No more Simply More

[Vallesan]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

We had a few "issues" with Explora.  1.  The attitude of the Guest Relations folks (Explora has a different term for these folks since Explora uses their own language) was "we are not a cruise line but simply a floating resort.  What other cruise lines do has nothing to do with us"  Their overall attitude was that they know it all and nobody should dare question anything.

 

But that attitude issue, from a crew where 80% of their members were at sea on their first cruise, was not our main issue.  They will learn and eventually they will morph into an excellent cruise line.  With MSC and the Aponte family at the helm, failure is not in their DNA.

 

But what is keeping us from booking another cruise are their unimpressive itineraries.  The Explora folks will privately tell you that they are trying to tap a market of younger (under 60) affluent cruisers who generally do not have the time for really long voyages.  While other luxury, or ultra luxury lines tend to focus on longer itineraries (measured in weeks and months) the EJ folks generally plan cruises where most segments are no longer than 10 days.  We fall into the wonderful category of retirees who prefer to book longer cruises (1 month or longer) on more exotic itineraries.  Being on a ship that has short segments mean it can become like a ferry boat with passengers embarking/disembarking every few days (similar to MSC's model in Europe).  We prefer cruises where we socialize with other passengers who are mostly going to be around for a few weeks or months.

 

If we see a decent longer itinerary on EJ, we would consider booking a future cruise.

 

Hank

 

Hank

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my question. I value your opinion as I think your reviews are very fair.

 

Having looked at many videos I’m not sure the ship will be the right fit for us. I do get the impression that they are looking towards a younger market who haven’t ‘cruised’ before but who will become ‘loyal’ cruisers in the future. 
 

The itineraries in themselves aren’t an issue for us as our long haul days are over so Europe suits us well. In saying that I agree that short 7 day cruises aren’t the best.  We  have sailed Oceania 10+7 B2B in the Caribbean and then Seabourn, Greek Islands, which we thought was 14 days but was actually 7+7. I’m  guessing that because the short segments are comparatively cheap, without wanting to sound snobby or snotty, the guests are just ‘different’. We decided not to cruise again on  short segment B2B for this reason. I guess I didn’t take that into account when taking an option on this cruise!

 

Thanks again.
 

 

[as3369]

1 hour ago, terrydtx said:

I received this morning our final payment invoice for our Marina cruise next March. I then checked to see what the current pricing is for our A2 cabin with SM to compare to what we booked back in 2023 with SM. I found that the current price for our cabin has gone up by $950pp in the last month with SM. I wonder if this is Oceania's game plan to raise SM pricing so that when it goes away in two weeks, they will lower pricing to make its customers think they are getting a better deal without SM? 

 

I also noticed several of the cabin categories that a month ago showed as wait listed are now showing as available. This tells me that many who had booked this cruise have canceled in the last month.

Maybe some guests discovered that the cabins were not remodeled.  From reading these forums it seems like ONLY the PH suites were refurbished.

  

[Jayne E]

1 minute ago, as3369 said:

Maybe some guests discovered that the cabins were not remodeled.  From reading these forums it seems like ONLY the PH suites were refurbished.

  

Be aware that many PH3 cabins still have a tub and old bathroom. We booked one and then realized this and cancelled. 

[as3369]

2 minutes ago, Jayne E said:

Be aware that many PH3 cabins still have a tub and old bathroom. We booked one and then realized this and cancelled. 

Thank you.  We have a PH2 booked for 2026.

[JDPCruisers]

5 minutes ago, as3369 said:

Thank you.  We have a PH2 booked for 2026.

We have a PH2 in Jan/Feb 2025 on Vista and understand they do not have the tub/shower combo, which is one thing we do not like about non-E-Class Celebrity ships. Showers only for us and it becomes a fairly important component in deciding a cruise. Itinerary still being primary at this stage of our cruising life.  

[Hlitner]

13 minutes ago, Vallesan said:

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my question. I value your opinion as I think your reviews are very fair.

 

Having looked at many videos I’m not sure the ship will be the right fit for us. I do get the impression that they are looking towards a younger market who haven’t ‘cruised’ before but who will become ‘loyal’ cruisers in the future. 
 

The itineraries in themselves aren’t an issue for us as our long haul days are over so Europe suits us well. In saying that I agree that short 7 day cruises aren’t the best.  We  have sailed Oceania 10+7 B2B in the Caribbean and then Seabourn, Greek Islands, which we thought was 14 days but was actually 7+7. I’m  guessing that because the short segments are comparatively cheap, without wanting to sound snobby or snotty, the guests are just ‘different’. We decided not to cruise again on  short segment B2B for this reason. I guess I didn’t take that into account when taking an option on this cruise!

