Jim & Kat on Navigator: our 1st cruise --commentary & thoughts

[OctoberKat]

Hi pingpong, I, too, hope discussion proceeds sans ruckus!

 

I am not an experienced cruiser having but a single Regent Navigator voyage in my tally. I have three more cruises booked, one with Silversea this November and two on Seabourn in March and June 2016. Both ships are smaller than Navigator but with more favorable space-to-passenger ratio: Navigator 67.3 feet, Silversea Whisper 74 feet, Seabourn Quest 71 feet. The latter two vessels aren't so much smaller as they are carrying fewer passengers, hence more room aboard.

 

We've also a Belmond barge cruise in July along the canals of Burgundy.

 

Expectations, indeed, are a factor for me, buttressed by cost. We booked a master suite and that was wise on our part and the larger digs and veranda contributed greatly to our experience. I would not sail on any cruise line in any but the larger suites (real suites).

 

The notion of whether a cruise is or is not luxury is one which is controversial on these boards. Let me say, rather, that Navigator gave us a very pleasant cruise. There's a post above where I discuss the issue parsed by luxury at sea and luxury ashore, two very different critters.

Edited March 15, 2015 by OctoberKat

[Baggywrinkle99]

One person's "luxury" is another's "squalor". It's so very subjective. I can take or leave having a butler to be honest, but to others they are indispensable. Likewise, I don't need or want to have my plate carried for me (actually it's an irritant) but others absolutely love it.

 

I think the magic ingredient on any cruise is the overall "vibe" created by the passengers. If they are happy, relaxed, friendly and obviously having a wonderful time the whole mood of the ship lifts to reflect that. Staff are happy too. If you are unlucky and find yourself among a group of grumps (it happens) then the whole experience is diminished. And of course on a ship one is effectively stranded in that environment.

 

The best and worst cruises we've taken were both with Regent and for the same reason - the people - so I don't believe it has anything to do with any particular cruise line.

[fizzy]

 

I think the magic ingredient on any cruise is the overall "vibe" created by the passengers. If they are happy, relaxed, friendly and obviously having a wonderful time the whole mood of the ship lifts to reflect that. Staff are happy too. If you are unlucky and find yourself among a group of grumps (it happens) then the whole experience is diminished. And of course on a ship one is effectively stranded in that environment.

 

 

That is so exactly right. My last SS cruise could have been perfect in every way and we are SO easy but a lot of the passengers were noticeably cranky, pushy and entitled and it changed the usual seamless ease for the crew. I found myself feeling sorry for the staff and that should not have to be. I wish management would have some type of protocol in place to tone down some of these people. whether SS. Regent or Seabourn, I'm sure it's more noticeable because of the size of the ships. They, in effect, can change the whole cruise for everyone.

[Travelcat2]

".....it was not the luxury we expected, when comparing to other cruise lines, certain areas were too small to accommodate the passengers at times....."

 

Hi Jane (Cambridge). I'm certainly not "wedded" to Regent. Although they are the only ocean cruise line that we have tried so far, I'm quite willing to "shop around" and consider other choices (in the luxury category) for future options.

 

I'm wondering if you (and perhaps OctoberKat) could expand a bit on both of your cruising expectations and tell me what would be required (and which you apparently felt you did not receive) which would have actually met your standards for a "luxury" experience? What things could/should Regent have done to meet those expectation/s of "luxury"? I apologize in advance, if you have listed those things previously. If you have, I must have missed them.

 

Was it mainly the fact that you think the ship was too small for the number of passengers onboard (i.e. crowded public space)? Or were there other shortcomings you experienced (service, amenities, food, etc.) which prevented you from giving Regent a "luxury" rating?

 

I would think that if the ship was bigger, they'd simply try to fit more passengers onboard and the public spaces would still seem too crowded. Or is the problem one of "price vs. value"? Do you think the prices that are charged are simply too high for the total product that is offered?

 

I hope these questions don't cause a big commotion on the thread, but if anyone with substantial cruising experience comes off of a Regent cruise thinking that it was not a "luxury experience", I'd like to know what cruise alternatives they would be comparing it to? :confused: Regards

 

Wow - the gang is here. pingpong1, the questions that you ask are important ones and I hope that they are answered.

 

From my perspective, OctoberKat's questions were difficult to answer. She had no cruising experience and very high expectations. She stayed in a Master Suite which very few Regent passengers on Cruise Critic have stayed in. Add that to the fact that she was comparing Regent to luxury hotels... it created a quandary.

 

While I try to be 100% honest on CC, I do not want to discourage people from sailing on Regent. The Navigator has the same level of service as other ships. However, IMO, she does not have sufficient public areas and it is important to note that there is an aft vibration (as there is on the Voyager - our favorite ship).

