Villa Vie Residences

[as3369]

2 hours ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

The filming on board is one of many issues.

 

If people are even slightly considerate now, and I’ve seen many unblanked faces of co-cruisers on blogs - then nature being what it is people will take less care as time goes on.  And they do seem to be in te upper quartile of noisy. And this over time will become to some more and more irritating and might end in bad feeling.  

 

Also there are some on board who clearly see themselves as the kings and queens and the top of the pile.  The bee’s knees. They do not give the impression of being quiet people.  It seems to me that if their personality is let’s say gregarious and loud then some after a while might find themselves constantly making their way to an exit when they enter a bar.  But you can’t do it midway through breakfast, lunch or dinner.   Few people are offended by quietness and tranquility but it can only take a single couple or three to ruin the next 15 years. And if there are a few then they might compete and spread themselves around the ship. 

 

It seems to me that many might find themselves finding their experience not as they might have anticipated, but assuming the finances don’t implode then I could imagine how this might work for a singleton who at least could find some solitude and escape in their sole-occupancy cabins, but even extremely close  couples might find it a bit of a strain.

 

Jeff

 

 

 

If I were a resident of this ship, I would strongly oppose any attempts to photograph or film me or my activities.  Maybe I would be tossed aside by the "Founders" for my opposition.

 

I am intrigued with the idea of "living on a cruise ship" although I would always maintain a U.S. residence.  The economics of this ship do not make any sense and a quick glance of what was offered at the onset and what reality is will ultimately result in a failed business. 

 

 

[rebeccalouiseagain]

This has been an interesting experiment.  I would imagine this "living on a ship" would get old fast.  Even had they arrived to a beautiful, immaculate ship.  It would be fun for the first month or so- and then I think everyone would want to go "home" to where they hark from.  Yes- it's nice to know people on the ship and see familiar faces but it's a double-edged sword because you may not like everyone. Also- if you were to date onboard that could get really dicey.  Whether you like them at first and then something happens (like they are a stalker or conversely are "dating" other people at the same time). There are just too many aspects that would make for gossip and like high school.  I'll stick with traveling on different ships- when I want and with who I want.  Thankfully- I also don't mind solo cruising- I see it as an adventure.

[UKCruiseJeff]

3 hours ago, as3369 said:

If I were a resident of this ship, I would strongly oppose any attempts to photograph or film me or my activities.  Maybe I would be tossed aside by the "Founders" for my opposition.

 

I am intrigued with the idea of "living on a cruise ship" although I would always maintain a U.S. residence.  The economics of this ship do not make any sense and a quick glance of what was offered at the onset and what reality is will ultimately result in a failed business. 

 

 

 

I suspect that your objection would end up being unresolved and you would simply end up being ostracised. And then you’d be locked in with people.  The biggest potential virus in this type of environment is adverse gossip about people behind their backs by the outbreak of nasty cliques. 

 

It is to me counter-intuitive that people that think of themselves as needing the wide horizon of world-wide exploration and travel make a life changing decision like this and give up the option of traditional travel and decide instead that living in a cupboard for the “rest of their lives” is an astute decisions.  That is only if they get what is written on the tin. 

 

It is my perhaps misplaced theory that everyone really needs a home base to feel genuinely secure.  It is a primeval imperative. Sensible people tag on travel to their secure home.  

I  suspect that the majority of sensible people that travel extensively always look forward to getting home and making that first cup of tea. And then plan their  next trip. 

 

Jeff

Edited Monday at 09:40 PM by UKCruiseJeff

[cwayne]

37 minutes ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

 

I suspect that your objection would end up being unresolved and you would simply end up being ostracised. And then you’d be locked in with people.  The biggest potential virus in this type of environment is adverse gossip about people behind their backs by the outbreak of nasty cliques. 

 

It is to me counter-intuitive that people that think of themselves as needing the wide horizon of world-wide exploration and travel make a life changing decision like this and give up the option of traditional travel and decide instead that living in a cupboard for the “rest of their lives” is an astute decisions.  That is only if they get what is written on the tin. 

 

It is my perhaps misplaced theory that everyone really needs a home base to feel genuinely secure.  It is a primeval imperative. Sensible people tag on travel to their secure home.  

I  suspect that the majority of sensible people that travel extensively always look forward to getting home and making that first cup of tea. And then plan their  next trip. 

