Is Royal the worst rated ship on CC?

[Mom33]

To see the most comprehensive "live" and pictures from someone that was actually on the cruise, check out these threads:

 

The pictures say it all with no need for commentary.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1961004

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1950107

 

74 days to go for us! :D

[baldercash]

The pictures say it all with no need for commentary. :D

 

A ship is more then a bunch of pretty pictures, no one has said that Royal is not a good looking ship.

She better look nice as she is only 6 months old so of course she is going to appeal to the eye. Problem is she does not work and disappoints according to the reviews.

The reviews place her on the bottom of the list as one of the worst ships reviewed by Cruise Critic members.

So far we can assume that the numerous deficiencies that have been mentioned and listed on threads and reviews are the cause for her poor standings or we can assume as some have postulated that it is due to CC posters who are part of a conspiracy to write poor reviews about her.

It appears even Princess management recognizes she has problems which is why she has planned upgrades and they are modifying her sister ships before they set them afloat.

 

As suggested by many Royal boosters one can lower their expectations and go slip sliding across her appealing marble floor on one of the worst rated ships on Cruise Critic.

She is what she is, you bring her to the dance well then you have to dance with her!

Edited January 14, 2014 by baldercash

[Woobstr112G]

While I was extremely unhappy with my OS suite and the soot issues, overall I thought the Royal was a nice ship. I judged her harshly at first, due to being unhappy with the cabin, but after I calmed down I found that there were a number of things I really liked about the Royal. While I probably won't be booking her or the Regal anytime soon, I think the Royal/Regal have many features that the cruising public will enjoy.....:):):)

 

Bob

[Blk_Amish]

While I was extremely unhappy with my OS suite and the soot issues, overall I thought the Royal was a nice ship. I judged her harshly at first, due to being unhappy with the cabin, but after I calmed down I found that there were a number of things I really liked about the Royal. While I probably won't be booking her or the Regal anytime soon, I think the Royal/Regal have many features that the cruising public will enjoy.....:):):)

 

Bob

 

This is much bigger than the voice and reviews on CC. If one takes what posted and the reviews on CC as gospel so be it but I can't. Not long along (yesterday) I was called/refered to a Welfare Queen. Everyone knows I give the biggest Drag Queen a run for his money. I put as much faith in the reviews as that person's post, taken with a grain of salt. I either take EVERYTHING posted on CC to heart or nothing at all, so worse ship or Welfare Queen, neither/both:D. I know of no one in PUBLIC would refer to me as a Welfare Queen or Royal Princess as the worse ship. There is a PUBLIC that is NOT represented in the 2 or so percent here, thank heavens.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Blk_Amish

[Cruise Junky]

This is much bigger than the voice and reviews on CC. If one takes what posted and the reviews on CC as gospel so be it but I can't. Not long along (yesterday) I was called/refered to a Welfare Queen. Everyone knows I give the biggest Drag Queen a run for his money. I put as much faith in the reviews as that person's post, taken with a grain of salt. I either take EVERYTHING posted on CC to heart or nothing at all, so worse ship or Welfare Queen, neither/both:D.

 

Interesting how you picked up on that and not the part that he won't be booking her again.

[Blk_Amish]

A ship is more then a bunch of pretty pictures, no one has said that Royal is not a good looking ship.

 

Sometimes all we need from the ship is her stunning beauty to compliment an amazing occasion. We are already taking something to the ship that will set the stage for a wonderful time before she even sets sail. The fact no one said that the Royal is not a good looking ship, then we know she will be music to our eyes. Let them dance even if the dance floor sucks.

 

Pauline

[baldercash]

While I was extremely unhappy with my OS suite and the soot issues, overall I thought the Royal was a nice ship. I judged her harshly at first, due to being unhappy with the cabin, but after I calmed down I found that there were a number of things I really liked about the Royal. While I probably won't be booking her or the Regal anytime soon, I think the Royal/Regal have many features that the cruising public will enjoy.....:):):)Bob

 

The soot issue aside, I realize it would ruin most peoples cruises but it is something that Princess did not plan and as it has not been encountered on other ships so they did no planning against it. The rest they should have known. From what I have read they discount because of it, not great but it should sooth the disappointment some what?

 

But did your disappointment in your cabin go to the feeling of not good value for money spent?

 

Your post seems to encapsulate the reviews.

One or two issues disappoints on your cruise, you state there are a number of things you liked about the ship. maybe give it a 4*?

Problem is you are not interested in going back on Royal or Regal.

 

There are so many deficiencies on this ship that a disproportionate number of pax have this experience.