 

Thanks again.
 

 

There are lots of good things on EJ.  They have really emphasized cuisine, and it is darn good.  Whether, in the long run, they maintain the quality does remain a question.  On the early cruises (we cruised 18 days to their naming ceremony) the line featured Moet Chandon products and had a full line of their Champagnes included.  Not a bad thing having all the Moet champagne one desires and I quickly found that their Rose Champagne is quite amazing.  But it has been reported that they have since ceased offering those products and substituted a less expensive champagne brand (owned by Moet).  

 

Another interesting facet is that EJ has 3 Steinway Pianos on each of its ships (they actually ordered 18 expensive Steinways for their fleet).  We met one of the top entertainment executives (from the home office in Geneva) who was proud that they paid for those expensive instruments.  But, it is one thing to have expensive pianos, and another to actually have anyone playing the things :). 

 

A surprise with EJ is that even though they have been operating for over a year, they have yet to implement any kind of loyalty program.  A small thing, but still strange.  Their marketing is 2nd rate and it was months after our first cruise that we even received an e-mail pushing some new itineraries. 

 

I will say that their ship (we were only on EJ1) is drop-dead gorgeous.   They obviously hired the best designers, and in the European fashion everything is designed to look good, but not always very practical.  For example, in one of their lounges the furniture uses a light green velour fabric that is not going to hide stains (it is in a bar/lounge) or wear.  In fact, even though the ship was only a couple of months old we already saw signs of wear on some furniture.  Many of their chairs, around the ship, are very low which makes them difficult to exit :).  They also are over the top with high quality shops.  If you want a $100,000 watch you can find it on the ship.  But if you want a less expensive item, forget about it!  Consider that they allocated space to two very fine watch brands (one is Rolex).  All very impressive but it may not be very practical.  

 

On our cruise, some of the food was quite interesting.  In their lido (buffet) they had a raw seafood bar where you could find things like raw oysters on the half-shell, cracked crab claws, huge shrimp, etc.  Want lobster?  It was sometimes an issue of which type!  On the other hand, when we asked the pizza cook (in their Lido) if he would make a pepperoni pizza (they had pepperoni 3 feet away at the sandwich station) the cook refused!  He told us that he could only make the type pizzas authorized from Geneva!  Compare this to Seabourn where they would never say "No" but would move heaven and earth to find the pepperoni and make what you want.  EJ also has a contract with the Henessey Folks which means they feature their products.  Want some Henessy VSOP cognac?  No problem.  Want Remy or Courvoisier?  No way!  Want Glenmorangie Scotch (which is owned by Henessey) and its no problem.  Want a single malt from other companies...good luck,  And a funny moment happened when a passenger ask for some rye and ginger.  EJ1 had no rye whisky.  None!  One bar tender was embarrassed but speculated that the purchasing folks in Geneva had no clue that rye even existed.

 

Hank

[terrydtx]

1 hour ago, as3369 said:

Maybe some guests discovered that the cabins were not remodeled.  From reading these forums it seems like ONLY the PH suites were refurbished.

  

You have a good point, as the only cabin categories still showing "Wait List" are all of the Suites. PH3 and above.

[Vallesan]

@Hlitner Hank thank you again.

 

Low chairs are definitely a no-no for me. When it comes to ‘ultra luxury’ watches my son has been in the business for nearly 30 years so again no interest.

 

Actually I’ve cancelled the cabin we had on hold. A ‘beautiful’ ship with good sized cabins isn’t enough for us. Atmosphere and fellow passengers are also very important.

 

Just taking an option on an Allura cruise for next summer instead!

[ORV]

12 hours ago, edgee said:

To each their own. I work with a larger agency which rebates me in the form of a check (no shop card BS) amounting to about 10% of my cruise cost and also covers gratuities on many cruises as well as some on board credit. I have a great agent I work with as well as a 7 days a week customer service department to help me if my TA is unavailable. I cannot see in effect paying 10 to 12 percent more for my cruise by using a different agency or booking direct.

It sounds like maybe Oceania is cutting back on commissions to agencies. If so that might affect what you're getting. Let us know if it changes. 

[as3369]

40 minutes ago, terrydtx said:

You have a good point, as the only cabin categories still showing "Wait List" are all of the Suites. PH3 and above.

Oh boy... There are several posts indicating that some of the PH3 were not refurbished either.  Oceania is creating a nightmare for themselves.

