SS Cruise Critic Member Review Data v. Other Ultra Premium Lines

[UKCruiseJeff]

When people post their experience - it isn't "misinformation" but "information". Useful information.

 

The ratings are not implying that a Silversea customer would rate a cruise on P&O the same as a P&O customer would rate it.

 

The customers are rating how they rate the cruise they went on compared to what they expected of it compared by implication to presumably what they expected of it and comparable cruises. It isn't putting the quality of the cruises in order. All the rating does is tell you how each line has satisfied it's own customers. It doesn't imply you will be happy on it. If you compare lines it shows which line is best at meeting it's customers expectations. That is all.

 

 

Jeff

[Travelcat2]

Host Dan: The 5% number came from reading Cruise Critic boards. I suspect that a much higher number read mainstream boards while fewer read the luxury boards. Just did a quick number check on how many total reviews there are for a few cruise lines....... it supports my theory (but you are correct that we have no data on "lurkers" -- I am just surprised at how many people onboard Regent have not heard of Cruise Critic).

 

NCL (mainstream) - 17,482 reviews

Oceania (premium plus or whatever) - 916

Regent (luxury) - 550

Silversea (luxury) - 472

Seabourn (luxury) - 245

Crystal (luxury) 291

 

I completely believe that the numbers and reviews that CC sets forth are accurate. However, reviews from even two years ago may be completely obsolete as there have been so many changes.

 

As with Cruise Critic's sister company, Trip Advisor, I only look at fairly recent reviews and look for a pattern - whether it is a positive or negative pattern. In terms of Silversea, I have seen more passengers posting negative comments about food than in the past. These posts are becoming difficult to ignore.

[vistaman]

i did assist on a cruise event in my own country and indeed there was quite a lot of moaning and complaining of the standard of the food on SS

and the fact SS does present itself far better than it really is

i do not think the low quality of orange juice and the not so fresh cheeses are acceptable on breakfast "luxury" level

i do not know Regent , but i am afraid i must qualify the standard of F and B operations, ingredients as the weakest in the 5 starred level

despite the friendly services both in cabins as in bars .

[UKCruiseJeff]

The timeliness of cruise reviews I think is the most salient point. I can't be bothered to track but I'd predict that over time SB was below SS and then crossed over and SB beats SS hands down now as we see. I have thought about it and have a theory.

 

Some time ago there seemed to me to be two players in this sector. SB and SS. But SB had a problem. No balconies. So they really built up compensatory factors to retain loyalty, which was mainly on the soft product. It was all they could do to counteract SS's balconies. Excellent, food, service, and general satisfaction. SS had the balconies and attracted people like me who felt the balconies were essential. I think they then became lazy. I also think they became arrogant ( eg charity, poor CS, focus on agents rather than customers etc) and then ambitious for expansion. So all these conspired together and they lose their way. But during that SB consolidated it's expertise on soft product and then it started to acquire balconies but didn't compromise it's quality ethos. It ended up with a better product from the viewpoint of it's customers.

 

That is my un-scientific theory.

 

 

Jeff

[Keith1010]

Kilroy has provided a great service for people considering a first cruise in this category. Azamera, which really should not be listed, proves a few interesting points.

 

Having experienced the other lines, minus Regent, the only surprise is that SB weighs so much over Crystal. If Doug Ward would take time to do for himself what you did for everyone, he would be writing a better book. Between company advertising and his outdated reviews, it's no wonder so many can be disappointed with their choosing Silversea.

 

I think that Douglas Ward does a wonderful job.

 

And I don't see where this thread does anything better.

 

He provides a lot of useful information.

 

Oh well.

 

Even when it comes to books we all have different opinions.

 

And I always recommend his book as a good resource to have.

 

Keith

[Kilroyshere]

... I have thought about it and have a theory.

