Okay, I need your opinion

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

I currently have a 7 night Greece and Croatia cruise on Rhapsody of the Seas booked for next summer (I'll be going solo). I booked this cruise mostly to see Venice, because you never know how long cruise ships are going to be allowed to go there. The itinerary consists of Dubrovnik, Kotor, Santorini, and Katakolon (Olympia).

 

Well, out of curiosity, I was just browsing itineraries and found a 12 night Baltic cruise on Brilliance from Amsterdam for a little less than $300 more. Itinerary includes Skagen, Tallinn, St. Petersburg overnight, Helsinki, Stockholm, and Copenhagen.

 

Would you switch?

[leaveitallbehind]

Short answer, yes. I like the longer itinerary and although both are very nice, I like Brilliance a little better as well.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

Short answer, yes. I like the longer itinerary and although both are very nice, I like Brilliance a little better as well.

Thanks. I'm really tempted to switch, but I'm just not ready to give up Venice, lol.

[leaveitallbehind]

Thanks. I'm really tempted to switch, but I'm just not ready to give up Venice, lol.

 

Yeah, that would be the trade off - and not an easy decision since that was the reason behind the original booking.

[Biker19]

Take the longer one. You will always be able to see Venice, just maybe not on a big cruise ship.

 

Biker, who loved the sailout from Venice and Kotor on Rhapsody.

[Paulxyz2004]

Definitely Switch to the Baltics. Venice, Dubrovnik and Kotor are great, but it´s just not worth visiting and supporting the bancrupt Country of Greece. The Baltic itinerary has all great ports.

 

Look for a different cruise out of Venice at another time.

[smtcan]

If you have the extra time, fly from Amsterdam to Venice for a couple of days before or after the Baltic cruise. There are lots of very reasonable discount airlines in Europe.

 

I would choose the Baltic cruise, it was one of the best we have ever done.

[molly361]

Another vote for switching

[luvscruising2007]

If you have the time, consider spending a day or 2 or 3 in Venice before or after the cruise. Personally, I like the idea of the Brilliance itinerary. I have never been to any of the ports so I can't say which is best.

[Clarea]

Thanks. I'm really tempted to switch, but I'm just not ready to give up Venice, lol.

I'd have to stay with Venice.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

Thanks everyone. Decisions, decisions...

[leaveitallbehind]

Thanks everyone. Decisions, decisions...

 

 

But both good choices either way for their own reasons. :)

[naughtybuoy]

If you have the extra time, fly from Amsterdam to Venice for a couple of days before or after the Baltic cruise. There are lots of very reasonable discount airlines in Europe.

 

I would choose the Baltic cruise, it was one of the best we have ever done.

 

I second this.

[kernow]

Yes, I'd switch. We've done both cruises (or very similar). Venice was my best ever sailaway until we did Stockholm and that was even more spectacular.

Our Baltic cruise is in my top three all time favourites and Brilliance is also one of my favourite ships.

 

Julie

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

If you have the time, consider spending a day or 2 or 3 in Venice before or after the cruise. Personally, I like the idea of the Brilliance itinerary. I have never been to any of the ports so I can't say which is best.

If you have the extra time, fly from Amsterdam to Venice for a couple of days before or after the Baltic cruise. There are lots of very reasonable discount airlines in Europe.

 

I would choose the Baltic cruise, it was one of the best we have ever done.

 

I second this.

Unfortunately, the budget won't really allow for extra days in Venice. So it's definitely an either-or situation. Thanks for the suggestion though!

[Florida_cruisers]

I have taken a Mediterranean cruise and a Baltic cruise. The Mediterranean has been at the top of our favorite cruise to date. Hence why we are going again next year.

[kerryincork]

Venice is amazing but I loved St Petersburg, Russia is much harder to get to on your own than Italy 😀

 

Sent from my SM-N910F using Forums mobile app

[kevinyork]

Two very different cruises. Hot Mediterranean ports with the BEST sail away ever in Venice, simply stunning, or great Northern European ports. You would need to factor in that in St Petes the ships tours are expensive and generally short but local tour operators have better, longer and overall less expensive tours. You need a tour to be able to clear Russian Immigration.

