A Quick Review of Our First Oceania Cruise

[Mura]

I'm not the first one to say that tastes are individual and that all opinions are valid.

 

We enjoy Waves, especially if we get back late from a tour and perhaps Terrace is closed. But we'd never say we prefer Waves over Terrace.

 

Yes, we've encountered seating problems in Waves on occasion and appreciate that they will bring our food to us in Terrace when that happens. We do prefer Terrace over Waves in general, but again, if we're late Waves is great. And then I get my beloved Smoothie.

 

For breakfast we will eat in our room if we have a tour, otherwise we go to the GDR. We do love breakfast there. (My mother taught us that when we brought her on a cruise with us in Oceania's early days.)

 

For lunch we will check menus and either do the GDR or Terrace ...

 

For dinner we also check menus. We aren't as enamored of the specialty restaurants as many others are, but on the "O" ships we do love Jacques and La Reserve. We weren't happy on Sirena this fall with the combination of Toscana and Polo into one restaurant with the other being Red Ginger. We did like Red Ginger better than we ever have, but it's always been #4 with us when ranking the specialties. And we really think the combination of Toscana and Polo into Tuscan Steak does not work. At least it doesn't for us. I'm sure there are others who will disagree.

 

Just feel free to try everything and see what suits YOU best. There are no wrong choices.

 

Mura

[Decebal]

Thank you for taking the time to post your review.

The responses were fascinating especially when Celebrity is mentioned on the Oceania thread. I also cruised Celebrity twice with vastly different results.

The first cruise was to Alaska on a smaller ship and cruising for the first time. We loved the entire experience and the stunning beauty of Alaska.

When we were ready for a second cruise to the Caribbean, we chose Celebrity again. This time is was on the Equinox, aboard with 2,500 new friends. A vastly different experience. First and foremost, I felt the cruise was understaffed, the main dining room was so bad we had dinner there only 3 times on a 10 day cruise and took refuge at the buffet for dinner. The waiters in the main dining room were actually running to be able to serve all their tables.

As for the buffet for breakfast and lunch? Total bedlam. Crowded and I played waitress on the cruise for my parents, it was way too crowded for them to navigate. Unfortunately, dad is Mr. Buffet so was stuck there for breakfast and lunch. Dinner was the only quiet time.

Another point I would like to make is that the initial price on Celebrity looks affordable for the regular cabins, but they charge you for everything else. Mom wanted to do afternoon tea. $40 for that experience. Specialty restaurants, extra. None of us drink, but paid $300 ( I think) for bottled water. And honestly, the cabins looked downright shabby. But you get what you paid for.

Lastly, I think the segregation between the high end cabins and regular cabins and the perks that come with them creates this vast difference in opinion. While I have no problem with paying as much as you want for a fancy cabin, I have a problem when half the facilities are set aside for the high end customers, with restaurants, bars and special areas set aside for only certain customers. If I am on a ship, aside from the cabin, I expect access to all areas of the ship.

Anyway, long story short, the Caribbean vacation was not cheap for a so-so experience. I also absolutely, definitely concluded that the big ship experience was not for me, even if I could upgrade to more expensive cabins. Thus, Oceania is our next destination.

Again thank you for the review and happy sailing on the cruises that make truly happy. After all, that is what truly matters.

[Host Jazzbeau]

...Lastly, I think the segregation between the high end cabins and regular cabins and the perks that come with them creates this vast difference in opinion. While I have no problem with paying as much as you want for a fancy cabin, I have a problem when half the facilities are set aside for the high end customers, with restaurants, bars and special areas set aside for only certain customers. If I am on a ship, aside from the cabin, I expect access to all areas of the ship.

 

I don't think you will find that on many ships these days. Even Oceania sets aside space for the Concierge Lounge and the Executive Lounge. And Celebrity's reserved spaces are hardly "half the facilities." But if you want truly egalitarian you must sail on an ultra-luxury ship where everybody has paid to be 'first.'

[Decebal]

I don't think you will find that on many ships these days. Even Oceania sets aside space for the Concierge Lounge and the Executive Lounge. And Celebrity's reserved spaces are hardly "half the facilities." But if you want truly egalitarian you must sail on an ultra-luxury ship where everybody has paid to be 'first.'

