Diminishing Quality on Carnival?

[Computer Nerd]

Really... Funny because the first thing to offend me on my first Carnival cruise was the fact that we were cruising the Caribbean and instead of mood music like steel drums, we had screaming rap music and a giant screen detailing closeups of huge shaking butts in spandex. I thought I was on a late night walmart shopping trip! I'm glad to hear that Carnival might actually think that Caribbean music might just fit a Caribbean cruise.

 

So just how many things offend you on a Carnival cruise? ;p:')

[grandmarnnurse]

IMO, if people would gladly pay it, Regent and Seabourn would have 20+ ships and Carnival would have only 5. While other lines may have better service (subjective) or better food (again subjective), the price point is so high that it is no longer a good value. Many folks simply don't have the money to pay a higher fee and many others (such as myself) don't value what is being paid extra for. Take Disney since you used that as an example. You gladly paid 3 times for a Disney cruise than a Carnival cruise (and I'm glad you enjoyed it) but I place more value on being at sea on a Carnival ship 21 nights compared to your 7 and there isn't a single thing on a Disney ship that to me justifies the extra expenditure. If people would gladly pay for the supposed better service, why doesn't Disney have 26 ships like Carnival? Or even 10? They only have 4 ships and carry only a handful of people compared to Carnival (or any other major line) so obviously people will not gladly pay exorbitant prices with out exorbitant value in return.

My oldest daughter cruised Disney once, and tried to convince me to book with them one year. I took a look at the price, saw that the price of an inside cabin would get me a balcony on Carnival!! And I wasnt all that gung-ho about shelling out that kind of cash to be surrounded by Disney characters and many more kids than are already on Carnival ships! NO THANK YOU! That had a recipe for hell! I am happy sailing Carnival (and RCCL and NCL), and have absolutely no desire to sail Disney!

[Tapi]

IMO, if people would gladly pay it, Regent and Seabourn would have 20+ ships and Carnival would have only 5. While other lines may have better service (subjective) or better food (again subjective), the price point is so high that it is no longer a good value.

 

 

The answer is as simple as looking at income levels. There’s obviously considerably more people that can afford a Carnival cruise than those that can afford a Regent or Seabourn cruise. So consequently there will be more Carnival ships. But the reality is that most people don’t live with generous amounts of disposable income to spend on a luxury cruise line.

 

More than once, someone has started a thread here on Cruise Critic asking what their biggest reason to cruise on Carnival is, and the most popular answer is always price. For many, it’s what they can afford. Carnival has done a fantastic job at making cruising affordable for everyone by keeping prices low and strategically placing ships at embarkation ports that no other cruise line has considered and which are within an easy drive for millions, which in turn gives fellow passengers for whom airfare would make a cruise vacation prohibitively expensive the ability to go sailing.

 

You mention value. People sailing on luxury cruise lines aren’t looking for “cheap” or for “value”. They are looking for the level and quality of service, cuisine, and ambiance that they’ve come to expect after becoming accustomed to that, and nothing less. Paying for first class airfare to meet the ship at an exotic port of embarkation thousands of miles away is not a financial burden. Simply stated, they are at a point in life where they have the income to comfortably pay for all of that without flinching.

 

About Disney, we did it one time, and most likely we won’t do it again. We gladly paid the price because we specifically wanted to experience what Disney had to offer. But now that we’ve done it, we are ready to move on to the next cruise line. Nothing wrong with Disney. We are just not the kind of people to remain loyal to one cruise line and prefer to try as many as possible.

 

Several years ago, I would’ve never considered a Disney cruise. Frankly, I couldn’t afford it. I had convinced myself that I didn’t care for anything that Disney had to offer. But at some point in time I found myself in a place in life where a Disney cruise could become a reality. The last things on my mind when I booked that cruise were the words “cheap” or “value”. High on my list were many other adjectives which Disney delivered quite well and that’s what made it worth it.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited March 30, 2018 by Tapi

[ryano]

The answer is as simple as looking at income levels. There’s obviously considerably more people that can afford a Carnival cruise than those that can afford a Regent or Seabourn cruise.

 

Ive actually priced some of these all inclusive luxury lines during their off seasons and once you count everything they include (tips, drinks, excursions, airfare, etc) they really arent much more than a Carnival or Royal Caribbean cruise after you pay for all those things.

 

Seabourn has a 7 day cruise leaving tomorrow from Barbados going to some cool places that mass market lines cant even go for 2299.00 pp in a Veranda suite. All inclusive.

