Difficult Choices in a Real World

I have just returned from a splendid 14 day Xmas/New Year's Whisper cruise. I feel grateful to be able to travel on Silversea, and grateful that a company like Silversea is operating.

But I understand that these must be difficult times for lines like Silversea. First they had 9/11 and its aftermath. Now they must be contending with circumstances well beyond their control -- esp. the steep decline in the value of the US$ and the rising cost of fuel.

Let's then imagine that the authorities in Ft Lauderdale are deliberating on ways to cope with these new economic realities.

They can, of course, raise fares considerably. But let's assume that they reject this option.

The alternative is to reduce expenses. Something has to be cut.

What would you change in the Silversea product to reduce the line's costs? Quality of food? Number of staff? Availability of unlimited free drinks? Entertainment? Enrichment lecturers? Social staff? Etc.

Clearly, none of us would welcome any such changes. But if reductions must be made, in what area would you prefer to see them made?

None. I'd rather see them charge what they need to, and keep the quality of the product. There are two kinds of people in the world; one who wants price, and another who's willing to pay for quality. Hopefully there are enough of us who want quality. We don't need another Princess cruise.

Ditto.

The argument I now make will be disagreed by many who do not want their own personal access to the product compromised. I am arguing purely from what I genuinely believe is the company's best interest. As it happens this topic is pretty much what I do for a living but that of course doesn't mean I'm right.

There is a rational set of debating points which in my view support an argument along the lines of putting prices up and improving the experience even further.

Deep discounts work on a marginal costing basis and are often illusory. Two different accountants with the same passenger fare. One would say that the customer makes a loss for the company, the other accountant would argue that the fare is almost all "pure profit" due to marginal costing considerations. They both can't be right.

In the current process of slight but detectable drops in quality, SS's vision core of it's customers will contract. They risk a situation of being in a market that may not exist. Too expensive to be mainstream and not good enough to meet the needs of it's previous core customers. The hard core of potentially life-long loyal customers do not want reduced quality. They are content to pay for quality. Even more important they do not want suprises - bad ones that is. They want consistency. They want to be pleasently suprised but not dissapointed on their next cruise. Consitency of high quality costs a lot of money.

Those with smaller budgets will still not pay for what will still be comparatively high per diems. The existing core won't be taken for a ride and aren't fools but they will pay for exceptional quality. They will not pay less for less quality. They will not pay the same for deteriorating quality but experiment elsewhere. SS's ships are small. They should concentrate on quality and if necessary optimise profits by pricing upwards and improving product quality. They shouldn't try to expand until they have got to grips with the current four craft and understood their own product. If they try to expand before they have it right they will make the wrong decision and attempt to go downmarket hoping that "we" won't notice. We will.

It is easy to reduce quality and charges. It is very slow and difficult - sometimes impossible - to establish from start the reputation that SS currently have. The reputation is as valuable as it's other tangible assets. They shouldn't compromise the quality reputation asset in any way. If anything they should make it better and stronger.

This will make the clear water between SS and it's upper end competitors less murky and much more decisive. This will bring customers to SS that want an exceptional product; lose the customers that cannot grasp the difference or can't afford it and I believe there is a very small upper end market that is sufficient for the current fleet and perhaps in time for a slightly larger fleet but of ships that are definately no larger.

That is my very strongly held view. Where do I send the invoice?

I aggree, with both of the above.

But would simply like add a 3rd dimension not yet raised. It's that of opening new markets or improving existing market oppurtunity.

I personally, am a prime example of my statement.

2 years ago Silversea started a major targeted push into markets that until then, they had only slightly dabbled.

Silversea appointed for the first time senior executives who they relocated to South America & Australasia.

These 2 teams are based full time in the above locations and have provided new oppurtunity's for the company to tap into markets, they previously dealt with from vast distances, useing T/A's and brokers.

That is how l became aware of Silversea to begin with.

In a recent statement made to the Australian & Asian government's travel summit, Silversea had announced it had improved sales from the region in excess of 300% in 3 years.

Silversea also agreed with Princess cruises statements that the Australia/Asia market was developing at a much faster pace than what is being seen in the northern hemisphere per head of capita.

