I Don’t Cruise ...

[Toryhere]

The majority of us just don't care what others think! :cool:

 

Of course you care that others think you are not a snob. And you look down on people that you think are trash.

 

There seems to be some contradiction there. But I think the problem is that you somehow don't like the idea of differentiating one product from another, just in case it might appear that in doing so you are taken to be lording it over others. There is an incipient kindness of outlook in that. But the willingness to call someone else's motives into question is not so kind.

 

If I said to a friend I was going line dancing, he or she would be surprised because I have never expressed any interest in going line dancing before. He or she would have an image in ind about what line dancing is and would also know that I have said in the past that I don't feel the need to go line dancing. Now if you substitute the word ''cruising'' the image my friends have is of huge mass market ships with water slides, lots of children, rock climbing and the like. My friends know that I wouldn't travel on one of those ships because I don't find such activities congenial. And I don't like crowds. So if I am describing my upcoming voyage on SeaDream II, I find it aids communication if I don't use the word ''cruise'' and instead say that I'm going on voyage in the Caribbean on a mega-yacht. This has nothing to with feeling superior to others, just feeling different. If there is any superiority involved it is about challenging oneself to create a holiday one enjoys.

[Toryhere]

Let's face it, the OP is still stuck in Downton Abbey, so very worried about having everyone understand how upper crust he is. I guess it's a British thing. :rolleyes: The majority of us just don't care what others think! :cool:

 

Did I mention that my grandfather once beat a fellow pupil to death at Eton, for being middle class?.:'):'):')

[Texas Tillie]

Did I mention that my grandfather once beat a fellow pupil to death at Eton, for being middle class?.:'):'):')

 

How precious! Yes, I see that your comment is a joke. :rolleyes:

 

I'm more convinced than ever that you and Violet would have been best buds!

[English Voyager]

Did I mention that my grandfather once beat a fellow pupil to death at Eton, for being middle class?.:'):'):')

 

 

[wripro]

Okay -- so we disagree on the country of origin but do agree about people on Carnival (guess that we are both snobs:evilsmile:). Hopefully you meant "Carnival and Royal Caribbean"? not "RSSC" which is Regent Seven Seas Cruises.

 

I did mean Royal Caribbean. Sorry.

[Travelcat2]

Of course you care that others think you are not a snob. And you look down on people that you think are trash.

 

There seems to be some contradiction there. But I think the problem is that you somehow don't like the idea of differentiating one product from another, just in case it might appear that in doing so you are taken to be lording it over others. There is an incipient kindness of outlook in that. But the willingness to call someone else's motives into question is not so kind.

 

.

 

Once again, we are not understanding each other very clearly. Most importantly, I do NOT look down on people that I think are trash. I do not think that anyone is trash (other than those that kill people). And, I am not a snob but don't care too much if some people think that I am (depends upon the person).

 

Also, I do want to differentiate between cruise lines in order for clarity on the boards. When posters ask to compare NCL and Crystal for instance, I scratch my head as, In my opinion, I don't think that a true comparison could be made. And, on the "luxury" board, mixing luxury cruise lines and non-luxury cruise lines makes it a challenge to respond in a way that makes sense.

 

If all of what you posted is a joke then I missed the funny part. Sometimes irony and/or humor does not translate well but I do appreciate reading your points of view.

[calliopecruiser]

Also, I do want to differentiate between cruise lines in order for clarity on the boards. When posters ask to compare NCL and Crystal for instance, I scratch my head as, In my opinion, I don't think that a true comparison could be made. And, on the "luxury" board, mixing luxury cruise lines and non-luxury cruise lines makes it a challenge to respond in a way that makes sense.

 

Sure, but a marketing label is still only someone's opinion (or some marketing team's opinion), and it won't be any clearer to anyone who doesn't know why those choices of marketing terms were made. The only thing that would work would be for the entire industry to decide on measurable, publishable standards, like hotels in European countries......you must have X to be rated 1 star, you must have X & Y to be rated 2 stars, you must have X, Y, & Z to be rated 3 stars, etc. And then you'd have someone complaining that their ship has X & Z, and should get more stars than 1 even though it isn't justified by the system. And that system can only be based on measurable things like facilities, amenities, or staffing numbers - not on the quality of the staff or food, or example.

