Do any of you have a preference for size or age of ship?

[cruisemom42]

1 minute ago, navybankerteacher said:

True - they are in the higher price range — but then just a quarter century ago cruising itself was a high price vacation option.

 

Only in this century did cruising become a mass market activity - so today’s new mega-ships  serve that purpose;  while refitted and new build smaller ships will continue to serve the upscale market they always did.

 

Not so sure about that. My parents weren't wealthy but we started cruising (as a family) in the 1970s. 

 

I like cruising but as a solo every cruise costs me about twice as much per dium as for a couple. I'm not willing to give up the amount of time I spend traveling in order to pay more per trip. It's not that I don't see the value, it's just that my priorities are different.

 

[navybankerteacher]

2 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Not so sure about that. My parents weren't wealthy but we started cruising (as a family) in the 1970s. 

 

I like cruising but as a solo every cruise costs me about twice as much per dium as for a couple. I'm not willing to give up the amount of time I spend traveling in order to pay more per trip. It's not that I don't see the value, it's just that my priorities are different.

 

“Wealthy” is something of a subjective term.   It has generally been possible for selective average income people to afford some higher cost activities by allocating resources and doing without some things a lot of other people might take for granted. (Just think how many $ a person  could set aside for a cruise if he/she opted not to grab a Starbucks Vente while on the way to work every morning).

 

In the 1970’s a couple or weeks on the Jersey Shore was a big vacation - while cruising was simply out of the picture for most.

[cruisemom42]

5 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

“Wealthy” is something of a subjective term.   It has generally been possible for selective average income people to afford some higher cost activities by allocating resources and doing without some things a lot of other people might take for granted. (Just think how many $ a person  could set aside for a cruise if he/she opted not to grab a Starbucks Vente while on the way to work every morning).

 

In the 1970’s a couple or weeks on the Jersey Shore was a big vacation - while cruising was simply out of the picture for most.

 

My father was a mid-level govt employee and my mom was an elementary teacher. We traveled to Europe and we cruised annually. Travel was just important to us.

[wcook]

40 years ago Cathy Lee was doing teevee commercials for Carnival and the Big Red Boat was taking Disney families on three day Bahamian cruises. Both solidly aimed at middle class couples and families. 

[Aquahound]

On 4/11/2024 at 2:17 PM, sjde said:

 

Do any of you have a preference for size or age of ship?

 

 

New and monstrous.  Give me a brand-new mega-ship full of activities and great entertainment.  If I decide to indulge in what others consider to be "upscale," I'll book a high-end suite on the brand new mega-ship.  🙂

Edited April 14 by Aquahound

[navybankerteacher]

12 minutes ago, wcook said:

40 years ago Cathy Lee was doing teevee commercials for Carnival and the Big Red Boat was taking Disney families on three day Bahamian cruises. Both solidly aimed at middle class couples and families. 

40 years ago was 1984 - the Big Red Boat started sailing in 1985. 
 

The posts to which you seem to have responded were talking about how cruising was a high end activity in the 1970’s.

[George C]

I started cruising in mid 1970’s and I cruised solo so a cruise for a week would be about a months pay . Now I cruise only in suites and I prefer the larger ships because of the entertainment. 

[GaryAndJennGoPlaces]

We have taken 3 cruise in the past year. The first one was a 2 night on the Margaritaville at Sea Paradise, second a 7 night on Royal Caribbean's Grandeur of the Seas, and third a 5 night on Virgin Voyages Scarlet Lady. All three are pretty close in length of ships... on the smaller side. What we found is that it seems to have a correlation to the number of nights. Margaritaville at Sea Paradise didn't have tons of things on the ship, but at only 2 nights, they had the right amount, because the cruise was so short. On the Grandeur of the Seas, we found ourselves getting a little board with the onboard activities. Basically, it seemed like they ran out of different things to do. You can only play trivia so many times before you get bored with it, and the things they had that we liked, and were a lot of fun, were only once a day, at most. On the Scarlet Lady we probably had the best time. They had enough activities going on that you had plenty to keep you going throughout the cruise.

We believe that around 5 nights is the max for a smaller ship (even though the Scarlet Lady didn't feel like a smaller ship), unless they have lots of activities. While we thought 7 nights on a smaller ship would be relaxing, but we found ourselves getting bored and trying to find something different to do. We believe Grandeur of the Seas would have probably been perfectly fine had it only been 5 nights. If we ever go on a 7 night or greater, we will definitely go on a much bigger ship

Edited April 16 by GaryAndJennGoPlaces

[shipgeeks]

Small and plain, such as RC Vision Class.  Outer promenade deck, but no inside "promenade".  Preferably no "thrill rides" cluttering up the upper decks.

I guess, in a nutshell, that means old and classic, with views of the sea and sky from many vantage points.  And as long a cruise as possible, with as few ports as possible.

[MCC retired]

The newest midsize ship ( becoming rare) within our budget would be our preference.