[stevefrisco]

Ive actually priced some of these all inclusive luxury lines during their off seasons and once you count everything they include (tips, drinks, excursions, airfare, etc) they really arent much more than a Carnival or Royal Caribbean cruise after you pay for all those things.

 

Seabourn has a 7 day cruise leaving tomorrow from Barbados going to some cool places that mass market lines cant even go for 2299.00 pp in a Veranda suite. All inclusive.

 

 

I've done the same, it seems like there's a lot of deals to be had on the "higher end" cruise lines if you are flexible and play your cards right compared to the advertised price. I don't see CCL or Royal (the lines I watch most closely) have much variation in their prices unless there's some sort of natural disaster like last year's hurricanes. Just my two cents.

[Tapi]

Seabourn has a 7 day cruise leaving tomorrow from Barbados going to some cool places that mass market lines cant even go for 2299.00 pp in a Veranda suite. All inclusive.

 

 

Too bad I have to work tomorrow![emoji23]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Computer Nerd]

The answer is as simple as looking at income levels. There’s obviously considerably more people that can afford a Carnival cruise than those that can afford a Regent or Seabourn cruise. So consequently there will be more Carnival ships. But the reality is that most people don’t live with generous amounts of disposable income to spend on a luxury cruise line.

 

More than once, someone has started a thread here on Cruise Critic asking what their biggest reason to cruise on Carnival is, and the most popular answer is always price. For many, it’s what they can afford. Carnival has done a fantastic job at making cruising affordable for everyone by keeping prices low and strategically placing ships at embarkation ports that no other cruise line has considered and which are within an easy drive for millions, which in turn gives fellow passengers for whom airfare would make a cruise vacation prohibitively expensive the ability to go sailing.

 

You mention value. People sailing on luxury cruise lines aren’t looking for “cheap” or for “value”. They are looking for the level and quality of service, cuisine, and ambiance that they’ve come to expect after becoming accustomed to that, and nothing less. Paying for first class airfare to meet the ship at an exotic port of embarkation thousands of miles away is not a financial burden. Simply stated, they are at a point in life where they have the income to comfortably pay for all of that without flinching.

 

About Disney, we did it one time, and most likely we won’t do it again. We gladly paid the price because we specifically wanted to experience what Disney had to offer. But now that we’ve done it, we are ready to move on to the next cruise line. Nothing wrong with Disney. We are just not the kind of people to remain loyal to one cruise line and prefer to try as many as possible.

 

Several years ago, I would’ve never considered a Disney cruise. Frankly, I couldn’t afford it. I had convinced myself that I didn’t care for anything that Disney had to offer. But at some point in time I found myself in a place in life where a Disney cruise could become a reality. The last things on my mind when I booked that cruise were the words “cheap” or “value”. High on my list were many other adjectives which Disney delivered quite well and that’s what made it worth it.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

I think where we differ is that you seem to equate "value" with "cheap". It's not the same, not even close. Value is getting your money's worth. One can buy anything in this world cheap and it may last (has value) or may break in a day (doesn't have value). Likewise, someone can spend a lot of money on something and that item may have every bill and whistle that you want and last a million years (has value) or it just may have a fancy name stuck on the back of it (doesn't have value). While I agree price is a good part of what provides value, it is not the end all of providing value. And of course, value is perceived differently by each person. I LOVE the big screens on ships so I can watch movies at night (can't stand boring shows) so that provides value to me. To the person beside me they may fume at there being a big screen on the ship (as many have stated on this site).

 

So while you are correct that there are some people that just can't afford to do something, there are others like me who could afford to do it but don't see the value in doing so. A waiter in a tux with a towel over his arm does nothing for me but more nights on the ocean does. A fantastic show in a theater does nothing for me while a good movie under the stars in a comfortable recliner does. I don't do Disney (Regent, Oceana, Seabourn, etc....) not because it's more expensive but because I don't see the value for the extra money spent. If I saw the value, I would probably do it.