 

Jeff

You make very valid points and solid common sense. I must admit we were intrigued by the idea (well, me more then my husband) and discussed it at length. However reality overrode the fantasy and the "what ifs" took over. Home is a sanctuary when all else goes awry and that wouldn't be there on the ship.  We might consider a segment of this cruise if it proves successful but even that has its unique challenges. It might be like being the new neighbor where new people aren't really wanted. I don't need videos of the people, but seeing some of the available activities, entertainment, food options, pool area, etc would be helpful in making up your mind to join this voyage. They're going to have to sell a lot more cabins to give this venture a chance and for that you've got to show all the great things about it.  

Edited Monday at 10:15 PM by cwayne

[CanadianKate]

1 hour ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

 

 

It is my perhaps misplaced theory that everyone really needs a home base to feel genuinely secure.  It is a primeval imperative. Sensible people tag on travel to their secure home.  

I  suspect that the majority of sensible people that travel extensively always look forward to getting home and making that first cup of tea. And then plan their  next trip. 

 

Jeff

 
Jeff: I have always defined 'home' as where I sleep with my husband. So home can be a rental cottage in the woods of Canada (where I currently sit staring at the fire that is my 'central heating'), a hotel room in Hong Kong, a ship's cabin, or a short-let apartment in any city of the world. 

That said, I have always had some sort of a home base to return to because that is what my comfort level requires.

But there are many for whom such a base is not an imperative.  And while the vast majority of people on Cruise Critic may agree with you and I that they need a home base, it is close-minded to say that those who don't are ignoring a primeval imperative. Or that such people are not sensible. There are many nomadic societies and one must be careful to not let one's  viewpoint or values dismiss the value of societies or individuals with values different from our own. 

I agree that Villa Vie will likely fail,  but I will feel slightly sorry for the people who had the fortitude to step out of cultural norms and live a dream, even if their focus on that dream blinded them to obvious problems with this rendition of that dream.

But you are going beyond dismissing the Villa Vie potential debacle and are implying a vagabond lifestyle cannot be sensible even in other circumstances. You are dismissing that it might be perfect for people made of different stuff than you. You are also ignoring that there are a large number of people living such lifestyles in North America and Europe and for whom their 'home-base' is nothing more than a post office box somewhere with a mail forwarding service. Not to mention those traditional nomadic cultures who still exist in other parts of the world. 

I expected someone who travels extensively would know better than to make sweeping statements about "everyone" and claiming to know what values sensible people have. Today I learned otherwise. 

 

Edited Monday at 10:42 PM by CanadianKate
Fix sentence fragments

[UKCruiseJeff]

1 hour ago, CanadianKate said:

 
Jeff: I have always defined 'home' as where I sleep with my husband. So home can be a rental cottage in the woods of Canada (where I currently sit staring at the fire that is my 'central heating'), a hotel room in Hong Kong, a ship's cabin, or a short-let apartment in any city of the world. 

That said, I have always had some sort of a home base to return to because that is what my comfort level requires.

But there are many for whom such a base is not an imperative.  And while the vast majority of people on Cruise Critic may agree with you and I that they need a home base, it is close-minded to say that those who don't are ignoring a primeval imperative. Or that such people are not sensible. There are many nomadic societies and one must be careful to not let one's  viewpoint or values dismiss the value of societies or individuals with values different from our own. 

I agree that Villa Vie will likely fail,  but I will feel slightly sorry for the people who had the fortitude to step out of cultural norms and live a dream, even if their focus on that dream blinded them to obvious problems with this rendition of that dream.

But you are going beyond dismissing the Villa Vie potential debacle and are implying a vagabond lifestyle cannot be sensible even in other circumstances. You are dismissing that it might be perfect for people made of different stuff than you. You are also ignoring that there are a large number of people living such lifestyles in North America and Europe and for whom their 'home-base' is nothing more than a post office box somewhere with a mail forwarding service. Not to mention those traditional nomadic cultures who still exist in other parts of the world. 

I expected someone who travels extensively would know better than to make sweeping statements about "everyone" and claiming to know what values sensible people have. Today I learned otherwise. 

 

 

Thanks,

 

You have redefined a home as being a room in a hotel where any one of any number of strangers whose name you might never know and who have there own key to your home and can let themselves in or out whenever they wish whether you are at home or not.

