Why is there no intermediate mid-market cruise line?

[Flatbush Flyer]

6 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Really?  2 questions. When was the last time you sailed all those lines?  Second question. Why is it a “real stretch” to compare Viking to O and Azamara?  

Sorry Cruzaholic41: "No soup for you."

[Cruzaholic41]

14 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Sorry Cruzaholic41: "No soup for you."

So the first answer is never and an answer doesn’t exist for the second. Got it. 

[Flatbush Flyer]

17 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

So the first answer is never and an answer doesn’t exist for the second. Got it. 

Wrong and wrong. Reread some of your posts: Still - "no soup for you."

[Aquahound]

57 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

 Why is it a “real stretch” to compare Viking to O and Azamara?  

 

I've been looking at Viking but haven't pulled the trigger yet.  Those I know who cruised them speak very highly.  I think most reasonably people would put Viking, Azamara, and Oceania in the same category. 

 

But seriously, you didn't expect a legit answer, did you?

[SteveH2508]

2 hours ago, cruizergal70 said:

What's your deal with art shows, photogs, casinos and such? Even if they are on a ship, they can easily be avoided. Not a fan of art shows? Don't go. It's that simple.

 

As far as trying a "premium" line, I'm too much of a low maintenance cruiser to pay for "extras" I don't want or need. I cruise for the ports and not the on ship experience. 

 

 

The itineraries that the premium lines offer tick the ports box much better than the mainstream same old itineraries. Smaller ships can go to places that the 'Elephant of the Seas' cannot. Added to that, they are more flexible about dining etc. if there are long trips to places (e.g. Safagah to Karnak/Luxor you will get back late - the dining times are shifted to accommodate that).

 

It's all about your personal priorities - ours is itinerary, decent food and no hard sell of inches of gold/art daubs etc.

 

Run the numbers for a premium line cost compared to your mainstream line overall cost and you might be surprised by the results.

[DaveSJ711]

10 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

I've been looking at Viking but haven't pulled the trigger yet.  Those I know who cruised them speak very highly.  I think most reasonably people would put Viking, Azamara, and Oceania in the same category. 

 

But seriously, you didn't expect a legit answer, did you?

 

My wife and I took four Viking cruises in the last year.  There must be something about the line that we like.  Or perhaps it's just my Scandinavian heritage.

[Cruzaholic41]

21 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

I've been looking at Viking but haven't pulled the trigger yet.  Those I know who cruised them speak very highly.  I think most reasonably people would put Viking, Azamara, and Oceania in the same category. 

 

But seriously, you didn't expect a legit answer, did you?

Viking has become my new favorite line. They are excellent and between those 3, I’d rate them highest. Food, service, and attention to detail are excellent. None are particularly great with entertainment but what impressed me about Viking was the way they brought local talent on from each port. The meals were also tailored to the ports. The whole cruise felt more immersive than the other 2 lines. 
 

Azamara is also excellent. The biggest drawback is the tiny fleet so cruise options are limited. Plus, I’m not a big fan of those old R Class ships. Cabins are tiny. 
 

Oceania is a line I used to enjoy but ever since they became a NCL brand, things seemed to slip. The entertainment highlight was a string quartet and frankly, the quartet on HAL - Lincoln Center Stage - blew them away. My last cruise with them, on Marina, was the last I’m booking for a while. Frankly, I prefer Celebrity over Oceania. 

[Aquahound]

43 minutes ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

My wife and I took four Viking cruises in the last year.  There must be something about the line that we like.  Or perhaps it's just my Scandinavian heritage.

 

25 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Viking has become my new favorite line. They are excellent and between those 3, I’d rate them highest. Food, service, and attention to detail are excellent. None are particularly great with entertainment but what impressed me about Viking was the way they brought local talent on from each port. The meals were also tailored to the ports. The whole cruise felt more immersive than the other 2 lines. 

 

 

Thank guys.  That's very helpful.

 

DaveS, hi, I'm right across Rich Passage from your island. 

[cruisemom42]

48 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Viking has become my new favorite line. They are excellent and between those 3, I’d rate them highest. Food, service, and attention to detail are excellent. None are particularly great with entertainment but what impressed me about Viking was the way they brought local talent on from each port. The meals were also tailored to the ports. The whole cruise felt more immersive than the other 2 lines. 
 

