Is there a decline in quality?

Recently, I read several reviews and posts claiming that the standard of one or other of the luxury cruise lines has begun to decline in recent years.There are two recurring themes in such reviews and posts. Firstly, is the reference to the fact that the luxury lines are are now controlled by the big conglomerates that also control the mass market lines, so that the “bean counters” in those organisations are applying the same methods of management to both the mainstream ships and the luxury brands.

The other theme is the fact that most of the luxury lines are increasing the size of their ships and therefore reducing the sense of intimate service that existed before. In addition, the need to fill bigger ships means that luxury lines need to broaden the demographic of the passengers.

What do others think?

My experience is limited to Crystal in the luxury segment going back to 2007. Have some things been eliminated, yes. Examples include pillow chocolates, wastebasket doilies and a linen mat next to the bed at turn-down. Are these big deals, no. The food and service are as good as ever. On Crystal the entertainment is better than ever. I'm happy with the way Crystal has evolved.

Patty

My experience has most recently been on Regent and Crystal. My Silversea experience is a bit older, so I'll put that one aside.

Except for the tiny, and to me irrelevant, things Texas Tillie names, Crystal has remained pretty consistent. Regent had a slump for a while, but now seems to have come back better than before. Of course, the quality of service has a certain element of intangibility to it, and can change from cruise to cruise, but my general sense in that people seeing "gone downhill" are looking for changes. I boarded a Crystal cruise just a couple of weeks after the line had changed hands, and people were already pointing out perceived changes and "blaming" the new owners, when there hadn't even been time to make changes.

That’s a good point about people looking out for changes.

However, there are some thoughtful people who have done more than carped about minor changes.

One of the inspirations for this thread of Seaborn that inspired this review was that the move away from the yacht-like experience had led to a diminution of quality. The reviewer in that case noted that the larger ship meant that the the old familiar atmosphere was gone and that some of the passengers were now no longer the sophisticates of yore.

It would seem that Crystal has wisely eschewed the changes made by some of the others.

The only decline that I see is due to the shortage of qualified crew members which is not necessarily the fault of the cruise lines. With more and more ships being built, getting crew members that are experienced and speak English has become more and more challenging. I have seen more inexperienced (newly trained) crew than in the past which affects the level of service that you receive.

P.S. While I did not feel that Regent declined, it definitely stepped up its game this past year.

The most import Thing to remember is that these lines are all at different places in their cycle. Seabourn has invested in a larger fleet for example. Not everyone has experience a decline in quality, only some. Only a couple of years ago Silversea had some problems with quality and food health and hygiene. The majority of Regents fleet is ageing, when new ships come on line there are inevitably teething problems. Crystal went through a weak time in my opinion about four years ago, when everything on Seremity in particular was tired and its staff just unhappy. They all have their issues at some point, and prices have been kept very similar for nearly twenty years, so things have to give or prices go up.

The most import Thing to remember is that these lines are all at different places in their cycle. Seabourn has invested in a larger fleet for example. Not everyone has experience a decline in quality, only some. Only a couple of years ago Silversea had some problems with quality and food health and hygiene. The majority of Regents fleet is ageing, when new ships come on line there are inevitably teething problems. Crystal went through a weak time in my opinion about four years ago, when everything on Seremity in particular was tired and its staff just unhappy. They all have their issues at some point, and prices have been kept very similar for nearly twenty years, so things have to give or prices go up.

As an experienced Seabourn person, what is your view about the move from the three sisters to the larger ships? Has it improved the experience?

The only decline that I see is due to the shortage of qualified crew members which is not necessarily the fault of the cruise lines. With more and more ships being built, getting crew members that are experienced and speak English has become more and more challenging. I have seen more inexperienced (newly trained) crew than in the past which affects the level of service that you receive.

 

 

P.S. While I did not feel that Regent declined, it definitely stepped up its game this past year.

Is the experience on the newer bigger Regent ship any different from the experience on Voyager and Mariner?

I’ve read quite a few less than stellar reviews of Explorer, but these seem to relate to the problems you pointed out, such as needing to find qualified crew members and train them up to luxury line standards.

As an experienced Seabourn person, what is your view about the move from the three sisters to the larger ships? Has it improved the experience?

Which sisters? The triplets of old to ody class, or ody class to Encore et al?

If you mean the first triplets to ody, I miss the triplets,but do love Odyssey class for the enhancement of public areas like seabourn square. I also love the penthouse and penthouse spa suites on ody class. The Seabourn of the noughties however was an amazing experience with lots of celebrities, larks and an intimate feel that isn't there as much with ody.