 

Some time ago there seemed to me to be two players in this sector. SB and SS. But SB had a problem. No balconies. So they really built up compensatory factors to retain loyalty, which was mainly on the soft product. It was all they could do to counteract SS's balconies. Excellent, food, service, and general satisfaction. SS had the balconies and attracted people like me who felt the balconies were essential. I think they then became lazy. I also think they became arrogant ( eg charity, poor CS, focus on agents rather than customers etc) and then ambitious for expansion. So all these conspired together and they lose their way. But during that SB consolidated it's expertise on soft product and then it started to acquire balconies but didn't compromise it's quality ethos. It ended up with a better product from the viewpoint of it's customers.

 

That is my un-scientific theory.

 

 

Jeff

 

Others are better versed in Cruise Line history than me. I was introduced to SB in the 80's when the Luxury end of cruising was more 'yacht-like.'

 

At the time I recall Cunard's 2 little ships Seagoddess I & II and Radisson's Song of Flower as the other small ship/yacht line traveling the globe. There was Renaissance I believe operating mostly in Europe. There may have been other players. All those ships held 100 to 200 passengers. These ships didn't have as many balconies as ships do today. The food, service and attention on all the lines IMO was exceptional and nothing akin to today's Luxury cruise line service and food.

 

At that same time; the largest cruise ships were between 1,000 and 2,000. So SB, Cunard, Radisson and Renaissance all were offering Luxury cruises and ships that were about 10% the number of passengers and gross tonnage of the big mass market ships.

 

Times changed and big cruise ships starting offering more amenities e.g.; balconies, multiple food venues, more elaborate entertainment...they became Vegas-esque at Sea.

 

And the next gen of Luxury cruise ships evolved carrying 400 to 600 passengers...and the largest cruise ships at sea held 4,000 to 5,000 passengers. And the Luxury ships once again held that 10% ratio to the big players.

 

And the new Luxury ships handled water better, had better designed cabins, nicer bathrooms, more privacy, more outside covered space to stay outta the sun, more bars, better and bigger spas & exercise rooms and more variety of lounges... They offered food by named chefs, became affiliated with land based clubs, ranches, spas and health venues, and the Luxury marketing became more mass...ya now just don't get the same audience on today's 'yacht' like ya used to on the SB Spirit or Seagoddess with the rich and famous abundant on board and service better than you'd get in the White House.

 

That's how I believe this industry has evolved. And each Luxury cruise line is watching what the others do, offer, where they sail and other features such as including air/ground/hotel/shore excursions, internet free or discounted, butlers, cruise/exploring the Antarctic...and every time one Luxury line distinguishes itself with a new feature or superior amenity, all the others follow to one degree or another.

 

However, sometimes a cruise line does not follow the crowd and trend or falls off the wagon. A review is a very valuable tool to find that out.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Kilroyshere

[oregon50]

I think that Douglas Ward does a wonderful job.

Keith

 

Yes, so you have stated more than a few times. Generally, I agree and it is a great resource for someone beginning at zero. However, Silversea has changed drastically during the past ten years and he seems not to have noticed.

[Suite Travels]

Crystal never sails with a 1000 peeps because of the better single supplement rates. Our cruise is 720 out of 1050.

[Kilroyshere]

Crystal never sails with a 1000 peeps because of the better single supplement rates. Our cruise is 720 out of 1050.

 

Some of the Luxury lines are drifting towards the 1k plus passenger ships.

 

Personally, I find the larger the passenger audience and ship is, service suffers, quality declines and what made Luxury cruising what it was, is diminished.

[Suite Travels]

Let me see, I am just finishing my caviar in my suite with a bottle of Dom. So what do you consider luxury?

 

Sorry all could not resist. You have never stepped on Crystal as far as I know.

Edited January 23, 2016 by Suite Travels

[TrulyBlonde]

Let me see, I am just finishing my caviar in my suite with a bottle of Dom. So what do you consider luxury?

 

Sorry all could not resist. You have never stepped on Crystal as far as I know.

 

Luxury to me is not having to brag about it! I actually want to try Crystal, but the size of cabins, fixed dining, etc. does not meet my requirements. However, I have not cruised on SS either, but have booked a B2B for 2017 due to itinerary, nice size cabins, under 500 passengers, and the ability to get into smaller ports. After seeing Keith's photos, I think we made the best decision for us.

