Celebrity competition

[Oville]

I believe I have an inkling of where this thread is leading.

 

We will be inundated with statistical minutia which cannot be refuted because it is numerical data. It will be dry data gathered outside of the reality of being there.

What does that mean, well one can look at blue prints and square footage's but when you walk into the the space and are faced with the reality of the numbers you may have chosen poorly.

To judge a cruise based only on statistics is a flawed premise.

Yes having the biggest cabins, largest balconies, highest staff to guest ratio, most square footage per guest are indicators but in no way insures you will have a memorable cruise.

 

A cruise experience like most things in life that are good tend to be more then the sum of their physical parts.

Dissecting the best things in ones life usually tends to demean them.

 

Thank you, once again you put a smile on my face. Hope to meet you on some future cruise. Who knows when your paths may cross. Perhaps it will be on X, RCI or even Princess.

[baldercash]

Thank you, once again you put a smile on my face. Hope to meet you on some future cruise. Who knows when your paths may cross. Perhaps it will be on X, RCI or even Princess.

 

Will be on the Navigator out of N'Orleans March 6th 15 days to Rome.

Then Millennium out of Hawaii Nov 2nd 35 days to Singapore.

That's it for the booked cruises this year, but then there are always the spontaneous ones which are usually the most fun.

Booked the Emerald Princess Fall Colours cruise last Oct just 2 weeks out. We got diverted by Hurricane Sandy. We were Screeched in Corner Brook NFLD never thought I would cruise there. More interesting then the planned itinerary a great time and lots of stories!

 

If you are on one of those we might get to meet.

Cheers

[Oville]

Will be on the Navigator out of N'Orleans March 6th 15 days to Rome.

Then Millennium out of Hawaii Nov 2nd 35 days to Singapore.

That's it for the booked cruises this year, but then there are always the spontaneous ones which are usually the most fun.

Booked the Emerald Princess Fall Colours cruise last Oct just 2 weeks out. We got diverted by Hurricane Sandy. We were Screeched in Corner Brook NFLD never thought I would cruise there. More interesting then the planned itinerary a great time and lots of stories!

 

If you are on one of those we might get to meet.

Cheers

 

Our paths won't be crossing in the near future, but who knows. As a New Englander I think we probably won't take any more Canadian cruises, at least for awhile.

 

You have some wonderful cruises book. Enjoy them all. Fortunately Sandy spared us at our home, it was a close call.

[slp123]

The statistics below come from various independent travel consultant marketing reports as well as from the cruise lines themselves. I only pared down the number of statistics presented to make this more understandable.

I did not cover small ship, ultra luxury lines but kept Crystal in because its ships are larger and it serves as a good contrast point for the rest of the lines. I did include Oceania and Azamara (shaded in turquoise) as they are somewhere between Premium and Luxury lines and then went on to include lines that are most often considered to be "Premium" and they are not shaded below. Finally, I have included the large popular mass market lines (the cruise industries label, not mine) and these are highlighted in orange.

 

The ratios of passengers to crew are simply determined by dividing the total passengers per ship with the total crew per ship and then the ratios from each ship of the line are averaged together. The only nuance is I looked at this ratios that measures level of service two ways; one assuming a full ship but not more than having all the cabins have double occupancy and the other way assuming that all cabins were occupied at maximum capacity of all 3rd and 4th berths. The latter situation more occurs more frequently in summer and at Christmas when families travel and they share a single cabin.

 

Space ratio measures the enclosed space (cubic feet) per passenger on the ship. So a ship has 30 cubic feet per passenger where the ship's gross tonnage is 30,000 and it carries 1000 passengers. Larger space ratio does not necessarily correlate with larger stateroom size. Ships can have small staterooms but very large public areas, yielding a higher space ratio number. What is most important to remember is the higher the space ratio, the more passengers will have a sense of the ship's roominess.