Azamara is also excellent. The biggest drawback is the tiny fleet so cruise options are limited. Plus, I’m not a big fan of those old R Class ships. Cabins are tiny. 
 

Oceania is a line I used to enjoy but ever since they became a NCL brand, things seemed to slip. The entertainment highlight was a string quartet and frankly, the quartet on HAL - Lincoln Center Stage - blew them away. My last cruise with them, on Marina, was the last I’m booking for a while. Frankly, I prefer Celebrity over Oceania. 

 

I have considered Viking, but I find many of their itineraries to be not that inspiring. Azamara, on the other hand (which I have tried once and liked) seems to have more adventurous itineraries and quite a few overnights in port. I don't mind the smaller cabins (I travel solo).  

 

What is your opinion about Viking itineraries over the other two? What itineraries have you done with them?

[Cruzaholic41]

7 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I have considered Viking, but I find many of their itineraries to be not that inspiring. Azamara, on the other hand (which I have tried once and liked) seems to have more adventurous itineraries and quite a few overnights in port. I don't mind the smaller cabins (I travel solo).  

 

What is your opinion about Viking itineraries over the other two? What itineraries have you done with them?

My first cruise with Viking was US and Canada East Coast. I think we had 2 overnights and the sea days were the St Lawrence. I loved the product, so I booked a port intensive Scandinavian and Baltic Sea itinerary. It was called Viking Homelands. It had 3 overnights and only 1 sea day.  The cruise was absolutely top notch. 
 

It’s hard for me to put a finger on best itineraries because between these 3 lines, they seem to change them up often. My time niche is 10-15 nights, so they all fit right in. But that said, my last Azamara cruise embarked in Cape Town. I enjoyed the cruise but in hindsight, I would have preferred more than just South Africa ports. 

[cruisemom42]

33 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

My first cruise with Viking was US and Canada East Coast. I think we had 2 overnights and the sea days were the St Lawrence. I loved the product, so I booked a port intensive Scandinavian and Baltic Sea itinerary. It was called Viking Homelands. It had 3 overnights and only 1 sea day.  The cruise was absolutely top notch. 
 

It’s hard for me to put a finger on best itineraries because between these 3 lines, they seem to change them up often. My time niche is 10-15 nights, so they all fit right in. But that said, my last Azamara cruise embarked in Cape Town. I enjoyed the cruise but in hindsight, I would have preferred more than just South Africa ports. 

 

I also generally look for 10-14 night itineraries, as I'm not yet retired. Allows me to spend a few extra days either side of the cruise many times.

 

The Viking Homelands itinerary looks almost exactly like the itinerary I did on Princess a few years ago. (With exception of the more western ports in Norway).  A truly wonderful cruise, but I look for (or hope for?) something more from a premium line. 

[DaveSJ711]

40 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

My first cruise with Viking was US and Canada East Coast. I think we had 2 overnights and the sea days were the St Lawrence. I loved the product, so I booked a port intensive Scandinavian and Baltic Sea itinerary. It was called Viking Homelands. It had 3 overnights and only 1 sea day.  The cruise was absolutely top notch. 
 

 

Our first two cruises with Viking were similar to yours.  We booked a Baltic cruise that allowed us to spend a lot of time in St. Petersburg (3 nights compared to the usual 2 nights).  Then last September, we traveled from Bergen to the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, and the St. Lawrence River.  We'd been to many of these places on our own land-based trips, but it was great fun to see them by ship.

[Joebucks]

On 5/23/2020 at 7:57 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

Depending on which premium line you're talking about, there can be far more than just gratuities and drinks included.

 

For example, Oceania's regular O Life pricing includes unlimited Internet and specialty dining, all non-alcoholic beverages, airfare (or an air credit) and a choice of booze, excursions of SBC. Via your TA (or with most O loyalty levels), add comp gratuities and additional SBC. 

 

International coach airfare alone for a mass market cruise could add at least $1000-1500 pp to their bottom line. Then add the drinks, booze, tours, tips, internet, SBC. And will that mass market line give you a complimentary 14 day cruise to anywhere for every 20 cruise credits you earn?

 

Then there's the  items you don't get on a premium line like art shows, photogs, smoky casinos, thousands of passengers, amusement parks, chair hogs, self service buffets....

