Regent vs. HAL

[fizzy]

11 hours ago, MalbecWine said:

 A real suite should have a divider not a curtain that separates the the bedroom and living area.

I believe that you are 100% correct and that the obsession with the word "suite" on this board is comical.

[Hambagahle]

8 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

If Regent or any other cruise line wants to call them suites, who am I to argue?  A cabin is like a bedroom while a suite has a living room type separate area.  I have not found a definition that suggests that having a curtain or divider negates the fact that it is a suite.  Wikipedia defines a suite in a hotel or cruise line as "A suite in a hotel or other public accommodation such as a cruise ship denotes, according to most dictionary definitions, connected rooms under one room number."

 

In any case, not sure why it matters.  

To me one room with separate sitting area is like a Junior Suite.  It is not a suite just a large bedroom.  A separate sitting/dining area and a separate bedroom is a suite.  And I think Regent is OTT to say the ships are "all suites"...they aren't.  Why not say "spacious cabins" or something more precise?   But as you say Jackie - who are we to argue?  We just go and enjoy ourselves - cabin / jr suite or /suite !!

[Dolebludger]

One thing we do, especially on cruises longer than a week, is to determine the size and layout of the room before we book. You can usually do this on the line's website or through your TA. Cruise lines often have very exaggerated names for their accommodations that may not match reality. After a while doing this, you will get a sense of the size you want/need. For example, for a room with a separate sitting area, we prefer 300 sq. ft. of interior space, or more. This is like the basic "suites" on the Regent Navigator and Voyager. When you get this info, be sure that the balcony is NOT included in the square footage. 

[kennicott]

2 hours ago, Dolebludger said:

One thing we do, especially on cruises longer than a week, is to determine the size and layout of the room before we book. You can usually do this on the line's website or through your TA. Cruise lines often have very exaggerated names for their accommodations that may not match reality. After a while doing this, you will get a sense of the size you want/need. For example, for a room with a separate sitting area, we prefer 300 sq. ft. of interior space, or more. This is like the basic "suites" on the Regent Navigator and Voyager. When you get this info, be sure that the balcony is NOT included in the square footage. 

Agreed.

[kennicott]

Another problem I find with the sales rhetoric commonly bandied about, like using the word "suites", by lines and guests is the tendency to categorize with ambiguous terms such as luxury, premium and so on. When recommending Regent to friends I usually give them this advice " "Regent is a so called luxury line. But don't expect too much because of the classification, some go away dissatisfied since they wanted an utopian voyage or something whimsical--- Lower your expectations." and  "Relax and enjoy--Try not to be critical, do not dwell on little mistakes by the crew etc. or that habit can ruin your entire voyage."

[Travelcat2]

55 minutes ago, kennicott said:

Another problem I find with the sales rhetoric commonly bandied about, like using the word "suites", by lines and guests is the tendency to categorize with ambiguous terms such as luxury, premium and so on. When recommending Regent to friends I usually give them this advice " "Regent is a so called luxury line. But don't expect too much because of the classification, some go away dissatisfied since they wanted an utopian voyage or something whimsical--- Lower your expectations." and  "Relax and enjoy--Try not to be critical, do not dwell on little mistakes by the crew etc. or that habit can ruin your entire voyage."

 

Agree what you say in the 2nd half of your post.  "Labeling" cruise lines can be difficult but, In my opinion, it is necessary.  

 

I'm sure that most people new to cruising don't have much of an idea what the different cruise lines offer without going into multiple websites and checking.  Even then, you don't know much about the experience on the ship (unless you read CC which reportedly, only 5% of cruisers read).  Again, who is going to read about every cruise line?

 

When you have mainstream, premium and luxury designations ("premium plus" and "luxury lite" came into existence with Oceania and has now spread to Azamara and Viking Ocean.)  This gives new cruisers a starting place (of course this is complicated by companies/publications that seem to disagree which cruise lines are luxury and which are premium or premium plus (premium and mainstream cruise lines are fairly well established with little disagreements.)

 

I learned a lot in 2018 since it was the first time in 30 years that we took both mainstream and premium cruises.  Man - what a difference! 