 

By the way I had trouble inserting the chart into this post and it is included as as an attachment (If anyone wants to tell me how to do it right and insert the image in the post, I am all ears). If you are having trouble viewing the chart, click on the attachment and then enlarge it by hitting ctrl key simultaneously with the plus (+) key).

[navyrotorhead]

to slp123 for the link to the Carnival report. INCREDIBLY INTERESTING READING! :cool:

 

Doubt I would have ever thought about it, let alone look for it. Thanks again. ;)

[slp123]

to slp123 for the link to the Carnival report. INCREDIBLY INTERESTING READING! :cool:

 

Doubt I would have ever thought about it, let alone look for it. Thanks again. ;)

 

You are welcome!

[mafig]

The Caribe deck, at least on the Emerald, was 50/50. That is half of the balcony was under cover and half was open. We found that these balconies were roughly twice the size as other decks. We had a regular cabin and not a mini-suite although there may have been mini suites on this deck.

 

 

The balconies on the Caribe deck are 9 x 9. Half open and half covered.

 

Not on the new Royal, however,:(

[fishin' musician]

I believe I have an inkling of where this thread is leading.

 

We will be inundated with statistical minutia which cannot be refuted because it is numerical data. It will be dry data gathered outside of the reality of being there.

What does that mean, well one can look at blue prints and square footage's but when you walk into the the space and are faced with the reality of the numbers you may have chosen poorly.

To judge a cruise based only on statistics is a flawed premise.

Yes having the biggest cabins, largest balconies, highest staff to guest ratio, most square footage per guest are indicators but in no way insures you will have a memorable cruise.

 

A cruise experience like most things in life that are good tend to be more then the sum of their physical parts.

Dissecting the best things in ones life usually tends to demean them.

 

It's at least a good starting point for comparisons. Better IMO than varying opinions.

[AusaicMosaic]

Quote[d

[*]On HAL every stateroom from inside to suite is offered the same room service menu. On X you have to purchase at least a Concierge grade cabin to get full room service. In fact you have to book a Concierge cabin to get the level of amenities that HAL puts into all its cabin, such as sparkling wine on departure, fresh fruit in the room, free shoe shines and better towels and linens. So in essence you are being extra'd when you take a concierge level cabin to receive what HAL includes in its standard cabin

end QUOTE

 

We sailed X Millenium in 2009 in a balcony concierge cabin and last October we flew to Seattle so we could cruise home for 23 days on HAL Oosterdam in a wheelchair accessible balcony cabin.

I can assure you that the sparkling wine and fruit and afternoon canapés that we received on X were definitely missing on HAL.

Before both cruises, I did a lot of checking, especially here on CC.

I read the boards every night last thing and am on here because we cruise Sydney to Port Douglas and back on the Solstice on 28th of this month.

Can't wait!!

[baldercash]

Here is were we can get buried in data.

Lets take the simplest comparison.

Azamara - 1.82 - 1.96

Oceania. - 1.79 - 2.09

We know both lines run R class ships but we cannot do a straight comparison as O also has the new Marina class.

When Azamara's 2 R ships are loaded to complicity the ratio to passenger increases only .14.

When Oceania's 3 R ships & 2 M ships are loaded the ratio to passengers increases by 1.13

 

We can assume the ratio on O & A ships is similar on light & max load.

But because O has 3 R ships to help bring down the ratio on it's 2M ships which must have much more 3& 4 berth capacity we cannot figure out the M class loaded ratio. Some one want to do the math on that. My guess is it may be the highest of all the cruise lines posted!

I would guess from this data that M class ships have a higher ratio of staff to passengers then on O's R. Also M class has more 3 & 4 cabin capacity since they are new ships?

So What I have learned from all this is sailing similar O or A ships will have similar ratios and M class will be different but by how much I don't know!

 

But the problem is bigger as all lines have blended capacities. X has the Xpedition which is more of a boutique ship then the R class. X has Century which likely has an R class ratio but on a larger ship. I know the M class used to have a excellent ratio but that has been raised by adding Aqua class cabins. Then S class the biggest ships in the fleet I believe has a reasonable ratio for the industry as well.