 

And we haven't ever talked about quality: USDA Prime meats, great bedding and cabin amenities, exceptional crew and space ratios.

 

Premium cruise lines define true value. You should try one.

 

 

You should work for their marketing department. Great presentation on all of the benefits, just with the old omitted price trick. Somewhere along the line, marketing got sophisticated enough to convince people that paying 2-4x more for stuff and bundling in extras, is a massive savings.

 

It's definitely a great cruise line. I may even sail them sooner than later.

 

The mass market model won because not everyone wants to spend and arm and a leg on stuff that has no value to them. Which is exactly what one-size fits all approaches are, no matter how much you debate them. You are correct that some people will come in and spend more than some other lines may include for a similar or better price, with a different experience. It isn't for everyone though, as you often valiantly fight for

Edited May 25, 2020 by Joebucks

[calliopecruiser]

32 minutes ago, Joebucks said:

Somewhere along the line, marketing got sophisticated enough to convince people that paying 2-4x more for stuff and bundling in extras, is a massive savings.

Do they actually market it as savings?  I didn't think so, but I don't spend too much time looking at marketing materials.  My impression, though, was that they market it as an overall better experience because those things are included, not as a less expensive way to cruise.  

 

If someone is just looking at an inexpensive way to cruise, a) there will never be a one-size-fits-all, because we all choose different types of extras to purchase, and b) it will never be an all-inclusive.  But, not everyone is concerned with finding the least expensive way to cruise (thank God we all don't want the same things in life).  For me, the best value is an all inclusive luxury line, even though it's not the cheapest (though, sailing solo, it's not far off). 

[Flatbush Flyer]

40 minutes ago, Joebucks said:

 

You should work for their marketing department. Great presentation on all of the benefits, just with the old omitted price trick. Somewhere along the line, marketing got sophisticated enough to convince people that paying 2-4x more for stuff and bundling in extras, is a massive savings.

 

It's definitely a great cruise line. I may even sail them sooner than later.

 

The mass market model won because not everyone wants to spend and arm and a leg on stuff that has no value to them. Which is exactly what one-size fits all approaches are, no matter how much you debate them. You are correct that some people will come in and spend more than some other lines may include for a similar or better price, with a different experience. It isn't for everyone though, as you often valiantly fight for

Throughout my various posts about O Life, I have often remarked that the "cruise only" price and the O Life price minus the air and SBC perks are the same.

The real value of O Life is evident if you select the excursions instead of SBC since you can get double $ value by selecting $199 tours instead of $100 tours (and the O Life tours chosen count for minimum purchases to get 25% off YWYW >$199 tours). On a long cruise, that combo can save you $1k+.

 

I constantly research the "net daily rate" (all required costs and desired options door to door for my trips) and impact of loyalty level add-ins of varying cruise lines and, FOR OUR TRAVEL PROFILE, no other cruise line comes close as regards "bang for your buck."

 

Want a "bare bones" experience for a one week cruise from a "drive to" port AND you're not doing tours or specialty restaurants or using internet and you don't drink? Oceania will still give you an outstanding experience but you could find something to your liking in the mass market at a lower price (but with lower quality).

 

[SteveH2508]

We keep a spreadsheet where we track every cost on each of the cruises we have taken. It quickly  became clear that our onboard spend on a mainstream line was at least as much as the base fare. We then started to check out other premium lines and worked out the cost per day for us. The difference in cost was small but the better experience more than made up for it. If you can find some deals (they are out there though this is an unusual time), you might find that the premium lines actually work out cheaper than the mainstream nickle-and-dime lines when you reckon in everything.

[Flatbush Flyer]

14 minutes ago, SteveH2508 said:

We keep a spreadsheet where we track every cost on each of the cruises we have taken. It quickly  became clear that our onboard spend on a mainstream line was at least as much as the base fare. We then started to check out other premium lines and worked out the cost per day for us. The difference in cost was small but the better experience more than made up for it. If you can find some deals (they are out there though this is an unusual time), you might find that the premium lines actually work out cheaper than the mainstream nickle-and-dime lines when you reckon in everything.

Exactly what I have been preaching for years and using what I call the "net daily rate" comparison math (instead of just cabin price) is a real "eye opener" for folks who regularly sail upper mass market lines like Celebrity, HAL or Viking.