 

However for 5 nights more on a cruise I would go with the Baltics trip.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LMaxwell]

I'd switch; it's hard to pass up 5 more days in Europe for such a small amount of money. If Venice is critically important to you a cruise port stop may not be enough; may warrant it's own land based trip in the future.

[Bruin Steve]

I currently have a 7 night Greece and Croatia cruise on Rhapsody of the Seas booked for next summer (I'll be going solo). I booked this cruise mostly to see Venice, because you never know how long cruise ships are going to be allowed to go there. The itinerary consists of Dubrovnik, Kotor, Santorini, and Katakolon (Olympia).

 

Well, out of curiosity, I was just browsing itineraries and found a 12 night Baltic cruise on Brilliance from Amsterdam for a little less than $300 more. Itinerary includes Skagen, Tallinn, St. Petersburg overnight, Helsinki, Stockholm, and Copenhagen.

 

Would you switch?

I have taken several European cruises--including three Baltic itineraries and five in the Med...plus a few "land" trips in the region as well.

 

My first rule is that I never take a cruise in Europe as short as just 7 nights. This coming June/July, for example, I couldn't find a longer cruise I liked, so we are taking two 7-nighters back-to-back. It's just that it is a shame to take all that time and money to fly there, then turn around and come home just 7 days later. Then, my second rule is to always fly in at least two days early, if not more. We need the time to recover from the long day flying there and to adjust to the major time zone change. Plus, it gives you a chance to actually see the city you are cruising out of. For a place like Venice, it is pretty much an imperative.

 

OTOH, if all things had been equal (same price, same length of cruise), I would take the Mediterranean/Adriatic cruise hands down. In the Baltic, St. Petersburg is, obviously, the prize...Tallinn is a little gem and Stockholm and Copenhagen are very nice cities...But, aside from St. Petersburg, they tend to lack the long history/archaeology angle you get in the Med...and culture/food tends to be a bit more repetitive (I'll take good Italian food over Scandinavian cuisine any day). In the Adriatic, Kotor and Dubrovnik are among my favorite ports that I have visited--strikingly beautiful medieval walled cities...and Santorini is a one-of-a-kind. But, in only seven days and trying to cover both the Adriatic and the Greek isles, you aren't getting a lot of ports for your visit. We did a 13 night Adriatic on Celebrity a few years back...and that one was an almost perfect itinerary: Venice--Koper--Ravenna--Split--Kotor--Dubrovnik--Bari--Corfu--Malta--Sicily--Salerno--Rome. If they ever offer one like that again, that's the one to take.

 

Since the two you are looking at are similarly priced nut the Baltic is 5 nights longer and since you can't afford extra nights in Venice, I'd reluctantly say to go with the Baltic...just because the 12 night itinerary will be more relaxing. But, DEFINITELY keep looking for a Med cruise that makes sense. Especially look when the new schedules first come out. We did that for our upcoming Jewel back-to-backs and the price we got was about half the price of where the fares have been almost ever since. We are in a hump balcony for less than others are paying for an inside cabin. Also, look for those "guarantee" rates...You will often get a lesser price if the cruise line picks the cabin for you--and, who cares as long as you get on the ship? And, if you are very tight on the budget, go with the inside cabin--just accept that you will use the public spaces as YOUR balcony and only use the cabin to sleep and change clothes. And, really try to spend at least an extra night in the embarkation port--you are really only adding the price of a night in a hotel--and often there are bargain hotels to be found--and, sometimes you also find the airfare will be cheaper flying in on a Wednesday or Thursday than on a Friday or Saturday...and that makes up for some of that hotel cost. It also helps in case your flight ends up being delayed or you miss a connection. You don't want to miss the ship...

 

Good luck...

[hapster85]

Never having been to Europe, for that small of a price difference, I'd have to choose the longer itinerary. I'm sure you'll have a lovely time either way, but you have to ask yourself, are you going to regret it if you don't see Venice on this trip? Maybe that will make your decision easier.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

I have taken several European cruises--including three Baltic itineraries and five in the Med...plus a few "land" trips in the region as well.

