MSC is comparable to....

[bobbisailsolo]

Considering a cruise on MSC Splendida sailing north cape.. I really don't know anything about the line, other than its Italian? How does it compare to the mainstream US lines? Is it like NCL, very casual, where the food is so so, but the service and itineraries are great and well priced? Or more like Princess, a bit more classic? ... Or HAL? Or RCL very family friendly. Just trying to get a feel for it, to see if it's for me. The itinerary is better that the HAL and Princess, but not sure if I'd like the atmosphere... Being a very casual cruiser, preferring a laid back atmosphere.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Typhoon1]

It doesn't. We used to think Carnival was the bottom of the barrel. After one MSC cruise, MSC quickly replaced it.

[bobbisailsolo]

It doesn't. We used to think Carnival was the bottom of the barrel. After one MSC cruise, MSC quickly replaced it.

 

Ha! that made me literally laugh out loud.

[thraak]

Last month, I sailed on the Divina and will so again.

I am booked on NCL Getaway in the fall. (Fell for their current BOGO promo).

I still feel the love for MSC, that's why I still read these boards.

But....I am so suspicious of MSC haters that continue to troll on the MSC forums.

Why? Seriously, is it boredom or just an abundance of idle time?

[sippican]

It doesn't. We used to think Carnival was the bottom of the barrel. After one MSC cruise, MSC quickly replaced it.

 

Which ship, which itinerary?

[The_Big_M]

I see them as the Euro equivalent of RCCL.

 

Like any line, there are differences, especially with their Italian operations/heritage, but that's the kind of standard and facilities they operate with.

[neptuno]

Our family loves MSC. But recently, when Divina got too big and "Americanized", we became disapointed. Five MSC sailings out of Florida (Poesia included), and we would still recomend MSC USA at least once, but getting too big and Carnivalized. Divina is a beautiful new ship, but overcrowded and with a so-so itinerary; two tender ports on the western, and the "milk run" eastern. But if you have never sailed her, she is a beauty, a destination in herself, and any first timers will rave. Compared to Celebrity Reflection, the Divina dance venue alone will keep Divina afloat. And the off peak pricing is very attractive. But beware, MSC will sell every last cabin at unheard of prices,($199 inside) just to fill the 4300 person capacity, and that gets a bit crowded.

[bobbisailsolo]

I was looking at the Splendida which sails up the coast of Norway. I'm really not a big fan of the large mega ships, so thinking this may not be for me, after reading the comments?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bltrn]

I strongly suggest you consider the Yacht Club. The service and amenities are found only on other luxury lines at half the price.

[AmoMondo]

The other mass market line it is most similar to would be Costa but without some of the American ways of doing things. Costa's carnival group parentage shows at times.

 

Splendidais a very large ship and YC would be a way if getting a smaller ship experience but with still all the extras of a big ship just outside should you want it.

 

I believe the Orchestra (next size down) and the sinfonia (smallest class in the fleet) are also sailing in Northern Europe as the same time as the Splendida but may not be doing Norway.ive not looked at the itineraries closely as it is not a region I want to go to.

[moomoocow]

It doesn't. We used to think Carnival was the bottom of the barrel. After one MSC cruise, MSC quickly replaced it.

 

In the full interests of disclosure Typhoon I would suggest you add that you were on a charter.

[Norwegian Cruiser 73]

I was looking at the Splendida which sails up the coast of Norway. I'm really not a big fan of the large mega ships, so thinking this may not be for me, after reading the comments?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

For the first time in history MSC homeport a Fantasiaclass ship ( MSC Splendida ) in Northern Europe and the itineraries on offer are unique. Includes the beautiful Norwegian Fjords, Spitzbergen and Iceland. The ship is big but it's interior it's still intimate and cozy and if you want a upscale luxury experience, go for the Yacht Club.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Norwegian Cruiser 73

[pmacher61]

Rather than rely on the feedback from a handful of individuals, you may get a better idea of what other Cruise Critic members think of MSC by looking at this link to the Cruise Critic "Cruisers' Choice Poll" (all time for overall quality). It's a mathematical compilation of about 125,000 cruise reviews that have been published by CC. You can also sort the results for various aspects, e.g., dining, service, entertainment, etc

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberpoll_all.cfm?rating=Overall&sort=Highest

Edited May 8, 2014 by pmacher61

[papcx]

Here we go again!

[The_Big_M]

Rather than rely on meaningless numbers, with no indication of the basis for the rating, nor the reasons or experiences, why not read actual people's thoughts and experiences.

