Has Ship Building Finally 'Jumped the Shark'? Cruising?

[woodofpine]

OK... this may be an Oasis diss, but not really so specifically. My last cruise was on Crown P. which I enjoyed, but it solidified a personal swing in interest toward 'smaller' ships.

 

I'm a 'mass market' family cruiser mind you. The size of ships today has created general over capacity that makes the fare restrained cruiselines a terrific value. But those capacity economics we all know have resulted in relentless cost cutting that has tarnished the silver lining or panache of cruising - a little. I was surprised Oasis wasn't fully booked for December '09; I wonder what RCI's lenders think of that! The cruise industry's success also has undebatably impaired some islands. How nice is it REALLY at Virgin Gorda's Baths between 10 and 2? Front street in Georgetown, Grand Caymen is how nice most days (really)?

 

As the end of the year approaches I think we'll look back on this decade (and the late 90's) as cruising's 'Golden Age'. But going forward - in the Caribbean... ehh!

 

Oasis - I'd love a tour or a 2 night to Nassau to check it out - but that's probably it. I'm sure there are some interesting things that 50 feet more girth allows in designing interior space; but an enhanced sense of being at sea isn't one of them. When a ship 'is the destination' then it's not competing in the cruise market anymore, its competing with land based all inclusives. Something's been jumped!

 

With maybe very few exceptions, I have no particular interest in cruising ships of over 100,000GT. It's where the sharks are...

[Druke I]

I have absolutely no interest in sailing on Oasis - much too big for my tastes.

 

I really enjoy the R-class of ship, having been on Pacific Princess, Oceania's Regatta, and Oceania's Nautica.

 

Oceania currently has a newbuild under construction, approximately 62,000 GRT, 1200 PAX, which I think is a great size and manageable passenger load.

[Toto2Kansas]

We don't find much interest in the mega monster ships, but that is our choice. I know there are some that are looking for an amusement type atmosphere while onboard, we just aren't in that group.

Thankfully, there are still smaller ships afloat that we can still enjoy the actual cruising part of it and not need to be entertained every second of the day and night.

 

I think these huge ships will attrack the younger, crazier crowd, then the smaller ships, which is fine by me. ;)

 

FYI, my son called me to ask me if I saw the Oasis on the news, and he was in aww of it and really wanted to sail on it with his family. It didn't surprise me at all, as they love the fact they have something to do all the time. For us, cruising is more of a relaxing experience.

 

To each his own, and I do hope that those interested in the amusement type ships enjoy them. We will stick to the smaller ships now!

[gertz]

Just have to get in here. It is not only that they are too big they carry way to many people. The Oasis is just too big period but it has a better space ratio than the Caribbean Princess and its cousins but space ratio goes out the window when you get as big as the Oasis.

We haven't been back to the Caribbean since the CB was new and we sailed on her. That was enough never again. Well take back part of that we did the Grand out of Galveston.

We are not particularly fond of the small ships on lots of sea days either. Great on port intensive cruises.

We prefer and have said it numerous times, the Island and Coral the best followed by the Sapphire and Diamond then Grand, Star, Golden. The Dawn, Sea, Ocean, Sun are fine but think they are on the way out.

But I read lots of reviews that think these overstuffed ships are great. Maybe it is a product of age.:eek:

[Spender Nui]

I have absolutely no interest in sailing on Oasis - much too big for my tastes.

 

I really enjoy the R-class of ship, having been on Pacific Princess, Oceania's Regatta, and Oceania's Nautica.

 

Oceania currently has a newbuild under construction, approximately 62,000 GRT, 1200 PAX, which I think is a great size and manageable passenger load.

 

I happen to agree with you. That's about the same size as HAL's Statendam class ships and works very well.

 

We've sailed a couple of times with REN and also on Celebrity's Journey. They are nice ships and are more in line with what cruising used to be ... except the smart casual dress code (which everyone adheres to) affords more comfort in today's world, rather than a dress code that isn't enforced.

 

Ports are all over crowded now. Imagine Oasis in port with a couple of Princess Grand class ships. Utter chaos.

[paul929207]

We love the three "little girls" that Princess has - the Pacfic, the Royal and "our beautiful white lady", the Ocean. Sure you give up some things. There is no Anytime Dining. There are fewer entertainment options. Offsetting that are many positives. The smaller ships are easier to find your way around on. You get to know the other passengers and the crew. Lines are shorter or non-existent. These ships go to wonderful ports that other ships do not or cannot go to.

[Druke I]

Yes, but the Statendam class are some 7000GRT smaller, with 60 or so more PAX, which does alter the Passenger Space Ratio negatively relative to Oceania's newbuild, Marina.