[Expat Cruise]

IMO, if people would gladly pay it, Regent and Seabourn would have 20+ ships and Carnival would have only 5. While other lines may have better service (subjective) or better food (again subjective), the price point is so high that it is no longer a good value. Many folks simply don't have the money to pay a higher fee and many others (such as myself) don't value what is being paid extra for. Take Disney since you used that as an example. You gladly paid 3 times for a Disney cruise than a Carnival cruise (and I'm glad you enjoyed it) but I place more value on being at sea on a Carnival ship 21 nights compared to your 7 and there isn't a single thing on a Disney ship that to me justifies the extra expenditure. If people would gladly pay for the supposed better service, why doesn't Disney have 26 ships like Carnival? Or even 10? They only have 4 ships and carry only a handful of people compared to Carnival (or any other major line) so obviously people will not gladly pay exorbitant prices with out exorbitant value in return.

 

When I fly to from the United States I fly business class, the majority of the passengers on the 777 or 787 are in coach cattle class..... But the market is there for business class for the select few. The same thing with cruise lines some people don't care if they become cattle, just give them lots of food and drink and they are happy. But others care more about quality.

[buddylover]

I'm Platinum on Carnival and I completely agree with the OP's assessment. Carnival has slipped and they need to step it up a notch for the consumer, and down a notch for the share holders. The product is slipping and it is showing.

 

Ditto......we are with you completely. While all the 'cheerleaders' are on here defending CCL - for those of us who have sailed with them over the years, we have watched everything go 'downhill' and the cost go UP UP UP!! Yes, all the mainstream lines have had cut backs as costs in life have gone up, but CCL seems to have slipped the most to us! When cramming in more pax and taking away from open venues (such as the Atrium) and destroying the beauty of the ship experience by removing windows in public venues (on Promenade mostly) means more to the bottom line of CCL....then they are making a statement to us seasoned cruisers who have grown used to a different experience for our $$. The newer ships in the fleet (Vista etc) - are just obvious examples of major passenger overload/crowds + cut backs in the ships themselves (i.e, the theatre is a major awful change as well - so it can be used as a 'multi purpose' room as they took away many of the other public venues/dance clubs etc - moveable chairs, poles obstructing vision). Flame all you want....spend your $$ any way you want, but there are other options out there for those looking for who hold these beliefs and desires. If you like what CCL offers today, then book CCL....but do not flame others with different perceptions.

[jimbo5544]

Ditto......we are with you completely. While all the 'cheerleaders' are on here defending CCL - for those of us who have sailed with them over the years, we have watched everything go 'downhill' and the cost go UP UP UP!! Yes, all the mainstream lines have had cut backs as costs in life have gone up, but CCL seems to have slipped the most to us! When cramming in more pax and taking away from open venues (such as the Atrium) and destroying the beauty of the ship experience by removing windows in public venues (on Promenade mostly) means more to the bottom line of CCL....then they are making a statement to us seasoned cruisers who have grown used to a different experience for our $$. The newer ships in the fleet (Vista etc) - are just obvious examples of major passenger overload/crowds + cut backs in the ships themselves (i.e, the theatre is a major awful change as well - so it can be used as a 'multi purpose' room as they took away many of the other public venues/dance clubs etc - moveable chairs, poles obstructing vision). Flame all you want....spend your $$ any way you want, but there are other options out there for those looking for who hold these beliefs and desires. If you like what CCL offers today, then book CCL....but do not flame others with different perceptions.

I am confused, is it flame all you want or do not flame?

[beshears]

All I want to say is I have done Holland America, Norwegian, Princess, Royal Caribbean and Carnival, over my 25 years of cruising. Like some people I "could" nit pick, but that is not me. The only line that we said we would not do anymore is NCL. I believe, for what we get on Carnival, for the money, we are happy with. Some people come with BIG expectations, and YES, you will get them, IF you pay the price. That's why, when I find something new or exciting on the ship, it is a PLUS for me. :)

[Joebucks]

The word "cutback" is the most annoying, overused word on this forum. What is the benchmark that everyone compares to before "cutbacks" happened? Is it when cruising was for the very wealthy, on small ships, with no balconies, limited entertainment, no outdoor movies, limited dining options, etc? (Btw, that experience is still available, and even from the Carnival Corporation). Cruising HAD to transform to become a larger business. Personally, I am not interested, at least this point in my life, in the "old model." Why is it that we will so freely talk about things that have gone away like tablecloths, butter, mints, etc, but not things that are new or improved? Just in the last year I went on a ship with disgusting buffet burgers, to now having a solid, included, option that is Guy's. Most of the complaints here are seriously ridiculous. One of the few complaints I'd actually agree with is the midnight buffet. However, we all know how much waste that contributed.