Now Odyssey class to Encore et al, mmmm, not really for us. I find the decor dark, and further intimacy is lost. Just not got the SB wow factor for us. We will stick with Odyssey class until we have to have a rethink when they are no more!

The early days of the Seabourn triplets in the late 80s and early to mid 90s were the epitome of luxury sailing. imo every other line including Seabourn has been downhill since. BUT that doesn't mean SB isn't still very good.

The reviewer in that case noted that the larger ship meant that the the old familiar atmosphere was gone and that some of the passengers were now no longer the sophisticates of yore.

I find that comment really interesting.......Many people might miss the old familiar, but an objective look might actually reveal that it's new, but not necessarily worse (i.e. a decline). But, to some people, new is always worse than the familiar. The same goes for the "quality" of the passengers, since many people go about life with rose coloured rear-view mirrors - those "sophisticates" might not be as good as that reviewer remembers.

I find that comment really interesting.......Many people might miss the old familiar, but an objective look might actually reveal that it's new, but not necessarily worse (i.e. a decline). But, to some people, new is always worse than the familiar. The same goes for the "quality" of the passengers, since many people go about life with rose coloured rear-view mirrors - those "sophisticates" might not be as good as that reviewer remembers.

Calliopecruiser, I often don't agree with you on the Crystal board, but I have to say you are oh, so right about the "quality" of people on the luxury lines. :D People who complain that their fellow cruisers aren't "sophisticates" need to be cruising on private yachts!

Patty

I find that comment really interesting.......Many people might miss the old familiar, but an objective look might actually reveal that it's new, but not necessarily worse (i.e. a decline). But, to some people, new is always worse than the familiar. The same goes for the "quality" of the passengers, since many people go about life with rose coloured rear-view mirrors - those "sophisticates" might not be as good as that reviewer remembers.

I suppose his argument is that making the ships bigger will attract more people who would not have tried the line before when the ships were smaller. But as you say it is totally subjective, though I think it is a common belief that making something available to more people males it less exclusive.

Which sisters? The triplets of old to ody class, or ody class to Encore et al?

If you mean the first triplets to ody, I miss the triplets,but do love Odyssey class for the enhancement of public areas like seabourn square. I also love the penthouse and penthouse spa suites on ody class. The Seabourn of the noughties however was an amazing experience with lots of celebrities, larks and an intimate feel that isn't there as much with ody.

Now Odyssey class to Encore et al, mmmm, not really for us. I find the decor dark, and further intimacy is lost. Just not got the SB wow factor for us. We will stick with Odyssey class until we have to have a rethink when they are no more!

I think the reviewer in question was referring to the original triplets, which it seems both you and wripro seem to have enjoyed more than the later ships.

though I think it is a common belief that making something available to more people males it less exclusive.

And I think that's right.....something can't be exclusive if it's available to all (or even to many). But "luxury" and "exclusivity" aren't the same thing (at least in my opinion).

Is the experience on the newer bigger Regent ship any different from the experience on Voyager and Mariner?

I’ve read quite a few less than stellar reviews of Explorer, but these seem to relate to the problems you pointed out, such as needing to find qualified crew members and train them up to luxury line standards.

Explorer is only a tiny big larger than their sister ships. Explorer has become our favorite ship by far - the suites are laid out better (lots of storage, larger bathrooms with two sinks a bathtub and good size shower), an amazing work out area with lots spa areas (hot and cold saunas - plus one that is aromatherapy), etc. I could go on and on about the ship. Yes - some people find it a bit glitzy but we love it for the comfortability.

In my opinion, Explorer gets a bad rap because it was advertised as "the most luxurious ship ever built". It isn't perfect but love her. The few (very few) issues that she has will be corrected when the Splendor debuts in February 2020.

And I think that's right.....something can't be exclusive if it's available to all (or even to many). But "luxury" and "exclusivity" aren't the same thing (at least in my opinion).

I agree that the two are not the same, but I think they are linked.

Exclusivity builds an ethos. And luxury is not just about rich furnishings and deluxe goods, it also about style.

The classic example of a brand losing caste was Burberry, whose trademark check fabrics became so ubiquitous that the quality suffered and its old customers moved to other brands. Burberry turned this around because it came to realise that being an exclusive brand made it truly a luxury product.

If your favourite luxury cruise line became popular with yobbos, it may maintain a lot of the material comforts that signify luxury, but I doubt it would remain a true luxury line for long.

Exclusivity builds an ethos. And luxury is not just about rich furnishings and deluxe goods, it also about style.

