ak1004

On 4/22/2024 at 7:44 PM, osandomir said:

I’ve seen all that negative reviews about Sirena but really didn’t put too much trust in them because our experience has always been great. We’ve sailed on her many times as well as on all other O ships but Vista. I didn’t understand how things could go downhill so fast since our last Sirena cruise about a year ago.
 

So we just boarded the Sirena today and found the ship in the same good shape. And I’d like to comment about the food. We quickly managed to get reservation in the specialty restaurant on the first night, but after we saw the dinner menu cancelled the Red Ginger as we really liked what was offered in the GDR. Well, I just want to say our dinner was excellent. I don’t think that we’ve equally enjoyed every meal onboard in the past, but tonight we didn’t find the food to be a bit of less quality than it used to be. It was as good if not better than we’ve ever had before.
 

While I understand that the food is subjective and not everyone has the same taste it still makes me wonder were all that people who complained eat elsewhere. And we’re looking forward to enjoying this cruise on the Sirena not less than we have always done.

I had exactly the same experience about our cruise on Riviera last May. And then read some reviews after we came back, and wondered if we were on the same cruise..

43 minutes ago, Woodrowst said:

Getting back to the core of the thread (Luxury vs premium lines), I’m not sure the issue is need.  It really is more about appreciation.  The question is whether you appreciate the incrementally elevated level of service provided on a luxury line.  I don’t mean to be rude, but unless you have sailed on both levels you really don’t know your answer.
 

As an example, some who have sailed on a luxury line say they feel their butler added substantially to their experience.  Some others have said that they did not find that a butler enhanced their experience.  And a third group said they did not think a butler would enhance their experience but found after having one that it did.  
 

If you have never sailed on Crystal, Seabourn, Silversea, or other luxury line how do you know that you are not in the third group above; those that did not think that they would appreciate the elevated service but after trying it found that they did?

Personally I can appreciate the incrementally elevated level of service and willing to pay for it (to some degree). But the question is - is this really the case? We sailed on old Crystal, SS, O and Azamara, and I cannot honestly say that the level of service was that different.

Yes, it was nice to have a butler on SS - but SB doesn't have butlers. does it make SB less luxury than SS?

Maybe someone who cruises extensively (like 3-4 months a year) and sails say 3-4 weeks on SS and then a few weeks later 3-4 weeks on O can really feel those nuances. We sail around 3 cruises a year, each one around 10-12 nights, and truly enjoy all of them - maybe it's just not frequent enough to truly compare them and see the difference? But to me, when I see the current prices of SS and Crystal, I just don't see the value.

6 hours ago, Yesimapirate said:

Sadly I think you will be proven wrong but not in a positive way.  The cruise lines have plenty of money to spend.  The reduction in costs at this point is a result of full cabins.  If you can raise your prices, cut your costs and still have fill cabins, you have zero incentive to change.  The changes will only come when bookings begin to drop  

 

Let's not forget that NCL holdings just spent billions on new ships.  Money is available,  they're just making a business decision on how they invest it.

 

Quite honestly,  it's the same false narrative the airlines used after 911, the 2008 recession and during covid. They got rid of meals, charged baggage fees and increased all kinds of other fees.  It was forgiven because they "needed the revenue to survive".  And now that they're having record revenues and profits,  they simply increase their fees and change their frequent flier programs to generate more revenue.   It's perfectly fine, they're a business and can do what they want.  But please don't be mistaken that you need to be altruistic to them or accept lower standards.  

The problem with airlines is that the only two choices are to accept higher prices or not to fly. Of course it's different with cruising, but don't forget that everything is more expensive now. I checked a few hotels in Europe that we booked pre Covid, prices are now 50-70% higher. Same for restaurants and pretty much everything. So while in theory you have many choices, practically this is not the case.

22 minutes ago, RetiredandTravel said:

We contacted our TA prior .  Seems very easy.  Its our first SS cruise so I'll tell you in 5 weeks if it worked. 😁

 

 

Just sent an email to our TA. We sail before you, so will tell you 😁

12 minutes ago, RetiredandTravel said:

 

 

We put in a special request for still Panna water in the room every day.  Thanks Stumblefoot.  Couldn't you do the same for Perrier or equivalent.  Take it do dinner if its important to you.