 

How does the difference between a 3.9 and a 4.0 on a different ship have any meaningful impact on what your experience will be?

 

Some just like to make a big deal about what isn't that much of a difference, really...

[neptuno]

Perhaps a new thread is in order, but so goes the question. Anyone care to chime in on the pros and cons of Divina v. Reflection(Carib)? Which, btw, are close in price now.

[pmacher61]

Here we go again!

Where might that be?

[pmacher61]

Rather than rely on meaningless numbers, with no indication of the basis for the rating, nor the reasons or experiences, why not read actual people's thoughts and experiences.

 

How does the difference between a 3.9 and a 4.0 on a different ship have any meaningful impact on what your experience will be?

 

Some just like to make a big deal about what isn't that much of a difference, really...

Many reasonable people would conclude that a mathematical compilation of the numerical ratings thousands of cruisers have given to their onboard experiences might have greater relevance than a handful of anecdotes. A 4 is better than 3.9 and if each of those scores were the average result of ratings given by several thousand cruisers, it would be reasonable to conclude there was a perceived difference in quality.

 

In actual fact, however, a cursory review of the linked poll results will reveal that MSC ship scores are not only .1 behind the scores of their competitors. The difference is much greater across the board for all ships and most all aspects of the cruise experience. MSC ships are rated much lower than the competition by a significant amount. They occupy a significantly disproportionate percentage of the quintile of lowest rated ships.

Most MSC ships with 1 or 2 exceptions are rated lower than every single ship in the fleet of the mass market competition. The results are not insignificant despite the anomalies and flaws inherent in the compilation of the scores.

Edited May 10, 2014 by pmacher61

[The_Big_M]

Many reasonable people would conclude that a mathematical compilation of the numerical ratings thousands of cruisers have given to their onboard experiences might have greater relevance than a handful of anecdotes. A 4 is better than 3.9 and if each of those scores were the average result of ratings given by several thousand cruisers, it would be reasonable to conclude there was a perceived difference in quality.

 

Many reasonable people know that 'numbers don't tell the whole story' and that what one person prefers, another doesn't. They know that a score is an indication but doesn't actually show where the weaknesses, and mistakes were.

 

Moreover, in cases without qualified populations like this, the ratings are purely subjective and can be subject to various forms of bias, which taint the results. This makes the results invalid, let alone trying to apply them to an indvidual's personal situation. And lastly, unless the person rating them has been on the same ships, which clearly isn't the case, the comparison is invalid. One group of people give one set of scores, and another give another group, which is why any test that does try to fairly compare different groups assessed by different people will apply weightings and standardisations to adjust for this. This is not done in this case, because it is not intended as a reliable comparison, just a simple rough indication.

 

In fact, when you are marking you cannot even rate to that degree of granularity, but only to the integer level. So if you were trying to say that you think something is similar to a ship rated say, 3.7, you could only rate it as BETTER, or WORSE! Not the same!

 

Since you state that a 4 is better than a 3.9, can you please explain how it is better? What specifically are the differences in personal experience that that will cause on the cruiser's pleasure?

 

In actual fact, however, a cursory review of the linked poll results will reveal that MSC ship scores are not only .1 behind the scores of their competitors. The difference is much greater across the board for all ships and most all aspects of the cruise experience. MSC ships are rated much lower than the competition by a significant amount. They occupy a significantly disproportionate percentage of the quintile of lowest rated ships.

Most MSC ships with 1 or 2 exceptions are rated lower than every single ship in the fleet of the mass market competition. The results are not insignificant despite the anomalies and flaws inherent in the compilation of the scores.

 

In actual fact, there is a .3 variance between the sister ships Celebrity Solstice and Celebrity Equinox, when you'd expect their ratings to be virtually the same.

 

These are the top rated ships by Berlitz in one category - yet Solstice is a whole 0.9 points against the top rated ships here.

 

Further, Queen Mary 2, which gets the top prize there above Solstice, comes a whole 1.0 further down below Solstice here, at 4.2. This puts it below such 'impressive' candidates as Carnival Elation, at 4.3.

 

The most that can be said from the groupings is that European originating ships (Cunard, Costa, MSC and Holland America) are rated below American originating ships (Celebrity, RCL, Carnival), with Princess spread across the middle (4.8 to 4.0). I wouldn't try to read anything into that except that ratings are biased towards American style liners, and it's not possible to discern differences between ships given the huge variance.

 

Those ratings aren't any more than a very simplified form of looking at the supporting reviews. And if you read those reviews, you'll see how varied and unreliable those assessments are.