 

And this is not an Oceania commercial! Check out Azamara's "net daily rate" too. And FWIW, do check out the loyalty level perks. For example, 20 cruise credits gets a 14 day cruise to anywhere on Oceania. After only a few cruises get comp gratuities and decent SBC. I trust that Azamara has something similar.

 

This "net daily rate" math works as well for comparisons to luxury lines. For example, take Oceania and add every added cost option to match most of what is available on a similar Regent itinerary..... Do the math and be sitting down when you look at the bottom lines!

Edited May 25, 2020 by Flatbush Flyer

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Throughout my various posts about O Life, I have often remarked that the "cruise only" price and the O Life price minus the air and SBC perks are the same.

The real value of O Life is evident if you select the excursions instead of SBC since you can get double $ value by selecting $199 tours instead of $100 tours (and the O Life tours chosen count for minimum purchases to get 25% off YWYW >$199 tours). On a long cruise, that combo can save you $1k+.

 

I constantly research the "net daily rate" (all required costs and desired options door to door for my trips) and impact of loyalty level add-ins of varying cruise lines and, FOR OUR TRAVEL PROFILE, no other cruise line comes close as regards "bang for your buck."

 

Want a "bare bones" experience for a one week cruise from a "drive to" port AND you're not doing tours or specialty restaurants or using internet and you don't drink? Oceania will still give you an outstanding experience but you could find something to your liking in the mass market at a lower price (but with lower quality).

 

 

One of the problems that I (and perhaps others) have with your Oceania posts is that you invariably choose such loaded words -- for example implying that those who do not choose to cruise Oceania or the like want a "bare bones experience" or "lower quality" -- when in fact they may just be looking for other things. Or that we are unable to tot up the actual costs on our own and decide whether or not Oceania has value for us.

 

Oceania is not a particularly good fit for me as a cruiser, with the exception of the food and the fact that I like smaller ships. But:

• O is not a good value proposition for solo cruisers. Unlike some of the luxury lines, they rarely offer anything less than the full "solo supplement" making the per diem for a solo traveler difficult to justify, when the cost is often lower on a ship that includes more.
• O Life is not good value for cruisers like me who a) do not use the ship shore excursions, b) tend to use Frequent Flyer points for travel, and c) do not drink a lot. I do like to have wine with dinner, but other lines actually include that, while O does not. 
• I do not place a high value on entertainment overall, but I do like good lectures that are not "canned talks" but are from lecturers who have created them based on the itinerary. From what I have gleaned on the O boards, I would almost certainly be disappointed here.

 

So while I consider myself a cruiser in search of more than a "bare bones" experience, I have difficulty seeing the "value" of Oceania for me. I would truly like to experience the onboard dining, but at double the cost of two passengers who share a cabin, I can instead enjoy some spectacularly fine meals ashore at the various destinations to which I'm cruising -- which is probably more my cup of tea anyway.

 

Edited May 25, 2020 by cruisemom42

[SteveH2508]

The take away from this thread is that it is an individual decision based on circumstances, cruise preferences and indulgences, travel requirements, timings etc..

 

Today we have booked a 35 day Cruise and Maritime voyage for next September (premium it is not - see upthread). The price was right, the itinerary was right and it sails from London. We can walk to pick up the transfer coach at Victoria if we felt so inclined. We go in tailoring our expectations for the onboard experience accordingly.

 

It would be a very dull world if we all liked the same things!

[Flatbush Flyer]

8 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

One of the problems that I (and perhaps others) have with your Oceania posts is that you invariably choose such loaded words -- for example implying that those who do not choose to cruise Oceania or the like want a "bare bones experience" or "lower quality" -- when in fact they may just be looking for other things. Or that we are unable to tot up the actual costs on our own and decide whether or not Oceania has value for us.

 

Oceania is not a particularly good fit for me as a cruiser, with the exception of the food and the fact that I like smaller ships. But:

• O is not a good value proposition for solo cruisers. Unlike some of the luxury lines, they rarely offer anything less than the full "solo supplement" making the per diem for a solo traveler difficult to justify, when the cost is often lower on a ship that includes more.
• O Life is not good value for cruisers like me who a) do not use the ship shore excursions, b) tend to use Frequent Flyer points for travel, and c) do not drink a lot. I do like to have wine with dinner, but other lines actually include that, while O does not. 
• I do not place a high value on entertainment overall, but I do like good lectures that are not "canned talks" but are from lecturers who have created them based on the itinerary. From what I have gleaned on the O boards, I would almost certainly be disappointed here.