Since X has Aqua class which is only double occupancy they will automatically have a ratio advantage over other lines.

A line like RCL which is geared to a younger or more active demographic will have a higher or "poorer" ratio as it will cruise with more families thus more 3 & 4 person cabins.

But sailing a trans - Atlantic with all cabins sold mean a RCL ship is at a high or low ratio as there are no families?

[baldercash]

Funny came back from walking the dogs and looked at the numbers again.

We sail RCL out of N'Orleans on the 6th for a TA. Looking at the double occupancy per passenger space ratio RCL has one 1foot for less then HAL.

But we need to see the number for loaded ships to really compare.

[Bruin Steve]

Here is were we can get buried in data.

Lets take the simplest comparison.

Azamara - 1.82 - 1.96

Oceania. - 1.79 - 2.09

We know both lines run R class ships but we cannot do a straight comparison as O also has the new Marina class.

When Azamara's 2 R ships are loaded to complicity the ratio to passenger increases only .14.

When Oceania's 3 R ships & 2 M ships are loaded the ratio to passengers increases by 1.13

 

We can assume the ratio on O & A ships is similar on light & max load.

But because O has 3 R ships to help bring down the ratio on it's 2M ships which must have much more 3& 4 berth capacity we cannot figure out the M class loaded ratio. Some one want to do the math on that. My guess is it may be the highest of all the cruise lines posted!

I would guess from this data that M class ships have a higher ratio of staff to passengers then on O's R. Also M class has more 3 & 4 cabin capacity since they are new ships?

So What I have learned from all this is sailing similar O or A ships will have similar ratios and M class will be different but by how much I don't know!

 

But the problem is bigger as all lines have blended capacities. X has the Xpedition which is more of a boutique ship then the R class. X has Century which likely has an R class ratio but on a larger ship. I know the M class used to have a excellent ratio but that has been raised by adding Aqua class cabins. Then S class the biggest ships in the fleet I believe has a reasonable ratio for the industry as well.

Since X has Aqua class which is only double occupancy they will automatically have a ratio advantage over other lines.

A line like RCL which is geared to a younger or more active demographic will have a higher or "poorer" ratio as it will cruise with more families thus more 3 & 4 person cabins.

But sailing a trans - Atlantic with all cabins sold mean a RCL ship is at a high or low ratio as there are no families?

 

I believe those statistics, if I am reading them correctly, are just flat our in error...at least as it relates to Oceania...

 

We have cruised on both the R-ships (which are pretty much identical to Azamara's R-ships and on the new Marina...

The R-ships are very nice and very comfortable...The Marina blows it away...

 

The Marina (and sister ship Riviera) is a 66,084 gross ton ship that carries (at double occupancy) 1,252 passengers and 800 crew ...Doing the simple math, that is a space to passenger ratio of over 52.7...The crew to passenger ratio is better than 1:1.57...

 

This should bring Oceania's numbers to a way better position as these ships now make up 40% of their fleet and over 54.6% of their passenger capacity...

 

I cannot even find a number for "third and fourth" berths on Marina or Riviera...but, I really don't think that is an issue. My experience with Oceania is that there are rarely ever any third or fourth berths filled--if they even exist...The target marketing and passenger demographics tend to lean toward very few children on board and economic demographics that indicate that it would be extremely odd for more than two to share a cabin...There are a large number of "single occupancy" passengers...Sort of the polar opposite of, say, Carnival--where it seems EVERY third and fourth berth is constantly full...

 

With that, I would say that these two ships actually rival the ratio numbers of the luxury lines...

[chamima]

The Caribe deck, at least on the Emerald, was 50/50. That is half of the balcony was under cover and half was open. We found that these balconies were roughly twice the size as other decks. We had a regular cabin and not a mini-suite although there may have been mini suites on this deck.

 

Thanks, we are interested in the new Royal so we'll check out the deck plans. Princess has some nice itineraries.

