ak1004

Well, Oceania does allow brining any drinks on board, including wine. So I definitely don't think Oceania does any Nickel-and-Diming. Speaking of which - to me, SS does more Nickel-and-Diming by charging extra for 2 restaurants, premium internet, laundry etc. O doesn't claim to be all inclusive, SS does. So what's the justification for all the extra charges? Don't get me wrong, none of this is a deal breaker to me, I will gladly sail on both lines given the right itinerary and price - my point is that if you look hard enough, you will find enough negatives in any product. btw, my understanding is that it was after Royal Caribbean acquisition that they brought back the unlimited black caviar (SS veterans, please correct me if I'm wrong). Also, we sailed on O first time in 2018 and then 3 times post Covid, personally I didn't see any difference in food and service.

Well, people might say that Royal Caribbean bringing their 'Nickel-and-dime' approach to Silversea and Carnival bringing their 'Nickel-and-dime' approach to Seabourn. Some people also say that O cancels ports to save money (while they actually lose tons of money by cancelling ports). And people who want to book private tours will continue doing it even with shortened times in ports. I do agree with you that ecological reasons is just an excuse, and I agree that O communication is terrible. But personally I still like their product, and I don't believe that they cancel ports more than other lines, as you can read on numerous topics on SS and SB boards. And my apologies for the mix up with your gender.

I agree about small cabin and bathroom instead of bigger room on a mega ship. But I still prefer a bigger room on a newer O ship. I could never understand why people would pay basically the same price (sometimes more) for a 175 sqft cabin on a older ship with fewer dining options compared to 240 sqft cabin on a newer ship. I'm familiar with the argument that smaller ships can go to ports that larger ships cannot, but I found very itineraries where this was really the case, and usually it's maybe 1 port per 10 nights itinerary.

Good to know. From Toronto it's still 777 unfortunately which for us is not the best option. Don't they ask for more money if you fly early? For us this was the main issue.

Is dinner still at 6:30? I remember reading somewhere that (at least on some ships) it starts at 6 now?

Agree about 2). Regarding 1), dodn't they still have an outdated 2-3-2 configuration on most if not all planes?

We are the same, but that means that SS typically will charge you deviation fee and possibly any difference in fares. With my points (Aeroplan), 90% of the time you get the best results by booking as soon as the flights are released (typically 350-355 days in advance). I was always able to book at best possible prices (in points). Sometimes extra award seats are released later, but it's a gamble. For example, for our upcoming flight to Venice in May I could book for 70k points in May 2023 when the flights have been just released, but I had D2D booked with SS including business class upgrade at very good rates. When they asked for extra $1,000 USD to fly 2 days earlier, we took an air credit, but flights to Venice from Toronto were already over 250k, so now we have to fly via Rome or Frankfurt. They never came back below 100k. Of course other programs might be different. Anyway, this was a good lesson to never book flights with a cruise line.

I know. And it just confirms my theory that all lines have port cancellations.

Don't they always book you to arrive the day you sail? This is what they did for our upcoming cruise in May (flights were available around 9 months in advance). But when we requested to arrive 2 nights early, they requested almost $1,000 USD extra per person for business class flights. So we took air credit and booked our own flights.

My post was in response to OP saying that she will not sail on Oceania because they cancel ports and change itineraries. So my point was that all lines do it those days.

We sail for ports. I could tolerate overcooked meat and mediocre entertainment (among other things), but if I knew that a certain cruise line cancels ports more than other lines, I would definitely cross that line from my list. I just don't believe this is the case. I believe that no cruise line would cancel ports unless they absolutely have to. This is why we have O, SB, SS, Azamara and Windstar on our short list of lines we would sail with, given the right itinerary and price.

P.S. a lot of upset and unhappy guests on both SS and SB boards and social media groups due to cancelled ports and other changes. lay don’t think that Oceania is worse than other lines when it comes to port cancellations. But I guess perception is everything.

A nonrefundable 20% off is combinable with the 20% increase that preceded it 😁

On related note, personally I would do my first cruise with O on a newer ship (Marina, Riviera or Vista). Much larger cabins, more dining options, newer ships etc. Here are two sample itineraries on the Marina which are actually cheaper (first one 2024, second 2025)! The prices of the older ships (R class) just don't make sense to me. In this example, Marina itineraries have only 1 sea day (compared to 2 in the OP itinerary) include Casablanca, and are actually cheaper for veranda cabin which is 240 sqft, compared on 175 sqft on the Sirena.

