Are we seeing the first signs of changes for the future and were some lines prescient with respect to the future post COVID?

[SelectSys]

So one of the worst offenders in terms of cruise catalogs coming to our house is Viking.  They must bombard our house with a catalog at least once every other month.  In looking at the catalog, I am starting to see an expansion of their footprint in terms of ships and locations.  Their new expedition ships and large format river cruise ship for the Mississippi look well suited for the post COVID era.

 

Do you think Viking was "ahead of curve" on anticipating these changes?  Do you see other lines as being innovative with respect to the likely post-COVID world?  Will the post-COVID world lead to an increased bifurcation between mass lines and luxury lines?  Will the mass market lines pay the biggest price in terms of other lines skimming off their most profitable passengers or will the "ship within a ship" concept be enough?

[Flatbush Flyer]

24 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

So one of the worst offenders in terms of cruise catalogs coming to our house is Viking.  They must bombard our house with a catalog at least once every other month.  In looking at the catalog, I am starting to see an expansion of their footprint in terms of ships and locations.  Their new expedition ships and large format river cruise ship for the Mississippi look well suited for the post COVID era.

 

Do you think Viking was "ahead of curve" on anticipating these changes?  Do you see other lines as being innovative with respect to the likely post-COVID world?  Will the post-COVID world lead to an increased bifurcation between mass lines and luxury lines?  Will the mass market lines pay the biggest price in terms of other lines skimming off their most profitable passengers or will the "ship within a ship" concept be enough?

IMO, "ship within a ship" (to experience a wannabe premium/luxury cruise) is like going to Las Vegas to see "New York" or "Paris." It's just not the "real thing" which, of course (with good planning/negotiation) need not cost much more.

 

As far as ocean cruising is concerned, the only forward looking move by Viking has been the "expedition" ship effort. Otherwise, all they've done is to try to recreate (with questionable success - particularly when it comes to food) the premium experience on lines like Oceania (or even Azamara).

 

As far as other lines' Covid forecasting (whether intentional or not), the non-Viking longstanding premium/luxury lines, with small ships/great space ratios, lower passenger loads and a cruiser demographic less likely to be negatively impacted by Covid economics (including the introduction of higher fares to make up for lower passenger targets adjusted for Covid restrictions), were already best positioned for a post-Covid cruising world.

 

FWIW: we were on O's Nautica in February. From extra-vigilant embarkation (with "where have you been?" boarding denials) to already existent food safety restrictions (e.g., no touching the buffet foods) to passenger temp checks at each port and immediate quarantine of passengers taken ill, etc., the only significant thing missing was a lower passenger load to assure adequate social distancing (on a ship that already had a terrific space ratio for its <700 passengers) and the mask/distancing/vaccination requirements.

 

As for the future, O's ships already have Covid refitting underway (expanded medical facilities, new HVAC filtering et al.,) and are at the forefront of adjusting for the CDC demands/expectations.

 

Will the O passengers "return" (even if only ship tours are allowed)? Absolutely. Just look at current booking through the fourth quarter of 2022. Pretty much every one of their longer/most desirable itineraries are already "waitlisted" thanks in part to other cruisers who are ditching the mass market behemoths' "ship within a ship" and are looking for a far better/safer experience.

[SelectSys]

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

MO, "ship within a ship" (to experience a wannabe premium/luxury cruise) is like going to Las Vegas to see "New York" or "Paris." It's just not the "real thing" which, of course (with good planning/negotiation) need not cost much more.

 

Any tips on obtaining these cabins at a discount?

 

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

As far as ocean cruising is concerned, the only forward looking move by Viking has been the "expedition" ship effort.

 

That caught my eye in the catalog.  Also, the Mississippi river ship seems much larger than their equivalent European cruisers.  This probably improves the economics for a US flagged ship.

 

Something certainly has driven the Viking diversification.  Perhaps they view the adjacent opportunities as yielding more success than simply increasing the traditional river fleet.

 

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

As far as other lines' Covid forecasting (whether intentional or not), the non-Viking longstanding premium/luxury lines, with small ships/great space ratios, lower passenger loads and a cruiser demographic less likely to be negatively impacted by Covid economics

 

I think the size of their ships might also be easier to restart than some of the larger ships requiring big crews.