 

To be fair, our mini-cruise on NCL was a christening cruise so everything onboard had no charges attached to them.  And, we stayed in a separate section of the ship that is classified as luxury (to me - luxury on a 4,000 passenger cruise ship makes little sense).  The ship was lovely and there were tons of things to do - from car racing to paintball.  However, with one exception, the food did not meet our expectations (not even the specialty restaurants that usually have a cost).

 

Then we took a Celebrity cruise on a ship that carries 2,000 passengers.  Again, we stayed in a suite and had access to specialty restaurants whenever we wanted to.  Again, food not up to par -- service (except in the special dining room and lounge for "suite guests"), was mediocre.  The suite was nice - had lots of cupboards but they were the depth of a bookshelf (in order words - useless).  The worst part is that we people were trying to sell us things all of the time (even when we sat in the "private" lounge to have a cocktail after boarding).

 

I shared this as an example of how luxury, premium and mainstream cruise lines differ from luxury cruise lines.  We have also sailed Oceania.  Somehow the new classification of premium plus and luxury lite blur the lines - in some areas.  Oceania's Riviera is almost as lovely as Regent's Explorer.  That is where the similarity ends.  The food (except in some specialty restaurants) do not match up to Regent or Silversea (the two luxury cruise lines that we have sailed on).  The officers on Oceania do not interact with passengers as much as they do on Regent.

 

This was discussed on the General board but no one could come to an agreement between premium plus and luxury.  Plus, there are wonderful ships like Europa I or II (cannot keep them straight) that are luxury but cater to families and there are generally under 25 passengers on the ship that speak English.  To confuse matters more, Hapag Lloyd has ships that are not luxury and ones that are.

 

Sorry that this was so long.  In my opinion, having a general idea of what category a cruise line belongs in is very helpful.  It is also helpful to not pay attention to polls (not trying to be political, but how accurate are voting polls? - the same kind of thing).  

 

P.S.  Back to the suite "thing" - if the word "suite" bothers you, how would you differentiate between a room with a bed, television and dresser (tiny) with a 300+ sq. ft. bedroom with a separate area for a sofa, desk, etc.?

Edited January 7, 2019 by Travelcat2

[MalbecWine]

On 1/6/2019 at 2:36 PM, raphael360 said:

Thanks - I didn't take it badly.    I see all these discussion about upgrades but, having sailed more that 200 days on the Odyssey class ships,  I think the best rooms are the veranda suites mid ship.  We actually check the "no upgrade" button on our reservation because we would hate to be upgraded to a spa suite for free.  Now if American Airlines wants upgrade us to business class to Australia next month,  FOC,  I'll take it 🙂 Hear that AA? If you're listening, you owe us big time!

 

I don't think AA is listening.

A suite for us is with two bathrooms and a large bedroom with solid doors dividing the sitting area.  If we can’t obtain a large suite on a cruise we look for connecting PH suites which gives us two bathrooms and two walk-in closets.  Yes, we do have to pay a supplement for this.

[MalbecWine]

American Airlines does not read CC.

[Bellaggio Cruisers]

This discussion is only as good as each writers opinions:

Each one should define their own cruise needs. 

1- why are you taking a cruise

2- how much money do you want to spend

3- how important is your itinerary

4- how important are your accommodations vs cost

5- how important is the dining and menus

6- how important is personal staff attention to you

I can continue but I think you get my message. 

We answer all these questions for ourselves and we return to Regent. 

Because we prefer Regent, we choose our accommodations accordingly.  Sometimes we splurge, sometimes going with the basics. 

We have tried all the other larger cruise lines. None meets our standard as Regent does. My personal opinion!

Regards

Sheila

 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Bellaggio Cruisers

[kennicott]

I tend to agree with Bellaggio here. Most of us commenting appear to be seasoned veterans of cruising, thus we have our own ideas as to what we prefer in the way of cruise itineraries, ship size, cabin size, amenities provided, etc regardless of relying on the use of terms like "suite" or "luxury" which probably mean squat to us. When good friends ask my pertinent opinion though, in order to articulate a response without using nebulous terms so that it makes sense to them, I first try to determine what piques their interest in sailing in the first place. For instance, no sense wasting a lot of time talking trans-Pacific or trans-Atlantic if they are scared of extended open ocean travel and detest lots of sea days. 