 

For those who swear up and down it has changed for the worse, and have moved on, I present to you a different theory. A cruise, especially with the same company, has many similar qualities. To do it 10-30 times is going to leave many people wanting more. That's natural. That applies to anything repetitious. I've been to my favorite vacation spot around 25 times, and there is now more to do and see there than ever. However, I have done it so many times that it has lost some of its luster, and must give it a break.

[Thorncroft]

The word "cutback" is the most annoying, overused word on this forum. What is the benchmark that everyone compares to before "cutbacks" happened? Is it when cruising was for the very wealthy, on small ships, with no balconies, limited entertainment, no outdoor movies, limited dining options, etc? (Btw, that experience is still available, and even from the Carnival Corporation). Cruising HAD to transform to become a larger business. Personally, I am not interested, at least this point in my life, in the "old model." Why is it that we will so freely talk about things that have gone away like tablecloths, butter, mints, etc, but not things that are new or improved? Just in the last year I went on a ship with disgusting buffet burgers, to now having a solid, included, option that is Guy's. Most of the complaints here are seriously ridiculous. One of the few complaints I'd actually agree with is the midnight buffet. However, we all know how much waste that contributed.

 

For those who swear up and down it has changed for the worse, and have moved on, I present to you a different theory. A cruise, especially with the same company, has many similar qualities. To do it 10-30 times is going to leave many people wanting more. That's natural. That applies to anything repetitious. I've been to my favorite vacation spot around 25 times, and there is now more to do and see there than ever. However, I have done it so many times that it has lost some of its luster, and must give it a break.

 

Guys is probably one of the most successful co-branding attempts by Carnival. Others have come and gone. I would guess that eventually, Guys will also go away and be replaced with something newer and better. Enjoy it while you can.

[Tapi]

I think where we differ is that you seem to equate "value" with "cheap". It's not the same, not even close. Value is getting your money's worth

 

 

I follow your logic. But the point that I’m trying to make is that, when someone has enough disposable income to sail on a luxury cruise line, they are not as likely to say “I’m sailing Regent/Seabourn because it’s a great value” than to say “I’m choosing Regent/Seabourn because of the five star service, cuisine, ship decor, and activities”. Per your definition, these luxury lines may provide their guests with “value”, but how much money it cost them sail on those lines is not something high on their list of priorities. So when someone doesn’t care at all about cost, value somewhat falls off the radar as well.

 

I work with many colleagues who have moved up to the luxury segment (older gentlemen close to retirement and who are making considerably more money than they know what to do with it). We spend a lot of time talking about cruises, and the only time that they mention cost is when I specifically ask. And even then, sometimes they can’t even tell me because they weren’t paying attention to it! Otherwise they never, ever bring it up. That’s how little they care about cost, and thus, about “value”.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited March 30, 2018 by Tapi

[Tapi]

Double post

[bobandsherry]

The answer is as simple as looking at income levels. There’s obviously considerably more people that can afford a Carnival cruise than those that can afford a Regent or Seabourn cruise. So consequently there will be more Carnival ships. But the reality is that most people don’t live with generous amounts of disposable income to spend on a luxury cruise line.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

I can well afford Regent or Seabourn but just don't seen the value myself. I chose Carnival and find it a great value.

 

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

[Tapi]

I can well afford Regent or Seabourn but just don't seen the value myself. I chose Carnival and find it a great value.

 

 

For you, what you pay for your cruise and thus, “value”, is important. My previous posts concern Seabourn/Regent cruisers, some who can’t even tell how much they paid for their cruise. They just appreciate what these lines have to offer, no matter the cost.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Computer Nerd]

I follow your logic. But the point that I’m trying to make is that, when someone has enough disposable income to sail on a luxury cruise line, they are not as likely to say “I’m sailing Regent/Seabourn because it’s a great value” than to say “I’m choosing Regent/Seabourn because of the five star service, cuisine, ship decor, and activities”. Per your definition, these luxury lines may provide their guests with “value”, but how much money it cost them sail on those lines is not something high on their list of priorities. So when someone doesn’t care at all about cost, value somewhat falls off the radar as well.

 

I work with many colleagues who have moved up to the luxury segment (older gentlemen close to retirement and who are making considerably more money than they know what to do with it). We spend a lot of time talking about cruises, and the only time that they mention cost is when I specifically ask. And even then, sometimes they can’t even tell me because they weren’t paying attention to it! Otherwise they never, ever bring it up. That’s how little they care about cost, and thus, about “value”.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

I understand and respect your point of view. Unfortunately 99.999% of folks don't make enough to ever say "cost is no object". I also think some of it may be how people were raised. I was taught about value as a little kid by my parents (mainly my mom). 30 years ago value and cheap pretty much went hand in hand. Nowadays, value doesn't have to be the cheapest but I'm always still looking to see if I get the value for the increase in costs. For me, this would never change even if I had money to burn.