[Catlover54]

 

 

LOL to the point that my ribs hurt!

[Cyber Kat]

Rose Sayer from the movie African Queen : [after travelling through the rapids] “Now that I've had a taste of it I don't wonder why you love boating.”

 

Love this quote, so I always tell people that I’m going boating [emoji16][emoji41]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[cheersforbeers]

I also agree. I also stay in suites on cruises but have no need for anyone to know.

 

In Europe, especially, I wouldn't stay in a luxury hotel if it were free....I prefer small local B&B's. Eat in local restaurants or cafes. In Italy I stayed in convents....very unique experience. I like that kind of travel.

 

 

We don’t stay in suites, but did stay in a Holiday Inn Express once. LOL

[Travelcat2]

Upmarket is quite a precise term it means to appeal to the more affluent and discerning consumer. That is what the ''luxury'' lines do.

 

I could use the term ''upmarket wine'', and everyone would know what I meant.

 

Wish that I could agree with you but "upmarket" is not a term typically used here. Instead, we might refer to a luxury cruise line as "upscale" or a wine as "top shelf". Again, there are many differences in our "common language". Thanks to this post, I've learned a new term.

[Toryhere]

Wish that I could agree with you but "upmarket" is not a term typically used here. Instead, we might refer to a luxury cruise line as "upscale" or a wine as "top shelf". Again, there are many differences in our "common language". Thanks to this post, I've learned a new term.

We use “top shelf” too, But more often “top drawer”

[Toryhere]

Once again, we are not understanding each other very clearly. Most importantly, I do NOT look down on people that I think are trash. I do not think that anyone is trash (other than those that kill people). And, I am not a snob but don't care too much if some people think that I am (depends upon the person).

 

Also, I do want to differentiate between cruise lines in order for clarity on the boards. When posters ask to compare NCL and Crystal for instance, I scratch my head as, In my opinion, I don't think that a true comparison could be made. And, on the "luxury" board, mixing luxury cruise lines and non-luxury cruise lines makes it a challenge to respond in a way that makes sense.

 

If all of what you posted is a joke then I missed the funny part. Sometimes irony and/or humor does not translate well but I do appreciate reading your points of view.

 

As I said, I think your comments show an incipient kindness.

I note that here on other threads you have admirably stated that you would like the classification of cruise lines to be more definite and accepted.

I was trying to do something similar in relation to the name of what we do when we embark on a voyage on a luxury ship.

Of course I realise that a lot of people while they enjoy the good things in life are very keen not to be seen to be putting on airs. But my experience is there is a danger of reverse snobbery if that attitude is taken too far.

I think that making distinctions in meanings is what causes the sum of human knowledge to increase. Anyone who would condemn making such distinctions through fear of snobbery is labouring under the delusion that all useful advances in human knowledge arise from people acting altruistically or nobly. Human history shows that the motives of those who increase knowledge are often far from morally pure.

In any case I consider that we need to fight the modern Puritanism that seems want to reduce the topics on which we can speak and condemn people who wish to discriminate between good taste and bad.

[calliopecruiser]

I think that making distinctions in meanings is what causes the sum of human knowledge to increase.

I agree, and see examples of the reverse all the time. But my wanting it to be different is not enough to make it different.....and that's the same here for you. Deciding that you're going to simply use a word to mean something different than what it's come to mean to everyone does not mean that others will understand you, agree with you, or not think you're being obtuse. One anonymous poster on an internet forum may have good intentions, but no one else knows if that's true, or has any reason to agree with you or follow you.

