In Defense of Viking

[TravelerThom]

[ have sailed on two Viking river cruises which went off with off with ZERO problems (one on the Elbe!)

 

The following (along with the 2 for 1 BS and pay years advance BS) is why there may NOT be a third cruise on Viking. Pretty much a shame as I enjoyed my time on board:(

 

There was quite an active discussion of what may have actually happened - mechanical vs. human error - and how Viking handled the criss and the aftermath.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?p=51242829#post51242829

 

I was there - I think the actual staff who were there did the best they could. Especially given that two of their coworkers were killed in the crash. They handled a very stressful situation as well as they could, but there was no way to make a cruise that suddenly because an impromptu bus tour on the very first night into a positive situation. The "main office" though, I think could have handled things better. They kept assuming us that we all would be contacted "immediately" upon our return to arrange for compensation and that we would be "satisfied". Those that wanted to leave immediately were not told if their trips would be refunded or not. I stayed on for the bus tour and if I had originally signed up for a bus tour, I would say it was pretty good. But I paid for and expected a cruise, not a strictly regimented, inflexible schedule with a no-choice menu, so I was overall disappointed and hoped that we would receive a future cruise to replace the one we did not have. But instead it took Viking two weeks to contact us, they gave us all 50% credit for the cruise fare part only (not air, nothing else) and a voucher for 50% of that same amount that could be applied to a future cruise. More than half the folks I have talked to from that trip are not planning on using that voucher, ever. I think that says something.

Viking management is absolutely 100% totally clueless when anything goes wrong. I do 2 - 4 river cruises a year, and I have ZERO feeling that they are concerned about customer satisfaction ( but I do get multiple mailings EVERY month). PRINT LESS CRAP; listen to your current customers. Word of mouth will bite you on the butt later if not sooner.

[MalibooNewYork]

My daughter has been looking at Christmas market river cruises and seriously considering Viking. When I told her of how mean spirited and cheap Viking is being in regards to the recent tragedy, she is rethinking booking with Viking. One point she brought up is that for her a voucher that must be used within a year is worthless as she works and probably could never use it.

Word of mouth and social media contribute mightily to the butt biting.

[garycarla]

My daughter has been looking at Christmas market river cruises and seriously considering Viking. When I told her of how mean spirited and cheap Viking is being in regards to the recent tragedy, she is rethinking booking with Viking. One point she brought up is that for her a voucher that must be used within a year is worthless as she works and probably could never use it.

Word of mouth and social media contribute mightily to the butt biting.

 

Sorry, but making a decision on cruise line based on one unusual situation where two crew members were killed is just a bit much, don't you think?

[xpcdoojk]

-------------------

 

Well so much for a fair minded and impartial Forum Host. Defensive much? And apologies if my comments hit too close to home, but thanks for proving my point.

 

I have not cruised Viking, nor do I plan to, ever. Their payment business practice is unacceptable when there are other options out there. The size of their ships seems to guarantee that when their are water level problems that they are going to be the most affected.

 

As far as attacking the Host... the Host in this forum is the best I have ever encountered at CC...

 

So, straw man arguements aside, you are way off base, and seem to be looking for a fight that you have already lost.

:eek:

 

:rolleyes:

 

JC

[Mark_T]

As far as attacking the Host... the Host in this forum is the best I have ever encountered at CC...

 

'Attacking' seems a bit overstating things.

 

Our Host does not hide the partisan nature of his posts and if you agree with them you will see no problem of course.

 

If you do not share his perspective then you might reflect on the fact that not all hosts behave like that and not all boards permit their moderators to post like that.

 

Once you get used to it, it becomes less of a problem but it can be a surprise for new posters.

[CPT Trips]

Yes, the host is sometimes partisan as far as cruise lines are concerned. He sometimes has opinions on other issue that I disagree with. But, I do think he has a wealth of information to share. On balance I like his active participation. I find it easy most of the time to allow his opinions to slide by. If I really disagree, I'll post.

[drcpa]

I have not cruised Viking, nor do I plan to, ever. Their payment business practice is unacceptable when there are other options out there. The size of their ships seems to guarantee that when their are water level problems that they are going to be the most affected.