 

 

Do you do it in advance or while on board? If in advance, is it possible to do it online or you have to contact the TA to put a request?

1 minute ago, Lois R said:

Really? I guess we all come from different backgrounds and we all have different priorities in life ( and on a cruise). You might want to say " in your opinion" it is unacceptable because it does not have any affect on my sailings and doesn't speak to me at all.

Everything is our opinions and our priorities and preferences.

If someone mentions that a line doesn't have enough premium wines and it's unacceptable, and their opinion. I couldn't care less because I don't drink. Same for premium sparkling water.

Does it have a major effect on my sailings? No. I will manage. But I think it's matter of principle. Same as a line calling itself all inclusive but charging extra for 2 out of 8 restaurants, "premium" internet etc. Are those things a deal breaker to me? No, but they are part of the overall experience. 

Anyway, we will be sailing on the Spirit soon, and unless the prices change, this will be probably our last SS cruise for a while. Just cannot justify those prices for what you get. Lack of premium sparkling water is just a symptom. 

12 minutes ago, flyers said:

And if the Ships sparkling water is not sparkly enough the Royal Club canned soda water is always available.

It's not about sparkly. It's about the taste. Not having premium sparkling water on a luxury line is unacceptable and speaks volume. 

4 minutes ago, ronrick1943 said:

I think we are missing an important part of the mix.  The crew!  A good cruise to us also includes  the crew performance--the crew can make a cruise or break a cruise.  It sets what's going to happen...........

Agree, but this is directly related to the service. Also, if they have clear instructions and guidelines from the corporate that dictate cutbacks, sometimes the best crew cannot save the day.

Also, age and condition of the ship. Crystal fans will always point out to the crew, but just read some of the reviews. The best crew will have a hard time to resolve some of the issues on a 25 years old ship.

On 4/17/2024 at 7:07 PM, Host Jazzbeau said:

I suspect your friend means they have sparkling water (made onboard), but not branded sparkling water [or maybe not the particular brand they prefer].  

 

BTW I agree with your friend: ship-made sparkling water isn't 'proper.'  Thankfully our Butler and the Restaurant waiters on Whisper were able to get us San Pellegrino once we knew to ask.

Exactly.

On our recent cruise on the Dawn it took them forever to get Perrier or Pellegrino, and around mid cruise our butler informed us that they ran out of both, and also most diet drinks.

For some people having good wine is a big issue. For others it’s sparkling water.

11 minutes ago, ORV said:

Spotty internet, hard to reply. Let’s just say Oceania is not for everyone. There are some issues, but I don’t think it’s as bad as what’s being made out. If you need to be entertained then Oceania is not for you. If you are ok with your own company then you’ll be fine. But it’s obvious the product is not what it was 5 years ago. 
 

BUT, the sameness of the daily activities is pretty much what it’s been for the past 15 years. If that is an issue then you would never have liked it. This is not Celebrity, Princess, Hal, Royal or NCL. It’s low key, yes the demographic skews older, but there is a mix. 
 

Things are getting better as the cruise progresses. 

Agree 100% with your assessment of entertainment and activities.

Except for those areas, what is not the same as 5 years ago?

9 minutes ago, TRLD said:

No most just go off and never give feedback.

 

Considering that this cruise held 600 with 200 first timers to find 3 oc CC agreeing and one on the next cruise with similar thoughts after 4 days seems like an unusually high number.

 

Those on board are mostly repeat customers that have decided they like the experience or atleast will not say anything different while onboard to those that think it is wonderful.

And yet the future cruise office was always packed with long lines. The only crowded place on the whole ship.

Btw this was not the case on our recent SS cruise..

6 minutes ago, FetaCheese said:

Suggest you go with open mind, then form your own opinions.  In my opinion, a very small % of pax post on CC.  I've met pax on several cruises who have never heard of CC.