There is no conspiracy she truly disappoints 40% of those who cruise her.

Thus Royal is rated one of the worst ships by CC members.

 

You may have to dance with her but you don't have to take her home!

Edited January 14, 2014 by baldercash

[Blk_Amish]

Interesting how you picked up on that and not the part that he won't be booking her again.

 

I won't be booking her again. I also have ONE cruise planned on Allure for the same reason and won't be booking again even for free. I assume he won't be doing it for the same reason I won't be. Some of us get to the point where we finally try things with an open mind, but know where to find our sweet spot or comfort zone, its not on the new line of ships or resorts for me. I picked up on everything but simply thought he tried it and now can say been there, done that, but back to his sweet spot/layout:D

 

Princess or cruising is not my comfort zone vacation so I can easily say I may never do either again.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Blk_Amish

[JimmyVWine]

While I was extremely unhappy with my OS suite and the soot issues, overall I thought the Royal was a nice ship. I judged her harshly at first, due to being unhappy with the cabin, but after I calmed down I found that there were a number of things I really liked about the Royal. While I probably won't be booking her or the Regal anytime soon, I think the Royal/Regal have many features that the cruising public will enjoy.....:):):)

 

Bob

Bob: Your "2 cents" are worth a million bucks. This post nails it. Royal continues to be overly polarizing, but I think that most people on either pole are overreaching. The ship is not a floating gulag, but it apparently falls short of what many people want, especially in comparison to other ships from which to choose. Both the "haters" and "lovers" of Royal should realize that when people sail on Royal, odds are that they will find things to complain about, but in the end they will enjoy their cruise. The only meaningful question marching forward is: Will their experience cause them to want to rush back to sail on her again, or will they take the "been there, done that" approach and move back over to other Princess ships, or other cruise lines entirely.

 

Companies like Princess depend on repeat business. And the reviews speak for themselves. Many say: "Loved it. Would sail on her again in a heartbeat." Many say, (as Bob has suggested): "We enjoyed our cruise, but I am no rush to sail on this ship again." And many say: "This is a poorly designed ship and I won't step foot on her likes again." And people here can struggle with and challenge the legitimacy of those opinions, their efficacy, their accuracy, their numerosity and their value. But they are what they are. Even if the person who says that they will never step foot on Royal again says so for wrong and inaccurate reasons, it is their actions that count to PCL, not their reasoning. And PCL cannot be happy that so many people are saying that they are in no rush to sail Royal a second time, and it doesn't matter if they are saying so because they had a lousy time, or, like Bob, they had a fine time. If PCL loses repeat business, that is a bad thing. And a brand new ship with a 63% "love it" rating is worrisome.

 

This discussion is not about whether any particular poster here will enjoy their future cruise. It is about the concern that PCL must have with the low ratings and why those low ratings are occurring. If it is because there are design issues that can be fixed, then they need to be fixed. If they are because people are inaccurately interpreting certain aspects of the ship, then PCL needs to do a better job in educating the masses. Trust me. PCL is not "writing off" the reviews (both positive and negative) that end with: "I am in no hurry to sail on Royal or Regal any time soon" as being the product of some phenomenon that only Negative Nellie's post reviews, or that 200 is too small a data sample to count, or that "Live" threads are more meaningful. Not when Coral (389 reviews), Diamond (488 reviews), and Ruby (544 reviews) are well above 80%. And not when Celebrity Reflection (launched just a bit before Royal) has 257 reviews and a "love it" rating of 88% on CC. Dismiss this data all you want. I proimise you that PCL is not.

[Mom33]

The point missed here is that all the reviews are not negative. Just on this thread alone, I count 9 people that have stated they would cruise the

Royal again! I have read many comments from people that were on the ship, that the pluses outweighed the minuses. The ship is different and not to your liking then you have other ships to sail. The people that enjoyed the cruise

should not be criticized or belittled for doing so. Their reviews are just as important to Princess as negative ones.

 

 

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[Oh2B@C]

Princess Executive 1: "Is the Royal Princess sailing full consistently?"

 

Princess Executive 2: "Why, yes it is."

 

Princess Executive 1: "Awesome. Don't change a thing. Who cares about any negative reviews..."

[bhopal21]

The point missed here is that all the reviews are not negative.

 

The ship is different and not to your liking then you have other ships to sail. The people that enjoyed the cruise

should not be criticized or belittled for doing so. Their reviews are just as important to Princess as negative ones.

 

As the OP pointed out 62% of the reviews were favorable.