 

Berlitz puts it pretty well when discussing the cruising experience:  "One person's luxury is another person's standard.  Luxury [elegant, sumptuous] are like the difference between a Bentley and a motor scooter. Unfortunately the words luxury, lux and premium----all used interchangeably---have been degraded through constant overuse by marketeers and advertisers." 

A good case in point is the current subject of the size of the E category Concierge Suites on the RSS Mariner. I too agree that the balcony and the main bedroom portion of the cabin is a little small for my taste, but what makes up for it is the relatively large size of the bathroom and the walk in closet, particularly when the bathroom has a large walk in shower. The same category suites on the Navigator and Voyager are almost perfect for us. We have spent some time sailing now on the R-3 (Pacific Princess) on deck eight in the mini-suites there which are wider than the Mariner's but have close to the same total square footage. Except for the cramped bathroom and inadequate closets we prefer the bedroom and balcony on this ship over the Mariners. We had cabin 8000 for a month, combined with Club Class dining the cruise experience makes it almost on par with the Mariner, at about half the price for a like itinerary. Here is a shot of that cabin followed by one of a portion of the our last bathroom on the Mariner and its walk in closet.             

 

 

[Travelcat2]

Kennicott:  really found your last post interesting.The closet photo that you posted is tiny compared to other Regent ships.  The photo of the Princess suite definitely seems to have more space than the Mariner.  However, it begs the question as to whether the food and service is as good as on Regent.

 

Admittedly, my view of Regent suites is based on 32 cruises.  We are fortunate to have had the opportunity to sail on Regent for so long.  I agree with Bellagio cruiser on the points that she has made.

 

It is difficult to compare Princess (or other premium cruise lines) as it is like comparing apples and snakes.  If you are happy with HAL, Princess or other premium cruise lines, I suggest that you go for it.  

 

IF another cruise line is superior to Regent (not just a luxury section of a mainstream cruise line) I would be interested in hearing what you have to say

 

 

[kennicott]

3 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

 However, it begs the question as to whether the food and service is as good as on Regent.

 

Answer is no. However, as I mentioned, Princess now has a limited number of "mini-suite Club Class Dining" cabins designated. This brings the dining and food quality up to almost par with Regent. I said "almost".

[Dolebludger]

I think this all illustrates that there is no such thing as a perfect cruise for everybody. I have yet to even find the perfect cruise for me. One thing that hasn’t been discussed much on this thread is that some lines (and accommodation classes on some lines) have priced themselves out of what some of us have as our vacation budget. And this has been amplified  by increases in airline fares for business/first.  Anybody want a flight over an hour or so in economy?  Regent fares do include business/first air, but only on intercontinental flights. How does one take their air that is business first and separately book their own business first on legs where Regent doesn’t? I don’t know? Does anybody?  On any other cruise line, the air is a totally separate expense. We found a MSC Yacht club cruise in Europe at a cost for two at only about $7000  eleven nights. Good deal we thought. Then we discovered that the business/first air would be over $10,000!  Coupled with transfers, two nights hotel, insurance, and such, our $7000 cruise turned into an over $20,000 cruise. We did not go. Could we could have written a check for it all and have it clear? Yes. Did we want to? No. 

 

Fact is, with the increase in cruise prices coupled with business/first air prices, we don know if we will ever cruise again.  Back in the first decade of this century, we took a 14 night Regent (then Radisson) cruise for $2,500 pp and economy air (not included then) was more accommodating than now and was less than  $1,500  for the two of us. This equaled a $6500 14 night cruise — and on Regent to boot! Unfortunately, due to these factors, those days only a little over a decade ago are gone. So many of us cut down on the number of trips we take, and look for the very best deal on acceptable ones we can find.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Dolebludger

[mikenbob]

Some folks like Carnival...great, cruise on Carnival.  

Some folks like NCL...great, cruise on NCL.

Some folks like Royal Caribbean...great, cruise on Royal Caribbean.

Some folks like Celebrity...great, cruise on Celebrity.

Some folks like Seabourn...great, cruise on Seabourn.

Some folks like Holland America...great, cruise on Holland America.

Some folks like Regent...great, cruise on Regent.

Some folks like SeaDream Yacht Club...great, cruise on SeaDream Yacht Club.

Some folks like Crystal...great, cruise on Crystal.