[MrsWaldo]

Crystal never sails with a 1000 peeps because of the better single supplement rates. Our cruise is 720 out of 1050.

 

 

720 is still about 300 too many for me.

 

Jeff on the SB v SS based on my experience, I honestly felt that my SS cruise had service, and food edge over SB. There was a significant variation between the service of the 2. While SB had a few standouts in most venues my experience on SS was that the service was generally good to great everywhere.

 

Given the itineraries I would be happy to sail with either. I still have a future cruise deposit with SB. Same itinerary on offer at same per diem then I would be certainly choosing SS.

 

On each and every SS/SB cruise we have had guests who have been aligned one way or another....interestingly on our last SB there were a number of SS pax who were not happy with SB. A few weeks ago there were a number of SB pax on SS, who too, were not happy with SS. So sometimes it can boil down to best fit for you.

 

Interestingly, and i have mentioned this before, IME just prior to sailing with either line there seems to come a run of disgruntled passengers airing their disappointments, then a few months later all is rosy again.

 

Now here's an observation made on board both by Miss W and myself... this has been on all 3 lines we have sailed with.

 

Passenger orders in the following way:-

"I want x."

Food is placed on table.

"Get me y"

Grumbles are heard.

Waitstaff return

Grumbling continues

(note no manners or respect to the waitstaff are used in the process)

 

After observing these behaviours by the same guests over a period you begin to notice that the quality of service being provided tends to decline to the minimal acceptable level and the staff choose not to go the extra mile.

 

When you are nice to the staff they also remember who you are, they seem to have your drink ready, they begin to know you as a person and the things you are more likely to prefer.

 

This in itself will alter your view of the cruise line and may change your review or rating accordingly.

 

You get more from reviews by analysing the comments than by analysing the data. The other is comparing reviews written by the same person. Do those reviews focus on the negatives, the positives or seem to be a mixed bag.

 

I'd actually like to be the fly on the wall that reads customer feedback cards at the end of the cruise to see what the genuine feedback is, as opposed to opinions which are shared to an unknown audience.

[UKCruiseJeff]

Mrs W,

 

I can tell you that we were appointed by the great man himself after he had just spent three days in Monte Carlo reading all of the cards himself and with his senior VP team. We chatted in the Nice airport lounge (he recognised me from a cruise when we had chatted) land we happen to be on the same flight and by the end of the flight from Nice to London we had basically been appointed to assist.

 

Our first job was to redesign the cards so that each section was pinnable to a named VP, and we worked with them to help them understand how to manage the systems to really understand and analyse feedback and harvest satisfied customers. Eventually that relationship came to an end.

 

I've spoke about the relationship before and so this isn't any secret.

 

Jeff

[Suite Travels]

Luxury to me is not having to brag about it! I actually want to try Crystal, but the size of cabins, fixed dining, etc. does not meet my requirements. However, I have not cruised on SS either, but have booked a B2B for 2017 due to itinerary, nice size cabins, under 500 passengers, and the ability to get into smaller ports. After seeing Keith's photos, I think we made the best decision for us.

 

You don't know what you are missing.

[Keith1010]

Yes, so you have stated more than a few times. Generally, I agree and it is a great resource for someone beginning at zero. However, Silversea has changed drastically during the past ten years and he seems not to have noticed.

 

I think it is a great resource and I am not starting at ground zero. :)

 

Keith

[Keith1010]

Ship size is yet another example why choice is great in my opinion.

 

I loved the 200 passengers Seabourn ships. Very unique.

 

I also love the 1,000 passenger (normally carries less) Crystal Ships.

 

And, I also have enjoyed ships in between these sizes.

 

Some people prefer only one size. Some like me enjoy ships of various sizes.

 

Yes, size matters in terms of different cruise experiences. For me it's just a different experience.

 

And size matters as to what a cruise line might emphasize.