 

As has been stated, the new Royal is a totally new ship style for Princess so the old balcony sizes and covered vs. open designations won't be valid for her.

That said, on the older Princess ships (Golden, Diamond, Emerald, Ruby, etc.) the uncovered deck with the mini suites was Dolphin (deck 9).

There are no mini suites on Caribe (deck 10). All of the cabins are the regular ones with the oversized balconies.

There are some mini suites on the rear of Emerald Deck (deck 8) that have covered balconies but they sell out quickly.

[slp123]

Here is were we can get buried in data.

Lets take the simplest comparison.

Azamara - 1.82 - 1.96

Oceania. - 1.79 - 2.09

We know both lines run R class ships but we cannot do a straight comparison as O also has the new Marina class.

When Azamara's 2 R ships are loaded to complicity the ratio to passenger increases only .14.

When Oceania's 3 R ships & 2 M ships are loaded the ratio to passengers increases by 1.13

 

We can assume the ratio on O & A ships is similar on light & max load.

But because O has 3 R ships to help bring down the ratio on it's 2M ships which must have much more 3& 4 berth capacity we cannot figure out the M class loaded ratio. Some one want to do the math on that. My guess is it may be the highest of all the cruise lines posted!

I would guess from this data that M class ships have a higher ratio of staff to passengers then on O's R. Also M class has more 3 & 4 cabin capacity since they are new ships?

So What I have learned from all this is sailing similar O or A ships will have similar ratios and M class will be different but by how much I don't know!

 

But the problem is bigger as all lines have blended capacities. X has the Xpedition which is more of a boutique ship then the R class. X has Century which likely has an R class ratio but on a larger ship. I know the M class used to have a excellent ratio but that has been raised by adding Aqua class cabins. Then S class the biggest ships in the fleet I believe has a reasonable ratio for the industry as well.

Since X has Aqua class which is only double occupancy they will automatically have a ratio advantage over other lines.

A line like RCL which is geared to a younger or more active demographic will have a higher or "poorer" ratio as it will cruise with more families thus more 3 & 4 person cabins.

But sailing a trans - Atlantic with all cabins sold mean a RCL ship is at a high or low ratio as there are no families?

 

You open arguing that we can be buried by the data I have presented. Then you turn around an argue that the blended summary can be misleading as cruise line's ships can vary greatly from one another and you need the figures on individual ships. I actually have the information on each ship in each cruise line's fleet that I covered. That would require looking at the data for a 119 ships.

 

Further I drew no conclusion from the figures I presented. But if I were to draw any conclusions it would be that for the factors of staffing and spaciousness Celebrity stands out and above cruise lines that are considered its most direct competition. With respect to staffing ratios with 100% normal occupancy, Celebrity is much more an equal of Azamara and Oceania (deluxe lines) and Crystal (luxury line) and is far better than Princess and HAL. In fact Princess and HAL are closer to RCL, NCL and Carnival than they are to Celebrity. And when you look at the figures when a ships sail with capacity above 100% (which happens in the summer and school holidays when families of 3 or 4 share one cabin), Celebrity does even better. This means the other ships have a greater ratio of cabins that accommodate 3rd and 4th berths. That makes sense for lines like NCL, RCL, Carnival and Disney which have a greater kid/family focus. baldercash also correctly argues this pointl, (In fact the one line that is most equivalent to Celebrity in this area is Azamara . . .and both have the same owner, RCL. I was happy to learn that these lines do not allow a large overcapacity crowd.

 

With respect to space ratios, almost all the lines averaged out in the range of 33.57 and 38.11. Those significantly out of this range were Luxury line Crystal on the high side and NCL on the low side. Cunard was also on the high side and that makes sense as well since it is part Premium line and part Luxury line given that its Grill passengers (all suite accommodations) have their own exclusive dining rooms, cocktail lounges and separate sun decks.

The space ratio numbers were only calculated based on 100% occupancy. Therefore when overbooked during summer and Christmas and Spring Break holidays, Celebrity and Azamara are the two lines least likely to feel crowded when overbooked.