So my point here is,

Yes, don't drop quality for price and yes, keep your market clearly defined in company policy and direction.

But actively seek new markets without sacrificing core company value's. In other words value add to your core customer base by continuing to develop outside your traditional comfort zone.

For the first time, Silversea will have 2 vessels in the Australasia region for Christmas 05 at the same time as extending the time they traditionally spend in the region.

With only 4 ships, Silversea has much more scope for developing their existing product without the need for more metal, with that statement UK1 l agree.

To reinforce my statement, for the 3rd year running Silversea ships have visited my home town of Townsville ( a place of which you probally have not heard of) twice a year. It was on one of these visits that l was lucky enought to be invited onboard for lunch as part of their new Australian business strategy.

In fact it was only last week that l watched a very gracefull Silver Cloud dock 4 blocks from beachside home.

Silversea came to me, l did not have to chase them and as a result they found a new customer. If you do what you do very well and you go out of your way to prove it, then the next new market is only just around the corner.

I stongly believe this can be achieved without limiting product, reducing service or price sacrificing.

Please excuse my spelling, l wrote this one on the run!!

Cheers Colin..................

Ps. I am a bit excited, my Silver Wind doc's all turned up today & i'm over the moon about them.

What a great kit they provide, very impressive. I think l am going to be up half the night reading all this stuff.

Now its real!!

l am about to enjoy the hospitality of Silversea!!

with or without the soap, which to tell you the truth is the last thing l particularly care about.

Sorry, l couldn't help myself, l am to busy taking another swig outa the bottle before l return it to the bar. (:-))

One wonders if any decline in standards is really due to inadequate fares.

Comparison with Hapag Lloyds Europa (rated 5 star + by the Berlitz Guide) reveals the following for 2005.

Silversea:Athens/Istanbul cruises(7/10 nights)-- £412/419 per diem(including air fare from the UK,and port charges).

Hapag Lloyd:Athens/Istanbul cruise(12 nights)--£345 per diem(including air fare from Germany,and port charges,but excluding wines,and spirits).

Because of the deep discounts, SS now is available to wider market. I'm wondering if the new customers came with unrealistic expectations? As SS is the top 'luxuary' line, were they expecting the service you'd get on your billionaire's personal yacht? Thus the complaints? My last SS cruise was in March, so I don't know if the service has really slipped since then. When I was on, it looked fine to me.

Because of the deep discounts, SS now is available to wider market. I'm wondering if the new customers came with unrealistic expectations? As SS is the top 'luxuary' line, were they expecting the service you'd get on your billionaire's personal yacht? Thus the complaints? My last SS cruise was in March, so I don't know if the service has really slipped since then. When I was on, it looked fine to me.

I think you're right. Our two have been since March and both were in reality perfect. Arguably - from a practical viewpoint, with the exception of not being able to change the itinerary, the service on SS is better than a personal yacht because you don't decide in the morning what you want for lunch (so they can shop) and for loads of other reasons.

Whenever you have a product that is so reliant on human nature you need to be thoughtful as a customer and understanding as a customer and accept that 95% perfect is in reality perfect. Sometimes they do get things wrong and people are right to comment as long as that's balanced, but I'd prefer higher prices, even better quality and more exclusivity.

but I'd prefer higher prices, even better quality and more exclusivity.

Of all the ships reviewed in the Berlitz Guide,the Europa is rated the highest.(Compared to the Silversea ships by a margin of 101/137 points out of 2000,dependent on the Silversea ship).

If all that you seek by way of higher quality,and exclusivity,is being provided for a lower daily fare,then perhaps one should be demanding higher standards from Silversea for the existing fares.

Of all the ships reviewed in the Berlitz Guide,the Europa is rated the highest.(Compared to the Silversea ships by a margin of 101/137 points out of 2000,dependent on the Silversea ship).

If all that you seek by way of higher quality,and exclusivity,is being provided for a lower daily fare,then perhaps one should be demanding higher standards from Silversea for the existing fares.

The point you make re Berlitz was made for posts previously. Personally at this level using the beauty contests should be very careful as everyone's idea of what constitutes perfection is wildly different, particularly Americans v European v Personal expectations and standards. I personally think that SS food is adequate to good - but no better - and it doesn't bother me. I saw a program about Hapag a few days ago on German TV and I gather they source all food locally as they travel including meat (see other threads!). SS are concerned about litigation from customers and more is frozen.