Some folks have their own yacht...please invite me!

 

When did this become a contest of proving that the cruise line that you prefer to travel on is the winner of some imaginary best cruise line contest?  We like Regent.  Is it perfect?  No.  Does it meet our needs?  Sure.  If you prefer another line, great.  Happy sailing!

[Travelcat2]

Dolebludger - you asked about international business class and domestic air in the U.S.  and how to work the two.  We face this dilemma frequently and will not fly coach.  First, we deviate air and select an airline that does not have stops in the U.S. so our flights are Business Class.  When we have to return home from Miami, we take a 50% air credit and use the money from the credit towards the Business or First Class flights home.

 

To my knowledge, Regent is the only cruise line that includes international Business Class flights.  While it would be nice if we had domestic Business/First class, I am not going to be critical of Regent.  After all, when we cruise other lines, we have to pay 100% of the airfare.  

[kennicott]

4 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

 

It is difficult to compare Princess (or other premium cruise lines) as it is like comparing apples and snakes.  If you are happy with HAL, Princess or other premium cruise lines, I suggest that you go for it.  

 

IF another cruise line is superior to Regent (not just a luxury section of a mainstream cruise line) I would be interested in hearing what you have to say

 

 

Apparently you did not read my original post. I give up.

[Travelcat2]

5 minutes ago, kennicott said:

Apparently you did not read my original post. I give up.

 

You are correct - I did miss your first post but have now read it.  I know that you have given up but perhaps you will answer one question?  Not disagreeing that you can get cabins that are the same size or close to the same size as Regent.  However, if a cabin the approximate size of Regent costs 1/2 of the price, how can they afford to have food, service, etc. at the same level as Regent?  Not sure if you included the cost of airfare, tips, alcohol and excursions on Princess but those dollars can add up.

[ArtsyCraftsy]

I'm enjoying this discussion a lot.  I'm relatively new to cruise travel -- 3 cruises in all, 2 on HAL, one on RSSC, first cruise was in September 2017, HAL to Alaska.  EVERYTHING that is being discussed here is so subjective; what's most important to me may not matter to someone else.  

 

Comparisons are tricky for a lot of obvious reasons.  Each cruise line has its own "personality" and features.  That said, I good experiences with both HAL and RSSC, but I tend to view the travel experience a bit differently on each.

 

First, the overriding consideration for me is the cost based on single occupancy vs the expected experience.  I travel solo, so there's ALWAYS an extra cost associated with that.  The only cruise lines I've found that have either "single" special pricing or special "single" cabins are on the more popular commercial cruise lines that employ only large ships, and their "single" cabins are tiny interior or "ocean view" rooms that simply won't work for me.  Traveling solo has some advantages (I can be totally comfortable in a smaller cabin/suite, for example, since I'm not sharing space with anyone else), but cost is a huge disadvantage.  I also have some physical challenges that force me to weigh the overall onboard experience as equal to the onshore/excursion experience since there are times when going ashore is extremely difficult if not impossible.

 

After cruising both lines - HAL for a total of 52 days (14 to Alaska; 38 through North Atlantic); RSSC for a total of 28 days -- I'm moving more and more to RSSC primarily from a cost/experience tradeoff standpoint as a solo traveler.  HAL offers some extremely interesting itineraries, and I have two cruises booked on them this year: 28 days Hawaii-Tahiti-Marquesas in Mar-Apr on the Eurodam (2100 passengers) and 35 days Peru-Ecuador "Incan Empires" in Sept-Oct on the Amsterdam (1400 passengers).  But after 2019, I have no other HAL cruises on the books.

 

On HAL, I always book a Neptune Suite: ~500 sq ft + ~70 sq ft balcony, with some nice included perks.  On RSSC, so far I've booked a Concierge Suite -- considerably smaller (almost identical to the HAL Vista Suite -- ~300 sq ft + ~50 sq ft balcony) but very well organized so that as a single traveler I have ample room to "spread out."