 

When looking at these blended space ratios, it should be remembered that on certain cruise lines, ratios can vary greatly depending on which ship you are booked on. Carnival and NCL have the greatest variations within their fleets. There is about a 38% difference between their least spacious and most spacious ships. RCL has a variation of about 25% between least and most crowed ship. HAL, Princess, Celebrity. Oceania and Cunard have variations which range from 13%-20%. Disney, Crystal and Azamara and variations of 0%-6.5%

 

Finally since a lot of the readers of this post will be Celebrity travelers, here are a few interesting cruise line specific facts. S-class ships have space ratios that are about 12% better than space ratios for M-class ships. And M class ships have space ratios which are about 12.5% better than the Century. Finally I was surprised to see that despite the added cabins, Reflection had a space ratio that was 2.5% better than the other S-class ships and Reflections space ratio (39.42) was almost identical to Xpedition's space ratio (39.92).

 

All calculations are calculated from the aggregation of the statistics of each ship in a cruise line fleets. That is why, by way of example, Oceania and Azamara now vary with respect to Space Ratio where once they were identical operating identical ships. But when Oceania added two new ships it improved its staff ratio for normal capacity but negatively impacted its staff ration for overbooked situations because the new ships have far more 3rd and 4th berths. Is this something that is significant? I don't know as it would depend on how often Oceania is going to overbook and by how much.

[LuAnn]

Just to present another way of looking at it, I'll provide a different type of analysis though, yes, more subjective...

 

Every cruise line, for the most part, offers a lot of the same things--food, entertainment, a casino, a spa, pools, etc. So, in a way, everything is "competition". Heck, even land based resorts are competition because they are also trying to draw you there, competing for your vacation dollar.

 

But, like with most products, each line has it's particular main taget market...(just like automobile companies--even though all cars do basically the same thing, the target market for Bentley or Lamborghini is not the same as for Chevrolet or Hyundai).

 

Some cruise lines target a younger crowd, people with young families, people looking for the cheapest price...Others look to appeal to those with lots of time on their hands, lots of money and to whom price is no object...

 

Still others aim at a demographic somewhere in between...

You can see it in their marketing...Carnival pushes "Fun" and LOW prices (whether they are really any lower or not)...NCL pushes "no rules" and low prices...Royal Caribbean advertises adventure and activities and entertainment...

 

Celebrity, HAL and Princess (whether they all hit the mark or not) aim for a little more adult crowd--pushing an image of great service, elegance and relaxation...So, in a way, they are all targeting the same demographic...As it works out, HAL is fighting the longstanding reputation of catering to a much older crowd--but their target market is still the same...I think Princess falls short in a number of ways--but, of course, that is just my personal experience and preference...

 

The "luxury" lines--like Seabourne and SilverSeas and Crystal and Regent--aim at a completely different demographic...They don't really welcome kids and price themselves out of the market for most younger folks who are still paying off mortgages and having to pay to put kids through college and such...So, in a way, you could say none of these lines are really competing with Celebrity...

 

The most recent additions to the spectrum of cruising are Oceania and Azamara...and here is where the lines start getting really blurred...These lines have targeted a lot of the same market as currently cruise Celebrity or HAL by giving you an experience closer to that of the luxury lines--smaller ships, no kids programs, top service, some luxury amenities...but targeting the price range of "just beyond" what Celebrity charges...Advertising prices with "Free Air" and promotions to make the slightly higher prices seem more attractive...

 

What they are trying to do is to pick off the higher end of the Celebrity demographic...Sort of the same way that I drive Acuras--and chose them because for just a little more than buying a Honda, I get more perceived luxury features...Most marketing is trying to get you to take that small step up from what you originally were shopping for...

 

So, Oceania, for example, is definitely "competing" against Celebrity...They are marketing to the same customers--trying to siphon off the traditional Celebrity cruiser who might now be looking for just a little more though still not ready to go overboard and pick a very high priced luxury line...