 

I understand about the Concierge Lounge, what I meant is that on a mass market line like Celebrity there is now such a divide between the regular cabins and the ultra perk ones, that some people feel like they are on a different cruise. The reviewer of the Oceania cruise has not experienced the regular cruise on Celebrity and the sharp elbows at that buffet, and I think that is why people go "huh?". Just like we have not experienced the luxe side of Celebrity. Although, when I did look at the high end prices on Celebrity, my honest thought was, why do Celebrity for that kind of money when there is Crystal and Seaborn.

 

But I feel Celebrity is trying to have it both ways, and the more the mass market cruise lines try to cater to people who are willing to pay top dollar, the more they short change the rest of their customers, because I truly noticed the difference between the two cruises in quality and service. And a lot of businesses are doing that, concentrating on the people with money while the riff raff have to settle for the leftovers.

 

Just my two cents.

[Host Jazzbeau]

I understand about the Concierge Lounge, what I meant is that on a mass market line like Celebrity there is now such a divide between the regular cabins and the ultra perk ones, that some people feel like they are on a different cruise. The reviewer of the Oceania cruise has not experienced the regular cruise on Celebrity and the sharp elbows at that buffet, and I think that is why people go "huh?". Just like we have not experienced the luxe side of Celebrity. Although, when I did look at the high end prices on Celebrity, my honest thought was, why do Celebrity for that kind of money when there is Crystal and Seaborn.

 

But I feel Celebrity is trying to have it both ways, and the more the mass market cruise lines try to cater to people who are willing to pay top dollar, the more they short change the rest of their customers, because I truly noticed the difference between the two cruises in quality and service. And a lot of businesses are doing that, concentrating on the people with money while the riff raff have to settle for the leftovers.

 

Just my two cents.

 

You are quite right in your analysis, but another way of looking at it is that a regular cabin on Oceania costs [say] twice as much as a regular cabin on Celebrity -- so why would you not expect to notice a major difference in quality? OTOH, my experience in a suite on Celebrity was that food and service were equivalent to Oceania. Beyond those two items, there were of course tradeoffs: the larger number of passengers on Celebrity balanced by the greater number of entertainment options. So for similar cost, I rate them similar value. Thus Celebrity offers two options, while Princess only offers the lower one [no special restaurant for suites] and Oceania only offers the higher one. Isn't choice good?

[Decebal]

You are quite right in your analysis, but another way of looking at it is that a regular cabin on Oceania costs [say] twice as much as a regular cabin on Celebrity -- so why would you not expect to notice a major difference in quality? OTOH, my experience in a suite on Celebrity was that food and service were equivalent to Oceania. Beyond those two items, there were of course tradeoffs: the larger number of passengers on Celebrity balanced by the greater number of entertainment options. So for similar cost, I rate them similar value. Thus Celebrity offers two options, while Princess only offers the lower one [no special restaurant for suites] and Oceania only offers the higher one. Isn't choice good?

 

Choice is always good.:cool:

[cephelapodia]

...But I feel Celebrity is trying to have it both ways, and the more the mass market cruise lines try to cater to people who are willing to pay top dollar, the more they short change the rest of their customers, because I truly noticed the difference between the two cruises in quality and service. And a lot of businesses are doing that, concentrating on the people with money while the riff raff have to settle for the leftovers. ...

 

You may find this video interesting. It's about airlines, not cruises, but the principle probably extends to many industries.

 

The Economics of Airline Class, Wendover Productions

 

In short, on multi-cabin aircraft, the higher-cost cabins make the airline more money, with business class generating the most revenue per sqft (or sqm). I expect that the various cruise lines' business analysts (bean counters) know precisely what they need to offer to maximize their profits.

 

Let's look at one Owner's Suite on a 10-day Miami-Miami on Riviera compared to one cat G inside stateroom. The cruise-only fares are, respectively, $12,849 and $2,149. Oceania seems to charge a 100% single supplement most of the time, so that's $25,698 total for the Owner's Suite compared to $4,298 for the inside stateroom. I can't calculate cost and depreciation on the rooms themselves, and I don't know the additional cost for the various amenities. The largest green-dollar cost, I suspect, is the butler. (Compare that to something like the free wifi, which is a lost revenue opportunity rather than an actual cost.)

 

The point is, even adding in construction costs, wear and tear on furniture, etc., cost of things like the cashmere lap blankets and the name-brand toiletries (which I suspect are deeply discounted from the manufacturer as product placement), it doesn't cost Oceania $21,400 more to transport, house, feed, and entertain the two passengers in the suite. My guess would be about $2-3k more.