 

Why can't folks just decide whether or not the Royal is for them without trying to persuade the other side?

 

Move on, it is what it is.;)

 

Mike:)

[Blk_Amish]

Maybe entire Corporation, as a whole, is going after new or infrequent cruisers. I loved Carnival (part of the corporation) but after my last cruise I got the idea I am not their target market, so they won't mind if I left, but to where, Princess. The stockholders lost nothing. There is a possibility they are pushing the some of the old timers on Princess to HAL, as much as Carnival pushed cruisers like me to Princess. I am turning 50, but I don't think these newer ships were built with an aging mama in mind.

 

There might be method to the madness but some take change harder then others, read the dress code thread. Some still have their nose up in the air about denim, and drag queens are mistaken for welfare queens. One thing I get from the smaller size is that Princess is not looking for people who book but stowaway in the cabin or on their balcony. I have budgeted more for on board spending because I didn't book a balcony. If I am going to pay to uncork the extra wine, I won't even bother, so there goes the bar tab. If the dancing is as bad as posted, there goes more shopping and casino. Let me check to see how much the balcony will cost?. There may ever be one big enough to fit my butt, it's more of a viewing area and a chance to lessen the on board spending:eek:.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Blk_Amish

[Gunner22aa]

There is enough about this class of ship that I don't like that will keep me sailing on the Grand Class ships which both DW and I love. There are also things that I like but not enough to sway my opinion. That's just me. I take and advise all others who ask, all reviews with a grain of salt. How many times have I seen two reviews of the same ship and sailing that were diametrically opposing. One says trip of a life time and the other says the maiden voyage of the Titanic would have been better. The Royal and soon the Regal will certainly appeal to many but just not me. I can only hope that when the time comes for the Grand Class ships to go to the breaker that Princess will replace them with something comparable and not the mega ships of today.

[Mapu]

The point missed here is that all the reviews are not negative. Just on this thread alone, I count 9 people that have stated they would cruise the

Royal again! I have read many comments from people that were on the ship, that the pluses outweighed the minuses. The ship is different and not to your liking then you have other ships to sail. The people that enjoyed the cruise

should not be criticized or belittled for doing so. Their reviews are just as important to Princess as negative ones.

 

 

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

You can add two more that would sail the Royal again on the right itinerary.

We booked the 5 day sampler in October to be able to experience the ship for ourselves. We had a great time and enjoyed the lively atmosphere of the ship. I now know which categories I would book as well as location on the ship where I would prefer to be.

[Mom33]

A ship is more then a bunch of pretty pictures, no one has said that Royal is not a good looking ship.

She better look nice as she is only 6 months old so of course she is going to appeal to the eye. Problem is she does not work and disappoints according to the reviews.

The reviews place her on the bottom of the list as one of the worst ships reviewed by Cruise Critic members.

So far we can assume that the numerous deficiencies that have been mentioned and listed on threads and reviews are the cause for her poor standings or we can assume as some have postulated that it is due to CC posters who are part of a conspiracy to write poor reviews about her.

It appears even Princess management recognizes she has problems which is why she has planned upgrades and they are modifying her sister ships before they set them afloat.

 

As suggested by many Royal boosters one can lower their expectations and go slip sliding across her appealing marble floor on one of the worst rated ships on Cruise Critic.

She is what she is, you bring her to the dance well then you have to dance with her!

 

If you really look at the pictures, you really see the ship in use. Many questions are answered with out words.

 

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[JimmyVWine]

The point missed here is that all the reviews are not negative.

 

I don't think that this point is being missed at all. The discussion is centered on whether the percentage of those positive reviews is troublesome. No one is denying that 5 star reviews abound. Just in smaller numbers than PCL may have hoped for. If past performance predicts future results, then 63% of the people who sail on this ship will love it. No denying that. If those numbers are satisfactory, then so be it.

[JimmyVWine]

Princess Executive 1: "Is the Royal Princess sailing full consistently and returning satisfactory projected earnings.?"

 

Princess Executive 2: "Why, yes it is sailing full. But we are having to discount fares considerably to fill the cabins."

 

Princess Executive 1: "Hmm...that may be a problem"

 

The conversation might go something like this. Who knows?

Edited January 14, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[mafig]

Wouldn't you think the executives would have wanted the newest ship to command the highest prices (like Oasis and Allure do) and to continue to command them for years after (also like Oasis and Allure).

[Mom33]

Wouldn't you think the executives would have wanted the newest ship to command the highest prices (like Oasis and Allure do) and to continue to command them for years after (also like Oasis and Allure).