I don't disagree with you. The term cheerleaders applies to people who will defend their favorite cruise line (or any product) no matter what, even when the shortcomings are obvious. Not enough storage space? No problem, bring a clothes rack.. I like my Mercedes, have been driving it for the last 11 years (now fourth one). But I know exactly its strengths and weaknesses, and when someone says that Lexus offers a better value for money, I completely agree and not trying to argue on the obvious. btw, personally I have no issues with 20% non refundable discount, we did it with SS when the price was right. But the current promotion just brings the prices back to where they were 4-6 months ago.. No wonder you didn't use it..

We had absolutely no issues with the ship age when we sailed on the Symphony in 2019. But still prefer newer ships. It's always a combination of many factors.

It really depends what you are looking for. We sailed on 12 different lines, once we switched to smaller lines, we never looked back. Service, food, no crowds, no lines - there is no comparison. But we sail mostly for the itineraries, not the ship. Evening entertainment is not the same on small ships (in most cases), but it's less important to us. We typically spend most of the day in ports, come back to the ship, have dinner, go to the evening show and then go to bed around 10-10:30. We are in our late 50s and still are among the youngest couples on most sailings. So what? That said, I would not take O to the Caribbean cruise. But for Europe, it's among the best, and best value for money in my opinion.

I'm not buying real estate, and we were perfectly fine in the 210 sqft on Crystal - but you have to admit that SS cabins are in a different league. It's nice to have a walking closet. It's nice to have a real suite with a curtain separating the bed and the seating area (and if my wife wakes up 2 hours before me, she can go and read in the seating area without waking me up). To me those small details matter more than the crew remembering my name. And you have to admit that it's much nicer to be on a new ship than a 25 old ship. And yes, we didn't use the veranda either.. So to me, it's a tradeoff. If the prices were similar, I would definitely put Crystal on my list. 30-40% more expensive? No way.

The main difference is that for you, the ship is the destination. For me, it’s just a floating hotel that allows me to see the world. I couldn’t care less if the crew remembers my name. I don’t see them as my family. I see them as service providers. To me the service on other small ships is on the same level. I sailed on Crystal, Silversea, Oceania and Azamara in the premium and luxury category. Didn’t see much difference in service. Not saying that my perspective is the right one. It is the right one for me, yours is the right one for you. But based on the fact that Crystal ships sail half empty many times, looks like many people do agree with my perspective.

I don't disagree. Ship age is just one of the factors, but to justify their prices, Crystal has to be in a different league compared to SB and SS. The only area that they are really in a different league is entertainment and enrichment. The best we had on any ship. But this is more relevant for Caribbean where ship is the destination most of the time. For European port intensive cruises, this is less relevant since you are in the port most of the time - at least this is true for us. So to me, to pay 30-40% more for better entertainment and enrichment that I won't use most of the time, and maybe a slightly better service (but sacrifice the size cabin and the ship age) doesn't make sense.

Correction: a fan of mostly Oceania newer ships (2011, 2012 and 2023) where the cabins are 240 sqft. I mentioned many times that I don't think O older ships provide a good value, considering the pricing, the cabin size, the ship age and other factors. Cabins and ship age are just one of the factors, but they are a factor. We sailed on the Symphony and had a great time, but I would still prefer newer ships, all other factors equal (and of course we know other factors are never 100% equal, but cabin size and ship age are still part of the equation).

Enrichment and entertainment for sure. No argument. Food and service? Not sure. It has to be in a complete different league to justifythe price difference. Not to mention the cabins and the ships age.

I checked the website, the prices were up 10-15% compared to last time I checked, so they raised prices first and now the discounts are applied to the new elevated prices. So now the prices for European cruises are in the $650-700 USD range for a 210 sqft cabin with no veranda, and you get a whopping 10% discount, or 20% for a full payment. SB has many sailings under $500, SS under $600 including excursions. And their entry level cabins are 50% larger. Just a slightly different perspective, I know I will be crucified by the cheerleaders..

I had a similar discussion with Crystal cheerleaders. I mentioned that paying $650-700 USD per person per night for a 210 sqft cabin with no veranda on a 25 years old ship is not my definition of value when I can pay $500 on SB and get a 290 sqft cabin on a ship half age, with similar level of inclusions, service and food. They disagreed of course.

I think all lines have their share of bad reviews, including SS. Some of those reviews are just ridiculous. O board has few whiners, they just keep whining about everything. Personally I don't have clear evidence that O cancels ports more than other lines, but they have a big communication issue. People are much less likely to complain if they are communicated properly and/or offered some compensation. O does not communicate well and never offers compensation for cancelled ports. That said, they do replace cancelled ports with another port based on our experience, but it's not always possible. I know few people who continue sailing on SB and enjoy it very much, so I wouldn't dismiss them.