31 days on HAL vs 14 on Princess

[Mary229]

4 hours ago, DCThunder said:

The 31 days in South America was sold as a 31 day BA>FLL or A BA>Santiago, and then a Santiago>FLL.  We had about 1000 do the full 31 days and 800 do each of the two legs.

You can do the grand voyage and that is divided into a 35 and a 31 day segment.  

[Mary229]

@cruisemom42  you can do the same sort of search sorted for duration here on Cruise Critic thereby not limiting yourself to HAL choices and perhaps discovering another line you had not considered 

[cruisemom42]

32 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

@cruisemom42  you can do the same sort of search sorted for duration here on Cruise Critic thereby not limiting yourself to HAL choices and perhaps discovering another line you had not considered 

 

After my Westerdam experience, I am pretty keen on trying Oceania (which will happen in August; 17 days Iceland and Greenland) and then will be on Azamara in October on BTB Med cruises. I have sailed Azamara once before but it was a shorter cruise in order to get to Cuba during their brief window.

 

Of the two, my current feeling based on reviews and comments on their boards is that Azamara is more destination-focused and O is better for food (although their itinerary for the Iceland and Greenland cruise is nice: 4 stops in Greenland and can stop in Bar Harbor, being a smaller ship).

 

Right now Azamara is experiencing some teething problems under their new owners and as a result is offering some quite good fares on what I considered interesting itineraries with smaller stops that HAL no longer offers regularly.

 

[bennybear]

1 hour ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

After my Westerdam experience, I am pretty keen on trying Oceania (which will happen in August; 17 days Iceland and Greenland) and then will be on Azamara in October on BTB Med cruises. I have sailed Azamara once before but it was a shorter cruise in order to get to Cuba during their brief window.

 

Of the two, my current feeling based on reviews and comments on their boards is that Azamara is more destination-focused and O is better for food (although their itinerary for the Iceland and Greenland cruise is nice: 4 stops in Greenland and can stop in Bar Harbor, being a smaller ship).

 

Right now Azamara is experiencing some teething problems under their new owners and as a result is offering some quite good fares on what I considered interesting itineraries with smaller stops that HAL no longer offers regularly.

 

Will love to hear your opinion as it is always balanced.  

[Mary229]

1 hour ago, cruisemom42 said:

After my Westerdam experience, I am pretty keen on trying Oceania

I had exactly same series of events in 2017. the HAL ship was a mess and so I chose Oceania.  As a young person we loved NCL and were excited to give Oceana a try.  I came away very unhappy. I came crawling back.   I am still looking for a new home which is looking more like a tour company than a cruise ship