[Syd58]

17 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Count us as cruisers who have cruised on several real luxury lines (Crystal, Explora Journeys, Seabourn, Silversea).  A few months ago we finally took our first O cruise on the beautiful Vista, after being "shamed" into giving O a try by Flatbush Flyer who is a well known CC poster who has long championed O.   The Vista is a terrific ship and, for the most part, both DW and I were impressed with the O product.  That being said, O is not a luxury line and should not be confused as such.  Consider that the true luxury lines are essentially all-inclusive, have no coerced tipping, generally include unlimited adult beverages, and have a passenger space ratio in excess of O.  In fact, all the luxury lines that we have cruised are all suites!  

 

We do think that the new Vista, comes very close to being comparable to the luxury line ships.  But the older "R" ships that are operated by O, are not even close to a true luxury ship.  Those R ships have relatively small cabins (not suites) with cabin bathrooms that are what one would expect on a budget line...not a luxury line.  

 

We agree with Flatbush Flyer that O should be classed as a Premium Line, along with a a few other lines (Azamara and Viking).  We do think that O plays too many "games" with their booking options (this is not a norm with luxury lines).  Our first O cruise was taken under the new Simply More program, and we thought the program a bit too complex and silly.  We were OK with SM, because both DW and I enjoy adult beverages and liked the included Internet package.  

 

O could turn the new Vista (and upcoming Allura) into luxury ships, but they would first need to make that commitment and stop with the silly booking games.   Consider that when we book with Seabourn (just returned from 3 weeks on their Encore) we simply pay the fare which includes tips, Internet, unlimited beverages, bottles of booze put in our suite, etc.  On Seabourn there are no extra fees to use any dining venue (some other luxury lines have a few add-on dining options).  

 

As this point in time, I have no problem recommending the Vista or Allura to my friends.  But I will not recommend an "R" ship to anyone looking for anything close to a luxury line.  And I will add that the main Theater on the Vista, is appalling in its design!  Strange that the designers could design such a gorgeous vessel, provide very nice cabins and cabin bathrooms, and than fall flat on their face with the design of a showroom that has the worst sight lines at sea!  What on earth were they thinking?

 

Hank

Excellent points!  I do not like the way O keeps changing their pricing strategy; they have changed 3 times in a relatively short period. It makes it look like they aren't sure of what they're doing.

[as3369]

2 hours ago, terrydtx said:

You have a good point, as the only cabin categories still showing "Wait List" are all of the Suites. PH3 and above.

A PH1 just came available on your sailing if you are interested..  Very desirable 7135 with wrap around aft balcony.

[Hlitner]

41 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

Excellent points!  I do not like the way O keeps changing their pricing strategy; they have changed 3 times in a relatively short period. It makes it look like they aren't sure of what they're doing.

O is simply playing with a business model that has been enacted, in various forms, across the mass market cruise line industry.  The model is all about "maximizing onboard revenue" through various coercive means such as pushing packages that have some goodies, but also leave many folks paying for things they do not need or want.  For example, when we booked the Vista we did change the booking to Simply More because we wanted the drink inclusions and Internet.  But that SM package also included the large credit that could only be used for O excursions.  DW and I are not fans of cruise line excursions and only consider them when they provide something we cannot reasonably do on our own.  Over the years that has meant we probably average 1 excursion for about every 100 port calls.  But Simply More put us in a position of having to book O excursions to use the credit.  We did book the minimum number of excursions (to use all the credit) and strongly disliked all but one.  Without SM, we would not have even considered a single O excursion on our 32 day voyage.

 

It is no different on mass market lines.  For example, buy HAL's HIA package and they also toss in shore excursion credits as well as a few included meals at alternative restaurants.  In a sneaky way they have coerced folks into booking excursions they might not normally consider.  The Princess Premiere Package includes things like photo packages, special desserts.  Even if you do not want unlimited special desserts (these are monstrous ice cream concoctions) you have paid for them when you purchase the package.  

 

When O plays this Simply More game, they are simply showing their true colors as another "less than luxury line" who tries to maximize on board revenue.  At least for now, if you go on true luxury lines (Seabourn, Silversea, EJ, Regent, etc) they do not push packages.  When you book a Seabourn cruise there is only one price and no add on packages.  Some do argue that the downside to luxury lines is that everyone pays for everything as part of the cruise fare.  So, for example, somebody who does not choose to drink adult beverages would have paid for those drinks as part of their fare.  But that is simply the reality of luxury lines and luxury resorts where most things are included and there is very little nickel/diming.

 

Hank

[terrydtx]

15 minutes ago, as3369 said:

A PH1 just came available on your sailing if you are interested..  Very desirable 7135 with wrap around aft balcony.