 

I don't think Princess is out to compete with the behemoths. They are a totally different style of cruise.

As a matter of fact, they are not my style but I am not over on RCL forums

antagonizing posters in their forums like some of the drop in visitors here putting down Princess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[Blk_Amish]

Wouldn't you think the executives would have wanted the newest ship to command the highest prices (like Oasis and Allure do) and to continue to command them for years after (also like Oasis and Allure).

 

From what I understand the Oasis and Allure are cruising experience like no other, not present on any of the other RCL ships or lines. I am going on the Roayl Princess expecting the same cruising experience as I did the others, be in awe as I was with Sapphire Princess. What are they offering on RP that would justify the much higer price, for years to come? RCL changed the cruising experience with Oasis and Allure, not sure Princess did or intended to with the Royal. Princess is staying true to their cruising experience of beauty and elegance.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Blk_Amish

[JimmyVWine]

I don't think Princess is out to compete with the behemoths. They are a totally different style of cruise.

As a matter of fact, they are not my style but I am not over on RCL forums

antagonizing posters in their forums like some of the drop in visitors here putting down Princess.

And here is where your arguments begin to lose some credibility. The obvious answer to mafig's question is "Yes." I don't care what side of the "Royal debate" one is on, the answer is "Yes". It doesn't matter if Royal and Regal are not intended to be head-on competitors with Oasis, Allure and Quantum. (And I agree with you that they are not.) But not competing with behemoths does not alter the reality that PCL designed and built Royal and Regal to be profit leaders. And I don't have any first-hand knowledge as to whether or not they are achieving that. But to shout down a poster for raising a question that has an obvious answer rings of abject cheerleading which lessens the impact of objective, dispassionate argument.

 

As Pam has pointed out countless times....."Follow the money". Cruise fares are dependent on supply and demand. Little more. If the demand for Royal and Regal are high, PCL will be able to command premium prices from people clammoring to get on board. It is naive to deny that this was PCL's hope. Indeed, it is the hope of every single cruise line that introduces a new ship. No cruise line spends billions on new ships hoping and expecting them to create a demand that is no greater than its ships built in 1999.

Edited January 14, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[Mom33]

And here is where your arguments begin to lose some credibility. The obvious answer to mafig's question is "Yes." I don't care what side of the "Royal debate" one is on, the answer is "Yes". It doesn't matter if Royal and Regal are not intended to be head-on competitors with Oasis, Allure and Quantum. (And I agree with you that they are not.) But not competing with behemoths does not alter the reality that PCL designed and built Royal and Regal to be profit leaders. And I don't have any first-hand knowledge as to whether or not they are achieving that. But to shout down a poster for raising a question that has an obvious answer rings of abject cheerleading which lessens the impact of objective, dispassionate argument.

 

Is your opinion more important than everyone else?

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[JimmyVWine]

Is your opinion more important than everyone else?

Of course not. But mafig's question did not really solicit an opinion. And instead, you berated the post. Why?

[Blk_Amish]

And here is where your arguments begin to lose some credibility. The obvious answer to mafig's question is "Yes." I don't care what side of the "Royal debate" one is on, the answer is "Yes". It doesn't matter if Royal and Regal are not intended to be head-on competitors with Oasis, Allure and Quantum. (And I agree with you that they are not.) But not competing with behemoths does not alter the reality that PCL designed and built Royal and Regal to be profit leaders. And I don't have any first-hand knowledge as to whether or not they are achieving that. But to shout down a poster for raising a question that has an obvious answer rings of abject cheerleading which lessens the impact of objective, dispassionate argument.

 

As Pam has pointed out countless times....."Follow the money". Cruise fares are dependent on supply and demand. Little more. If the demand for Royal and Regal are high, PCL will be able to command premium prices from people clammoring to get on board. It is naive to deny that this was PCL's hope. Indeed, it is the hope of every single cruise line that introduces a new ship. No cruise line spends billions on new ships hoping and expecting them to create a demand that is no greater than its ships built in 1999.

Really, but I beg to differ. Royal Princess is not doing anything to the cruising experience as the Allure and therefore not justify the higer rate, at least for me to pay. I am paying for the Allure for a cruising experience like no other. I am going on Royal princess for the SAME reason I did Sapphire and other ship.

 

The line could be using the Walmart pricing method. Keep it lower so regular folks show up and spend a lot at the bars, photos, casinos and excursions. Anyone who thinks Walmart is not successful, think again.

 

RCL is my favorite line but my on on board spending is usually a lot less, as I know it will on the Allure.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Blk_Amish