 

I now have two more cruises booked on RSSC in 2020:  the 131-day "Navigate the World" cruise Jan-Jun and the 68-day "Grand Cape Horn Adventure" Oct 2020-Jan 2021 -- both in a Concierge suite.  I was initially concerned about the size difference between my HAL and RSSC experiences, but I asked myself while on my first RSSC cruise last fall "Can you be happy in THIS cabin for an extended period of time?" and the answer was always the same:  "Why yes, yes I can,"  which is what ultimately led me to book the 2020 world cruise ... in exactly the same cabin I was occupying at the time.  Besides, the next category "up" (PH) comes with a butler and I have no earthly idea how I'd use a butler if I had one.  I really don't need/want the added stress of having to deal with that, so a Concierge category cabin works out fine: perfect size, great amenities, excellent location.

 

The interesting thing, to me, is that the perks associated with a Concierge Suite on RSSC are very similar to the perks associated with a Neptune Suite on HAL: concierge service, welcome bottle of champagne, for example.  The total "per person" base cruise fare is comparable between the two -- HAL charges 100% single supplement; RSSC is averaging 42-45% --, but RSSC is all-inclusive while HAL is not, so when you add in the extra cost on HAL for wine packages, specialty dining, excursions, etc., in most cases, RSSC actually comes out less expensive for a comparable itinerary/cruise length.  Obviously, the major difference is cabin size, but the overall experience is trending better based on what I consider the most important factors (ambiance, service, FOOD, inclusive vs non-exclusive features, etc.).

 

I'll continue to look at HAL itineraries -- but they're cutting back on some service levels and that's starting to impact the overall cruise experience for me.  My second HAL cruise was not the same as the first -- everything seemed a bit "off," very slow service in the main dining room, having to remind cabin stewards more than once of simple requests (like fresh ice in the afternoon), etc.  The next two HAL cruises will tell me if the North Atlantic experience was the exception (or maybe if my first experience was actually the exception).  But my expectation is that I'll gradually move over to RSSC for 90% of my cruise travel over the next few years UNLESS they drastically modify their single supplement policy.

 

I also have two other cruises booked, one in 2019 on Oceania (Regatta) in July to r/trip to Alaska from Seattle for a week (my birthday), and in 2020 on Viking Ocean (Orion) for 21 days, also Alaska for my birthday, a B2B from Vancouver to Seward r/trip.  I just want to try a couple of other cruise lines for the experience, but they're going to have to go a long way to best my RSSC experience.

 

Lana in Bellingham, WA

 

 

[kennicott]

19 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

 

 However, if a cabin the approximate size of Regent costs 1/2 of the price, how can they afford to have food, service, etc. at the same level as Regent?  Not sure if you included the cost of airfare, tips, alcohol and excursions on Princess but those dollars can add up.

Good question---My spiel was somewhat misleading, my bad.  I think you were referring to this statement:  "Except for the cramped bathroom and inadequate closets we prefer the bedroom and balcony on this ship over the Mariners. We had cabin 8000 for a month, combined with Club Class dining the cruise experience makes it almost on par with the Mariner, at about half the price for a like itinerary."

 

What I meant to say in that context, was "from the standpoint of cabin and dining quality only", I did not mean to say the "overall cruise experience". Of course Regent is superior overall. Sometimes we are fortunate enough that we find a voyage on Regent that has commensurate pricing to that of Princess on a similar voyage. Since we prefer cruises of around a month, (less than three weeks I don't book anymore) and the older we get the more we love sea days, from time to time we can get a pretty good price out of Regent, which I attribute to many disdaining long days at sea on the open ocean. Of course, that trend is applicable to all lines as well, but it appears to me the long cruises on Regent provide a proportionately better value. Don't know if that makes sense, but I tried.

Back to the mini-suite statement on Princess. There were a couple of qualifiers in there, Regent has much better bathrooms and closets, they might appear small if one just finished a cruise in a huge "full" suite like we just did, but for us the much better bathroom and closet features bring the Mariner Concierge Suites up to par with the mini-suites on Princess providing the Club Class Dining is included on Princess (which are limited and usually sold out).

 

Earlier, someone else commented about Regent shore excursions being inferior to HAL's. Well, we have about 200 days sailing on HAL and have taken many a shore excursion with them. Granted, it has been a few years since we sailed on HAL but if their shore excursions today are superior to Regent's, then over the interim they have made remarkable improvements. Now, I'm not knocking the HAL shore excursions, most were good. You get the drift.    