 

Both OctoberKat and janecambridge were new to Regent (not sure if janecambridge was new to cruising). To be fair, I wanted to state the negative as well as the positive. I honestly do not recall stating that I would never sail on the Navigator again but do recall stating that she is our least favorite Regent ship and that we prefer not to sail on her. IMO, it is very difficult to give someone that is new to Regent a fair summary of what to expect as we do not know their traveling history.

 

When I posted honest experiences, I was met with arguments so I ceased giving suggestions. Again, in my opinion, when you are new to a cruise line, it is best to sit back and read the pros and cons of that cruise line and draw your own conclusions rather than argue with what is being said. After experiencing Regent, a comparison of your past cruises is helpful. In terms of OctoberKat's experience, I look forward to a comparison thread of Regent and Silversea (and Seabourn as well).

 

Baggywrinkle99 - agree about the mix of the passengers. Fizzy, I must ask if you have sailed on Regent as most of your experiences seem to be on another cruise line. While your experience with "cranky passengers" on Silversea must have been difficult, no one on Regent has reported the same experience.

 

Again, hope this does not create chaos on the thread.

[Travelcat2]

Corrected to say that Baggywrinkle99 did post that the passenger mix did affect a Regent cruise. Still would appreciate knowing when fizzy's last Regent experience was as things have changed dramatically in the past few years. Also, what happens on one luxury cruise line does not necessarily happen on another. Thanks:-)

[pingpong1]

Well, we seem to be off to a pretty good start, so far. Perhaps it would also help if people could explain what they consider the essential elements are for a cruise to be considered a "luxury cruise"? There is no "right" or "wrong" answer here, as the terms will be defined by each individual.

 

Fizzy and Baggeywrinkle have initially said that they feel that a generally pleasant and happy attitude and demeanor on the part of the passengers has a lot do with making a cruise "luxury". But there's probably plenty of "happy" people (drunks) on a carnival cruise to "no where". And you can do one of those cruises for about 1/10th the price of a Regent "luxury" cruise.

 

So what would/does a cruise line normally have to do to be able to charge the prices (that Regent does) and be able to call itself "luxury" - AND make most everyone "feel" that it was worth the price? Regards

[OctoberKat]

Even an inexperienced cruiser can do this math: "I have three more cruises booked, one with Silversea this November and two on Seabourn in March and June 2016. Both ships are smaller than Navigator but with more favorable space-to-passenger ratio: Navigator 67.3 feet, Silversea Whisper 74 feet, Seabourn Quest 71 feet. The latter two vessels aren't so much smaller as they are carrying fewer passengers, hence more room aboard." quoted from my earlier post.

Edited March 16, 2015 by OctoberKat

[fizzy]

As a matter of fact...3 navigators in a row to Bermuda. My favorite ship.

[fizzy]

Corrected to say that Baggywrinkle99 did post that the passenger mix did affect a Regent cruise. Still would appreciate knowing when fizzy's last Regent experience was as things have changed dramatically in the past few years.

 

What has changed dramatically regarding the passenger mix in the past few years that one would notice? People monopolize the staff in many ways. I find Regent and Silversea much more similar than different. The constant use of the word "luxury" has nothing to do with passenger vibe. So yes, I agree with Baggywinkles99.

[tallship]

In 2006, Radisson felt like luxury

Not much since then

I think it does depend on training of staff, passenger mix and experience

Is Regent now more like a Four Seasons/St. Regis or a Marriott?

 

The Regent experience for us has mostly been very good but our best and worst cruises have been on Navigator

Edited March 16, 2015 by tallship

[OctoberKat]

In response to pingpong's request for personal definitions of luxury, pertaining to the ship itself, not including itinerary:

 

-- Spacious public areas and many of them, some quiet areas -- all comfortably and handsomely furnished, gracious surroundings, lots of pillows large and small (decor needs to be much less trendy so it isn't hopeless outdated after two months; yes, hyperbole).

-- Large cabins, selection of suites with twice-daily housekeeping service

-- Unstinting, expert service

-- Good food and good wine available 24/7

-- No muzak anywhere

-- Upscale spa and salon with relaxation area

-- Pool with walk-in, walk-out access

-- Minimal pretension and formality

-- Access to shipboard management

-- Mobility assistance on occasion

-- Unexpected extras

-- Exceptional pre-sailing access and service

 

My VERY subjective preferences regarding luxury which I cannot reasonably expect to be met:

 

-- No muzak anywhere

-- Lectures and the like / classes

-- If there must be entertainment prefer light opera, classical music of all sorts, dance performances, theatre but not all musicals

-- Traditional afternoon tea

 

We're introverted so as long as our sailing compatriots aren't rude, we're happy.

 

I'm happy to pay big bucks for this type of experience. I'm less thrilled to pay aforementioned big bucks when the voyage misses the mark on many of my first set.