As I've said, I'm content with what SS currently provide at the price I pay. I'd be even more content if they improved it and charged more. Demanding more for the same price rarely results in permanent improvements unless it is associated with a volume increase, which would in itself detract from the product.

Ditto.

 

 

In the current process of slight but detectable drops in quality, SS's vision core of it's customers will contract. They risk a situation of being in a market that may not exist. Too expensive to be mainstream and not good enough to meet the needs of it's previous core customers. The hard core of potentially life-long loyal customers do not want reduced quality. They are content to pay for quality. Even more important they do not want suprises - bad ones that is. They want consistency. They want to be pleasently suprised but not dissapointed on their next cruise. Consitency of high quality costs a lot of money.

 

Very good analysis. Radisson is doing a great job in this difficult "between" top-tier and mass market. It's silly for Silversea to go in competition there. It's always the mistake many business make - losing the original focus by going for volume thus losing all.

Of all the ships reviewed in the Berlitz Guide,the Europa is rated the highest.(Compared to the Silversea ships by a margin of 101/137 points out of 2000,dependent on the Silversea ship).

If all that you seek by way of higher quality,and exclusivity,is being provided for a lower daily fare,then perhaps one should be demanding higher standards from Silversea for the existing fares.

Hapag-Lloyd certainly has a fine reputation, but I was a little surprised to discover (by accident) that its PR agency in the U.S. has also done work for Berlitz Publishing. That doesn't necessarily mean that the BERLITZ GUIDE's author and Hapag-Lloyd are in cahoots; it may simply reflect the fact that Langenscheidt owns Berlitz Publishing and uses the same U.S. PR agency that Hapag-Lloyd does. Still, it's something that people should at least be aware of when comparing Berlitz's rankings of Hapag-Lloyd and Silversea.

also keep in mind that the europa is not all inclusive....you pay for alcohol and wines. this alone ( and admittedly i have never sailed on the europa) would detract from the overall ambience aboard for me. the minute i have to start signing bills for anything it takes away from the feeling of being a guest instead of a paying passenger. i dont care hwo high berlitz rates it. as far as all those guides go everything is subjective. what one like another doesnt. i guess theyre just like passengers.

I find this thread interesting, because I love cruising at the luxury level, but with value. From the onset, I must let you know that I am a long-time Raddison cruiser who always kept up with SS on this board. Last March, I cruised on the Shadow and it was a wonderful experience. To me, it was like being on a Radisson ship (the larger RSSC ships were all built at the same shipyard), other than the all inclusive liquor in the bars. The rest was really the same when I compared the food, service, entertainment (well, maybe a little edge to SS on my particular cruise). I don't know whether observer and simon have cruised on RSSC yet. I did not have unrealistic expectations on SS and for the first few days I was underwhelmed. It was the whole experience at the end that gave me a positive experience....but since I told you I am "value" oriented, I just find that SS is much more expensive per diem than Radisson, for almost the same thing. Lately, I am getting e-mails from them with discounting from 20-45%. Radisson does this very early on, and takes it away as bookings increase. Silversea seems to have a different approach. I have to say that I booked with SS later on with a good deal that was offered late. Hard to say what is preferred by cruisers out there.

One last thing I have to take issue with: Simon said of Radisson: Radisson is doing a great job in this difficult "between" top-tier and mass market. It's silly for Silversea to go in competition

Simon, Radisson has earned its stripes by all measures of being up there with Crystal, Silversea and Seabourne, just look at the ratings in any survey or magazine. From my experience, all these lines are about the same, they are all great, just a matter of personal preference They have the same physical characteristics on all of their ships (Larger ones for Radisson), and the only advantage SS carries is the inclusive nature of the bar bill.... Have you cruised on RSSC? Having sailed on Silversea, and really enjoyed it, but I will not relegate RSSC to a lesser status than luxury just like SS in my mind.