 

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Pretty much every one of their longer/most desirable itineraries are already "waitlisted" thanks in part to other cruisers who are ditching the mass market behemoths' "ship within a ship" and are looking for a far better/safer experience.

 

This will certainly be true in the short run.  

 

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, SelectSys said:

That caught my eye in the catalog.  Also, the Mississippi river ship seems much larger than their equivalent European cruisers.  This probably improves the economics for a US flagged ship.

Nope, this is because on the European rivers you are height restricted to about two decks, and have to retract the wheelhouse for many bridges.  The Mississippi ships are bigger, because they can be bigger.

 

1 hour ago, SelectSys said:

I think the size of their ships might also be easier to restart than some of the larger ships requiring big crews.

When the large ships restart, with reduced capacity, they will also have reduced crew (less crew needed for less passengers, and also the need to spread crew out.

[Flatbush Flyer]

2 hours ago, SelectSys said:

....Any tips on obtaining these cabins at a discount?

Perhaps you didn't understand the point I was trying to make about "comparison" pricing (rather than "discounted" cabin pricing).

 

IMO, cabin prices are less a measure of a "deal" than is "what do you get for that price?" For example, an upper level mass market line may charge $1500/person for a 10+ day Asian cruise w/balcony while Oceania might charge $3000/person. But, that O price includes intercontinental economy airfare (e.g., $1200+\- per person value), internet, beverages, a choice of excursions, booze or SBC, specialty restaurants AND (depending on loyalty level), gratuities, spa credit and additional SBC.

Thus, the right intercontinental itinerary (air being necessary) and usual (for many of us) cruise offering preferences on an O ship may cost the same as (or less than) a Celebrity or HAL or Viking cruise (where you pay extra for items incl airfare) and also get you far better food and service.

 

But, if it's discounted Oceania cabin pricing you want, your best bet is to book onboard, which gets you a price break, lower price match guarantee and added current cruise SBC. With that onboard booking, you then have 30 days to transfer to a TA and the right TA can add perks including commission sharing (which can be a sizable "piece of change"). 

 

Your first O cruise (thus, not onboard)? Find a TA who is a top seller of Oceania cruises (O's Connoisseurs Club). They'll have access to occasional "quiet sales" and "new cruiser incentives," etc. And many will share commissions with you. Note too that O (like most lines) have holiday sales as well.

 

But, do know one important thing: O's best itineraries may often book full within days of being announced. 

 

Finally, while I am certainly not suggesting that anyone cruise a particular line for it's "loyalty program," do understand that Oceania's has significant perks far beyond some free drinks or a specialty dinner. Gratuities, a scale of increasing SBC, onboard purchase discounts, and the occasional (20 cruise credit) two week comp cruise all add up.  

 

Edited January 2, 2021 by Flatbush Flyer

[SelectSys]

41 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Nope, this is because on the European rivers you are height restricted to about two decks, and have to retract the wheelhouse for many bridges.  The Mississippi ships are bigger, because they can be bigger.

 

That is a good point in terms bridge height being a constraint.  Lock size may also be an issue to be considered.  

 

I do think the same trend on ocean cruise ships may be present on rivers as well based on the perception that large ships have more profitability.

 

I saw that a 600 passenger river boat is or has been introduced to China.

https://www.travelpulse.com/news/cruise/victoria-sabrina-poised-to-become-worlds-largest-river-cruise-ship-in-2020.html

[SelectSys]

43 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Perhaps you didn't understand the point I was trying to make about "comparison" pricing (rather than "discounted" cabin pricing).

 

Thanks for this clarification.  I understand more clearly your point.

[getting older slowly]

O  I think I get it.... O  is all about   having the Airfare included.....

 

Which O k  when Cruising Internationally......

 

Also some people   might like the ship within a ship.... ( they seam to fill the cabins )

 

O  remember everybody is different...  which is just as well...

 

O and one other thing  O only represents 0.5% of cruise passengers...   