 

In response, Royal Caribbean/Celebrity came up with Azamara, virtually copying Oceania's business model, to try to keep those customers in the family...

 

BTW, EVERY cruise line is competing with whoever is perceived to be one step down...Royal Caribbean is marketing to Carnival or NCL cruisers who are getting tired of the crowds and noise on RCCL and may be attracted by the upgraded amenities and better activities for their kids...Celebrity is marketing to the RCCL cruisers whose kids are now older and they, themselves no longer have an interest in rock climbing and surfing and would rather have great service, less crowded ships and more elegant bars and lounges...Everybody competes to gain a larger customer share and to attract the outlying demographic from the "neighboring" cruise line...

 

So, if you are looking for the cruise line with the experience and price closest to Celebrity, it is likely HAL...

 

BUT, if you are thinking that you have somehow "outgrown" Celebrity or are one of those who think Celebrity isn't giving you what they once did and you're looking to step up, then YOU are the "target market" for Oceania and Azamara...

 

Personally, I love Celebrity and have never really had an itch to go try HAL...I have done a couple of Princess cruises and have found them fairly unsatisfying--really a step down from Celebrity--ships were more crowded, service not as good...BUT I have been three times now on Oceania and have been very impressed...The prices are, generally, about 15-20% higher than Celebrity (when you adjust for free airfare, no specialty restaurant charges and other differences)...I can guarantee that I am right in Oceania's target...I can easily afford either cruise, I appreciate some of the Oceania extras (and no formal nights)...but, I am also not really willing to give Celebrity up either...I get treated very well every time by Celebrity, so why pay that 15-20% extra if I don't have to?

Well, I generally decide based on itinerary...

 

So, anyway, for me specifically, and for others like me--that may be the most competitive part of the spectrum...

 

 

Great comparison!!! We do O for T/A's and X for other cruises...we love O but the other cruises are so port extensive that it seems like work...and also because we have been to most of the ports they offer in Europe and Asia...but we still have other areas of the world to explore!!!!

 

Thanks for the "even-handed" ideas and thoughts in your post!!! LuAnn

[baldercash]

What I am saying is we are not just comparing apples to apples we have as well a mix of different varieties, grades and sizes of apples in each cruise lines basket.

Azamara is the only cruise line with one variety and size but people will likely still assign a different grade between the 2 ships.

[slp123]

I believe those statistics, if I am reading them correctly, are just flat our in error...at least as it relates to Oceania...

 

We have cruised on both the R-ships (which are pretty much identical to Azamara's R-ships and on the new Marina...

The R-ships are very nice and very comfortable...The Marina blows it away...

 

The Marina (and sister ship Riviera) is a 66,084 gross ton ship that carries (at double occupancy) 1,252 passengers and 800 crew ...Doing the simple math, that is a space to passenger ratio of over 52.7...The crew to passenger ratio is better than 1:1.57...

 

This should bring Oceania's numbers to a way better position as these ships now make up 40% of their fleet and over 54.6% of their passenger capacity...

 

I cannot even find a number for "third and fourth" berths on Marina or Riviera...but, I really don't think that is an issue. My experience with Oceania is that there are rarely ever any third or fourth berths filled--if they even exist...The target marketing and passenger demographics tend to lean toward very few children on board and economic demographics that indicate that it would be extremely odd for more than two to share a cabin...There are a large number of "single occupancy" passengers...Sort of the polar opposite of, say, Carnival--where it seems EVERY third and fourth berth is constantly full...

 

With that, I would say that these two ships actually rival the ratio numbers of the luxury lines...

 

I went back and looked at the individual stats for each ship and ignored the summary provided and did my own calculations to arrive at a blended average.

With respect to the Space Ratio, there was an error due to an erroneous "." in the averaging calculation software. The upward revised Oceania blended space ratio is 38.53. For your information Oceania's 3 R ships have space ratios of 36.3 and the 2 newer ships have space ratios of 41.88.