 

Sent from my iPad

[OctoberKat]

In 2006, Radisson felt like luxury

Not much since then

I think it does depend on training of staff, passenger mix and experience

Is Regent now more like a Four Seasons/St. Regis or a Marriott?

 

The Regent experience for us has mostly been very good but our best and worst cruises have been on Navigator

 

Heh, tallship, that must be the dialectic at work.

[OctoberKat]

From my perspective, OctoberKat's questions were difficult to answer. She had no cruising experience and very high expectations. She stayed in a Master Suite which very few Regent passengers on Cruise Critic have stayed in. Add that to the fact that she was comparing Regent to luxury hotels... it created a quandary.

 

I cruised once a year or so from 1950 to 1969 on the now defunct Panama Line, from age 1 to age 19. It is true my recent Navigator cruise is my first since 1969. Nevertheless I've bought in big time with three upcoming sea cruises on Seabourn and Silversea plus an outlier on Belmond's Amaryllis cruising Burgundy's canals which gets little respect on this thread yet I'm understandably high on the notion.

 

How does staying in a master suite prejudice my reporting one way or the other since I have said over and over how much we loved the suite and how much it, er, sweetened our experience? You seem miffed that I was not over the moon about our cruise which I have repeatedly said was fine and good enough yet the master suited only increased our pleasure. It seems I am being called out for staying in a high-end suite.

 

I've stated explicitly several times that luxury on shore and luxury at sea differ mightily. For example:

 

-- "It's important for first-time "luxury" cruisers to know that luxury at sea does not stack up well with luxury ashore. But, then, being ashore isn't being at sea. Be aware that gap between luxury onshore and the same at sea is wide. No reason not to cruise yet useful to adjust expectations and understand sea luxury is costly indeed."

 

And here is what I posted about being at sea:

 

-- "We entirely adored being at sea, in good weather and bad (except at Key West when we wanted to go ashore and it was pelting heavy rain). The ocean, the air, the wind, the forward impetus, sense of movement, the rock and roll -- all that was finest kind, it always felt like an adventure, so very different from our routine lives. It's all this that sends us looting the bank for more cruises."

 

This draws a clear and unambiguous line between the two experiences, ashore and at sea.

 

Both OctoberKat and janecambridge were new to Regent (not sure if janecambridge was new to cruising).

 

"new to Regent" disqualifies us from comment about our experiences? Or, negates our experiences, posts?

 

When I posted honest experiences, I was met with arguments so I ceased giving suggestions. Again, in my opinion, when you are new to a cruise line, it is best to sit back and read the pros and cons of that cruise line and draw your own conclusions rather than argue with what is being said.

 

It's called discussion: your many real experiences and opinions versus my single real experience and opinions. My posts are honest however it pains me to say.

 

As for "when you are new to a cruise line, it is best to sit back and read the pros and cons of that cruise line and draw your own conclusions rather than argue with what is being said." I'm struggling for a respectful response to this and have decided to let TravelCat speak eloquently upon her own behalf.

 

I am chagrined to be found in a squabble and hope to avoid future provocations. I am but human, usually.

 

Moving on, other opinions, input, insights?

Edited March 16, 2015 by OctoberKat

[OctoberKat]

As a matter of fact...3 navigators in a row to Bermuda. My favorite ship.

 

I've never been to Bermuda but would love to cruise there and stay for a bit.

[Travelcat2]

OctoberKat - you have expressed the same opinions a few times already and I have responded to the same comments that you post above. IMO, there is no need to respond further. Hope you enjoy your Silversea cruise which I suspect will be very similar to your Regent experience as we have found this to be the case with Regent and Silversea.

 

fizzy: So many things have change in the last few years that I would not know where to start. The passenger mix is one of them. This has been brought up by others as well. Just wondered if you had sailed Regent recently.

 

pingpong1: Thanks for trying. It worked for a while.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Travelcat2

[fizzy]

 

pingpong1: Thanks for trying. It worked for a while.

 

Many have tried...all have failed...some have quit. .And thanks to Octoberkat for the interesting perspective.

[tallship]

OctoberKat- please continue to remain part of the discussion. To give perspective I still work with about two weeks off a year. if I take a cruise, I do want luxury or what is touted as luxury. No one wants to pay for a business class seat and feel like there are in coach...the metaphors are endless.

 

At the end of the day the Regent experience is fine and is still my first choice but like you I am now looking at other options and I have also adjusted my expectations

[Travelcat2]

OctoberKat- please continue to remain part of the discussion. To give perspective I still work with about two weeks off a year. if I take a cruise, I do want luxury or what is touted as luxury. No one wants to pay for a business class seat and feel like there are in coach...the metaphors are endless.