[Cruzaholic41]

Who needs an Oceania brochure when you have FlatBushFlyer. 🙄

 

What’s this thread about again?  If I knew it was going to be an advertisement of one of the worst lines I’ve sailed (Oceania), I would have never opened it. 

[Flatbush Flyer]

1 hour ago, getting older slowly said:

O  I think I get it.... O  is all about   having the Airfare included.....

 

Which O k  when Cruising Internationally......

 

Also some people   might like the ship within a ship.... ( they seam to fill the cabins )

 

O  remember everybody is different...  which is just as well...

 

O and one other thing  O only represents 0.5% of cruise passengers...   

Actually, it's good if you're not flying at all. Then you just ask for the air credit -basically another discount while still allowing the O Life choices.

Note as well that other premium/luxury lines have numerous and varied inclusions not found on mass market lines. Do the research and you may find post-Covid deals on those lines too.

Most importantly, however, is that the space ratios and passenger loads on the smaller ships of premium/luxury lines are best suited to a post-Covid environment. After all, would you rather be taking chances with hundreds or thousands of fellow passengers.

[clo]

1 hour ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Who needs an Oceania brochure when you have FlatBushFlyer. 🙄

 

Okay, so he has a bias. But I've learned a lot from him.

[Heidi13]

7 hours ago, SelectSys said:

So one of the worst offenders in terms of cruise catalogs coming to our house is Viking.  They must bombard our house with a catalog at least once every other month.  In looking at the catalog, I am starting to see an expansion of their footprint in terms of ships and locations.  Their new expedition ships and large format river cruise ship for the Mississippi look well suited for the post COVID era.

 

Do you think Viking was "ahead of curve" on anticipating these changes?  Do you see other lines as being innovative with respect to the likely post-COVID world?  Will the post-COVID world lead to an increased bifurcation between mass lines and luxury lines?  Will the mass market lines pay the biggest price in terms of other lines skimming off their most profitable passengers or will the "ship within a ship" concept be enough?

 

Viking is most definitely not your typical Cruise Line and most definitely do not follow industry norms, as they don't even belong to the CLIA conglomerate.

 

First and foremost, Viking is a private company, so the management team is not driven to provide money for shareholder dividends. The owner is also a highly experienced luxury cruise line executive, who has worked in senior executive positions since the early 1970's. He was the CEO of Royal Viking Line, until the Line was purchased by NCL's parent company. Sadly, few of the mega ship lines, who own most of the luxury/premium brands have senior executives with close to this level of experience in the industry.

 

With his experience in the industry Torstein Hagen is well ahead of the curve, as he knows his market and more importantly knows what they want. They don't try to be something for everyone. They are totally honest that the ships aren't kid friendly and while pax like our own grandkids, we generally have no desire to cruise with other people's kids or grandkids. Therefore, the minimum age is 18 on date of departure. The other luxury/premium Lines accept kids. Viking also has no casino, photographers, etc.

 

They also conduct market surveys of past passengers to determine the acceptance of potential new initiatives. The first of 6 Ocean ships was launched in 2015 and by 2018, they had ordered 10 more ocean ships for a total of 16 by 2027. One new ocean ship being delivered in April 21 and 2 new ocean ships in 2022. Pax were requesting Arctic, Antarctic, Great Lakes, US Rivers, so by 2018/19 they introduced those new initiatives, with operations starting in 2022.

 

The Mississippi River ship is US Flagged, so they have set up a joint venture with a US company. Many cruises sold out quickly, same with the Expedition ships.

 

In addition to the US joint venture, they have one planned with a Chinese company. They are providing 1 ship initially, which will be re-flagged to the China flag to carry Chinese Nationals on coastal cruises. This is planned to expand to 4 ships in a few years.

 

On Dec 8th they posted the 2023 World Cruise on their newest ship Viking Neptune. More than 2 yrs out it is almost sold out, so they have no incentive to offer discount pricing. If you want discount pricing with Viking, suggest checking out their Trans-Atlantics, which have lower per diem pricing.

 

They also have negatives, which mega ship line pax may not find acceptable. Their payment in full date can be a year in advance of departure. On some of the Explorer cruises they are requesting over a year in advance, but it is negotiable.