 

As far as the underlying stats for Oceania's passenger capacity and staffing, these are the stats provided by the cruise line.

• R-ships carry 698 passengers at 100% capacity, 834 passengers if all 3rd/4th berths filled
  
• Marina/Riveria carry 1258 passengers at 100% capacity and 1578 if all 3rd/4th berths filled
  
• R ships carry 386 in staff and Marina/Riveria carry 800 in staff
  

[slp123]

What I am saying is we are not just comparing apples to apples we have as well a mix of different varieties, grades and sizes of apples in each cruise lines basket.

Azamara is the only cruise line with one variety and size but people will likely still assign a different grade between the 2 ships.

 

Agreed, that is why I added the information as to which cruise lines vary widely among its ships and which are more uniform. If someone is interested in further detailed ship by ship information, there are web sites that carry in easy to read tables ship specific data. Unfortunately I don't think I can give the link on here.

[Happy Cruiser 6143]

I found an article about cruise ship cabins which is not comprehensive but gives some interesting comparisons by cabin class across an assortment of cruise lines. The article is entitled Which and Where are the Best Cabins on a Cruise Ship

 

This is an example of the dodgy information out there. No mention whatsoever of Penthouse suites on the M class ships on Celebrity? Add the suite and the balcony together and the thing is bigger than my house!

 

I did a lot of this research before doing my first cruise. I prefer now to actually see the cabins and make my own judgment, also taking into account people's reports and photos from their experience. Plus, having cruised a bit now I know what's important to me and what's not.

[slp123]

This is an example of the dodgy information out there. No mention whatsoever of Penthouse suites on the M class ships on Celebrity? Add the suite and the balcony together and the thing is bigger than my house!

 

I did a lot of this research before doing my first cruise. I prefer now to actually see the cabins and make my own judgment, also taking into account people's reports and photos from their experience. Plus, having cruised a bit now I know what's important to me and what's not.

 

As you said, the information is out there. I really can't provide comparisons of every cabin type on each ship on every line. And I agree with you, the stats will not provide the definitive answer because of subjective issues that vary in importance from cruiser to cruiser. We have seen people on these boards who state no matter what the advantages they would not cruise on a specific line because of its smoking policy, because it lacks a true promenade deck, because the bathrooms are too small , because the ship plays music in public places on a non-stop basis or for one of many other factors. I don't have any one factor that must be fulfilled but there are factors that are not ever important to me. For example I really don't care about what is provided in the casino or for evening "big stage" entertainment as I don't gamble and I don't enjoy Vegas style entertainment which I find mindless. On the other hand, I really dislike crowded ships and so if I am not going on a small luxury ship then I want a large ship that has a spacious feel to it. That is why I am so looking forward to my cruise next week on Reflection, Celebrity's ship with the best space ration excepting Xpedition.

 

The bottom line is each person puts together a number of priorities and goes with those. And that's critical because if you know what's important to you and you have access to information that will educate you on your key factors, then you will be making an educated choice and will most likely have an enjoyable cruise and not be a victim of "unfulfilled expectations" and "thwarted intentions".

[Bruin Steve]

The upward revised Oceania blended space ratio is 38.53. For your information Oceania's 3 R ships have space ratios of 36.3 and the 2 newer ships have space ratios of 41.88.

• R-ships carry 698 passengers at 100% capacity, 834 passengers if all 3rd/4th berths filled
  
• Marina/Riveria carry 1258 passengers at 100% capacity and 1578 if all 3rd/4th berths filled
  
• R ships carry 386 in staff and Marina/Riveria carry 800 in staff
  

 

May be...BUT...Note that your ratio numbers are based on MAXIMUM (All 3rd/4th filled) capacity...

 

I believe this is fairly misleading when it comes to Oceania...

Though I have no verifyable numbers, I will guess, based on a number of factors, that Oceania ships very rarely sail with even the full double capacity, let alone MAXIMUM capacity...