 

As far as attacking the Host... the Host in this forum is the best I have ever encountered at CC...

 

So, straw man arguements aside, you are way off base, and seem to be looking for a fight that you have already lost.

:eek:

 

:rolleyes:

 

JC

 

I suggest people should not reject Viking out of hand based on comments by those who have never sailed on Viking and would never sail on Viking due to such things as final payment policy (I think my example was 2 for 1 promotions, but payment policy falls into the same category) and ship size and you say "I have not cruised Viking, nor do I plan to, ever. Their payment business practice is unacceptable when there are other options out there. The size of their ships seems to guarantee that when their are water level problems that they are going to be the most affected" and I'm the one way off base looking for a fight that I have already lost?

As I said to the moderator, "Thanks for proving my point" and in your case agreeing 100% to everything I originally posted.

[TravelerThom]

I suggest people should not reject Viking out of hand based on comments by those who have never sailed on Viking and would never sail on Viking due to such things as final payment policy (I think my example was 2 for 1 promotions, but payment policy falls into the same category) and ship size and you say "I have not cruised Viking, nor do I plan to, ever. Their payment business practice is unacceptable when there are other options out there. The size of their ships seems to guarantee that when their are water level problems that they are going to be the most affected" and I'm the one way off base looking for a fight that I have already lost?

As I said to the moderator, "Thanks for proving my point" and in your case agreeing 100% to everything I originally posted.

I agree with your previous comment that " in life that with a few notable exceptions an inch here or there really doesn't make that much difference". When applied to a few inches in cabin size (and Viking cabin sizes are quite similar to most in the industry) I am in agreement. BUT IMO water draft is a notable exception; a inch (actually closer to a foot) difference makes a huge difference given the shallow depth at many places on European rivers.

 

I thought your original statement made a number of good points. I thought the Yugo / Rolls Royce analogy was perfectly acceptable as a summary of some of the more extreme comments on here, whether those particular words had been used or not. I think that we have a quite good moderator on this board, but felt that to say those particular words had never been used on this board was pretty nitpicky, and better left unsaid. Viking like any company that stays in business has its good points, and also like any business has its bad points. This board is generally pretty friendly (certainly compared to some of the other boards), but unfortunately this thread does not meet that standard (and there is more than one party that contributed to that).

 

BTW I have sailed Viking a couple of times, but for reasons that I have previously stated it is doubtful that I will again. That doesn't mean that most of your points were not valid.

 

Thom

[caviargal]

<I'm very glad that you have found a river cruise line that fits your needs, but your defense of Viking is undercut by the "straw man" arguments. I have read every post on this forum for the last three years and just did a search to confirm my memory, and I could not find a single post that compared Viking to Yugo or to Walmart. Nor do I recall posts sneering at Viking customers as tourists in comparison to sophisticated travelers – nor anyone saying that Viking provides an "impersonal, boilerplate cruise." There has been criticism of Viking's constant "2 for 1" sales, but only as a misleading business practice -- it is not "unheard of in the industry" because Oceania does it too, but it is unusual in the River Cruising industry. The claims about Viking's rapid expansion and its effect on their ability to hire and train crew may be a matter of dispute, but hardly an "insulting, scandalous notion" as if true it would imperil the safety of the passengers. So we come down to your final point dismissing the reasons others have given for not wanting to sail on Viking -- and the answer, which you acknowledge, is that those posters are as much entitled to their opinions as you are to yours. If you want to convince people to try Viking, give us more detail about what you liked on your Viking cruises.>

 

The quoting system is not working again. :(

 

Great post and I fully agree!

 

I have seen enough Viking ships and read enough about their level of customer service to know that I will not be cruising with them in the future. Since I am the one investing time and money, that decision is solely up to me and I am not obligated in any way to justify my choices.

 

We all choose with our preferences and wallets in mind. To invest a lot to try a line that has zero appeal on any level simply makes no sense to me.

 

There are apparently of people who do choose Viking, as their continued expansion demonstrates. To those that have cruised with them and enjoyed it, great that you found a line you personally enjoy.