Edited May 10, 2014 by The_Big_M

[moomoocow]

Many reasonable people know that 'numbers don't tell the whole story' and that what one person prefers, another doesn't. They know that a score is an indication but doesn't actually show where the weaknesses, and mistakes were.

 

Moreover, in cases without qualified populations like this, the ratings are purely subjective and can be subject to various forms of bias, which taint the results. This makes the results invalid, let alone trying to apply them to an indvidual's personal situation. And lastly, unless the person rating them has been on the same ships, which clearly isn't the case, the comparison is invalid. One group of people give one set of scores, and another give another group, which is why any test that does try to fairly compare different groups assessed by different people will apply weightings and standardisations to adjust for this. This is not done in this case, because it is not intended as a reliable comparison, just a simple rough indication.

 

In fact, when you are marking you cannot even rate to that degree of granularity, but only to the integer level. So if you were trying to say that you think something is similar to a ship rated say, 3.7, you could only rate it as BETTER, or WORSE! Not the same!

 

Since you state that a 4 is better than a 3.9, can you please explain how it is better? What specifically are the differences in personal experience that that will cause on the cruiser's pleasure?

 

 

 

In actual fact, there is a .3 variance between the sister ships Celebrity Solstice and Celebrity Equinox, when you'd expect their ratings to be virtually the same.

 

These are the top rated ships by Berlitz in one category - yet Solstice is a whole 0.9 points against the top rated ships here.

 

Further, Queen Mary 2, which gets the top prize there above Solstice, comes a whole 1.0 further down below Solstice here, at 4.2. This puts it below such 'impressive' candidates as Carnival Elation, at 4.3.

 

The most that can be said from the groupings is that European originating ships (Cunard, Costa, MSC and Holland America) are rated below American originating ships (Celebrity, RCL, Carnival), with Princess spread across the middle (4.8 to 4.0). I wouldn't try to read anything into that except that ratings are biased towards American style liners, and it's not possible to discern differences between ships given the huge variance.

 

Those ratings aren't any more than a very simplified form of looking at the supporting reviews. And if you read those reviews, you'll see how varied and unreliable those assessments are.

 

 

:eek:

 

I think I love you Big M.

[Typhoon1]

In the full interests of disclosure Typhoon I would suggest you add that you were on a charter.

 

Why would it make a difference? Same ship, same staff, same itinerary, same food.

 

The chartering company planned to charter again in 2015. After a few days they quickly changed their minds, and went with Princess.

 

Don't feed me the line, " MSC didn't know what to expect". They knew full well. There was an MSC rep onboard the chartered Eurodam in 2013.

[The_Big_M]

Why would it make a difference? Same ship, same staff, same itinerary, same food.

.

 

As I understand it, depending on the charter, the staff may change.

 

Also, the entertainment program and schedule is no longer made by the line, but the charter group. You can have quite a different experience onboard given the activity focus and organisation.

 

Sure, the ship and food are the same, but is your grievance with the ship or the food? MSC have some of the most impressive ships. Food not so much... but not so different from the offerings of other competitive lines like Celebrity and RCL.

Edited May 11, 2014 by The_Big_M

[moomoocow]

Why would it make a difference? Same ship, same staff, same itinerary, same food.

 

The chartering company planned to charter again in 2015. After a few days they quickly changed their minds, and went with Princess.

 

Don't feed me the line, " MSC didn't know what to expect". They knew full well. There was an MSC rep onboard the chartered Eurodam in 2013.

 

Yes we get your cruise was beset with problems and was nowhere near your expectations. Other reviewers on your cruise have also pointed this out.

 

However there are mostly positive and objective reviews to be read about the recent cruises on the review page. And, yes, charters for MSC do not usually include staff or even sometimes full dining options.

 

I'm not feeding anyone a line. You encountered a different product in the same packaging to what the OP is requesting comparison about. So tell them that.

[thraak]

As I understand it, depending on the charter, the staff may change.

 

 

 

Also,

Edited May 11, 2014 by thraak

[thraak]

Why would it make a difference? Same ship, same staff, same itinerary, same food.

 

 

 

The chartering company planned to charter again in 2015. After a few days they quickly changed their minds, and went with Princess.

 

 

 

Don't feed me the line, " MSC didn't know what to expect". They knew full well. There was an MSC rep onboard the chartered Eurodam in 2013.

 

 

 

And, if I may add, I sailed the Divina following that charter and they did a marvelous job in sanitizing and giving it a good scrubbing as it was spotless and just like new when we sailed!!!