12 minutes ago, cayman09 said:

Don't be worrying, this is but a small sample. There are literally thousands of positive customers. We were onboard Regatta for 18 days last year and have no regrets. Loved the ship, the crew and the food. One poor main course out of all of them. We've booked two more.

Completely agree. Looks like 99% of the whiners are on CC. We rarely met unhappy guests on board O.

4 minutes ago, Woodrowst said:

Tell me what is important to you on a cruise and I will be happy to see if I can come up with an example or two of the incremental difference of a luxury vs premium line in the area(s) that matter to you.

Lets see:

1. Food (quality, variety).

2. Service.

3. Crowds (or lack of them).

We sailed on SS, Old Crystal, Oceania and Azamara in non mass market categories. Except for cabins that were too small on Azamara, didn't see a lot of differences in those areas. And in any case, even if there are differences, I believe that lines like O are much closer to "luxury" lines than to mass market lines, and definitely represent a better value for money. 

15 minutes ago, ronrick1943 said:

We prefer the larger Suites on "O" and other lines, as far as dinner goes (cancel or make a reservation) the Butler can handle that on all lines including "O".  We've seen what they call a suites on Regent and Silversea, the small suites are really a bed with a couch on the side.  To me that is not a suite, a suite is a living area with a door to the bedroom.  Just an opinion.,

I agree. The term "suite" is really being misused. It's nice that they put a curtain to separate the bed and the sitting area, but it really doesn't make it a real suite.

9 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

We get it :).  Since we spend little waking time in our cabin/suite, the large cabins are nice but also a waste of our money.  We prefer to be out and about and socializing with other passengers.  When we have a large suite, we almost feel obligated to spend more time in the suite.  No right or wrong it simply personal preference.

 

Hank

 

Agree. 240 sqft on the newer O ships is perfectly fine. I could never understand what people do in their cabins that they need 300-400 sqft or more (unless of course money is really not an issue). We come to a cruise to see the world, not to spend time in the cabin.

1 hour ago, mnocket said:

Talk about missing the point🙄

They are not missing the point because this is what important (or not) to THEM. 

27 minutes ago, Hearthosesteeldrumsplayin said:

I agree with your assessment that there is a difference between premium and luxury lines.  We sailed Regent and had a wonderful experience; but, we also had a wonderful experience on O.  It really depends on what you are wanting from a particular cruise.  Does included business class air matter to you?  What about drinks and entertainment?  They vary depending upon the type of line (as does the price point!)  Everyone has to make that judgement for their own preferences. (And I now have future cruises on both Regent's and O.)

But, it is helpful to hear from someone who has experienced both to provide some insight!  So, thank you @Woodrowst.

Very true.

For people who fly business class and buy cash tickets, Regent is an excellent value. For those who buy on points - not so much because their air credit is significantly less than the current cost of the flights.

So it's really what's important to YOU. If I don't drink, I couldn't care less about the alcohol quality - and no, I'm not missing the point because this is what's important (or not) TO ME. If 240 sqft on Vista is more than sufficient to me, then 300+ sqft "suites" on SB or SS are "nice to have", but not something worth paying for. Space ratios are important, but Riviera never felt crowded to me compared to SS ships that have higher ratios.

29 minutes ago, Acrusa said:

We are doing LA to PPT on Naitica this January just curious why people decided to leave the cruise in Hawaii. Why where they unhappy with the cruise. 

 

Matter of attitude I guess. We never had a bad cruise (well, maybe except for Carnival a while ago). Sometimes we don't like some aspects of the cruise, the ships etc. but to leave in the middle of the cruise?? Unless there is some emergency of course. 

I guess some people are never happy.

3 hours ago, Woodrowst said:

People are always asking for examples of the difference between luxury and premium cruising.  We have been on - and enjoyed- many Oceania cruises but are currently on the Silversea Silver Endeavor tootling around Scotland.  Silversea is, of course, a luxury line where Oceania is a premium line.  That is not to denigrate Oceania in any way - as mentioned we have enjoyed Oceania cruises and will continue to do so.