[cruisingpeople]

I was surprised Oasis wasn't fully booked for December '09; I wonder what RCI's lenders think of that!

 

It doesn't surprise me......

This is from an article by the Associated Press right after the Oasis left Finland for Fort Lauderdale.....

"Oasis tickets run $1,299 to $4,829, compared with $509 to $1299 on the company's next most popular ship, Freedom of the Seas."

IMHO, as much of a bargain that I think cruising is, that just seems to be an awfully high amount. Granted, it is a much bigger ship with a lot more amenities, but still. Like I said, just my opinion.

 

Joe

[UnVrYaN]

OK... this may be an Oasis diss, but not really so specifically. My last cruise was on Crown P. which I enjoyed, but it solidified a personal swing in interest toward 'smaller' ships.

 

I'm a 'mass market' family cruiser mind you. The size of ships today has created general over capacity that makes the fare restrained cruiselines a terrific value. But those capacity economics we all know have resulted in relentless cost cutting that has tarnished the silver lining or panache of cruising - a little. I was surprised Oasis wasn't fully booked for December '09; I wonder what RCI's lenders think of that! The cruise industry's success also has undebatably impaired some islands. How nice is it REALLY at Virgin Gorda's Baths between 10 and 2? Front street in Georgetown, Grand Caymen is how nice most days (really)?

 

As the end of the year approaches I think we'll look back on this decade (and the late 90's) as cruising's 'Golden Age'. But going forward - in the Caribbean... ehh!

 

Oasis - I'd love a tour or a 2 night to Nassau to check it out - but that's probably it. I'm sure there are some interesting things that 50 feet more girth allows in designing interior space; but an enhanced sense of being at sea isn't one of them. When a ship 'is the destination' then it's not competing in the cruise market anymore, its competing with land based all inclusives. Something's been jumped!

 

With maybe very few exceptions, I have no particular interest in cruising ships of over 100,000GT. It's where the sharks are...

 

I may be in the minority, but I think you are over-analyzing the situation a bit here. While some (mostly that happen to be on the princess boards here) may prefer the smaller ship, I know that many others truly enjoy the larger ships. I think this is really a matter of personal preference. In my estimation the only reason smaller ships are going to be easier to fill right now is just that, their smaller capacity and today's economy. Statistically people just aren't traveling right now. I suspect the Oasis would have been a huge hit had it come out 2-4 yrs ago. Or perhaps in another 2-3 years when we hopefully get out of this economic mess. Just my 2 pennies.

[kooljamming]

The cruise industry's success also has undebatably impaired some islands...

 

Believe or not there was a time Ocho Rios was a very nice place to visit:D

I was there 30 years ago before cheap cruise 'dem' com took over. Now Oasis of the Seas will pollute another part of the island, Falmouth.

A bad idea agreed on by a mega corporation and a greedy government(nice word) at the expense of the people and the infrastructure. I would like a day pass, at first, just to experience something so different. If it ever gets to So. Cal, another trip to Mexico can't hurt.

 

The destination unto itself is more of a resort, so hope they add a some kind of swim-up bar. Without ports cruising pales in comparison to a decent resort in the Caribbean or Mexico, offering all you can drink, rooms with nice views, a beach, many bars, several specialty restaurants, kids discounted or free, and countless pools. All this for as little as $80-$100 pp per day.

[Coral]

OK... this may be an Oasis diss, but not really so specifically. My last cruise was on Crown P. which I enjoyed, but it solidified a personal swing in interest toward 'smaller' ships.

 

 

Yes!

 

My last cruise was on the Crown also and I did not enjoy the ship at all. It was way too crowded and I walked away wishing I had been on a ship with less bells and whistles but a ship that I could walk around in with out being stopped by crowds, or have to wait to get a table in the buffet or Horizon Court, or get into entertainment venues or provides consistent service...

 

I have the Golden booked for May and part of me wishes that the price goes down on the Sea Princess and I can go back to what won we over with cruising to begin with (listening to the ocean, relaxing, good service, good food, seeing people more then once over the course of the cruise, etc....)

 

So - my dream ship right now would be 30-70,000 tonns with no wing bang amenities (muts, bowling, jugglers, ice skaters, zip lining....).

 

And yes, I did notice that the Oasis has a better space ratio then the Crown!

[catergirl]

after watching the livesteam tour, a few things caught my eye...the buffet seemed spacious, but too few tables spread far apart, wondered if there would be enough table space for all those people! also places like 'central park' seemed to have very little 'walk' room around them, thinking it would be very congested, especially with the cafe type venues there as well. the 'tidal' bar was different, but again very little seating room:eek: then there are soo many upcharge restaurants!!! the back amphitheatre also could be quite cool and breezy, if you have ever been at the back of the ship. just some practical thoughts IMHO!!