 

For example on the Seabourn triplets, the focus of the night was dinner. That was the main event and people might dine for a few hours. On a larger ship offering many options in the evening dinner is still emphasized but you have many other options for the evening from production shows to other entertainment.

 

Like most things in life, what one person likes another person doesn't.

 

Yes, luxury can be provided on various size ships and yes different size ships will offer a different feel.

 

Choice is good.

 

Keith

[Kilroyshere]

For example on the Seabourn triplets, the focus of the night was dinner. That was the main event and people might dine for a few hours. On a larger ship offering many options in the evening dinner is still emphasized but you have many other options for the evening from production shows to other entertainment.

 

Keith;

 

Might we stick to measurable, objective cruise features and benefits, cruise line to cruise line?

 

We both were on the same SS ship for 8-days. I suspect we’ve both been on other cruises of 7 days or more on other luxury cruise lines.

 

Let’s look at evening Entertainment as just one aspect here to measure:

 

All other cruise lines we’ve been on had evening entertainment options well beyond their in house singers/dancers/band as after dinner options.

 

Only SS in this past Spirit cruise, aside from the ship’s in-house singers/dancers/musicians, offered not a single evening option of a Professional entertainer, show, guest performer, comedian, magician, ventriloquist, guest dance duo or other professional entertainer brought aboard. None was there.

 

Some nights we were offered only SS’s in-house entertainment crew, and not all nights did they do that. They only offered a movie in the theater on at least one night.

 

And, the SS in-house crew included none of what say Regent does; who in addition to bringing aboard outside artists, have their own in-house dance duos (Ballet/ballroom dancers), large productions with elaborate stage-work, aerial artists ala Cirque productions, mini Broadway vignettes… Nothing of that sort was on the Spirit either with their in-house entertainment crew.

 

You say you’ve been on the former SB little sister triplets…do you recall their evening ‘Rock The Boat” elaborate deck BBQ, entertainment that followed with dancing till very late, on deck weather permitting? SS offered nothing of the sort.

 

Would you comment on that as a possible deficiency of SS for this past cruise and recognize what they failed to offer is not in line with other luxury cruise lines do offer for after dinner options?

 

Might this deficiency account in part, for SS’s lower data score reported by past cruisers, perhaps in the Cruise Critic Entertainment data scores?

 

BTW; I asked our CD Moss about this and he acknowledged that no entertainment was brought aboard. He claimed SS does not offer outside professional entertainment on cruises of 8-days. I must have missed that caveat in their sales literature or, was it even disclosed?

[Kilroyshere]

You get more from reviews by analysing the comments than by analysing the data. The other is comparing reviews written by the same person. Do those reviews focus on the negatives, the positives or seem to be a mixed bag.

 

Per Cruise Critics cruiser review data among Azamara, SS, SB, Crystal and Regent:

 

- SS scored the LOWEST overall satisfaction rating.

- SS scored the LOWEST percentage of "Excellent" reviews.

- SS scored the HIGHEST percentage of "Terrible" reviews.

 

Do you believe these results based on Cruise Critic data are skewed by some factor e.g.; not done by the same person or, might there be something here of information value for some cruisers to take note of?

 

Do you discount these review scores as not valid or are being misinterpreted because the comments within the reviews are not taken into consideration?

 

Do you believe there is some anomaly accounting for past cruisers to post less favorable review scores of SS versus other luxury cruise lines, for a reason you might explain?

Edited January 23, 2016 by Kilroyshere

[Keith1010]

Keith;

 

Might we stick to measurable, objective cruise features and benefits, cruise line to cruise line?

 

We both were on the same SS ship for 8-days. I suspect we’ve both been on other cruises of 7 days or more on other luxury cruise lines.

 

Let’s look at evening Entertainment as just one aspect here to measure:

 

All other cruise lines we’ve been on had evening entertainment options well beyond their in house singers/dancers/band as after dinner options.