 

Anyway, at dinner last night the sommelier offered us the complimentary wine of the evening.  I asked if he had a Spanish Rioja. On a luxury line they always say yes when they can so he went to hunt down a bottle of rioja and returned with one shortly.  Then he left the bottle on the table with me so that I could have as much as desired.  That would not happen on Oceania.  When I told him I appreciated having the entire bottle he said,”We want to spoil you on your vacation”.  I can’t say I have ever heard an Oceania staff member say that.

 

Again, this was not a post against Oceania.  It was to give an example of an experience that shows the incremental difference between a luxury and premium cruise line.

In the last 3 years we sailed twice on S and 3 times on O.

We found nothing on SS that makes it any more luxury than O and justifies the 40-60% price difference. Maybe the cabins, but that's it.

As non drinkers, your example doesn't really mean much to us, but service in most other areas was comparable to O. In fact, we had much longer waits on SS in the morning and afternoon buffet for things like water and coffee. We asked for Perrier, the impression was they are bring it from another ship. After two times we gave up and settled for their sparkling water, which is pretty bad compared to Perrier.

If you read SS board, there are a lot of complaints about service and food. I don't know how it was before Covid, but now we just cannot justify their prices and consider them in the same league with O. 

Maybe SB and Explora are different, but not SS.

8 hours ago, TRLD said:

I have sailed this exact size ship twice nefore, one of the old R class ships though with 2 other lines. In both cases there was plenty to do.  Not so much on this. Let me rephrase that. There were things to do, but pretty much the same thing day to day.  

 

We spend about 100 days per year on cruise ships. Last year we were sailed on 7 different cruise lines from 50 passengers to 5000 passenger ships. We pick primarily by itinerary with no loyalty to any line or any style. From mass market to luxury.  We like many others picked this because of the itinerary. French Polynesia and Hawaii on a ship size we were familiar with, small enough to get into Bora Bora.

 

 We like sea days and have been on much longer cruises, we like classical music and i carry about a thousand books on my phone and read about a book a day. Entertainment is normally not an issue.

 

The problem is not what was  going on any given day it is that nothing changes between days. A kind of sea going ground hog day movie. Live music started at 4 with tea and the string quartet. Playing pretty much the same background music every day. No interaction with guests  no talking, just classical.background music. Then at 5 it was happy hour with the show band. Basically the same thing. Background music, same thing day to day, no interaction. 

 

There was also a Piano player during happy hour in Martinis that atleast spoke,  After leaving the tea the quartet would play in the upper hall where they would atleast announce what they were playing and vary it to some degree, but there was only about 8 or 10 chairs in the area.

 

So lots of live music, mostly playing a very curated background to tea or happy hour. 

 

Like being in one of my old board meeting cocktail hours for days.

 

On the surface it would seem to be something  we would like. In practice it got old very quickly 

 

About the only variation was in the one show each night. A couple were very good (one piano player did 2 excellent shows, one piano player did 2 ok shows, the comedian not so good  2 different vocalists did 2 shows each, one was good one not so much). The 4 production shows were OK.

 

As far as food goes. There were some nice features such as the grill to order in the Terrace Cafe and the sushi selection. But in general the food did not really impress. The problem there was also the lack of variety.  Again a very curated menu. Very consistent, but as far as quality goes nothing special. Not bad, but pretty much in line with other lines. It lacked the customization of the luxury lines, though did have some unique features compared to mass market lines.

 

The long time Oceania cruisers seemed to like it, the 200+ first timers not so much.

 

I mostly agree with your observations about activities and entertainment. 

But the difference between you and me is that we sail for destinations, not sea days. This is why O is perfect for us for European port intensive itineraries, where we spend most of the day in ports, come back to the ship to have dinner, spend some time in the lounges, see the show and go to bed. This is why personally I don't think O is good for TA or Caribbean.

That said, there are more activities and choices on newer ships, so I always advise first timers to start with the newer ship.

