OCEANIA - CRYSTAL

[PaulMCO]

5 hours ago, kitty9 said:

I’ve been on Crystal 17 times and we will do our 10th on O next month (this info is for perspective).   Each line has their strengths and weaknesses, and a lot of these things  are based on personal expectations.  For me, the main dining room on Crystal, Waterside, is superior to Oceania both in terms of food quality, service and attention to detail.  We really don’t care for most of the dinner offerings in the GDR as they focus on quite a number of vegetarian and vegan items (sorry, we aren’t into that kind of food, but respect others that do, but it’s just not for us).  The service in the GDR is really lacking—-it took them 50 minutes to serve our basic breakfast of eggs and sausage—-not a good thing—-so we never go there for breakfast.  I feel the buffet in both Waves and Terrace is far superior to Crystal’s, and the O casual dining areas are kept open longer, which is great for those coming back from 4 hour excursions.  

 

Entertainment on Crystal is fantastic and very professional in terms of talent.  Crystal brings on name guest entertainers for their evening shows.  And their guest speakers are amazing.  I have seen Marvin Hamlisch, Buzz Aldrin, Stephen King and many other well known authors, politicians and entertainers.  And I have to agree that daytime activities on Crystal are more numerous.  

 

But, we prefer the O class ships to the two Crystal ships for many reasons I can’t fully explain, but just put it to personal preference.  

 

I will cruise both both lines again, and enjoy the positives of each line.  

+1 ..   We had Phillipe Cousteau on our Amazon Cruise.  Most interesting.

 

Some things that have not been mentioned is

• the loyalty programs.  Both are good, O is a little richer as far as bonuses. 
• Internet is much better on Crystal plus they allow 4 devices per passenger and it still works.
• OBC -- on O the TA contributed OBC is refundable, on Crystal it is not.
• In fare comparison you need to add the port fees to Crystal.  But then there is the 2.5% discount for repeat cruisers plus another 2.5% extra early payment that Crystal gives

I do think that Crystal should do away with the Churro concept and go back to Tappas or a grill concept for a quick meal in the evening. I do not think that will happen since the Silk is there for a reason (owners are Chinese and they are marketing the line to the Taiwanese and HK clients)

 

But again we are itinerary driven so we will sail on O, Crystal, RSSC and Silversea as needed. 

 

We are on a Uniworld river cruise on the Nile and looks like we can add another line to our future list.

[Paulchili]

35 minutes ago, PaulMCO said:

In fare comparison you need to add the port fees to Crystal.  But then there is the 2.5% discount for repeat cruisers plus another 2.5% extra early payment that Crystal gives

Here is my fare comparison (adding that this changes with itineraries, TA rebates, loyalty levels, promotional fares, ][etc):

 

Cost – we stayed in a B1 balcony on Crystal that was 269 sq. ft. for $495 per diem cost. Later this Fall (2018) we have a B2B on Marina (booked as 2 separate voyages) in a PH2 with 420 sq. ft. 

Both of our Marina voyages cost less per diem than the Crystal did ($437 & $406 per diem respectively). The only cost difference between the two is included alcohol on Crystal; as we don’t drink, this is of no added value to us.

Not only does the PH, which is almost double the size, cost less per diem but each of our Oceania cruises includes 2 free excursions/pp (about $750 value), 3 bags of laundry, $600 OBC on one and $900 on the other cruise, 2 spa sessions each cruise, a butler and ensuite dining from 4 specialty restaurants (as well as unlimited visits to specialties at no fee). In addition, we will receive loyalty refunds from our TA after each Oceania cruise – thus further lowering the per diem cost of Oceania cruises

Conversely, our Crystal cruise cost us an addition $1200 for shore excursion – and that was with 10 sea days and 4 ports where we didn’t take any excursions (pus one port where the excursion was cancelled due to weather).

So there is absolutely NO comparison at all as to the monetary value for the cruise on Crystal vs Oceania. Of course, if it were only that we get a much larger cabin (with all sorts of benefits) for less money but nothing else, then it may not be a bargain. Such may be a case on Princess (and some others) where we may get a huge cabin for less money but not much else. However, on Oceania it’s not just the lower cost but we do NOT have to sacrifice anything that we value – we get great food, good service and friendly staff & fellow passengers.

 

In addition, one needs to consider that this cost is per diem - thus, for example,  a 20 day cruise for 2 people will be the per diem difference X 20 X 2 - not an insignificant number.

Based on this alone I can’t see a good reason to go back to Crystal unless the math changed significantly or the itinerary was unique.

Both of these are possible.

