Azamara and Conde Nast(y)

[schmidlapp]

According to the latest Conde Nast article,

Azamara scored second from the bottom overall, besting Carnival only by 2/10ths of a point. How sad can it get... Food rating was not very good either.....

Have to wonder where these numbers are coming from?

Sorry I had to point this out as this will not help them in future bookings.

Personally we enjoy Azamara, apparently its not for everyone.

[bphman]

I learned long ago not to put too much faith in these rankings. Unfortunately, many do. A lot of the rankings and awards are bought and paid for. Don't know about Conde Nast.

[Paulchili]

With these type of "polls" it all depends on whom they ask and choses to answer. Often disgruntled clients shout louder than the happy ones.

As noted above, these ratings are almost meaningless. It's your experience and opinion that count most to you - not that of others.

JMO.

[Andy]

According to the latest Conde Nast article,

Azamara scored second from the bottom overall, besting Carnival only by 2/10ths of a point. How sad can it get... Food rating was not very good either.....

Have to wonder where these numbers are coming from?

Sorry I had to point this out as this will not help them in future bookings.

Personally we enjoy Azamara, apparently its not for everyone.

 

Hi Schmidlapp !

 

Azamara didnt even get on Conde Nast's radar in 2009. I think this thread : http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1160980 , will offer some insights on how these rankings come about.

 

Frankly, I have no interest in such rankings, especially if they are coming in slightly above Carnival. I mean, seriously ? Azamara is leaps and bounds ahead of the mainstream lines.

[xplrcrzn]

The Travel & Leisure poll, discussed in another thread, has Azamara ranked as 5th best large ship cruise line in the world. So take your pick. Personally, at one time CN Traveler was a very fine travel magazine but over the years it has become little more than another CN "lifestyle" magazine best suited for hair salon and bathroom reading.

[ddonalds]

It is unfortunate, though. Being a Crystal fan, and not knowing anything about Azamara, if I had read that article when I was first booking - I probably would have just picked Crystal (which, would not have been a bad decision). I picked Amazara after reading through Cruise Critic - but that's because I've been on this website for awhile - what about those people that don't use this website? The "grades" were amazingly low.......

[KnoxvilleSam]

Ratings aside, the article also identifies costs for each evaluated ship for an evaluated cruise line - defined as "Rates reflect the lowest cost per person per night for an oceanview cabin on the ship's least expensive sailing."

 

Azamara Journey - $420

Carnival Miracle - $140

Celebrity Solstice - $107

Crystal Serenity - $249

HAL Prinsendam - $105

NCL Pearl - $80

Oceania Insignia - $149

Princess Ocean Princess - $86

Regent 7 Seas Voyager - $557

Royal Caribbean Independence of the Seas - $112

Yachts of Seabourn Spirit - $357

 

So - - - Azamara is the second most expensive line (trailing only Regent 7 Seas), and is almost 3 times more expensive than Oceania (the line most used as an Azamara benchmark). If the quality ratings are as muddled as the cost numbers are inaccurate, Conde Nast doesn't know what it's doing. What's even worse - Conde Nast can ascribe the quality ratings and anecdotes to individual cruisers, whereas cost data should not be as susceptible to error.

 

Sam

[suec12]

Boy are those prices suspect - no way they compared similar sailings. Does anyone else find it odd that we have two threads running - one has Azamara as a lowly rated cruise line and the other as highly rated ships! But as imprecise as these ratings may be, if I was not actually familiar with the Azamara product, I might be discouraged by the Conde-Nast ratings.

[Paulchili]

I agree with you Sam - the ratings may be subjective but the pricing should not be.

I cannot believe that the cheapest OV room on Azamara is $420 and Crystal is $249. I know I am sailing in a balcony on Azamara at just a little more than half that price.

This type of misinformation invalidates the ratings as well, IMO.

[KnoxvilleSam]

Maybe that's an idle question, but it really kind of p***es me off to see egregiously bad "reporting." And it may be the case that Conde Nast really doesn't care. Or maybe it's just some poorly paid researcher who ran out of time and just turned in bogus figures?

[nevernever]

Along with others who have posted on this thread, I would place no reliance on the misinformation that appears to have been the basis of the Cond Nast ratings. Costing information would seem to be particularly suspect. For instance, I am sailing on Azamara Quest early in 2011, with a balcony stateroom that will cost about half the amount per person mentioned in the survey for an OV room. I think that Azamara would have every right to object to the public presentation of inaccurate and unreliable information.

 

Nevernever

[MightyQuinn]

Ratings aside, the article also identifies costs for each evaluated ship for an evaluated cruise line - defined as "Rates reflect the lowest cost per person per night for an oceanview cabin on the ship's least expensive sailing."

Knoxville, can you quote the source of this info? It does seem rather strange to have cost comparisons across such widely diverging ship sizes, classifications & itineraries.

 

This is all I can find on Conde Nast 2010 cruise ship ratings.

http://www.concierge.com/tools/travelawards/goldlist/2010/category/cruiselines

 

I can't find any ratings info for Azamara on Conde Nast website. I also entered "Azamara" into the CN search engine on concierge.com and got only a single reference, which was about Azamara cruises in SE Asia. Is the cost detail that you're quoting in a recent print magazine? Thanks.

[schmidlapp]

In further reading of the article, I was surprised to see that Azamara was listed as a RCI product. While I know RCI is the parent company, I always thought they were more closely related to Celebrity...