I agree, but luxury, like style, are very personal choices. What I think is luxurious might not be what someone else thinks of as luxury, and what I think of as stylish might be considered by someone else to be decidedly unstylish. An exclusive brand doesn't make it a luxury brand, IMO, even though it might make it a desirable (and expensive) one. There are some people who want the feeling of exclusivity, and are willing to be fooled into thinking that it therefore must be luxurious. Or they're not fooled, and it is their definition of luxury, but it's not necessarily anyone else's definition of luxury. I don't agree that expense creates exclusivity which defines luxury, in spite of what some auto, clothing, and jewelry designers want to tell us.

Explorer is only a tiny big larger than their sister ships. Explorer has become our favorite ship by far - the suites are laid out better (lots of storage, larger bathrooms with two sinks a bathtub and good size shower), an amazing work out area with lots spa areas (hot and cold saunas - plus one that is aromatherapy), etc. I could go on and on about the ship. Yes - some people find it a bit glitzy but we love it for the comfortability.

 

In my opinion, Explorer gets a bad rap because it was advertised as "the most luxurious ship ever built". It isn't perfect but love her. The few (very few) issues that she has will be corrected when the Splendor debuts in February 2020.

We sailed on Voyager a few years back. It was a great experience that was definitely the epitome of luxury cruising. I’m glad to hear that you think that Regent is as good as ever.

If we wanted to cruise again, we would probably pick Regent. But these days we find luxury yachting more appealing than cruising.

Thank you for this interesting discussion of the relationship between luxury and exclusivity. It's something I have been pondering as I read these boards and compare what is said here with my admittedly limited experience with cruising in general, and only on one line in particular.

I do agree that luxury and exclusivity are not the same thing, and that they are also inextricably linked in some people's experiences and perceptions. For me, I do want luxury but I find certain kinds of exclusivity off-putting and deleterious. I worry about defining people as "like-minded" or "kindred spirits" or "the right sort" -- often said with a verbal wink to those in the know. These comments seem vaguely nationalist, classist, and even racist, perhaps unintentionally so. To be frank, I can probably pass as "the right sort," but the folks who make those comments aren't the ones I want to hang with as part of my luxury cruising experience. It all sounds like the distinctions between old money and new money, and some pax who bemoan the loss of luxury seem to wish the cruise line would screen not only for who can afford the voyage, but also for their pedigree.

How would Onslow be categorised?

How would Onslow be categorised?

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Thank you for the hearty laugh, English Voyager!!! :')

Unibok, I agree with much of what you say but there should be a way to explain to people that are looking at doing a luxury cruise what the "culture" (for lack of a better word) is like on the ship. At the risk of getting bashed, I've been reading the NCL board as we will do a three-night preview cruise on the NCL Bliss at the end of May and I am very interested in learning as much as possible about the ship, passengers, etc. The discussions on the NCL board could not be more different than on luxury cruise line boards and I doubt if many NCL passengers would enjoy a luxury cruise line -- not because they are bad people or are "less than" anyone else. The majority seem to want a party atmosphere and wondered why lounges closed at 3:00 a.m.

So, although I don't use the term "like-minded", in a way you do have to be like-minded in some ways - whether you are on a mainstream, premium or luxury cruise line. Having said that, we have tried Silversea three times - love two of their ships, the service and the food. However, it is important to many guests on Silversea to keep the more formal dress code alive and well. We prefer an elegant casual dress code so we do not think the same as the majority of Siversea passengers. This does not make us wrong or right.

In terms of people that sail mainstream cruise lines - I know some people that are quite wealthy and because they enjoy what the mainstream cruise lines offer, they sail on them. So, no one should make the assumption that people that sail on mainstream cruise lines cannot afford anything better.

Not sure if this made sense but I tried.

How aout a new cruise line with ships named as follows:

S.S. Like Minded

S.S. People Like Us

S.S. Our Kind

Any takers?

Unibok, I agree with much of what you say but there should be a way to explain to people that are looking at doing a luxury cruise what the "culture" (for lack of a better word) is like on the ship.

As you've pointed out, though, the vibe or culture of a ship or line isn't standard either, so it's hard to explain generally. I bet it even changes on long vs short voyages. Though Regent, Crystal, and SeaDream are all considered luxury lines, I bet there are pretty major differences in the culture between them. I tell people about the culture of the cruises I've been on (Crystal, transoceanic), but I wouldn't try to tell anyone about the culture of Silversea, Regent, or even Crystal on a port-intensive Med cruise.