 

Post COVID, Viking has already completed the changes to ventilation, table spacing and installing a PCR Testing Lab, with capacity to test the entire compliment daily. They did seek input from CDC, but also considered other sources and standards. You can check out the post COVID plans on the Chairman's updates on Viking TV.

 

Since we have no desire to sail on mega ships, or even small ships owned by mega ship companies, I prefer not to comment. We haven't been on mass market in 5 yrs.

 

Regarding the ship within a ship, or a return to multiple classes, I guess some like it, but we prefer the same standard throughout the entire ship. Also, when you leave your 1st Class bubble you are back in steerage class.

 

If you are considering a cruise from the Viking brochures, suggest checking out the Viking Ocean Board.

[SelectSys]

24 minutes ago, Heidi13 said:

First and foremost, Viking is a private company, so the management team is not driven to provide money for shareholder dividends.

 

Didn't know that.  Being a private company does afford them with flexibility as long as they have reasonable access to other capital markets.  

 

25 minutes ago, Heidi13 said:

With his experience in the industry Torstein Hagen is well ahead of the curve, as he knows his market and more importantly knows what they want

 

just spent a few minutes reading about Mr. Hagen.  His story is certainly impressive from a business perspective.

 

33 minutes ago, Heidi13 said:

If you are considering a cruise from the Viking brochures, suggest checking out the Viking Ocean Board.

 

Not really, it was just receiving their brochure that triggered the thought of this thread and which lines are thinking ahead or are they still simply reacting.

[Roz]

18 hours ago, SelectSys said:

So one of the worst offenders in terms of cruise catalogs coming to our house is Viking.  They must bombard our house with a catalog at least once every other month. 

 

You only receive one every other month?  Come to my mailbox.  I get at least one a week. 

[ReneeFLL]

On 1/2/2021 at 8:01 PM, Cruzaholic41 said:

Who needs an Oceania brochure when you have FlatBushFlyer. 🙄

 

What’s this thread about again?  If I knew it was going to be an advertisement of one of the worst lines I’ve sailed (Oceania), I would have never opened it. 

Obviously you didn't add anything to the thread.🙄  He was giving info which is what CC is about.

[cruisemom42]

On 1/2/2021 at 1:16 PM, SelectSys said:

Will the post-COVID world lead to an increased bifurcation between mass lines and luxury lines?  Will the mass market lines pay the biggest price in terms of other lines skimming off their most profitable passengers or will the "ship within a ship" concept be enough?

 

I'm not sure if any of us are qualified to determine (at least not yet) which cruise lines may be ahead of or behind the curve until it is clear what the post-COVID future of cruising will be like.

 

I already was seeing increased space between mass market and premium/luxury lines prior to COVID, particularly as I am very sensitive to ship size. With HAL now having divested many smaller ships, I don't think any of the major mass market lines (with exception of Princess' one R-class ship) have what I would consider any smaller ships left, and HAL only has two "medium sized" ones.

 

This creates a decision point for many. If you cannot afford the premium/luxury lines, then you have little choice but to stay with the mass market/large ship model lines. Others, who have been "on the fence," may well commit to cruising on the premium/luxury brands going forward (assuming they still exist).  

 

I am not a fan of the "ship within a ship" model, for several reasons. First, it doesn't seem efficient for the mass market lines to try to create two different environments on a single ship. Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on doing what they do well -- e.g., keeping a large number of passengers fed, housed, entertained and -- for the most part -- satisfied? 

 

Second, I heartily oppose the idea that areas of the ship should be off limits to all except certain classes of passengers. Leisure cruising -- as it was re-invented in the 1970s -- was geared toward getting rid of those stuffy "class/caste" systems of the old ocean liners. Once outside their cabin (whether suite or inside), everyone had access to the same amenities and same treatment. Why are we re-creating the caste system now?

 

Third, I suspect the market for "ship within a ship" is somewhat limited. As another poster already said, why pay more to be in a small luxury enclave on a mass market ship -- the minute you leave the enclave, you are STILL on a mass market ship. But then again, some people apparently want to have access to the more glitzy entertainments of a large ship. And maybe there are some who will feel their status is elevated by the opportunity to sail in the "luxury boxes"...