 

That isn’t remotely like my idea of what a home is.  In fact it is the absolute opposite.  A home to me is a sanctuary where one can go that is the opposite to your idea and where once the front door  is shut no one can enter without being invited. 

 

It’s great that works for you.  I was simply expressing the idea that many people might have taken this path without considering fully what the loss of a permanent base means.  

 

And then you said you had one anyway.

 

Jeff

 

 

[gkbiiii]

I believe the reason that The World and other upscale ships are marketed as a "second home" for use two-three months a year, proves the general consensus.  Even Royal Caribbean's top cruiser, "Super Mario," refused to go on the 9 month world cruise, for this reason.  Mario has lived on Royal's ships for 15-20 years; but told me, he preferred shorter cruises, where he gets a different passenger mix often. The whole concept of "Founding Owners" reminds me of Crown & Anchor Pinnacles: the "Lords & Ladies of the High Seas!" 

[MacMadame]

There are plenty of people who travel around the world for years with no home base.

 

The nice thing about this concept is that would have allowed people to sample all the highlights around the world and also some out-of-the-way places you might not think of going to. In the end, you would know if you wanted to go back to a few places but you could at least say you'd seen the Taj Mahal, the Egyptian pyramids, the Great Wall, etc. There is no way I'm ever going to see all those places on my own. There is only so much time and money.

 

It's too bad that it was executed so badly and those poor people are not getting what remotely what they were promised. I look forward to Jenny Phenix's lawsuit and hope she takes them to the cleaners. Or at least gets her money and stuff back!

[as3369]

10 hours ago, MacMadame said:

There are plenty of people who travel around the world for years with no home base.

 

The nice thing about this concept is that would have allowed people to sample all the highlights around the world and also some out-of-the-way places you might not think of going to. In the end, you would know if you wanted to go back to a few places but you could at least say you'd seen the Taj Mahal, the Egyptian pyramids, the Great Wall, etc. There is no way I'm ever going to see all those places on my own. There is only so much time and money.

 

It's too bad that it was executed so badly and those poor people are not getting what remotely what they were promised. I look forward to Jenny Phenix's lawsuit and hope she takes them to the cleaners. Or at least gets her money and stuff back!

I know several people that retired and are traveling full time in their RVs.  We do have a lovely Leisure Travel Wonder which is great for sightseeing but I wouldn't enjoy the full-time RV life!

[MacMadame]

42 minutes ago, as3369 said:

I know several people that retired and are traveling full time in their RVs.  We do have a lovely Leisure Travel Wonder which is great for sightseeing but I wouldn't enjoy the full-time RV life!

Yes!

 

I wanted to sell everything and buy an RV and travel around the US and Canada but my husband is like you. He was up for doing that 3 months out of the year but not FT.

 

Different strokes and all.

[gkbiiii]

Notice that an RV/Houseboat is your private retreat, while a ship is not. 

[MacMadame]

1 hour ago, gkbiiii said:

Notice that an RV/Houseboat is your private retreat, while a ship is not. 

Why wouldn't your cabin on a ship be your private retreat?

[UKCruiseJeff]

4 hours ago, MacMadame said:

Why wouldn't your cabin on a ship be your private retreat?

 

I think it probably depends on what you define as “private” and “retreat”!

 

🙂

 

Jeff

 

ps.  I had no idea that I was a snob until I saw those terrible items and signs stuck on the cabin doors. I keep thinking “slum” and “graffiti” ……

 

 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 01:13 AM by UKCruiseJeff

[gkbiiii]

Notice how tacky & unsafe many of the cabin decorating is?  The one woman with the JR Suite, has a big tilted mirror; which will never survive a storm, let alone a Transatlantic crossing. 

[gkbiiii]

I wanted to bring up the economics of The World and the other Ultra-Luxury Residential vessels. The minimum annual costs are between $360,000+/$500,000+, for a recommended 3-4 month occupancy span, annually.  Thus the annual 90 day occupancy, costs $4,000+/$5,556+ a DAY!  The 120 day costs are "more reasonable" at only $3,000+/$4,167+ per day.  Finally, the total Annual Daily costs are $986+/$1,370 respectively.  For this type of money, you could look at yacht charters, Ultra-Luxury hotel stays, renting villas, etc.