 

At the end of the day the Regent experience is fine and is still my first choice but like you I am now looking at other options and I have also adjusted my expectations

 

No one is suggesting that someone not remain part of a discussion. The main point of my post last night was that the same questions to me have been asked and answered already so there was no need to respond again.

 

Agree that OctoberKat's perspective is very interesting - especially the part where she describes her vision of luxury. This is something I may ask people considering a Regent cruise in the future as it would enable CC posters to give their opinions as to whether or not those expectations would be met. IMO, she (and others) should write her review in the "review" section of CC where it will remain for people to view indefinitely instead of only on a thread.

 

It remains a mystery to me why threads (not just this one) that have less than rave reviews about a ship are discussed for a long period of time while positive threads are dismissed rather quickly.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Travelcat2

[diebroke]

There is no contest about who posts the most repetitive comments on this board. I predict everyone is aware of it except perhaps the person who does the repetitive posting. OctoberKat, when someone has a huge sense of self-importance & very low self awareness coupled with rejection of negative feedback, it is best to not attempt dialog.

I look forward to your perspectives on Silversea (which I have not cruised) and your Burgundy canal cruise. We recently did a 2 week river cruise on what I believe to be one of the most luxurious European river cruise lines. It was not exactly a luxury experience, but I’m glad we did it. We also did a private barge trip on the Canal du Midi with some friends & it was terrific luxury experience in spite of cabin sizes.

[liptastic]

Hi OctoberKat, your very honest and unbiased reflection of your Navigator cruise have been informative to read. While our own experience on Navigator has been different, I feel it's right to hear everyone's opinions.

I have enjoyed your posts and likewise to other posters look forward to hearing more from you.

I agree for sure with Fizzy and Baggywrinkles about the passenger dynamics and mix having an outcome of the cruise enjoyment. Of course there are cranky passengers on every ship on the seas, be it Regent or any other ship.

Regards, Jean.

[pingpong1]

Diebroke - Would you please divulge the name of the River Cruise Line that you did your two weeks on (and apparently liked very much)? I see more (European) river cruises in my future and would like to try something other than Avalon (the first I took) or Viking. There must be something "higher up the food chain" than those two. ;) I seem to recall dearly departed T. Orpington (RIP) once recommending either Tauck or Scenic to me. Was it either of those? Thanks Much.

[newlondon]

pingpong1, Imo there is no better river cruise line than Tauck. Uniworld comes in a close second. If you would like to go into more depth please e-mail me at w sloan . nl at gmail.com.

[TrulyBlonde]

"It remains a mystery to me why threads (not just this one) that have less than rave reviews about a ship are discussed for a long period of time while positive threads are dismissed rather quickly."

 

Travelcat2...I personally believe the mystery relating to a rave review being dismissed quickly vs: a review that does agree with your beliefs is carried on much longer than necessary due to the fact that you will continue to disagree with the poster, therefore, it creates more feedback from others. Ocktoberkat is actually refreshing on this board and others become stale. IMO

[Travelcat2]

"It remains a mystery to me why threads (not just this one) that have less than rave reviews about a ship are discussed for a long period of time while positive threads are dismissed rather quickly."

 

Travelcat2...I personally believe the mystery relating to a rave review being dismissed quickly vs: a review that does agree with your beliefs is carried on much longer than necessary due to the fact that you will continue to disagree with the poster, therefore, it creates more feedback from others. Ocktoberkat is actually refreshing on this board and others become stale. IMO

 

Respectfully, if you will look back on this thread you will find that it was not me that kept bringing it back up to the top of the threads by making new posts. Actually, I attempt to stop the repeat questions directed to me (such as I did last night) Also, I do not disagree with Octoberkat's experience on the Navigator but have questioned (prior to and after the cruise) whether her expectations of a luxury cruise were realistic. It was nice to read what her expectations were of the cruise. BTW, what is "muzak"? In would be nice for someone to start a thread about luxury cruising expectations.

 

Actually, it would be nice to be able to debate cruising calmly. It is interesting that for 2-3 weeks (end of last month and beginning of this month) things were quite calm on the Regent board. Not sure what happened....... full moon?

Edited March 16, 2015 by Travelcat2

[Vacate]

...

It remains a mystery to me why threads (not just this one) that have less than rave reviews about a ship are discussed for a long period of time while positive threads are dismissed rather quickly.

 

A DF of mine was the Southeast director of a major news organization. We discussed why "negative news" accounted for a majority of the reported stories. His comment was negative stories attracted more readers. Why? Well, in order for the reader to digest problematic information, troubleshooting tactics help to put the contents of the report in perspective. The negative stories become a "puzzle" of sorts.

 

Happy, feel good, stories are exactly that. Something that does not require the reader anything more than the enjoyment to relax and enjoy the information, hence, no need to ruminate the details.

 

This supposition might explain the numerous responses to the posts that seem negative in nature. Just a thought.