[caribill]

 

Oasis - I'd love a tour or a 2 night to Nassau to check it out - but that's probably it. I'm sure there are some interesting things that 50 feet more girth allows in designing interior space; but an enhanced sense of being at sea isn't one of them. When a ship 'is the destination' then it's not competing in the cruise market anymore, its competing with land based all inclusives.

 

 

Except land based "all inclusives" are usually all inclusive. On a cruise ship, there are (optional) extra costs around every corner (alcoholic drinks, better restaurants, soft drinks, decent coffee, even juice much of the time).

[sarge98]

OK... this may be an Oasis diss, but not really so specifically. My last cruise was on Crown P. which I enjoyed, but it solidified a personal swing in interest toward 'smaller' ships.

 

I'm a 'mass market' family cruiser mind you. The size of ships today has created general over capacity that makes the fare restrained cruiselines a terrific value. But those capacity economics we all know have resulted in relentless cost cutting that has tarnished the silver lining or panache of cruising - a little. I was surprised Oasis wasn't fully booked for December '09; I wonder what RCI's lenders think of that! The cruise industry's success also has undebatably impaired some islands. How nice is it REALLY at Virgin Gorda's Baths between 10 and 2? Front street in Georgetown, Grand Caymen is how nice most days (really)?

 

As the end of the year approaches I think we'll look back on this decade (and the late 90's) as cruising's 'Golden Age'. But going forward - in the Caribbean... ehh!

 

Oasis - I'd love a tour or a 2 night to Nassau to check it out - but that's probably it. I'm sure there are some interesting things that 50 feet more girth allows in designing interior space; but an enhanced sense of being at sea isn't one of them. When a ship 'is the destination' then it's not competing in the cruise market anymore, its competing with land based all inclusives. Something's been jumped!

 

With maybe very few exceptions, I have no particular interest in cruising ships of over 100,000GT. It's where the sharks are...

 

While the subject is larger ships, go on the internet and check out Royal Caribbean. They are having a ship built at the Aker yards in Oslo Norway. It will be named Genesis 220,000 tons, 6400 passengers. Now just where are they going to park that one?

[RickEk]

While the subject is larger ships, go on the internet and check out Royal Caribbean. They are having a ship built at the Aker yards in Oslo Norway. It will be named Genesis 220,000 tons, 6400 passengers. Now just where are they going to park that one?

 

The ship you are referring to IS the Oasis of the Seas.... Genesis was the name of the project....

[hubofhockey]

I think I would be bored on a smaller ship and have no interest in going on one. I loved the Crown Princess and all of the entertainment options and never felt crowded. I would be more likely to try a ship like the Oasis or even if Princess' next build was as big as the Carnival Dream than I would a small ship. But itinerary is still important. If the megaships can't even dock at some ports I want to go to, I guess that would impact whether I would actually book that ship.

[flynrph]

Here's a nightmare thought. Tendering................:eek: gonna happen someday for some reason..........

[room010]

I suspect a lot of the people who want to cruise on a megaship have no intention of stepping ashore anyway; the ship IS the destination. Fair enough if that's what you want but in that case why not go and stay in all inclusive resort on a beach somewhere?

 

During our trip to Alaska this summer we stopped in Juneau with 4 other large ships - Golden Princess, Diamond Princess, Zuiderdam (our ship), Celebrity Millenium (?) and one more whose name I don't recall. That must be well over 6 thousand passangers and I have to say it was absolute hell with PACKED streets and some stores and restaurants where you couldn't even get through the door. At least the endless jewellery store owners were happy. And these ships were able to dock so people could walk ashore - what it would have been like using tenders I dread to think. I sometimes wonder if the ship designers take these basic logistics into consideration.

[Coral]

I think I would be bored on a smaller ship and have no interest in going on one. I loved the Crown Princess and all of the entertainment options and never felt crowded. .

 

The interesting thing is that I find the entertainment options the same (if not better) but easier to get to on the smaller ships. For example - some of the ships don't have MUTS but they seem to be retrofitting the other ships with it (if this is important). I find I can go to more entertainment options on the smaller ships because there are less people and it is not as crowded. I don't have to show up an hour early to a show like people had to do on the Crown. I also find the Vista Lounge better then Club Fusion as they are able to use this for entertainment in a different (better way) then they do with Club Fusion. IMO - on the Crown Princess, I ended up not getting to most entertainment areas because it was too full by the time I get to it and I am not going to wait 2 hours for the later show. I have never had this problem on the smaller ships - so for me, the smaller ships (Sun, Sea, Coral, Island and even Grand, Golden, Sapphire) have better entertainment options as I can actually see them! They are the same shows as on the Crown.