[Travelcat2]

kennicott - thank you so much for the explanation.  It makes more sense now.

 

Have to comment on Regent shore excursions.  To make it simple - we do not care for most "free" excursions but do like Regent Choice excursions (those with a price tag).  

 

We do not think that Regent is perfect but prefer it to other cruise lines that we have sailed on (and we continue to check out other cruise lines).  Like you, we enjoy sea days and generally take a transatlantic cruise once a year.  We also take a more "interesting" (but not port intensive) cruise once a year.  Our third cruise has been on a cruise line that we have yet to try.  Since I am held by some posters to a higher standard, we need to have a much experience on other cruise lines as possible.

 

I find that what you say about Princess "Club Class Dining" very interesting.  It make me feel better about the suite-only dining room on Celebrity (they are first come - first served - no reservations).  

 

So far, despite loving the activities on NCL, we could not see ourselves sailing on NCL again.  And, with Celebrity, the muster was so poor (and in our opinion dangerous) that it put us off of that cruise line (in addition to having no proper sit down restaurants for lunch - a buffet so poor that we needed to find a restaurant ashore every day).  Our next "experiment will be a luxury cruise line that we have yet to sail.  It will be to your part of the world!

 

[Tampa Girl]

On 12/23/2018 at 4:13 AM, Hambagahle said:

I find this discussion fascinating because we have two sets of friends who just took their first cruises on HAL and are already booked to cruise again with them.  SO - I (cruised only on Hurtigruten, Regent and Oceania with TAs on Union Castle line and Cunard in the distant past) started looking at the HAL site to see how things compared.  Their prices sounded very reasonable - and I was looking at ONLY their top suites in each case because we like suites with a separate bedroom and at the least 1 1/2 baths - until I started adding in the cost of drinks, special restaurants (can be $55+ per person more for a dinner) and tours.   Once all that was done I was far better off financially on Regent and the "top" suites often did not have a separate bedroom at all.

 

Plus the smallest of the HAL ships is far larger than anything Regent has.  And  I don't like large ships...And then HAL is owned by Carnival.  That put a stop to my comparisons!!

 

So you won't sail on Cunard, either?  

[Tampa Girl]

On 1/6/2019 at 6:57 PM, Dolebludger said:

A concierge suite on the Mariner is identical to their lowest category suite (cat. H) in size and services -- but higher in price. It is 256 sq. ft. of interior space. Yes, I too find it small -- especially in light of the price. It in no way is a "suite".

 Regent's website lists the size as 318 sq. ft, plus the balcony of 49? sq. ft.  Is the website wrong?  The difference between 318 and 256 is substantial, and the pictures look like there is slightly more space than HAL''s R class Vista Suites.

[jeb_bud]

On Mariner Cat D- H are the same size at 252 sq ft plus balcony. Size is the same but amenities do vary, at least for new cruisers. 

[Travelcat2]

2 hours ago, Tampa Girl said:

 Regent's website lists the size as 318 sq. ft, plus the balcony of 49? sq. ft.  Is the website wrong?  The difference between 318 and 256 is substantial, and the pictures look like there is slightly more space than HAL''s R class Vista Suites.

 

Navigator and Voyager suites are 301 sq. feet with a 50 foot balcony (lowest category through concierge level).

 

In terms of HAL and other non-luxury lines, I would expect the suites to be larger for two reasons:  1)  the ships are at least twice the size of Regent; and 2) there is even more space available on the ship for larger suites due to the tiny size of the entry level staterooms.

 

It seems that cruise ships have a different standard than hotels, etc.  If there is a living room and a bedroom (even if the two are only separated by a curtain), most luxury lines consider this a suite.  

 

The bottom line on most premium cruise lines is that their suites are larger - public areas are larger but the food, service and ratio of crew to passengers differ greatly on luxury cruise lines.

 

P.S.  I do not consider Cunard as luxury although part of the ship is.  To me it is the same as NCL where The Haven Suite passengers are separated from the rest of the ship - have much better food and service.  They have their own lounge, restaurant, etc.  However, once you leave the "luxury" sections of the ship, you are still on a mainstream cruise line.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Travelcat2

[Dolebludger]

I assure all that the INTERIOR size of "suites on the Mariner -- categories H through D is 256 sq.ft. This does not include the balcony.