" is used, and this multiplier is based on various design characteristics. Gross tonnage is actually no longer linear compared to actual internal volume.

You are correct, that gross tonnage includes volume not accessible to passengers, and this somewhat skews the space ratio. A more accurate calculation would be "Net tonnage divided by the number of passengers", since net tonnage only includes the volume of "cargo space" (does not include crew spaces or machinery spaces). However, net tonnage, especially for cruise ships is not generally available, so the more commonly known gross tonnage is used.

That is a cool looking ship!

I agree it's a cool looking ship I just don't really care what a ship looks like on the outside. Heck, I only see the outside when I'm boarding or re-boarding during a cruise. 99% of the time I’m on/in the ship. That’s the stuff I care about, the common spaces inside, the cabins, the outside spaces. But most of all I care about the customer service, is the food good, can they make you decent cup of coffee, or a proper drink, do they have enough loungers, pools, exercise areas etc. If the important stuff is top notch the darn ship could look like a garbage scow for all I care.

If the important stuff is top notch the darn ship could look like a garbage scow for all I care.

Most people who bought a Pontiac Aztec probably said the same thing.

Most people who bought a Pontiac Aztec probably said the same thing.

I was going to go with an AMC Gremlin.

Most people who bought a Pontiac Aztec probably said the same thing.

LOL But I get rid of the garbage scow after a week!:D

Of course some of those Aztec owners did the same!;)

I agree it's a cool looking ship I just don't really care what a ship looks like on the outside. Heck, I only see the outside when I'm boarding or re-boarding during a cruise. 99% of the time I’m on/in the ship. That’s the stuff I care about, the common spaces inside, the cabins, the outside spaces. But most of all I care about the customer service, is the food good, can they make you decent cup of coffee, or a proper drink, do they have enough loungers, pools, exercise areas etc. If the important stuff is top notch the darn ship could look like a garbage scow for all I care.

Haha! While statements like this make for a nice #humbleBrag, in real life, space on ships is a limited resource.

Therefore, the best designers will be forced to have form follow function in order to maximize efficient use of space, not the other way around. All of those great spaces and luxurious amenities on the inside will be reflected in the form on the outside.

So, the form we see on the outside usually follows the function that is waiting for us on the inside, like this concept:

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=49654148&postcount=50

A lot of people might call this concept ugly, but I'm curious about what's inside that lead up to it looking the way it does on the outside? But, right off the bat, I would have to take off points for this concept not having any balconies.

The definition you gave is actually the definition of "Gross Registered Tonnage", which is a term that is no longer in use since the '80's. Gross tonnage is a unitless number that is a factor of the total internal volume of the ship. A multiplier "k" is used, and this multiplier is based on various design characteristics. Gross tonnage is actually no longer linear compared to actual internal volume.

 

You are correct, that gross tonnage includes volume not accessible to passengers, and this somewhat skews the space ratio. A more accurate calculation would be "Net tonnage divided by the number of passengers", since net tonnage only includes the volume of "cargo space" (does not include crew spaces or machinery spaces). However, net tonnage, especially for cruise ships is not generally available, so the more commonly known gross tonnage is used.

Thanks, that makes more sense!