 

My first rule is that I never take a cruise in Europe as short as just 7 nights. This coming June/July, for example, I couldn't find a longer cruise I liked, so we are taking two 7-nighters back-to-back. It's just that it is a shame to take all that time and money to fly there, then turn around and come home just 7 days later. Then, my second rule is to always fly in at least two days early, if not more. We need the time to recover from the long day flying there and to adjust to the major time zone change. Plus, it gives you a chance to actually see the city you are cruising out of. For a place like Venice, it is pretty much an imperative.

 

OTOH, if all things had been equal (same price, same length of cruise), I would take the Mediterranean/Adriatic cruise hands down. In the Baltic, St. Petersburg is, obviously, the prize...Tallinn is a little gem and Stockholm and Copenhagen are very nice cities...But, aside from St. Petersburg, they tend to lack the long history/archaeology angle you get in the Med...and culture/food tends to be a bit more repetitive (I'll take good Italian food over Scandinavian cuisine any day). In the Adriatic, Kotor and Dubrovnik are among my favorite ports that I have visited--strikingly beautiful medieval walled cities...and Santorini is a one-of-a-kind. But, in only seven days and trying to cover both the Adriatic and the Greek isles, you aren't getting a lot of ports for your visit. We did a 13 night Adriatic on Celebrity a few years back...and that one was an almost perfect itinerary: Venice--Koper--Ravenna--Split--Kotor--Dubrovnik--Bari--Corfu--Malta--Sicily--Salerno--Rome. If they ever offer one like that again, that's the one to take.

 

Since the two you are looking at are similarly priced nut the Baltic is 5 nights longer and since you can't afford extra nights in Venice, I'd reluctantly say to go with the Baltic...just because the 12 night itinerary will be more relaxing. But, DEFINITELY keep looking for a Med cruise that makes sense. Especially look when the new schedules first come out. We did that for our upcoming Jewel back-to-backs and the price we got was about half the price of where the fares have been almost ever since. We are in a hump balcony for less than others are paying for an inside cabin. Also, look for those "guarantee" rates...You will often get a lesser price if the cruise line picks the cabin for you--and, who cares as long as you get on the ship? And, if you are very tight on the budget, go with the inside cabin--just accept that you will use the public spaces as YOUR balcony and only use the cabin to sleep and change clothes. And, really try to spend at least an extra night in the embarkation port--you are really only adding the price of a night in a hotel--and often there are bargain hotels to be found--and, sometimes you also find the airfare will be cheaper flying in on a Wednesday or Thursday than on a Friday or Saturday...and that makes up for some of that hotel cost. It also helps in case your flight ends up being delayed or you miss a connection. You don't want to miss the ship...

 

Good luck...

 

First off, thanks so much to everyone for the feedback.

 

Second off, sorry, I might have been a little confusing. Someone mentioned flying to Venice from Amsterdam after doing the Baltic cruise. That is what I can't afford.

 

Whichever cruise I choose, I'll be spending 2 nights pre-cruise in either Venice or Amsterdam.

[internetwhiz]

I'd be staying with Venice. We went last fall and stayed three nights along the canals in Venice. Pony up and stay IN Venice. Dubrovnik, Santorini and Katakolon (Olympia) were just awesome last October.

 

It was everything I hoped it would be. Then we flew to Barcelona and brought Harmony to the US.

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

I'd be staying with Venice. We went last fall and stayed three nights along the canals in Venice. Pony up and stay IN Venice. Dubrovnik, Santorini and Katakolon (Olympia) were just awesome last October.

 

It was everything I hoped it would be. Then we flew to Barcelona and brought Harmony to the US.

Thanks! I actually already reserved a single room at the Hotel Fontana, which is about 5 minutes from St. Mark's Square, for 2 nights prior (it's refundable!) because I was happy with the price and knew Venice hotels can get expensive.

[Norwich Cruiser]

Toally agree with Bruin Steve I have been lucky enough to have sailed both itineraries a few times and yes Venice is a great sailaway and city but got to be the Baltic's especially at the negligible price difference.

I would certainly take his excellent advice.