I appreciate your effort, we are traveling with 2 other couples and we have 3 cabins in a row on Deck 9. We are all fine with our A3 cabins and location. 

[terrydtx]

15 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Some do argue that the downside to luxury lines is that everyone pays for everything as part of the cruise fare.  So, for example, somebody who does not choose to drink adult beverages would have paid for those drinks as part of their fare.  But that is simply the reality of luxury lines and luxury resorts where most things are included and there is very little nickel/diming.

From what I have read and heard this was why O is dropping the SM Program, too many complaints for customers about having to pay for things they do not want or use, like Alcohol and shore excursions.

[as3369]

17 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

O is simply playing with a business model that has been enacted, in various forms, across the mass market cruise line industry.  The model is all about "maximizing onboard revenue" through various coercive means such as pushing packages that have some goodies, but also leave many folks paying for things they do not need or want.  For example, when we booked the Vista we did change the booking to Simply More because we wanted the drink inclusions and Internet.  But that SM package also included the large credit that could only be used for O excursions.  DW and I are not fans of cruise line excursions and only consider them when they provide something we cannot reasonably do on our own.  Over the years that has meant we probably average 1 excursion for about every 100 port calls.  But Simply More put us in a position of having to book O excursions to use the credit.  We did book the minimum number of excursions (to use all the credit) and strongly disliked all but one.  Without SM, we would not have even considered a single O excursion on our 32 day voyage.

 

It is no different on mass market lines.  For example, buy HAL's HIA package and they also toss in shore excursion credits as well as a few included meals at alternative restaurants.  In a sneaky way they have coerced folks into booking excursions they might not normally consider.  The Princess Premiere Package includes things like photo packages, special desserts.  Even if you do not want unlimited special desserts (these are monstrous ice cream concoctions) you have paid for them when you purchase the package.  

 

When O plays this Simply More game, they are simply showing their true colors as another "less than luxury line" who tries to maximize on board revenue.  At least for now, if you go on true luxury lines (Seabourn, Silversea, EJ, Regent, etc) they do not push packages.  When you book a Seabourn cruise there is only one price and no add on packages.  Some do argue that the downside to luxury lines is that everyone pays for everything as part of the cruise fare.  So, for example, somebody who does not choose to drink adult beverages would have paid for those drinks as part of their fare.  But that is simply the reality of luxury lines and luxury resorts where most things are included and there is very little nickel/diming.

 

Hank

I'd rather just pay an all-inclusive price and can plan accordingly.  Have not sailed on Seabourn but Regent is awesome 

[Syd58]

46 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

O is simply playing with a business model that has been enacted, in various forms, across the mass market cruise line industry.  The model is all about "maximizing onboard revenue" through various coercive means such as pushing packages that have some goodies, but also leave many folks paying for things they do not need or want.  For example, when we booked the Vista we did change the booking to Simply More because we wanted the drink inclusions and Internet.  But that SM package also included the large credit that could only be used for O excursions.  DW and I are not fans of cruise line excursions and only consider them when they provide something we cannot reasonably do on our own.  Over the years that has meant we probably average 1 excursion for about every 100 port calls.  But Simply More put us in a position of having to book O excursions to use the credit.  We did book the minimum number of excursions (to use all the credit) and strongly disliked all but one.  Without SM, we would not have even considered a single O excursion on our 32 day voyage.

 

It is no different on mass market lines.  For example, buy HAL's HIA package and they also toss in shore excursion credits as well as a few included meals at alternative restaurants.  In a sneaky way they have coerced folks into booking excursions they might not normally consider.  The Princess Premiere Package includes things like photo packages, special desserts.  Even if you do not want unlimited special desserts (these are monstrous ice cream concoctions) you have paid for them when you purchase the package.  

 

When O plays this Simply More game, they are simply showing their true colors as another "less than luxury line" who tries to maximize on board revenue.  At least for now, if you go on true luxury lines (Seabourn, Silversea, EJ, Regent, etc) they do not push packages.  When you book a Seabourn cruise there is only one price and no add on packages.  Some do argue that the downside to luxury lines is that everyone pays for everything as part of the cruise fare.  So, for example, somebody who does not choose to drink adult beverages would have paid for those drinks as part of their fare.  But that is simply the reality of luxury lines and luxury resorts where most things are included and there is very little nickel/diming.

 

Hank

Find a strategy and stick with it. This switching back and forth is confusing to potential customers. If they are going to try to compete with the luxury lines (and in many cases, with price, it appears they are trying to do just that), they need to move back toward all-inclusive. We have 2 O cruises booked, and after that we’re likely going to stick with the luxury, all-inclusive lines, i.e., Crystal, Silversea, Seabourn, Regent.  In our cases, I’ve found their all-inclusive prices to be as good, or better, than O.

Edited 10 hours ago by Syd58

[Syd58]

26 minutes ago, terrydtx said:

From what I have read and heard this was why O is dropping the SM Program, too many complaints for customers about having to pay for things they do not want or use, like Alcohol and shore excursions.

The problem with this thinking is those that want these things, will likely be paying much more for their cruises. My guess, is this pricing strategy will be short-lived, when they see how much revenue they’re  losing from people moving to luxury, all-inclusive lines.

[AMHuntFerry]

5 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

Find a strategy and stick with it. This switching back and forth is confusing to potential customers. If they are going to try to compete with the luxury lines (and in many cases, with price, it appears they are trying to do just that), they need to move back toward all-inclusive. We have 2 O cruises booked, and after that we’re likely going to stick with the luxury, all-inclusive lines, e.g., Crystal, SS, Seabourn, Regent.  In our cases, I’ve found their all-inclusive prices to be as good, or better, than O.

That's just it...O is not trying to compete with luxury lines even through many customers frequent luxury and/or mainstream cruises. With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped. Here is who O sees as the main competition (https://www.oceaniacruises.com/value😞

[ORV]

32 minutes ago, terrydtx said:

From what I have read and heard this was why O is dropping the SM Program, too many complaints for customers about having to pay for things they do not want or use, like Alcohol and shore excursions.

That is the press release line. Do you really think that's the truth? The program lasted a year, yes there were complaints, but bookings are up. I think the real reason is onboard spending is down. Why buy a nice bottle of wine for $50-$100 when you can drink passable wine included? Why buy champagne when I can have it with lunch? And so it goes...........

[Syd58]

11 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

That's just it...O is not trying to compete with luxury lines even through many customers frequent luxury and/or mainstream cruises. With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped. Here is who O sees as the main competition (https://www.oceaniacruises.com/value😞

Maybe Viking and Azamara, but certainly not HAL, Celebrity, and Princess. With that said, Viking is pretty much all-inclusive. If they want to compete with HAL, Celebrity (non-Retreat), and Princess, they’re going to have to substantially lower their prices in most cases. Their new pricing strategy does just the opposite for many.

Edited 10 hours ago by Syd58

[Syd58]

7 minutes ago, ORV said:

That is the press release line. Do you really think that's the truth? The program lasted a year, yes there were complaints, but bookings are up. I think the real reason is onboard spending is down. Why buy a nice bottle of wine for $50-$100 when you can drink passable wine included? Why buy champagne when I can have it with lunch? And so it goes...........

I think the bottom line is they are trying to increase revenue. 

[AMHuntFerry]

Just now, Syd58 said:

Maybe Viking and Azamara, but certainly not HAL, Celebrity, and Princess. With that said, Viking is pretty much all-inclusive. If they want to compete with HAL, Celebrity  (non-Retreat), and Princess, they’re going to have to substantially lower their prices in most cases. Their new pricing strategy does just the opposite for many.

Yet Celebrity and HAL are frequently where "defectors" on CC are coming from, so yes, they are competition.

[Syd58]

4 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

Yet Celebrity and HAL are frequently where "defectors" on CC are coming from, so yes, they are competition.

 

4 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

Yet Celebrity and HAL are frequently where "defectors" on CC are coming from, so yes, they are competition.

Most who defect to O from Celebrity and HAL are looking for (what they perceive to be) a better product at a reasonable price. These people are likely only willing to pay so much more for this. It was probably a stretch for many at SM pricing; now the stretch will be even greater.

Edited 9 hours ago by Syd58

[ORV]

4 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

 

Most who defect to O from Celebrity and HAL are looking for (what they perceive to be) a better product at a reasonable price. These people are likely only willing to pay so much more for this. It was probably a stretch for many at SM pricing; now the stretch will be even greater.

You do realize that is an Oceania release that is comparing them to the upper Mass Market lines? So yes, Oceania management and marketing do consider them their competition. 

 

I've been reading this forum for a while, and it's my perception that in the last 15 years(since I've cruised them) most of the customers coming to Oceania are moving up from Princess, Hal, Celebrity etc., not moving down from Seabourne, Silversea, Regent, Crystal etc. You do see posts and meet those onboard that cover the spectrum. Oddly enough I've met a lot of people over the years that go on Oceania as their first cruise.