But then the facing page was a full page ad for Azamara and in the ad they stated they were a proud RCI affiliate. It appears that Azamara is now

advertising them more of an RCI product than what we always thought was more of an upscacle Celebrity. Makes me wonder where managment is going and what they are thinking???? So we thought Azamara was looking for their own identity. You sure do not see in the Seabourn ads a statement they are a proud member of Carnival cruises.....

[cindilouwho]

In further reading of the article, I was surprised to see that Azamara was listed as a RCI product. While I know RCI is the parent company, I always thought they were more closely related to Celebrity...

But then the facing page was a full page ad for Azamara and in the ad they stated they were a proud RCI affiliate. It appears that Azamara is now

advertising them more of an RCI product than what we always thought was more of an upscacle Celebrity. Makes me wonder where managment is going and what they are thinking???? So we thought Azamara was looking for their own identity. You sure do not see in the Seabourn ads a statement they are a proud member of Carnival cruises.....

 

RCI is the parent company of RCCL, Celebrity, Azamara, TUI, Pulmantur etc. So I don't think they meant anything about product positioning. However, Seabourn is listed as a subsidiary of Carnival PLC in just the same way on parent company sites.

[KnoxvilleSam]

Knoxville, can you quote the source of this info? It does seem rather strange to have cost comparisons across such widely diverging ship sizes, classifications & itineraries. .

 

The article is titled "Come Sail Away." It starts on page B4 and ends on page B18 of the August 2010 issue of Conde Nast Traveler. Ironically, the subtitle for the magazine is "Truth in Travel."

[schmidlapp]

One more thought crossed my mind as I was re-reading the article...

How in the world did Conde Nast get Azamara to pay for a full page ad

opposite the column where they recieved the very poor score?

[alidor]

I find it in poor management judgment to list this as an RCI product. If you want to try to sell an upscale product, associating it with RCI just doesn't work. It just amazes me that they just can't get their act together of what kind of product they want this to be. They've owned it for about 3 years now, give or take a few months, and I just don't understand how they can't get their act together on this.

 

We were on the Quest in January and the Asian itinerary was terrific but although the ship was satisfactory, it really wasn't in the upscale territory. From a work perspective, I still see them struggling with agents in presenting WHO they are.

[MightyQuinn]

The article is titled "Come Sail Away." It starts on page B4 and ends on page B18 of the August 2010 issue of Conde Nast Traveler. Ironically, the subtitle for the magazine is "Truth in Travel."

Thanks Knoxville. I'll keep an eye open for the magazine. I'm not a subscriber & concierge.com is my usual go-to for everything Conde Nast. Truth in Travel, you say? Ah ... the irony is rich. ;);)

[Susan-M]

While I know RCI is the parent company....

 

Isn't RCCL the parent company and RCI one of the cruise lines within that company? From a press release on ACC's site:

 

Richard D. Fain is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., the global cruise company operating 38 ships under the Celebrity Cruises, Royal Caribbean International, Pullmantur, Azamara Club Cruises and CDF Croisières de France brands.

 

I have no issues with whether they associate themselves with RCI or RCCL ... or with their 'identity crisis', just trying to clarify the RCI / RCCL point.:)

[Photogirl]

I believe that in 1997 Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines changed its name to Royal Caribbean International and the parent company is Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.

 

PG's Hubby

[Albert Ross]

I find it in poor management judgment to list this as an RCI product. If you want to try to sell an upscale product, associating it with RCI just doesn't work. .

I agree. In England we got a flyer "Introducing the new Azamara Club Cruises - the upmarket boutique cruise line owned by Royal Caribbean Cruise Line".

 

The word 'upmarket' is not needed IMHO - the word is a bit naff in my book - 'boutique' would have been sufficient - and a clear product placement in the RCCL camp which I think they need to avoid if they want to attract the sort of passenger I think they are wanting to attract.

[MightyQuinn]

<snip>.....and a clear product placement in the RCCL camp which I think they need to avoid if they want to attract the sort of passenger I think they are wanting to attract.

I agree. ACC brochures & flyers that we received recently (postmarked Malmo Sweden!) have a new tag line added:

Azamara Club Cruises is a proud member of the Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. family of cruise lines.

 

Maybe they think this association will give some credibility to their "new" brand!

[Photogirl]

I read the ratings of the various cruise lines by Conde Nast readers in my wife's copy of the magazine. The overall rating of AZ was 75.5, just above Carnival's 75.3. What I found interesting were the very low rating for shore excursions (57.3 if I remember correctly) and the low ratings for the cabins. There was also mention of the tiny "170 square foot" cabins in the write-up about the Journey.

 

What is so interesting is that the reviews of other "R-class" ships run by other cruise lines, like Oceania, make no mention of the tiny cabins, and the cabin ratings are much higher. Doesn't make sense, since they are all basically the same layout.

 

I wonder what is the problem AZ passengers see with their shore excursions compared to other lines.

 

PG's Hubby

[Redtravel]

Azamara started as part of Celebrity. Something different with good prices and good value. Bookings went up. Then they broke separately and then raised the prices. Bookings went down. What is next? Increase services, raise prices, lower prices, become part of another Royal Caribbean group or just sell off. Time will tell. If bookings don't go up, Azamara ships may be absorbed by another group.

[editor@cruisecritic]

Conde Nast's poll really is silly. Last year we did a story on its poll, on how a cruise ferry in Finland ranked really highly. When we asked the editors there what went wrong, and how that ship got into the top ten (mid-sized ships) they said, "we stand by it." OK then.

 

Take a look: http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=3041

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor in Chief

Cruise Critic