 

Only SS in this past Spirit cruise, aside from the ship’s in-house singers/dancers/musicians, offered not a single evening option of a Professional entertainer, show, guest performer, comedian, magician, ventriloquist, guest dance duo or other professional entertainer brought aboard. None was there.

 

Some nights we were offered only SS’s in-house entertainment crew, and not all nights did they do that. They only offered a movie in the theater on at least one night.

 

And, the SS in-house crew included none of what say Regent does; who in addition to bringing aboard outside artists, have their own in-house dance duos (Ballet/ballroom dancers), large productions with elaborate stage-work, aerial artists ala Cirque productions, mini Broadway vignettes… Nothing of that sort was on the Spirit either with their in-house entertainment crew.

 

You say you’ve been on the former SB little sister triplets…do you recall their evening ‘Rock The Boat” elaborate deck BBQ, entertainment that followed with dancing till very late, on deck weather permitting? SS offered nothing of the sort.

 

Would you comment on that as a possible deficiency of SS for this past cruise and recognize what they failed to offer is not in line with other luxury cruise lines do offer for after dinner options?

 

Might this deficiency account in part, for SS’s lower data score reported by past cruisers, perhaps in the Cruise Critic Entertainment data scores?

 

BTW; I asked our CD Moss about this and he acknowledged that no entertainment was brought aboard. He claimed SS does not offer outside professional entertainment on cruises of 8-days. I must have missed that caveat in their sales literature or, was it even disclosed?

 

I was responding to posts about ship size where it was mentioned that a luxury experience could not be done on a 1,000 passenger ship.

 

I have been on ships (Seabourn Triplets) where they had one or two entertainers from shore but none of their own in house entertainment. And as I posted, the focus was indeed on the meal.

 

All you say is not a deficiency. Rather it is something that you desire that was not available to you. A good lesson is to do your homework. For things that are important a simple way to do that would be to ask on Cruise Critic others who have been on similar cruises what they experienced whether its about entertainment, dress code or whatever.

 

Yes, on our Seabourn Cruises there was not a nighttime barbecue on our sailings on the triplets (not possible where we sailed) and on other luxury lines that we sail there is not a nighttime barbecue.

 

Even a line that we sail that has lots of evening entertainment once in awhile there is a movie at night and no show. Not often but it happens.

 

Again, there are some things that are important to you but that does not mean it is a deficiency of the line. Personally, I could care less about a barbecue and really don't think that makes a line a luxury cruise line. If it did, then we can add plenty of mainstream lines to the list.

 

As we've said, this cruise did not work for you but it did work for others and they like myself would say that we had a luxury experience.

 

Too bad you didn't try those specialty restaurants that we did. They were a very luxurious experience and far better IMHO than having hot dogs, hamburgers and an ice cream bar. To me, those are not what makes something luxury. Again, we all have different preferences and for me it is not ice cream or hot dogs. Rather it is a fine meal with a wait staff taking good care of us with table cloths on the tables and great food and wine. Oh well.

 

As I've said sorry this one didn't work for you but that doesn't mean it doesn't work for others.

 

We all have different things that we enjoy and those that we don't.

 

Thank good for choice.

 

Keith

Edited January 23, 2016 by Keith1010

[Kilroyshere]

I have been on ships (Seabourn Triplets) where they had one or two entertainers from shore but none of their own in house entertainment.

 

All you say is not a deficiency. Rather it is something that you desire that was not available...

 

 

Again, there are some things that are important to you but that does not mean it is a deficiency of the line. Personally, I could care less about a barbecue and really don't think that makes a line a luxury cruise line. If it did, then we can add plenty of mainstream lines to the list...

 

 

Too bad you didn't try those specialty restaurants that we did. They were a very luxurious experience and far better IMHO than having hot dogs, hamburgers and an ice cream bar. To me, those are not what makes something luxury. Again, we all have different preferences and for me it is not ice cream or hot dogs. Rather it is a fine meal with a wait staff taking good care of us with table cloths on the tables and great food and wine. Oh well. Keith

 

That’s just not true what you say.