 

So while I consider myself a cruiser in search of more than a "bare bones" experience, I have difficulty seeing the "value" of Oceania for me. I would truly like to experience the onboard dining, but at double the cost of two passengers who share a cabin, I can instead enjoy some spectacularly fine meals ashore at the various destinations to which I'm cruising -- which is probably more my cup of tea anyway.

 

No argument from me regarding your profile other than to point out that, in general, O's lecturers are excellent (many ex-profs specifically chosen for the itinerary. 

FWIW, we usually mix ship and private tours since the combo I mentioned above can result in certain exclusive ship tours being less costly than what I could DIY.

 

happy cruising.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Flatbush Flyer

[Aquahound]

1 minute ago, SteveH2508 said:

 

It would be a very dull world if we all liked the same things!

 

I agree, and that's why earlier, I pointed out there are several lines in the intermediate zone...whether higher or lower, they're still intermediate between Carnival and Crystal.  Unfortunately, some seem to think there's only 1 line in existence and everything else is crap.  

[LHT28]

I think some do more harm than good  to Oceania  with all their  cheerleading 🙄

 

 We love Oceania   but they are not for everyone

We  are not looking for  large ships  with lots of PAX   & yes  they are more expensive than some other lines

We do our own tours  ..we do not drink much  but DH is allowed to bring on spirits to enjoy in the cabin  unlike some other lines

 We enjoy the ambience  of the smaller ships   some may call it boring

 

People should  choose  a line that works best for them & their pocketbook

 Don't rule out the Premium or Luxury  lines  based on price   ..you might be pleased with the experience  or maybe not 😉

JMO

 

[LHT28]

1 hour ago, calliopecruiser said:

 For me, the best value is an all inclusive luxury line, even though it's not the cheapest (though, sailing solo, it's not far off). 

But  Crystal is not ALL inclusive   they do not include excursions

I would say semi inclusive  is a more apt term

JMO

[LHT28]

28 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Oceania is not a particularly good fit for me as a cruiser, with the exception of the food and the fact that I like smaller ships. But:

• O is not a good value proposition for solo cruisers. Unlike some of the luxury lines, they rarely offer anything less than the full "solo supplement" making the per diem for a solo traveler difficult to justify, when the cost is often lower on a ship that includes more.
• O Life is not good value for cruisers like me who a) do not use the ship shore excursions, b) tend to use Frequent Flyer points for travel, and c) do not drink a lot. I do like to have wine with dinner, but other lines actually include that, while O does not. 

 

I have mentioned this to you before   O does offer  some cruises  with lower SS   but  they may not be where you want to go at the  time

You are well travelled  so you probably have been to most places

 No need  to take the O Life perk  or the included air

We often just do cruise only rate

Take your own wine & pay the corkage  or just have  a glass of wine  from the menu ..buy a bottle on the ship

you have options

We  went on a luxury line  ..the wine included  was  not that good 

I would rather purchase some thing I like than put up with mediocre  wine because it is included

 

Enjoy whatever cruise you choose  ..there are many options out there

 

[calliopecruiser]

33 minutes ago, LHT28 said:

But  Crystal is not ALL inclusive   they do not include excursions

I would say semi inclusive  is a more apt term

Eh, almost everything is included, so "semi" (half) is also not right.  Excursions, in my opinion, are not part of a cruise (and that's why I have not looked at Regent, who like to pretend they are).  Excursions are part of touring the land, not cruising from port to port, and they have absolutely no bearing on the actual cruise experience (i.e. on the cruise ship).    In my opinion, expecting excursions to be part of "all inclusive" would be like expecting retail shopping to be included -- both may enhance your vacation, but neither are really part of the cruise.

 

Still, there are a few things that aren't included: Some top-flight alcohols, and a few items of exclusive sushi aren't included; photos and some private classes for things like golf or dancing also aren't included.   I've known a few people who have ordered specialty wines off the not-included menu for special treats, but as I am not a wine-drinker, I really didn't see the value for me.  I can still get my cocktails and 20 year old tawny port included. 

Edited May 25, 2020 by calliopecruiser