 

On a side note, can I ask what made you think your Disney cruise was worth triple the price? Genuinely interested because I can't see the value based on what I have read over the years on these boards and based on what my expectations are but as you have different expectations it would be nice to know what you based your statement off of.

[Greggy_D]

My oldest daughter cruised Disney once, and tried to convince me to book with them one year. I took a look at the price, saw that the price of an inside cabin would get me a balcony on Carnival!! And I wasnt all that gung-ho about shelling out that kind of cash to be surrounded by Disney characters and many more kids than are already on Carnival ships! NO THANK YOU! That had a recipe for hell! I am happy sailing Carnival (and RCCL and NCL), and have absolutely no desire to sail Disney!

 

I had the exact same thought process.

[declansdad]

Ditto......we are with you completely. While all the 'cheerleaders' are on here defending CCL - for those of us who have sailed with them over the years, we have watched everything go 'downhill' and the cost go UP UP UP!! Yes, all the mainstream lines have had cut backs as costs in life have gone up, but CCL seems to have slipped the most to us! When cramming in more pax and taking away from open venues (such as the Atrium) and destroying the beauty of the ship experience by removing windows in public venues (on Promenade mostly) means more to the bottom line of CCL....then they are making a statement to us seasoned cruisers who have grown used to a different experience for our $$. The newer ships in the fleet (Vista etc) - are just obvious examples of major passenger overload/crowds + cut backs in the ships themselves (i.e, the theatre is a major awful change as well - so it can be used as a 'multi purpose' room as they took away many of the other public venues/dance clubs etc - moveable chairs, poles obstructing vision). Flame all you want....spend your $$ any way you want, but there are other options out there for those looking for who hold these beliefs and desires. If you like what CCL offers today, then book CCL....but do not flame others with different perceptions.

 

 

Cuts both ways Buddy.

[declansdad]

When I fly to from the United States I fly business class, the majority of the passengers on the 777 or 787 are in coach cattle class..... But the market is there for business class for the select few. The same thing with cruise lines some people don't care if they become cattle, just give them lots of food and drink and they are happy. But others care more about quality.

 

 

So you are saying people who chose to cruise with Carnival are cattle?

 

Do you people ever read what you write and just listen to how it sounds?

[declansdad]

The word "cutback" is the most annoying, overused word on this forum. What is the benchmark that everyone compares to before "cutbacks" happened? Is it when cruising was for the very wealthy, on small ships, with no balconies, limited entertainment, no outdoor movies, limited dining options, etc? (Btw, that experience is still available, and even from the Carnival Corporation). Cruising HAD to transform to become a larger business. Personally, I am not interested, at least this point in my life, in the "old model." Why is it that we will so freely talk about things that have gone away like tablecloths, butter, mints, etc, but not things that are new or improved? Just in the last year I went on a ship with disgusting buffet burgers, to now having a solid, included, option that is Guy's. Most of the complaints here are seriously ridiculous. One of the few complaints I'd actually agree with is the midnight buffet. However, we all know how much waste that contributed.

 

For those who swear up and down it has changed for the worse, and have moved on, I present to you a different theory. A cruise, especially with the same company, has many similar qualities. To do it 10-30 times is going to leave many people wanting more. That's natural. That applies to anything repetitious. I've been to my favorite vacation spot around 25 times, and there is now more to do and see there than ever. However, I have done it so many times that it has lost some of its luster, and must give it a break.

 

 

Great post. However, if they didn't use the word cutbacks they would have no way to bash Carnival. Doesn't matter that their have been plenty of improvements and additions to Carnival ships, it only matters that they lost their mints.