[Mark_T]

I have seen enough Viking ships and read enough about their level of customer service to know that I will not be cruising with them in the future. Since I am the one investing time and money, that decision is solely up to me and I am not obligated in any way to justify my choices.

 

I agree 100%, you have absolutely no need to justify your choices.

 

... but, if I may explain, just a little, why some people get a bit frustrated with a certain post style (not exclusively yours I might add), it is that if you want to not justify your decision it might help not to keep repeating it at almost every possible opportunity.

 

If someone asks about Viking or seeks to compare two lines, it isn't all that helpful to jump in and say that you have not and never will sail with Viking.

 

You have your firmly held opinion and if you wanted to say 'I will not because of x, y, z' and be specific, not just 'things I've seen and things I've read' then it could be a helpful contribution and someone can decide if they put the same weight on those things as you do.

 

If you don't want to explain or justify then there is always the option to leave such questions for those who do want to explain and justify so the reader can benefit rather than be left wondering quite what these things are that have left you so negative without actually having any direct experience...

 

Like I said, not exclusively your posts, but it is this type of comment that triggered this entire thread I believe. Too many people seem to want to be seen commenting negatively based on what they have read instead of relating their own direct experiences or perhaps linking to posts they consider negative so someone could read the original statements rather than get a vague impression 2nd hand...

 

It just helps to be specific, even if being negative, rather than perhaps inadvertently, just creating a mist of uncertainty and doubt when there could be clarity and information someone could use to base their decision upon...

[caviargal]

I agree 100%, you have absolutely no need to justify your choices.

 

... but, if I may explain, just a little, why some people get a bit frustrated with a certain post style (not exclusively yours I might add), it is that if you want to not justify your decision it might help not to keep repeating it at almost every possible opportunity.

 

 

It just helps to be specific, even if being negative, rather than perhaps inadvertently, just creating a mist of uncertainty and doubt when there could be clarity and information someone could use to base their decision upon...

 

Actually, I have in many instances stated specific reasons I am not interested in Viking:

 

- Ships are generic and ugly IMO, inside and out

- Cabins are small, as compared to others

- Longboats have too many passengers aboard for the size, as compared to others

- Design of ships has historically not done well in low and high water conditions

- No gyms

- No active excursions as their stated target demographic is seniors

 

Those reasons may not apply to anyone else, but those are specific IMO, and only the comment on appearance and decor is subjective.

 

Also, IMO, this thread was posted for the sole purpose of inciting such a discussion and was, again IMO, confrontational from the outset. Did not serve any other purpose IMO.

Edited October 6, 2016 by caviargal

[drcpa]

Actually, I have in many instances stated specific reasons I am not interested in Viking:

 

- Ships are generic and ugly IMO, inside and out

- Cabins are small, as compared to others

- Longboats have too many passengers aboard for the size, as compared to others

- Design of ships has historically not done well in low and high water conditions

- No gyms

- No active excursions as their stated target demographic is seniors

 

Those reasons may not apply to anyone else, but those are specific IMO, and only the comment on appearance and decor is subjective.

 

Also, IMO, this thread was posted for the sole purpose of inciting such a discussion and was, again IMO, confrontational from the outset. Did not serve any other purpose IMO.

 

I suggested people be open minded about considering Viking and I seem to have offended those people who have never sailed on Viking and will never sail on Viking and have said so 10,000+ times. Thanks again for proving my point, IMO.

[Mark_T]

- Ships are generic and ugly IMO, inside and out

- Cabins are small, as compared to others

- Longboats have too many passengers aboard for the size, as compared to others

- Design of ships has historically not done well in low and high water conditions

- No gyms

- No active excursions as their stated target demographic is seniors

 

Thank you, I'm glad you took my post in the manner it was intended to be taken ...

 

Just as an example, posting that is so very helpful to new cruisers as they can quickly see, for example, that they may have no interest in gyms and active excursions, they may like what they have seen of the design and decor and may be intending to book aquarium class in which case the Viking cabin is 'large' in comparison to the equivalent on Uniworld for example.

 

So all of those reasons that are negative for you don't actually matter to them at all.

 

This then leaves them to ask more about the high/low water problems and can ask what those who have actually sailed on Viking feel about the population density...