 

Very rarely do they have many if any at all of those 3rd or 4th berths filled...and they often have many cabins, though "fully booked", carrying only single passengers...It is due to the demographics and marketing of the ships...There are no children's programs--Cruise lines like Princess, Royal Caribbean, even Celebrity to a certain extent...and especially Carnival, NCL and Disney...often fill up a majority, if not all of those 3rd and 4th berths...They are marketing to a lot of families with young children one may not want to put into their own cabin...or, Carnival, for example, marketing to a lot of very young folks on very tight budgets who will even put four adults in the same cabin...

 

On Celebrity, for exmple, you get a lot less of those...On Oceania, you get almost none...

 

Then, on some lines, with a little older demographic, you pull in a higher number of older widows and/or widowers who will pay a "single supplement" and travel alone--in effect giving you a sold out cabin for two with just one passenger...

 

When you look at just the pure numbers--even comparing by just "full double capacity" or by "maximum capacity", it is still a case of apples and oranges...

[slp123]

May be...BUT...Note that your ratio numbers are based on MAXIMUM (All 3rd/4th filled) capacity...

 

I believe this is fairly misleading when it comes to Oceania...

Though I have no verifyable numbers, I will guess, based on a number of factors, that Oceania ships very rarely sail with even the full double capacity, let alone MAXIMUM capacity...

 

Very rarely do they have many if any at all of those 3rd or 4th berths filled...and they often have many cabins, though "fully booked", carrying only single passengers...It is due to the demographics and marketing of the ships...There are no children's programs--Cruise lines like Princess, Royal Caribbean, even Celebrity to a certain extent...and especially Carnival, NCL and Disney...often fill up a majority, if not all of those 3rd and 4th berths...They are marketing to a lot of families with young children one may not want to put into their own cabin...or, Carnival, for example, marketing to a lot of very young folks on very tight budgets who will even put four adults in the same cabin...

 

On Celebrity, for exmple, you get a lot less of those...On Oceania, you get almost none...

 

Then, on some lines, with a little older demographic, you pull in a higher number of older widows and/or widowers who will pay a "single supplement" and travel alone--in effect giving you a sold out cabin for two with just one passenger...

 

When you look at just the pure numbers--even comparing by just "full double capacity" or by "maximum capacity", it is still a case of apples and oranges...

 

That is why when presenting these numbers I said that one would actually have to know how often and to what degree over booking occurs on any particular line.:)

[slp123]

Here is a better view of the earlier posted chart.

 

[slp123]

Another measurement used by the cruise industry in evaluating where a ship fits market-wise is the "cost per berth". Ships with expensive amenities and/or larger cabins and/or greater public space will have a higher "cost per birth".

 

If you are curious as to any particular ship and how it compares to others, I can supply the information.

[bar_20]

Numbers! Shumbers! You can have a cabin thats bigger on X than Y and Z but if you have a terrible cabin stewart that can make the extra room meaningless. You can have the best food in the MDR but if your waiter and his helper are mediocre and this happened to us, the better food can be meaningless. X or HAL? I have been on both and I would say both were about equal. On HAL the average age was about 70, the ship was dead at midnight. On Celebrity the average age on our cruise was about 55. The ship was a little more lively at night.

 

We just booked a cruise on X. We looked at a cruise on HAL that was about the same. X's cruise is 28 days, HAL is 29 days. The room catagories were about the same, room sizes were real close. Celebrity's price was $3000.00 cheaper per person per cabin. It was a no brainer on which one to choose. Had the rate been reversed we would have gone with HAL.

 

I have been on NCL before. Their fares were usually cheaper than other cruise lines. We liked their anytime dining, which most cruise lines have now adopted in some form or other. We liked their lack of dress up nights. What we didn't like was their constant use of the intercom system to sell something, They always had some kind of sale going on. The other thing was the high pressure to buy drinks out on the decks. It just reminded me of K-Mart. However if you can overlook that then they can be a bargain. Cruise lines are a sum of their parts and like a chain, as long as the links are well oiled any cruise can be an enjoyment.