[Computer Nerd]

Ditto......we are with you completely. While all the 'cheerleaders' are on here defending CCL - for those of us who have sailed with them over the years, we have watched everything go 'downhill' and the cost go UP UP UP!! Yes, all the mainstream lines have had cut backs as costs in life have gone up, but CCL seems to have slipped the most to us! When cramming in more pax and taking away from open venues (such as the Atrium) and destroying the beauty of the ship experience by removing windows in public venues (on Promenade mostly) means more to the bottom line of CCL....then they are making a statement to us seasoned cruisers who have grown used to a different experience for our $$. The newer ships in the fleet (Vista etc) - are just obvious examples of major passenger overload/crowds + cut backs in the ships themselves (i.e, the theatre is a major awful change as well - so it can be used as a 'multi purpose' room as they took away many of the other public venues/dance clubs etc - moveable chairs, poles obstructing vision). Flame all you want....spend your $$ any way you want, but there are other options out there for those looking for who hold these beliefs and desires. If you like what CCL offers today, then book CCL....but do not flame others with different perceptions.

 

So why are you on the Carnival section of the site instead of the Oceana or Seaborn section? It's not like we have blinders on and can't see there are alternatives but it's obvious that many of us don't believe those alternatives have the same value as Carnival.

[Tapi]

I understand and respect your point of view. Unfortunately 99.999% of folks don't make enough to ever say "cost is no object"

 

My point exactly. For that .001% of cruisers (or whatever the actual percentage may be) there are cruise lines out there where money isn’t a factor.

 

 

On a side note, can I ask what made you think your Disney cruise was worth triple the price? Genuinely interested because I can't see the value based on what I have read over the years on these boards...

 

This Disney cruise was a bucket list item than anything else. Not something that I chose because I considered a great value, but simply because I wanted to see what it was about.

 

As previously mentioned, we aren’t Disney fans (we hadn’t even set foot on a Disney park as a family until a month before this cruise). But I was very interested in experiencing things that are unique to Disney. First, because of the technical aspect behind all their offerings, including their ship design. For our kids, I wanted to see what the Oceaneer’s Club and the Oceaneer’s Lab, as well as the Aquaduck water coaster had to offer. I was also intrigued about the themed restaurants and the rotating dining room concept. We also wanted to experience Remy and Palo and to see if they lived up to the hype. We wanted to see if their stage entertainment was truly as phenomenal as reviewers had said, and if they’d be able to impress people like us who don’t really go to shows on ships. We also wanted to visit Castaway Cay, which needless to say, can only be reached on a Disney ship. Finally, we wanted to experience what many described as the best customer service of any mainstream cruise line.

 

In the most part, Disney delivered and fulfilled our expectations. I went on that cruise believing that we had paid a lot of money for “pixie dust”, but after returning, I realized that, while I still consider that their prices are high, I now think that they weren’t as overinflated as I believed before we sailed.

 

I’m glad that I sailed on Disney. I experienced it, saw what it was about, but now I’m ready to move on to the next cruise line. Too many cruise lines, ships and destinations to explore (several which I’m interested in regardless of their value). [emoji3]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Stateroom_Sailor]

The word "cutback" is the most annoying, overused word on this forum. What is the benchmark that everyone compares to before "cutbacks" happened? Is it when cruising was for the very wealthy, on small ships, with no balconies, limited entertainment, no outdoor movies, limited dining options, etc? (Btw, that experience is still available, and even from the Carnival Corporation). Cruising HAD to transform to become a larger business. Personally, I am not interested, at least this point in my life, in the "old model." Why is it that we will so freely talk about things that have gone away like tablecloths, butter, mints, etc, but not things that are new or improved? Just in the last year I went on a ship with disgusting buffet burgers, to now having a solid, included, option that is Guy's. Most of the complaints here are seriously ridiculous. One of the few complaints I'd actually agree with is the midnight buffet. However, we all know how much waste that contributed.

 

For those who swear up and down it has changed for the worse, and have moved on, I present to you a different theory. A cruise, especially with the same company, has many similar qualities. To do it 10-30 times is going to leave many people wanting more. That's natural. That applies to anything repetitious. I've been to my favorite vacation spot around 25 times, and there is now more to do and see there than ever. However, I have done it so many times that it has lost some of its luster, and must give it a break.

 

Personally I never cruised during classic times, and can only compare Carnival's quality within the stretch of 6 years, on the same concept of ships. Guys Burgers doesn't make up for the loss in quality, service, cleanliness, and maintenance, just seems like a dangling carrot. Guys is popular, probably an upgrade over the previous incarnation, but I believe Blue Iguana is a downgrade over the Wok. Like Zip's in WA, and Culver's, I think it's unwise to eat this extra fatty and greecy fast food, that's twice as bad as McDonald's. My one and only Guy's Burger, had twice as much mayo as meat, and even after scraping as much off as possible, it was gross... and I felt drained for a couple hours.