 

So if Oceania - or whoever - can toss together a laundry list of perks to make someone pony up an additional $18k in profit, why wouldn't they?

[Decebal]

You may find this video interesting. It's about airlines, not cruises, but the principle probably extends to many industries.

 

The Economics of Airline Class, Wendover Productions

 

In short, on multi-cabin aircraft, the higher-cost cabins make the airline more money, with business class generating the most revenue per sqft (or sqm). I expect that the various cruise lines' business analysts (bean counters) know precisely what they need to offer to maximize their profits.

 

Let's look at one Owner's Suite on a 10-day Miami-Miami on Riviera compared to one cat G inside stateroom. The cruise-only fares are, respectively, $12,849 and $2,149. Oceania seems to charge a 100% single supplement most of the time, so that's $25,698 total for the Owner's Suite compared to $4,298 for the inside stateroom. I can't calculate cost and depreciation on the rooms themselves, and I don't know the additional cost for the various amenities. The largest green-dollar cost, I suspect, is the butler. (Compare that to something like the free wifi, which is a lost revenue opportunity rather than an actual cost.)

 

The point is, even adding in construction costs, wear and tear on furniture, etc., cost of things like the cashmere lap blankets and the name-brand toiletries (which I suspect are deeply discounted from the manufacturer as product placement), it doesn't cost Oceania $21,400 more to transport, house, feed, and entertain the two passengers in the suite. My guess would be about $2-3k more.

 

So if Oceania - or whoever - can toss together a laundry list of perks to make someone pony up an additional $18k in profit, why wouldn't they?

 

Don't get me wrong, I totally believe in capitalism 101 where the buyer sets the price. A business survives only if the buyer is willing to pay the price for the product, and obviously there is a luxury market out there. However, the trend seems to be towards super luxe vacations and slimmed down bare bone ones, the middle class vacations are slowly being eliminated.

[Chris86]

 

Perhaps had we not sailed in a suite (and from what I've read here, the price for cabins below suites are more in line with Celebrity prices) we wouldn't have made the same comparisons. Our preference however is to travel in a suite.

 

I think that is a big point. Insides and OV and perhaps verandas are quite good value on Oceania. Very much in-line with mass market prices once you factor in the perks.

[orchestrapal]

Since it is and always has been difficult to book Owners and Vista suites on the R ships there must be many who will pay for the additional space ( about 9 times an inside) of those suites.

Worth it to us because a divorce after living in a walk-in closet would would be much more expensive. And, it is not just the added space, butler and added, described in print, perks but the ability to be able to live in one's suite if that is the kind of privacy some people look for. To us the ship is the destination these days.

[buggins0402]

You may find this video interesting. It's about airlines, not cruises, but the principle probably extends to many industries.

 

The Economics of Airline Class, Wendover Productions

 

In short, on multi-cabin aircraft, the higher-cost cabins make the airline more money, with business class generating the most revenue per sqft (or sqm). I expect that the various cruise lines' business analysts (bean counters) know precisely what they need to offer to maximize their profits.

 

Let's look at one Owner's Suite on a 10-day Miami-Miami on Riviera compared to one cat G inside stateroom. The cruise-only fares are, respectively, $12,849 and $2,149. Oceania seems to charge a 100% single supplement most of the time, so that's $25,698 total for the Owner's Suite compared to $4,298 for the inside stateroom. I can't calculate cost and depreciation on the rooms themselves, and I don't know the additional cost for the various amenities. The largest green-dollar cost, I suspect, is the butler. (Compare that to something like the free wifi, which is a lost revenue opportunity rather than an actual cost.)

 

The point is, even adding in construction costs, wear and tear on furniture, etc., cost of things like the cashmere lap blankets and the name-brand toiletries (which I suspect are deeply discounted from the manufacturer as product placement), it doesn't cost Oceania $21,400 more to transport, house, feed, and entertain the two passengers in the suite. My guess would be about $2-3k more.

 

So if Oceania - or whoever - can toss together a laundry list of perks to make someone pony up an additional $18k in profit, why wouldn't they?

 

Perhaps a more reasonable analysis would be using the OS square footage (O ship) against the revenue generated by seven verandah cabins (same approximate square footage). Profitability seems to become more of a push.

 

On the airline front, Delta is reducing the number of business class seats and replacing them with a true premium economy cabin on some of their TA flights (which is the opposite of what the mass market cruise lines are doing). United is removing their first class cabins, to go all business. But that said, what space some people will put up with for 8 hours is quite different than 12 days.