 

That puts such a different texture on the position you hold and is really helpful even though you are making negative points as is your right.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Mark_T

[RDC1]

Sorry, but making a decision on cruise line based on one unusual situation where two crew members were killed is just a bit much, don't you think?

 

If it was totally a one off situation, yes. However, Viking (both river and ocean) have a bit of a track record concerning refunds and compensation when things go wrong. A similar example when Viking Ocean had to cancel mid cruise due to engine problems.

[CPT Trips]

Mark T . . . I'm looking for the like button

 

OP . . . Now you need to use the ignore feature.

[suspaul]

While this board is/can be very helpful it's also repetitious, especially the views of several posters who continue to put down Viking. Most of us know what they say about opinions, and sorry but how can you have an informed opinion if you've not used the product?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[TravelerThom]

..., Viking (both river and ocean) have a bit of a track record concerning refunds and compensation when things go wrong. A similar example when Viking Ocean had to cancel mid cruise due to engine problems.

And there was Viking Ocean's treatment of several people caught in exploding glass from their showers. Not very pretty. And I found it surprising that Viking claimed there were only two cases (exactly the number of CC member who had reported been shrapneled). Maybe, but I find that hard to buy given the percentage of cruisers that are on CC. I will continue to say that I was happy on my Viking cruises, but nevertheless don't have much faith in their credibility when things go wrong.

 

Thom

[caviargal]

 

So all of those reasons that are negative for you don't actually matter to them at all.

 

 

Exactly.

 

And there are those for whom payment requirements, ship design, and reputation for customer service (especially during high/low water issues) are irrelevant when choosing a river cruise line. For them, Viking could be a perfect choice :)

Edited October 7, 2016 by caviargal

[caviargal]

I suggested people be open minded about considering Viking and I seem to have offended those people who have never sailed on Viking and will never sail on Viking and have said so 10,000+ times. Thanks again for proving my point, IMO.

 

No thanks, necessary, as IMO, the sole reason for such a post is to incite a negative debate.

 

It is very interesting to me that Viking is the only line discussed on this forum that incites so much contentious discussion. I cannot image such a thread would be initiated for any other river cruise line. Must be a reason for that anomaly...

[bitob]

I can add to the hostility

 

I know four different cruise specialist travel agents who would never recommend Viking. They have sailed all the lines. These four agents don't even know one another.

 

My favorite ta earned a free cruise from Viking and wouldn't take it.

 

Makes you wonder

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[KathyK13]

Exactly.

 

And there are those for whom payment requirements, ship design, and reputation for customer service (especially during high/low water issues) are irrelevant when choosing a river cruise line. For them, Viking could be a perfect choice :)

 

I find this statement very condescending, basically saying that Viking is a good choice only for those who don't care about quality. Especially ship design; that's a very subjective thing.

 

This is the sort of comment I think the OP objects to; it's the tone set by the comment.

[Squigmond]

I can add to the hostility

 

I know four different cruise specialist travel agents who would never recommend Viking. They have sailed all the lines. These four agents don't even know one another.

 

My favorite ta earned a free cruise from Viking and wouldn't take it.

 

Makes you wonder

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Makes you wonder how he/she earned a free cruise without recommending Viking.

[smokinmike]

Exactly.

 

And there are those for whom payment requirements, ship design, and reputation for customer service (especially during high/low water issues) are irrelevant when choosing a river cruise line. For them, Viking could be a perfect choice :)

 

 

Lighten up Francis.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[TravelerThom]

Makes you wonder how he/she earned a free cruise without recommending Viking.

 

Have you ever worked in sales? To be honest I haven't either, but I have been a part owner in a Travel Agency. Customer comes in, says I saw the Viking ads on PBS and I want to go. After 4 or 5 questions about "where do you want to go" and "what do you want to see" and "what are your interests" with clueless answers the average agent gives up and sells them the damn ad. Sad, but true.

[bitob]

Makes you wonder how he/she earned a free cruise without recommending Viking.

 

 

He will book Viking for people if they ask for it. Many people don't ask a ta for recommendations.

 

But if they ask his opinion he will steer them elsewhere

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums