Hanoj

A hold can accomplish the same at no cost if it expires. I would only book now if the desired cruise shows limited availability in the contemplated cabin category and preferred location. I have found the Price & Build website feature very helpful for assessing the extent to which a particular sailing has available cabins.

Here’s today’s announcement and source for updates: https://www.bluelagoon.com/seismic-activity

This can't be the easiest of dilemmas to resolve with so many other lines also scurrying to reroute to ports that are not nearly as well developed for handling cruise ships. But still. Hard to be with this much uncertainty.

I prefer breakfast in brunch so I won’t feel I paid for something under SM I don’t consume 🙃. Save the wine and beer for lunch when I’m maximizing whatever “optimized” reduced port time available. This way I will only have to feel poorly for one meal a day overspending for the cruise fare. Of course this would be optimal if I am able to use the elusive SM excursion credits, also overpaid. Overt sarcasm here. Frankly, as Patch Adams said, IDGARA. I’ve adjusted my decision criteria to O’s new pricing program. In some ways it makes comparisons easier since no cruise line I’m interested in offers O’s former cruise only fares (applied to US guests). I’m evaluating two similar 10 night Caribbean Islands itineraries sailing in November 2024, one on Marina and the other on the Viking Sea (their 2nd oldest ship). A PH3 on deck 8 (291 sq ft including veranda) is $160 per night ($80 pp) less than a DV5 on deck 5 (270 sq ft including veranda). These are comparable in that both are aft locations with guest decks below and above (the lowest decks, respectively, meeting this preference). The are other differences. Viking’s itinerary is more port intensive with no sea days compared to three with Oceania, though Viking has an overnight in the embarkation port. We like both ships with the slightest nod to Viking but prefer O’s food. Viking’s included excursions hold very little appeal. With O we at least have a chance for using the SM credits to defray costs of excursion(s) we actually might otherwise choose. The price difference is relevant (though Viking calls at St. Kits and St. Thomas, both of which we would like to visit) but my main hesitancy is with O missing ports or shortening stays, allegedly, though we experienced this on Vista in August.

Oceania world cruisers were told the same. Hopefully Viking will resolve this uncertainty soon so guests can enjoy their voyage without contemplating contingency plans.

This. Seems indicative of a disturbing trend regarding Oceania. While I fully sense the halcyon days of cruising are past (for a host of reasons affecting the entire industry), perhaps never to return, I'm not willing to cut any company slack for poor treatment, which includes how changes affecting me are communicated, both in regards to transparency and timeliness.

That is a limitation of lies😏. Applies to lines too. Transparent communications are best. Known (by O if true) itinerary changes that are not communicated until on board seems to be bait and switch, especially if known before full cancellation refund period (but for the $150 pp admin fee). I prefer as much advance notice of known changes as possible because we are primarily DIY or private tour patrons. Late communications (upon boarding) make revising plans, especially with private tour operators, more difficult. Rather be able to adjust plans and communicate with tour providers before I board my flights.

Our May 2020 BIE was of course cancelled. We looked into Viking for 2023 and prices were much higher and Viking's cost per day was more than some luxury lines. We chose Oceania and sailed their new ship Vista in August around the BI from Southampton to Southampton. It was a 12 night itinerary compared to Viking's 14 nights (how many guests use Viking's "days" in the denominator for per day cost comparisons?). But is was much more affordable than Viking for a Veranda stateroom (291 sq ft - between DV & PV size), in no small part since it didn't include overnights in two ports. Viking's tendency to include over night in ports (often both ends) is losing its appeal since it is very expensive compared to using a hotel.

I expect they will roll out new euphemisms for cost cutting measures. Tides are reasonably well predicted but fuel costs not so much. It seems O believes enough of its guests don’t care about such changes and others of us aren’t clever enough to discern real reasons behind their subterfuge. Apparently they believe these approaches are better than assessing fuel costs surcharges.

Viking may be using dynamic pricing, increasing prices as categories approach being sold out.

And you don’t see a price rise coming when the price elasticity of demand doesn’t allow for it. I think the revenge spending after the shutdowns may have played itself out for cruises. Many have experienced declines in service and quality and are noticing what appear to be less than transparently communicated cost cutting measures, which risk consumers losing confidence thereby diminishing demand. O seems to be using port durations roulette as a pathway of least resistance. I just priced a late June 2024 Alaska cruise on Regatta in a PH3 (Seattle to Seattle - I won’t begin or end a cruise in Vancouver BC) and it’s over $1,563 per night. I’m unwilling to let O “optimize arrival and departure times,” ostensibly as part of their Sail & Sustain program, to reduce operating costs. I read in a in Regatta cruise review that the guests “were cured of ever cruising again” over such changes. I think I’m there. Sailed on Vista in August around the British Isles and we had port duration changes communicated after we boarded. It’s improbable every cruise line will survive the present challenges facing the industry. Oceania may be hastening its own demise. Or not. In the meantime, I will postpone booking decisions, either to chose last minute deals (for which I would be willing to accept compromises and lowered expectations) or to let it play out.

I’ll hazard some observations about the generally more negative tone in the Oceania CC forum compared to others (in descending order of my perusals: Viking, Seabourn, Regent, Windstar - don’t feel Silversea would suit us). I’ve sailed Viking twice before the shutdowns (and had 2020 & 2021 cruises cancelled) and Oceania once, on Vista in August 2023. We enjoyed each cruise and our selection criteria continues to evolve to include getting to and from embarkation/debarkation ports, ease of cruise terminal transitions, port durations, tendering vs. docking, etc. We are presently evaluating itineraries with Oceania and Viking. IMO, Oceania’s “Finest Cuisine at Sea” branding presents unique challenges in today’s conditions. Since resumption of cruising, the consistent sourcing of food supplies with sufficiently high quality and in adequate quantities has to be much more difficult than when O built its culinary reputation. And at what cost? Food prices are very high, made much more difficult for O who reportedly expends more per guest on food than other lines. Add to this all the training of new galley and wait staff to the “finest cuisine” standard, where even the plating of food is not trivial, must make maintaining this branding standard extremely challenging. All cruise lines are facing similar challenges, but where O had differentiated itself before the shutdowns with cuisine puts them at a competitive disadvantage during a period of rapidly rising costs and sourcing difficulties. The real issue for O, as with other lines, is pricing. This too is perhaps more acute for O, as it is my impression (though I can’t substantiate this) O has attempted to offer greater value at a lower price point than Viking, et al. This is partly observed in O’s elimination of the former “cruise only” fare with the introduction of SM, for which perhaps a disproportionately high percentage of Oceania CC members lament this change. I believe a good measure of the negativity is because what O used to offer is not available with other lines. This way of cruising, for which many became loyal to O, no longer exists. For some, it may be similar to the grieving process over the death of a loved one (there’s five stages - denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance - and I’ve read commenting indicating each stage). Couple this with O’s poor communication reputation (lack of transparency and slow to inform about itinerary changes, etc.) and slow implementation of IT features (no phone/device app) and the difficulty of getting to acceptance over these changes breeds negative sentiments more so here than in other forums. Perhaps the price elasticity of O patrons demand is different than that for other lines. It appears to me O is not able to raise prices sufficiently, so they introduce SM approaching Viking inclusivity seeking to broaden its customer base. O may also be attempting to cut operating costs (shortening ports to reduce fuel costs?) in less than transparent ways, heightening speculation for patrons whose former way of cruising has changed dramatically. This can, but doesn’t have to, be a breeding ground for negativity, which appears more acute here.

Perhaps overly aggressive marketing campaigns (not insinuating anything adverse about Viking) and illusory perceptions with the marvels of technology (GPS, radar, sonar, etc.) are partly to blame for the gap between reality and cruise passenger expectations, especially for those of us, myself included, who have no meaningful marine navigation experience besides being a passive observer on a cruise, when it comes to evaluating shortened stays and canceled ports. Yeah, I once piloted a speedboat at 55 knots over placid lake waters during my naive youth, but this means nothing towards any appreciation for the challenges navigating a narrow passage like that approaching Napier in a nearly 48,000 tonnes cruise ship. Would that cruising conditions always allowed cruise ships (at least the ones on which I’m a guest) to keep their port calls. It’s a primary reason we cruise, particularly since my wife doesn’t have to prepare meals, which is significant since I have food allergies (which Viking has done a remarkable job accommodating), which means our land vacations, though more affordable than cruising, usually entail accommodations that allow us to prepare our own meals since avoiding my allergens at restaurants is not easy in some locales. Obviously, cruising is not without risks, some of which I have no real experience to appreciate. This is why I value the contributions of @Heidi13, @Jim Avery, and others, who have significant marine navigation experience. Thank you.

We sailed August '23. Fairly certain we were only able to use one device at a time as I recall having to log off to allow my wife to log on. Wife had a log in issue for which we visited the IT guy, but he didn't mention anything about each of us using separate log ins and at the same time. Makes sense they would allow all guests two log ins beginning October when SM took affect, even for those booked under O Life. Can't image the fun IT would have had dealing with different user privileges for every cruise with both SM and O Life bookings. So, an upside to SM.

Kind of begs the question, why schedule such ports of call? Missing ports seems to be more common now across cruise lines than pre-shutdowns. Some guests (see this mostly with Oceania) suggest missing ports or shortening visits is a cost cutting measure (I have no idea about the plausibility of such assertions - I just find it interesting because a cruise's itinerary is the most important factor in our selection process). And there seem to be certain ports, like Napier, where it is a recurring issue. Though, of course, reading about missed ports on the different forums is more likely to be posted than if they were successfully visited.

Ah, another reason confirming our decision to book air separately. Though I agree it would be preferable if the booking was not deleted in MVJ while on the ship.

We didn't have any issue, at least not before I fell asleep (I seem to recall there was one morning it had stopped and not resumed - I usually run a 10 hr version). Vista was the first O ship to have the new WiFi and we sailed under the old O Life program with only one login. DW would go to bed earlier and be off her device and then I would use mine. I would set the YT white noise before turning in. Vista's WiFi was best we've enjoyed at sea.

Here's the link:

We either use a portable white noise machine or play a 10 hour white noise YouTube video (no ads) from an iPad. These work well for us if there’s some noise outside our cabin. My wife can use earplugs. Though I tried many times, I yet to get to sleep with them in.

We too!

Perhaps the sound insulation on Vista was not uniformly applied (kind of like a Boeing door plug 🙃). We sailed Vista in 8015 for 12 nights in August. I was very impressed and I have very acute hearing (would that my vision were as good). I’m quite sensitive to noise and had no issues and we had neighbors.

Has Oceania improved their cookies🤪? If so, it may make it easier to endure shortened port stays and inability to use SM excursion credits. May add weight to the issues too.

Yes, and perhaps a better question is, how likely will the price go down? I used to keep all the Viking mailings to infer pricing trends, but I toss them all now so longer have any idea what to expect for better deals ahead. Even though we haven't cruised with Viking in almost 5 years we still get frequent mailings. I didn't check every cabin category nor every section and deck level, but I wouldn't be surprised if this cruise is only 50 - 60% booked (I'm an accountant with an eye for such things) based on what appears using Price & Build. But few things are as they appear. Does Viking do charter groups, but still show available cabins (for location selection purposes), and then once the available number of such individual bookings are filled they show them all sold? For example, lets say they have sold 20 of the 74 DV5 cabins (mentioned earlier showing 50 available) leaving only 30 really available (but 50 for location selection only). Do they do this? That is, allow charter groups to select cabins at a later time to give private party guests greater choice to induce bookings?. I have no idea how sophisticated their system is, but I do expect they are doing everything possible to fill their ships.

Perhaps it is undersold. I just received a call and an email from a Viking agent who noted I started to book on the website. He's not who we've dealt with before - I think the two agents we previously dealt with are no longer with Viking. I still plan to have my TA handle all this.

I usually also fill the safe, adding items that might otherwise be in a drawer or on a counter, to utilize that space. Also cuts down on clutter. DW and I still tend to overpack (I think it's in part because of living in the PNW where at certain times of the year we experience all four seasons in a day). We each bring one large trunk size suitcase and a backpack. Our luggage all fit beneath the bed and I usually left a few items in my suitcase, but gave more space to DW so she could fully empty hers. There was enough space, but for the few items (like dress shoes) I may or may not use, I didn't mind this approach. Made things feel less cramped.