 

SB has in-house entertainment. SB vets know Eric D. (now with Azamara) and other in-house entertainers there very well. SB’s ‘Rock The Boat’ was a regular elaborate evening deck BBQ and entertainment following event. SB and Regent both did homages to Broadway and London Theatre that was on every cruise we took. SB, SS and Crystal all brought outside professional entertainment aboard on every cruise, regardless of cruise length.

 

The importance to me or you of evening entertainment options does not negate the fact that this was an Entertainment deficiency. And Cruise Critic measures that category in their data.

 

I don’t play or have interest in Bridge. I don’t recall a Bridge expert aboard (perhaps they had one).

 

SS’s deck lunch was mostly burgers, dogs, fries and onion rings. I’ve seen better deck lunches on Carnival. Again, not a deal killer, but a deficiency.

 

Regarding Seishin and their French restaurant…this was an all-inclusive ship. Those venues had up-charges. I’d have been happy to ‘buy’ those events, but we don’t care for French cuisine and Seishin offered the same sushi/sashimi offered at lunch which I noted and gave kudos to in your ‘Live’ thread. We didn’t care for another course of sushi/sashimi at night when we already had it at lunch every day.

 

On Regent, SB and as I recall Crystal, there was no up-charge for their specialty restaurants which we did indulge in and enjoy very much several times per cruise. Again, this up-charge is another measurable difference (deficiency) between SS and the rest of the Luxury cruise lines.

 

There seems a pattern here that among cruising choices and option all the Luxury cruise lines offer, SS seems to have gone on the cheap and skipped many of them.

[Keith1010]

That’s just not true what you say.

 

SB has in-house entertainment. SB vets know Eric D. (now with Azamara) and other in-house entertainers there very well. SB’s ‘Rock The Boat’ was a regular elaborate evening deck BBQ and entertainment following event. SB and Regent both did homages to Broadway and London Theatre that was on every cruise we took. SB, SS and Crystal all brought outside professional entertainment aboard on every cruise, regardless of cruise length.

 

The importance to me or you of evening entertainment options does not negate the fact that this was an Entertainment deficiency. And Cruise Critic measures that category in their data.

 

I don’t play or have interest in Bridge. I don’t recall a Bridge expert aboard (perhaps they had one).

 

SS’s deck lunch was mostly burgers, dogs, fries and onion rings. I’ve seen better deck lunches on Carnival. Again, not a deal killer, but a deficiency.

 

Regarding Seishin and their French restaurant…this was an all-inclusive ship. Those venues had up-charges. I’d have been happy to ‘buy’ those events, but we don’t care for French cuisine and Seishin offered the same sushi/sashimi offered at lunch which I noted and gave kudos to in your ‘Live’ thread. We didn’t care for another course of sushi/sashimi at night when we already had it at lunch every day.

 

On Regent, SB and as I recall Crystal, there was no up-charge for their specialty restaurants which we did indulge in and enjoy very much several times per cruise. Again, this up-charge is another measurable difference (deficiency) between SS and the rest of the Luxury cruise lines.

 

There seems a pattern here that among cruising choices and option all the Luxury cruise lines offer, SS seems to have gone on the cheap and skipped many of them.

 

Oh it is true what I say. I don't make this stuff up. :)

 

Too funny. I sailed the 200 passenger triplet of Seabourn and there was no in house entertainment. Rather we had a comedian or magician and a pianist/vocalist from land. It was one of the most luxurious experience we have had but not because of the entertainment.

 

I understand the up charge. There is no up charge at La La Terrazzo no matter how many times you go. It is a large restaurant. At some of the restaurants there is an up-charge simply because they are relatively small (La Champagne only accommodate 24 people each night) so the up-charge does help to control the number of reservations. Otherwise people would try to dine there every night. Similarly, Crystal provides one inclusive reservation at Prego and Silk Road per cruise of less than 14 days and two for cruise 14 days or longer based on availability and that is to help to get everyone into their restaurants at least one time. Otherwise, some were trying to dine there every night and the dining venues were not sized to accommodate this.