Edited January 2, 2020 by Paulchili

[PaulMCO]

1 hour ago, Paulchili said:

Here is my fare comparison (adding that this changes with itineraries, TA rebates, loyalty levels, promotional fares, ][etc):

 

Cost – we stayed in a B1 balcony on Crystal that was 269 sq. ft. for $495 per diem cost. Later this Fall (2018) we have a B2B on Marina (booked as 2 separate voyages) in a PH2 with 420 sq. ft. 

Both of our Marina voyages cost less per diem than the Crystal did ($437 & $406 per diem respectively). The only cost difference between the two is included alcohol on Crystal; as we don’t drink, this is of no added value to us.

Not only does the PH, which is almost double the size, cost less per diem but each of our Oceania cruises includes 2 free excursions/pp (about $750 value), 3 bags of laundry, $600 OBC on one and $900 on the other cruise, 2 spa sessions each cruise, a butler and ensuite dining from 4 specialty restaurants (as well as unlimited visits to specialties at no fee). In addition, we will receive loyalty refunds from our TA after each Oceania cruise – thus further lowering the per diem cost of Oceania cruises

Conversely, our Crystal cruise cost us an addition $1200 for shore excursion – and that was with 10 sea days and 4 ports where we didn’t take any excursions (pus one port where the excursion was cancelled due to weather).

So there is absolutely NO comparison at all as to the monetary value for the cruise on Crystal vs Oceania. Of course, if it were only that we get a much larger cabin (with all sorts of benefits) for less money but nothing else, then it may not be a bargain. Such may be a case on Princess (and some others) where we may get a huge cabin for less money but not much else. However, on Oceania it’s not just the lower cost but we do NOT have to sacrifice anything that we value – we get great food, good service and friendly staff & fellow passengers.

 

In addition, one needs to consider that this cost is per diem - thus, for example,  a 20 day cruise for 2 people will be the per diem difference X 20 X 2 - not an insignificant number.

Based on this alone I can’t see a good reason to go back to Crystal unless the math changed significantly or the itinerary was unique.

Both of these are possible.

You can site yours and I site several cruise that we have done that were cheaper or same on Crystal...

 

Amazon Cruise in November 2018 where an O PH2 on an R ship was 24K (cruise only) for 23 nights versus a Crystal SH which we got for 24 nights for 22K. -- Crystal did have a special sale. 

 

Our Baltic cruise in a B2 on Serenity versus same on Nautica A2 -- was significantly less.  Oceania charges premium prices for the Nautica in those cruises.

 

Our current cruise for 2022 B2B for 22 nights in the Med/Spain -- 23K in an SH.  A similar Cruise with O life and Air removed  for 2021 on Marina is around 22K in a PH2.  Likely O will raise prices in 2022 to make it the same.

 

I will not sail in Crystal on certain itins that they demand Premium prices nor will I do so on O (or Silversea).

 

 

 

[Paulchili]

Paul - like I said, prices do vary from cruise to cruise and from one TA to another.

I have only one experience with Crystal and that was what I described.

Glad you did better with them. 

[almostretired]

On 12/26/2019 at 11:36 PM, AtA said:

Lynn you had confirmation bias even before you began your cruise and your comment above proves it. I’m done with this. I and several others showed your comments were not true. Have a great night

The review was not unexpected based on the comments posted well before ever boarding.

[bitob]

The reaction on the Crystal board to her posts was similar.

 

I will add my 2 cents.  We have 16 cruises on O.  Our friends have 30!! on O.  We are Crystallized.  All of us.  What do we love?  The speakers, the entertainment, the music, the service, the food and the dining venues,  the layout of the ships, the on board activities . . . . . .  for us there is no going back.  

 

We are fortunate at this point in our lives not to consider cost when booking a cruise.   We are going to bounce our last check.   BTW - we do not drink so the alcohol is irrelevant.  We also never do ship-sponsored tours so that factor is also irrelevant.

 

For us it is Crystal going forward.  We have six more Crystal cruises booked and our friends are on 4 of them.  We have convinced others to try Crystal as well and they have become repeat bookers. 

 

We leave on Jan13 on Symphony - San Diego to Guam.  All those delicious sea days with the  great Crystal on board experience is really something to which we look forward.

 

I urge even the most devoted Oceania loyalist to try Crystal

[LHT28]

1 hour ago, almostretired said:

The review was not unexpected based on the comments posted well before ever boarding.

Actually  our minds were not made up before  but  you Crystal people are so easy to wind up 😉

 

We were disappointed in the food  offerings on Crystal  & the buffet

 

As your  chief guru  says  "Change is good"

 

 

[FlyerTalker]

20 minutes ago, LHT28 said:

As your  chief guru  says  "Change is good"

 

One more factual inaccuracy.  He consistently says "Choice is good", not "change".