 

I will agree that Viking certainly seems to have a strong vision with regard to ocean cruising, and they have bet heavily on it. Their ships look beautiful and are a nice size for my requirements. However, I find their itineraries to be relatively un-adventurous, do not like having to book/pay far in advance, and also find their pricing to be solo-unfriendly.  But more power to them if they can fill all of their new fleet with passengers month after month....

 

 

[sverigecruiser]

6 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Third, I suspect the market for "ship within a ship" is somewhat limited. As another poster already said, why pay more to be in a small luxury enclave on a mass market ship -- the minute you leave the enclave, you are STILL on a mass market ship. But then again, some people apparently want to have access to the more glitzy entertainments of a large ship. And maybe there are some who will feel their status is elevated by the opportunity to sail in the "luxury boxes"...

 

 

 

One of the best things for me with the "ship within a ship" is that I can escape the more luxurious area when I want the anonymity of a mass market line. I don't need, or want, the pampering and personal service all the time so for me it's perfect to be able to get the anonymity of a mass market line when I prefer that. I don't really care about the big shows and I will never use a waterslide on a cruise but I still prefer a bit ship. The ship doesn't feel too big for me when I'm in the Haven or in the Yacht Club but it might do if I never had the option to go to a less crowded and more quite place. 

[navybankerteacher]

On 1/2/2021 at 8:01 PM, Cruzaholic41 said:

Who needs an Oceania brochure when you have FlatBushFlyer. 🙄

 

What’s this thread about again?  If I knew it was going to be an advertisement of one of the worst lines I’ve sailed (Oceania), I would have never opened it. 

It would be interesting to hear a bit about the lines you’ve sailed which you found to be better than Oceania.

[clo]

1 hour ago, cruisemom42 said:

Second, I heartily oppose the idea that areas of the ship should be off limits to all except certain classes of. Leisure cruising -- as it was re-invented in the 1970s -- was geared toward getting rid of those stuffy "class/caste" systems of the old ocean liners. Once outside their cabin (whether suite or inside), everyone had access to the same amenities and same treatment. Why are we re-creating the caste system now?

 

Totally agree.

[SelectSys]

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

This creates a decision point for many. If you cannot afford the premium/luxury lines, then you have little choice but to stay with the mass market/large ship model lines. Others, who have been "on the fence," may well commit to cruising on the premium/luxury brands going forward (assuming they still exist).  

 

I think that decision point has already been in place for quite some time.  My bias is towards more travel than less so I have yet to go up market in terms of cruise lines.  Same holds true for air travel and lodging as well.  

 

I guess the #1 alternative is to not cruise at all and spend your money elsewhere if the value isn't their for you.

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Why are we re-creating the caste system now?

 

Fundamentally it's about trying to maximize revenue/profits like always.  I also believe the "caste system"  has been coming for some time.  Special restaurants, special lounges, roped off areas at the pool, priority boarding/departure times, etc.  The ship within a ship is simply an extension of this already existing behavior.  For some  passengers, "the ship within a ship"  might be worth it if they enjoy the big ship amenities and/or are travelling with younger passengers.

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

I will agree that Viking certainly seems to have a strong vision with regard to ocean cruising, and they have bet heavily on it...  But more power to them if they can fill all of their new fleet with passengers month after month

 

Never thought about it much until receiving their last mailer, but I tend to agree with you after learning a bit more about the company and its leader.

 

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

[navybankerteacher]

9 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

...

 

Second, I heartily oppose the idea that areas of the ship should be off limits to all except certain classes of passengers. Leisure cruising -- as it was re-invented in the 1970s -- was geared toward getting rid of those stuffy "class/caste" systems of the old ocean liners. Once outside their cabin (whether suite or inside), everyone had access to the same amenities and same treatment. Why are we re-creating the caste system now?