Yes, I have cruised RSSC, and thought it's good value for the money. Food is very good. Accomodation is equal. I found service to be good and acceptable, but not as polished or smooth as Silversea. Fellow passengers were not as interesting as SS, but it might have a lot to do with the particular itenary we were on. All in all they have a good product, and I wouldn't hesitate to take it again but only if I can find a good deal. I still prefer the Silversea service and experience. I'll be going on RSSC in the spring because we are paying for some other people, and RSSC is cheaper and we think they'd be more comfortable on RSSC, but we are going on SS in the fall by ourselves.

I don't know whether observer and simon have cruised on RSSC yet.

I too have cruised on RSSC multiple times (Diamond, Navigator, Mariner).

I think that RSSC is a high quality product -- generally at a reasonable price. I am certain that I will cruise with RSSC in the future.

But I prefer Silversea.

I accept that the service is comparable (though I believe that's Silversea's is marginally better).

The important distinction for me is size: Mariner/Voyager (the two larger RSSC ships) carry nearly twice as many passengers as Shadow/Whisper. This makes a difference to me.

Mariner/Voyager (the two larger RSSC ships) carry nearly twice as many passengers as Shadow/Whisper. This makes a difference to me.

The original post was about the positioning of the SS product. The reason why your comment is absolutely spot on and right, and is at the core of the issue is that at the SS end, the critical core customers should be traveling once or twice a year - or even much much more - and feel "ownership" over the product, the staff and the ships. That is essentially what was on SS's mind when they started and why the guest rather than customer concept is "bullseye". The feeling of ownership is a key intangible, and is the most intoxicating and least understood aspect of the relationship between an SS type product and an SS type customer. If a customer feels he or she owns what is around them and feels at home then they'l come back, and back and back and back. An ordinary one off vacation experience is not the same. That is the concept behind loyalty and satisfaction.

If SS manage to make people feel genuinely at home as a returning customer, and that customers feel "ownership" over the product then the overall product has succeeded, and they will have a winning strategy. The only time that this strategy often fails is when they try to scale it upwards, or cure revenue problems by trying to increase volume by reducing prices. Then the product in my experience nearly always sinks.

 

One last thing I have to take issue with: Simon said of Radisson: Radisson is doing a great job in this difficult "between" top-tier and mass market. It's silly for Silversea to go in competition

JHP: The cruise director on our girl's Whisper cruise asked us what line most of us cruise on and why. We told him Rad was by far our favorite to date but that for those of us that had tried Seabourn and now SS for the first time, they were top contenders as well. According to this gent he said that SS does not consider Rad to be their competition at all as it is a different product. He said SS considers Seabourne to be their only main competition. Don't know if I would agree or not but thought I would pass it on.

UK1,

for me,Seabourn meet your stated criterion more than Silversea-perhaps aided by their smaller ships,and lower passenger numbers.

Having been fortunate to have sailed on both these lines,and Radisson(the Diamond),the differences have been subtle ones.

wripro,

with regard to paying for drinks making one feel less like a guest,and more like a passenger.

Why should what is acceptable on shore in a hotel cease to be so when afloat?

EASY....YOU ARE NOT ON SHORE! We book these small luxury ships so that you pay once...lean back and enjoy! We are aboard to forget the hassle and hands out for the buck society that we are leaving behind for a few days!

Canadagal,

What you say was said to you is completely my opinion as well.

I have only taken one cruise in my life and that was on the P&O Australia/Princess ship, the Pacific Princess New to the south pacific 3years ago. I loved it, wanted to do it again, but wanted a much better product & refined experience.

I supose therefore l am fresh meat to the upper end of cruising. I spent 2 years researching and checking things out before l made my decision.

I decided on Silversea.

Now l don't yet know wether l made the right decision, but here is why l made it.

1 All inclusive

The only thing that irritated me no end on the PP was having paper shoved under my nose to sign everytime l wanted something. So all inclusive had to be high on my list of wants. This is where Crystal lost the race for me at the first post as well as their split dining.

2 Itinerary

I wanted some adventure to my itin, out of the way places not useually visited by cruise ships. This was harder to find. It was also the biggest difference to me between the 4 that are being described above as well. RSSC seems to have a more vanila itin schedule, so does Crystal. Silversea and Seabourn both won hands down for me here.