[OldCaver]

2 hours ago, shipgeeks said:

Small and plain, such as RC Vision Class.  Outer promenade deck, but no inside "promenade".  Preferably no "thrill rides" cluttering up the upper decks.

I guess, in a nutshell, that means old and classic, with views of the sea and sky from many vantage points.  And as long a cruise as possible, with as few ports as possible.

That's us, exactly. A trans-Atlantic in a Vision Class ship, with lots of sea days.

[shipgeeks]

2 hours ago, OldCaver said:

That's us, exactly. A trans-Atlantic in a Vision Class ship, with lots of sea days.

Now you're talking my dream cruise!  A week across, a couple of weeks around the Med, then a week sailing back to the US, with no flights required.  

[crystalspin]

On 4/11/2024 at 3:17 PM, sjde said:

Do any of you have a preference for size or age of ship?

Not older than 1999, not larger than 100,000 tons (~3000 pax/1000 crew).

 

Oddly, just the range of Holland America's fleet.

[sverigecruiser]

We prefer new, big ships.

 

But we "need" ship within ship so that we still can get outside space and lounge without lots of people. When in MSCs Yacht Club lots of people is only a problem at the end of the cruise, standing in line for a cab!

[CanobieFan]

No, not really? I just wanna go. But I have found ships I didn't like/care for

[Hlitner]

Getting back to the original question, we prefer ships with fewer than 1000 with 600 (or less) being ideal.  The downside is that these ships are usually expensive.  Been cruising since the 70s on all sizes from 20 - 4000+.

 

Hank

[navybankerteacher]

4 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Getting back to the original question, we prefer ships with fewer than 1000 with 600 (or less) being ideal.  The downside is that these ships are usually expensive.  Been cruising since the 70s on all sizes from 20 - 4000+.

 

Hank

The connection is obvious: sailing on smaller ships is more expensive because those who know to make the choice are willing to pay more for quality.  A 4,000+ passenger ship will be likely be cheaper because the fixed costs of operating a ship can be divided among more passengers.   The operators of those smaller ships tend to know that they are dealing with people who have options —- if the experience is not up to their standards they will simply sail with other lines.   

[sjde]

It’s economy of scale too. 

[Canuker]

Cruise ships are far more remarkable for their similarities than their differences.

Much of the 'differences' are artificially created niche marketing devices.

[navybankerteacher]

6 hours ago, Canuker said:

Cruise ships are far more remarkable for their similarities than their differences.

Much of the 'differences' are artificially created niche marketing devices.

Not when it comes to the essential differences between small (1,000 passengers or less) and the multi-thousand mega-ships.  Hardly “artificially created niche marketing devices”.

[Canuker]

5 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Not when it comes to the essential differences between small (1,000 passengers or less) and the multi-thousand mega-ships.  Hardly “artificially created niche marketing devices”.

Given your distinction (+/- 1,000 pax), nbt, in what ways (other than mere size) are they materially different? E.g.:

Accommodation

F&B

Entertainment

Well-being

Itinerary

Calendar

Crew (naval, hotel)

Seaworthiness

Other?

 

Best,

Canuker

 

[navybankerteacher]

12 minutes ago, Canuker said:

Given your distinction (+/- 1,000 pax), nbt, in what ways (other than mere size) are they materially different? E.g.:

Accommodation

F&B

Entertainment

Well-being

Itinerary

Calendar

Crew (naval, hotel)

Seaworthiness

Other?

 

Best,

Canuker

 

Generally quality of food on smaller ships is distinctly better - on Oceania, for example, while there are “speciality” restaurants (at no extra charge), MDR and (uncrowded) Lido’s provide really enjoyable food well prepared and well served - as opposed to NCL (for example) if you want anything but the cheapest cuts of meat and narrow selections of everything else, you have to go to the extra-cost alternatives.    
 

Itineraries on the smaller ship lines are generally more interesting - not hitting the phony line-owned ports often offered on mass market line itineraries; and even hitting superior ports, like St. Barth’s, which do not accept large ships at all. Also coming into any port with a few hundred others, rather than several thousand, gives a much better chance to experience what is there.

 

The hotel crew are generally better trained so the service is smoother.  But entertainment on small ships does lack the big production  flavor offered on larger ships, and there are no skating rinks, go karts, water rides, etc. so that aspect is generally missing — perhaps made up for by more accessible live music, and much uncrowded common space available.

[sjde]

I agree with all of the above except I found the food as good on Princess, Celebrity and RCCL as Oceania and Azamara.

[navybankerteacher]

7 minutes ago, sjde said:

I agree with all of the above except I found the food as good on Princess, Celebrity and RCCL as Oceania and Azamara.

Are you seriously talking about the included MDR and Lido offerings (as opposed to extra cost specialty restaurants) on Princess, Celebrity and RCCL?

[sjde]

Yes actually I was,  though I thought the Princess quality had gone down when I recently went,  after having not gone for 10 years with them.