 

 

I had a friend who said runway models were "mutants" because she said it was literally the truth -- that their body type and physiology was not a part of the normal spectrum, and that they could do what they did only because of genetic mutations. Nevertheless, she knew that her literal definition was not enough to a) get people to understand her and b) get people to agree with her. She doesn't call them mutants around other people, but I know she still believes that's what they are (and I agree with her).

Edited February 27, 2018 by calliopecruiser
grammar

[Travelcat2]

Toryhere - you have given me food for thought - thank you.

 

I'm now wondering if I am a reverse snob (hoping not). Although my British DH and I rarely argue or get upset with each other, we do have different points of view on some things. One is the "class system" on cruise lines. He enjoys every benefit that we receive from staying in upper suites. While I enjoy the larger suite and the in-suite benefits, once you walk outside of your suite on a luxury cruise line, I feel that everyone should be treated the same - no special places where only people in upper suites can stay. I don't mind "invisible" benefits such as getting additional dining reservations in specialty restaurants because no one really knows how many times you have been to a specialty restaurant. I have had more than one battle on CC over these issues.

 

In terms of language, after 38 1/2 years of marriage, there are still some words that we misunderstand. He has been in the U.S. many years (raised and schooled in London) and there are likely "new" slang terms that he would be completely unfamiliar with.

 

Anyway, whether or not I am a reverse snob, I do care about people and want everyone to be treated fairly and as equally as possible. When it comes to cruise ships, there are a few things in play.

 

1. Some people enjoy the craziness and fun that can be had on a mainstream cruise line - even if they can afford a luxury cruise line.

 

2. Some people (like me) want to sail on smaller quiet ships, more or less a country club environment (and we are not member of any country clubs), great food and service and large suites - preferably with 1 1/2 bathrooms. and few to no children So, luxury cruising works perfectly for us.

 

3. People that cannot afford too pay upwards of $500/day per person but want a similar atmosphere as luxury cruisers and they tend to sail on Azamara, Oceania and Viking Ocean.

 

4. People that can afford luxury cruises but prefer taking more premium-plus cruises or just like the atmosphere.

 

I'm likely wrong on some things and are missing others but this is how I see it at the moment.

[calliopecruiser]

Toryhere - you have given me food for thought - thank you.

 

I'm now wondering if I am a reverse snob (hoping not). Although my British DH and I rarely argue or get upset with each other, we do have different points of view on some things. One is the "class system" on cruise lines. He enjoys every benefit that we receive from staying in upper suites. While I enjoy the larger suite and the in-suite benefits, once you walk outside of your suite on a luxury cruise line, I feel that everyone should be treated the same - no special places where only people in upper suites can stay. I don't mind "invisible" benefits such as getting additional dining reservations in specialty restaurants because no one really knows how many times you have been to a specialty restaurant. I have had more than one battle on CC over these issues.

 

In terms of language, after 38 1/2 years of marriage, there are still some words that we misunderstand. He has been in the U.S. many years (raised and schooled in London) and there are likely "new" slang terms that he would be completely unfamiliar with.

 

Anyway, whether or not I am a reverse snob, I do care about people and want everyone to be treated fairly and as equally as possible. When it comes to cruise ships, there are a few things in play.

 

1. Some people enjoy the craziness and fun that can be had on a mainstream cruise line - even if they can afford a luxury cruise line.

 

2. Some people (like me) want to sail on smaller quiet ships, more or less a country club environment (and we are not member of any country clubs), great food and service and large suites - preferably with 1 1/2 bathrooms. and few to no children So, luxury cruising works perfectly for us.

 

3. People that cannot afford too pay upwards of $500/day per person but want a similar atmosphere as luxury cruisers and they tend to sail on Azamara, Oceania and Viking Ocean.

 

4. People that can afford luxury cruises but prefer taking more premium-plus cruises or just like the atmosphere.

 

I'm likely wrong on some things and are missing others but this is how I see it at the moment.

 

5. People that can afford luxury lines, but find the timing and itinerary of another line's voyages more suited to them at the moment.

[TrulyBlonde]

5. People that can afford luxury lines, but find the timing and itinerary of another line's voyages more suited to them at the moment.