As for you comment "The long time Oceania cruisers seemed to like it, the 200+ first timers not so much." - on our Riviera cruise last May we went with friends who sailed exclusively on Celebrity for over 20 years. Guess what? They are not going back to celebrity. Already booked 3 more on Marina and Vista, but won't go on the R ship.

btw, we went on 2 SS cruises in the last 2 years, didn't see much food customization - in fact, I think food on O is better, for 40% less.

But yes, choice is good. No point to argue really. Celebrity and other lines have their devoted loyalists. For us, it's itinerary and price first, but we are not going back to 3,000+ ships.

Oceania on its worst day is better than Celebrity on its best day. Like comparing Mercedes to Toyota.

People come to R ships and are not aware about the shower size?? This shows lack of the most basic homework.

But yes, entertainment and activities are not the strongest areas on O. Again, some minimal homework would set expectations right and avoid disappointments.

More Oceania for us.

3 hours ago, pinotlover said:

Hank;

 

Food being Bland and boring was an issue on our cruise also. Expect for the cheerleaders to assault you claiming every meal is excellent and every bite succulent, because as you know tastes are subjective! 🙄

Personally I found Hank's observations and review very objective and balanced. I share his view of Red Ginger, despite this being a favorite restaurant of many O cruisers. I don't think anyone would claim that every meal on O (or any other line) is excellent. Same for most restaurants on land (there are some exceptions of course). But Hank also said the O food is second best only to Explora, which speaks volume.

41 minutes ago, ronrick1943 said:

First thanks for taking the time for writing about your cruise.  En

joying it a lot.  We were on the new Nova, and I think they were trying to hard.  I don't mind dressing up, but it was over done for me--that's just me.

And think that what they have on the Nova is already a relaxed dress code compared to other ships (they now switch to the new dress code fleet wide). On our recent Dawn cruise it was absolutely ridiculous (3 different types of dress code).

53 minutes ago, Sdancer said:

 

The reason I am posting today to let you Today that I received an email from Oceania that on the "second look" they decided to refund us for skipped Cozumel.

How about that? 🙂

Have a nice day!!!

Good for you! How much was it per person?

And yes, many people actually claim that O skips ports to save money. Just read some of the topics on this board.

51 minutes ago, Emdee said:

All of us have our hot buttons and price points as someone on the Crystal Board says choice is good. 
We tried Oceania in 2008 and it wasn’t our cup of tea at all. Have not tried them since then. We are still somewhat itinerary driven so Regent whom we have been cruising with since 2003 and Crystal and the SSea Endeavour cover our needs.  Seabourn has very good Caribbean itineraries so may sail them in order to break up our winter. 

Absolutely!

Things might have changed on Oceania in 16 years.. but it's good that not everyone likes it, more Oceania for us!

16 minutes ago, Emdee said:

Both Seabourn and SSea staff are inconsistent in service and food in my opinion is nowhere near the new Crystal. In my opinion the new Crystal service and food are amazing….I personally believe better than before. Our butlers on Crystal definitely went above and beyond ….much better than any we had on other lines including SSea. My last Crystal cruise in December was when I was recuperating from knee surgery and the concern I received from the staff makes me tear up. The staff really make you feel part of the Crystal family and that is priceless and worth the higher costs. I would rather go on three cruises on Crystal instead of four on SSea and Seabourn. The only SSea we are likely to go on are the Expeditions and we are currently booked on The Endeavour as the ship ( built by Crystal) is technically amazing.  

We didn't do SB yet, but I agree that SS service can be inconsistent. And with the recent price increase, I don't find value in SS anymore.

However, we enjoy Oceania very much, and can book it around $400. I find food on O excellent and service very good too. To me there was nothing on SS or Crystal that made them more luxurious than O when we look at things that are important to us.

Crystal might feel like family if you did dozens of cruises on their ships, know the crew and they know you. On our cruise on C in 2019 we felt like outsiders. Doesn't mean the service wasn't good, on the contrary. But part of the family? Not really, at least this was not our feeling. To some people it's worth the extra cost. To others it's not. Especially if you sail for destinations and not see the ship as a destination.