[woodofpine]

I appreciate everyone's comments.

 

Many mega-ships have virtuous passenger space ratios. Good thing. There is a certain claim that I feel is a bit bloated though. Mega-ships have 'greater amenities'... Such as? For the most part, cruising is sleeping, eating/drinking, a show lounge/theater or two with adjacent souvenir sales. I forgot - spa/exercise area adjacent the pool deck. Isn't this what just about all ships over 50,000GT offer? To abuse an analogy, in the 'steakhouse' of cruising, isn't the foregoing the steak; the rest is sizzling BS.

 

OK - I acknowledge RCCL has created unique brochure 'bullet points' with rock climbing walls, ice rinks, and artificial surfer waves (Princess has a jumbotron). Personally, I find these to be 'talking points' rather than functionally compelling. I'm not dissing RCI, they've created a unique identity - but I'd be curious what percentage of their pax have used these three features more than once? RCCL's interior (now exterior Central Park) promenade designs deserve credit architecturally. Again, I'm not bashing them. But I'm keenly aware that in presenting Oasis RCI has relied greatly on dimensionally skewed artists renderings of 'Central Park' etc. to create a sense of space that photos diminish greatly.

 

Maybe I'm just neurologically impaired. On mega ships, I begin to lose a sense of sea orientation. But I am still aware of being confined on a ship. I find this a bit disconcerting. An RCI Oasis passenger posting on CC mentioned not being aware of pulling away from the pier; this generally upbeat poster didn't phrase this as an altogether positive experience. The phrase 'not for everyone' was used. Interesting business 'shark' question... Should a ship that has to sell 5,000-6,000 berths prompt 'not for everyone' reactions? Time will tell. Allure of the Seas is next...

[Colo Cruiser]

It doesn't surprise me......

This is from an article by the Associated Press right after the Oasis left Finland for Fort Lauderdale.....

"Oasis tickets run $1,299 to $4,829, compared with $509 to $1299 on the company's next most popular ship, Freedom of the Seas."

IMHO, as much of a bargain that I think cruising is, that just seems to be an awfully high amount. Granted, it is a much bigger ship with a lot more amenities, but still. Like I said, just my opinion.

 

Joe

 

I saw an article too about how they are killing the sales on their other ships and iteniaries.

A smart move? I think not.

It will wear off. Then what?

[tcdcruiser]

Some will like the mega ships and other will not - what ever floats your boat. For me RCI can keep it. I cruised the FOS last year and it had 1200 children (under 18s) aboard...I can't imagine the's OOS worst case kid capacity. Maybe they should have named it the Children of the Seas.

 

Unfortunately, I expect 10 years from now we'll be seeing these mega-ships doing the Alaskan cruises.

[Doug R.]

Enough with the wringing of the hands and bemoaning the inevitible progression in ship size and amenities.:rolleyes: I have heard the same moaning everytime a cruiseline comes up with a new innovation or practice. Many act like it is going to be the death of cruising and it never is.

 

If you don't like bigger ships, don't book them, it is that simple. Crusing will go on with or without you. If the demand wasn't there they wouldn't build them.

 

Worried that the mega ships will cause the smaller ships to be underbooked??? Wooo Hooo! Let's go bargin hunting!!!

 

For those who are upset at the premium price for the Oasis, wait about a year or two down the road and the novelty wears off.

 

Looking into the future from a post on Cruise Critic from November 25, 2019:

 

"You can have the newer mega-ships. I prefer the smaller ones like the Oasis of the Seas." :eek:

[RickEk]

But I'm keenly aware that in presenting Oasis RCI has relied greatly on dimensionally skewed artists renderings of 'Central Park' etc. to create a sense of space that photos diminish greatly.

 

I thought I was the only one who thought that those artist-renderings would be unrealistic compared to the actual ship. :p Especially the renderings of Central Park. It does look like those "inside" cabins would be perpetually in shadow most of the day and completely viewable from the upper decks. :eek:

 

Unfortunately, I expect 10 years from now we'll be seeing these mega-ships doing the Alaskan cruises.

 

Nah, I don't think Alaska would allow them in Alaskan waters.

[Colo Cruiser]

I thought I was the only one who thought that those artist-renderings would be unrealistic compared to the actual ship. :p Especially the renderings of Central Park. It does look like those "inside" cabins would be perpetually in shadow most of the day and completely viewable from the upper decks. :eek:

 

 

 

Nah, I don't think Alaska would allow them in Alaskan waters.

 

and the popularity will fizzle, I don't see them filling them all the time.