 

That's me to a tee!

[broberts]

Upmarket is quite a precise term it means to appeal to the more affluent and discerning consumer. That is what the ''luxury'' lines do.

 

I could use the term ''upmarket wine'', and everyone would know what I meant.

 

There is no correlation between affluence and discernment. And certainly one should not presume that consumers of "upmarket" products and services are affluent or discerning.

 

My understanding of "upmarket wine" is a product that is expensive. Is that what you meant?

[cheersforbeers]

“Upmarket wine” from a box to a bottle. From Wal Mart to Party Stop.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Travelcat2]

5. People that can afford luxury lines, but find the timing and itinerary of another line's voyages more suited to them at the moment.

 

What you say is true for some but we would not sail a premium cruise line based on itinerary or timing but our reasoning is completely different than what you or I posted. We are "Titanium" with Regent which means 25% off of excursions that are not included, included laundry and dry cleaning and private transfer from the airport to the pre-cruise hotel (also included on Regent) and from the ship to the airport at the conclusion of the cruise. It would take a lot for us to take a non-Regent cruise.

 

Prior to receiving current loyalty benefits Regent, we did cruise on Oceania (twice) and it was nice but not our cup of tea (mainly food issues). The cost was about the same as a luxury cruise line. Speaking for myself, by the time we upgrade to a suite that compares with a luxury cruise line, add in internet for two people (many cruise lines include internet for one person per suite), excursions and a premium alcohol package that can be used in every lounge, during meals, etc., we may as well pay Regent's price.

 

It is only fair to say that we did international land travel for 15 years prior cruising that began in 2004. In my opinion, some places are not seen "properly" by cruise ship (Australia, New Zealand for instance). So, rather than go on a cruise line that we are not comfortable with, it is easier and usually less expensive to simply fly to where you want to go.

[calliopecruiser]

. In my opinion, some places are not seen "properly" by cruise ship (Australia, New Zealand for instance). So, rather than go on a cruise line that we are not comfortable with, it is easier and usually less expensive to simply fly to where you want to go.

 

I don't think any place is seen properly by cruise ship, in my opinion. Cruising and land trips are entirely different types of vacations, I think, and I think they appeal to different people at different times. In 2019, I'll be doing a land trip (Italy) rather than cruising after 4 years of transoceanic cruises.

[Travelcat2]

I don't think any place is seen properly by cruise ship, in my opinion. Cruising and land trips are entirely different types of vacations, I think, and I think they appeal to different people at different times. In 2019, I'll be doing a land trip (Italy) rather than cruising after 4 years of transoceanic cruises.

 

In my opinion, in a perfect world (for me), you do land trips first and then, when you are a bit older, cruise the world with short visits to many places that you have seen before (but not necessarily near the ports)

[sandbag7]

The OP’s OP has led to an interesting thread, but in the end I’m drawn back to my experience on Sea Dream. The food so beloved by Ward was totally disappointing and the chefs could not even produce a decent foie gras dish as requested. And the passengers! Claimed members of the “Queens Rugby Team” (is there such a thing?), Contractors with third rate trophy wives, Bankers with braggadocio, and others more suitable to the bar scene on Airplane. So if that is yachting I’ll stick to cruising.

[English Voyager]

I don't think any place is seen properly by cruise ship, in my opinion. Cruising and land trips are entirely different types of vacations, I think, and I think they appeal to different people at different times. In 2019, I'll be doing a land trip (Italy) rather than cruising after 4 years of transoceanic cruises.

 

I have to agree with you.

 

Even with an overnight, or two, in a port of call, how much can one see?

 

A day in Florence; Two days in St. Petersburg??

[wripro]

I have to agree with you.

 

Even with an overnight, or two, in a port of call, how much can one see?

 

A day in Florence; Two days in St. Petersburg??

 

Maybe we finally have a concrete difference between luxury and upmarket. A luxury cruise will give you three nights in ST Petersburg while an upmarket one will only give you two.