'''

 

9 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

 

 

 

The emergence of the "ship within a ship" concept was a virtually unavoidable (but nonetheless regrettable) result of the growth of cruising.  The lines wanted to fill more bunks -- to do that they needed to hold down fares to bring the cost cruising down to levels affordable by more people --- to bring fares down they had to cut costs -- to cut costs they had to reduce expenses -- you cannot reduce expenses without reducing what those expenses pay for - the net result is that what the basic fare buys is no longer what will satisfy that part of the customer base which wants, and is willing to pay for, a QUALITY (rather than an inexpensive) cruise experience.

 

The sad result is that the one class cruise experience cannot be offered to everybody.  The logical outgrowth is the return of "one class" cruising --- but offered to those people willing to pay the fares asked by Crystal, Azamera, Oceania and others --- leaving the likes of HAL, Princess, and Celebrity to drift down to the levels of Carnival and RCL - except for those willing to pay a premium for the ship within a ship - to get good meals, good service and uncrowded space.

 

The interesting thing is that the premium those people are willing to pay might raise the cost of their mass market cruise to close to what they would pay to sail on a one-class premium line.

[SelectSys]

16 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

The sad result is that the one class cruise experience cannot be offered to everybody.  The logical outgrowth is the return of "one class" cruising --- but offered to those people willing to pay the fares asked by Crystal, Azamera, Oceania and others --- leaving the likes of HAL, Princess, and Celebrity to drift down to the levels of Carnival and RCL - except for those willing to pay a premium for the ship within a ship - to get good meals, good service and uncrowded space.

 

This doesn't necessarily seem like a bad/sad thing to me.  It appears, at least it did pre-COVID, that passengers had many options and choices to find an experience that met their experience needs and budget.  I am happy that I have choice in cruise lines just like I have choice in hotels which also possess vastly different amenity levels and services based on price.  

 

25 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

The interesting thing is that the premium those people are willing to pay might raise the cost of their mass market cruise to close to what they would pay to sail on a one-class premium line

 

It could be that those wanting the "ship within a ship" experience something that isn't available on a traditional luxury cruise line.  Perhaps they want to drive go karts during the day with their kids and have fine dining in the evening.  Maybe they want to get the reserved seats for the big theater production shows.  

 

What I am really wondering is what will come next in terms of cruise travel innovation.

[cruisemom42]

7 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

It appears, at least it did pre-COVID, that passengers had many options and choices to find an experience that met their experience needs and budget.  I am happy that I have choice in cruise lines just like I have choice in hotels which also possess vastly different amenity levels and services based on price.

 

I know this isn't the forward-looking response you're asking for, but I have to challenge your assertion that there are "many options" available for all cruisers.

 

If one is a solo cruiser who enjoys sailing on small ships, one has dwindling options. For me, small ship cruising is rapidly becoming a very expensive trip, relative to other types of travel.  And I am still at the stage of "wanderlust" that I would rather take several less expensive trips annually than one big blowout. 

 

So while I will continue to look for the odd bargain fare for a cruise that meets my criteria of ship size, itinerary and value, I expect cruises to feature less in my post-COVID travel plans.

 

[navybankerteacher]

16 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

 

..

 

Maybe they want to get the reserved seats for the big theater production shows.  

...

Of course, the ability of some to get reserved seats mean that the opportunity of others to have a wide selection of seats is restricted - or even to get ANY seat without rushing into the theatre early.  It is similar to Carnival's "Faster to the Fun" program -- the line was only able to sell expedited boarding by unavoidably delaying the boarding of others.

[Cruzaholic41]

1 hour ago, SelectSys said:

 

It could be that those wanting the "ship within a ship" experience something that isn't available on a traditional luxury cruise line. 

Bingo!  I’ve done the ship-within-a-ship a few times. The biggest benefit is getting an upgraded experience but still having access to great games, amenities, and entertainment. It’s perfect for those who are willing to pay a little more but are still young at heart. I’m a very active person who still likes to get up and dance to great music.  Unfortunately, premium and luxury lines tend to be VERY lacking in those areas. 
 

But to be clear, that’s what I look for in Caribbean cruises of less than 10 days. On longer exotic cruises, I lean toward premium because I like to immerse my cruise experience with my port experience. For this, I have found that Viking Ocean is my favorite. On board meals and shows are based on the port that day, which is a really nice touch.