 

It is too bad though that you didn't try Seishin. Yes, as you mentioned they offered some sushi/sashimi at the buffet but that represented just one of several courses that are part of the dining experience and not even all of the sushi/sashimi that was served. Part of the enjoyment is also the intimacy of the venue. Yes, a luxurious experience.

 

I don't play bridge either. But some people got together.

 

Each cruise line is going to be different. That is not a deficiency but if it is important to you then best to sail those lines that offer those things that are important to you.

 

Keith

[Kilroyshere]

Keith;

 

2 simple YES/NO questions I ask you to answer.

 

Did SS have outside professional evening entertainment aboard the cruise we both took last week: YES or NO?

 

Did most if not all other cruise lines you’ve sailed on have outside professional evening entertainment aboard: YES or NO?

Edited January 23, 2016 by Kilroyshere

[Keith1010]

I thought I was very clear that SS didn't have a land based performer on our cruise. You are not reading what I am writing.

 

And as I said when we sailed on the Seabourn triplets they had a couple of entertainers and no in house entertainment and the focus at night was mainly dinner.

 

Both were luxurious experiences for us.

 

Keith

Edited January 23, 2016 by Keith1010

[Kilroyshere]

I thought I was very clear that SS didn't have a land based performer on our cruise. You are not reading what I am writing.

 

And as I said when we sailed on the Seabourn triplets they had a couple of entertainers and no in house entertainment and the focus at night was mainly dinner.

 

Both were luxurious experiences.

 

Keith

 

 

I've tried to stay off the 'cold soup' kind of comparisons.

 

SS went on the cheap.

 

Regardless if you like to play Bridge or attend the evening entertainment, the fact is; SS on this cruise failed to provide amenities and significant features which all the other Luxury lines do whilst charging similar cruise fares as their competition. Outside professional evening entertainment is one example.

 

Without getting into which specialty food venue had the better food, you summarily excuse the SS dining $80 'up-charge' as crowd control. I say that's a poor excuse.

 

SB, Crystal and Regent may limit one night per week or cruise per suite in some of their specialty venues, but there's no up-charge. And on every cruise on those lines, we were able to get in a 2nd or 3rd time with their cancellation wait lists. And those other cruise lines offered multiple other food venues which did not limit times gone there and again, no up-charges.

 

Once again, another measurable difference on SS from the other Luxury lines.

Edited January 23, 2016 by Kilroyshere

[Keith1010]

I've tried to stay off the 'cold soup' kind of comparisons.

 

SS went on the cheap.

 

Regardless if you like to play Bridge or attend the evening entertainment, the fact is; SS on this cruise failed to provide amenities and significant features which all the other Luxury lines do whilst charging similar cruise fares as their competition. Outside professional evening entertainment is one example.

 

Without getting into which specialty food venue had the better food, you summarily excuse the SS dining $80 'up-charge' as crowd control. I say that's a poor excuse.

 

SB, Crystal and Regent may limit one night per week or cruise per suite in some of their specialty venues, but there's no up-charge. And on every cruise on those lines, we were able to get in a 2nd or 3rd time with their cancellation wait lists. And those other cruise lines offered multiple other food venues which did not limit times gone there and again, no up-charges.

 

Once again, another measurable difference on SS from the other Luxury lines.

 

Crowd control. 24 people on an eight day cruise equates to slightly less than 200 people. If complimentary it equates to 36% of the ship. It is a very unique dining experience and the other lines do not have a restaurant this small. Same for the Japanese restaurant which was also relatively small. Until you dine there, you won't appreciate that. We certainly never was at a loss for dining options. In fact, I was surprised at the number of choices available on a 550 passenger ship.

 

I didn't say which food was better. Just that the Japanese Restaurant had a much more extensive menu than the sushi/sashimi offered at lunch.

 

Sorry the cruise line didn't work for you. That doesn't mean it is not a luxury product. We each have different preferences when it comes to cruising.

 

Thank goodness for choice.

 

Keith