3 Ship size

I loved the size of the PP but was fasinated with Seabourn and the "yacht" thing they had going. Silversea stuck out to me as well, the first time l seen the Wind was in my own town which we hardly ever got to see cruise ships in port.

4 Cruise length

I wanted to cruise for over a month without repeating a single port. It is not as easy as it sounds even with all 4 of the above.

So in the end there were 2 groups, but l had also had another cruiseline in my contemplations that has not yet been raised. So l will add them here. The QE2 and later the QM2 (QGrills)

Group 1

Silversea & Seabourn

Fully inclusive, more non-repeating and in my opinion stimulating and unusual itin choices (because of size). Both have an excelent space per guest ratio with Silversea in front. From my first request for info to being invited on board for lunch, they just took my breath away. Seabourn was just as good with their first contact stuff. What l liked about Seabourn and there is a lot to like. Is that they kept following up. A letter, a phone call then a video arrived in the mail.

Group 2

RSSC, Crystal & the Queens

RSSC partly inclusive, cheaper than the above, but just dosen't seem to be able to hold it to the above. They offer a great product on the surface but it was the chatrooms like here that showed out the main differences to me.

I cannot see how they could be rated alongside the above. They offer an upper premium product but what they offer is not what l would call a luxury product (by all the info l can see).

Crystal seems expensive for what you get. Split dining and signing chits is not a luxury experience to me. I e-mailed them twice for info and phoned once and still never recieved the requests for info. I also am aware of their poor environmental record and will not condone their activities.

The Queens are a good product at the Grill level but they were just to big for me. I was also concerned with the average age of their typical passenger at that level. I felt like l would stand out and that it would be a fairly isolated sort of cruise for me.

So it came down to group 1

Seabourn lost for only two reason's. Cabin size and lack of cruising. They seem to spend a lot of time tied up. If l had wanted a cruise of 14 days or less I would have chosen Seabourn.

Now folks all of my post is my opinion. l have not cruised on any of them "yet" l tryed my best when researching to be fair and balanced, l realy did want an excellent product and gave them all a fair hearing.

Cost was not an issue (within reason) l was always ready to pay what l felt was fair and reasonable for what was on offer.

I decided to have a relationship with Silversea, but would truly love to have an affair with Seabourn

(:-))

Time will tell.

Colin.......................................................

english rose,

there is one big difference between not signing for drinks on a ship and on shore. i go to a restaurant for one meal. i rarely stay in a hotel for more than a few nights. but when i go on a ship its for a considerably longer time (my last cruise on SS was 24 days) and i am willing to pay for the privilege of not signing every time i order a drink. if i make new friends on the cruise none of us has to wonder who's picking up the next round. it makes the whole experience more genteel, more refined and more stress free. and you do feel more like a guest than a paying customer.

colin,

i just reread your analysis and agree whole heartedly with your observations. ive sailed mostly with silversea since 1994, the year they went into business (my first sailing was a baltic cruise on the cloud barely two months after her inaugural.) since then ive sailed all their ships on different itineraries and while each one has her own personality, i have found in general that the SS ambience prevails and the product is uniformly excellent. i sailed seabourn once many years ago and am returning there this summer for 28 days. they had the right itinerary at the time i wanted and i was anxious to compare the two lines again. like you, i think they both stand in a league by themselves. I also just recently did two transtalantic crossings on the QM2 in grill class where the service was wonderful, as was the food, but i would never consider a cruise aboard her, she's just TOO BIG with too many people to worry about each time she pulls into a port. plus i have to say that with the price i paid for my ticket i resented having to pay $1.50 each time i wanted i diet coke. that's a mass market mentality. once youve sailed all inclusive its hard to go back.

all this is to say i think you made the right decision and i know you will have the trip of a lifetime. ive followed your posts and cant wait to hear about it when you return.

the most important thing any of us can pack before a cruise is a good attitude. then we are assured of a good time.

enjoy!!!!

Colin,

Excellent analysis. To me the big negative with Seabourn is the lack of balcony. I happen to enjoy reading or having coffee outside in bathrobe, so it's stopping me from trying out Seabourn.

Certainly one's choice of a cruise line will be based on one's own preferences or criteria.

The point I am trying to make is that if one is too rigid,or inflexible,one risks foregoing what might prove to be an enjoyable experience.