Silver Dawn Review

[ak1004]

We just returned from the Dawn and I posted a review - https://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=710046

 

We had a great trip, although with few minor issues, and this sailing confirmed my current take: maybe before Covid SS and O were in different leagues, now I consider them comparable. SS might be a small step up, but a very small one, and I'm not sure the price difference is justified to me.

 

SS is a good value for people who drink decent amounts of alcohol, use exclusively ship excursions, need cabins larger than 250 sqft and take full advantage of the butler services. 

 

I know that not everyone would agree, but this is my opinion.

 

Questions are welcome.

[Gourmet Gal]

Nice review and mirrors my experience on Moon last year except it sounds like food was better on your cruise.  BTW, interesting food and beverage pairing - Caviar and Cappuccino!

Thanks for posting a review.

[Brad1185]

Great review. Wish the would ditch the jackets. Agree the internet needs a boost. On Viking we get speeds in the 60’s. 
 

‘We’re giving SS a try in October but I’m thinking like you said SS is probably not that much better than O with a considerable price difference. 
 

You would think SS would really deliver that wow factor but it sounds like though it’s not bad SS lacks the little extra that apparently is not there. 
 

 

 

[Brad1185]

Forgot to add they seem to have no shortage of foie gras and beef tartar. Seems like it’s on every menu. 

[Host Jazzbeau]

You are very clear about the areas where you feel Silversea has slipped since Covid, but your description of Oceania seems stuck in the past.  Posters on the Oceania forum feel that it has slipped very badly post-Covid.  So that would still leave the current experience on Silversea a step up from the current experience on Oceania.

[mancunian]

16 minutes ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

You are very clear about the areas where you feel Silversea has slipped since Covid, but your description of Oceania seems stuck in the past.  Posters on the Oceania forum feel that it has slipped very badly post-Covid.  So that would still leave the current experience on Silversea a step up from the current experience on Oceania.

We have been on the Oceania Vista this year and it certainly in our view was excellent and can give SS a tun for the money having also done Moon and Dawn this year.  These are the only two cruiselines that interest us these days.  We have done just under 70 cruises altogether.   I am afraid the difference is about food and price which swings in Oceania’s favour

[ak1004]

6 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

You are very clear about the areas where you feel Silversea has slipped since Covid, but your description of Oceania seems stuck in the past.  Posters on the Oceania forum feel that it has slipped very badly post-Covid.  So that would still leave the current experience on Silversea a step up from the current experience on Oceania.

 

We have very limited experience pre Covid (1 cruise with O and no cruises with SS), so I cannot compare to pre Covid and say with certainty which line slipped and which slipped more.

 

To me, this is less relevant. We all know that a lot has changed after Covid, and what's relevant is the comparison of the current situation, and this is what I do, based on 2 cruises with SS and 3 with O post Covid.

 

Yes, some people think O slipped badly, but you also read some very positive experiences. There was a very long and detailed topic on O board from a first time cruiser on O who did a very long planning and very detailed report and he said that O exceeded his expectations. So there are many opinions.

 

And the previous poster said it the best: to me, the food is better on O (not by a large margin but still better), rest of the areas comparable, some slightly better on SS, but not enough to justify the ~50% difference in price. 

[canderson]

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

And the previous poster said it the best: to me, the food is better on O (not by a large margin but still better), rest of the areas comparable, some slightly better on SS, but not enough to justify the ~50% difference in price. 

Guess it depends upon the suite.  For the cruises I've looked at, I don't see a lot of difference in pricing between O and SS for anything in the Silver Suite range and above, though O only has a few ships with something close to cabins of that exact size (a few ships with 700+ sq ft Vista).  Seems most of O's ships take a big jump between a 'standard' size cabin and the larger ones (400+ sq ft to 1000+ sq ft).

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, canderson said:

Guess it depends upon the suite.  For the cruises I've looked at, I don't see a lot of difference in pricing between O and SS for anything in the Silver Suite range and above, though O only has a few ships with something close to cabins of that exact size (a few ships with 700+ sq ft Vista).  Seems most of O's ships take a big jump between a 'standard' size cabin and the larger ones (400+ sq ft to 1000+ sq ft).

 

I never compared pricing for higher suites because we always book the lowest category. And I'm aware that comparing a 240 sqft on O with 300+ sqft on SS is not exactly apples to apples, but this is what we book, so this is the price point comparison for us.

 

And this is exactly why I mentioned that SS might be a better value for people who like larger cabins. Also the comparison is even more problematic because on O the size jumps from 400 sqft for PH to over 1,000 sqft on Oceania suite, nothing in between, so obviously the price double between those two categories. But on SS there is a Sliver suite which is around 700 sqft.

 

 

[ak1004]

Head-to-Head: Comparing Oceania vs. Silversea

[Gourmet Gal]

Thanks for the detail on your comparison.  Other than the bedding, how would you compare the style of the furnishings and decor.  Does the SS decor at least appear to be more high-end or are they also comparable?

[RICHARD@SEA]

On 12/26/2023 at 11:44 PM, Brad1185 said:

Great review. Wish the would ditch the jackets. Agree the internet needs a boost. On Viking we get speeds in the 60’s. 
 

‘We’re giving SS a try in October but I’m thinking like you said SS is probably not that much better than O with a considerable price difference. 
 

You would think SS would really deliver that wow factor but it sounds like though it’s not bad SS lacks the little extra that apparently is not there. 
 

 

 

after many years of cruising on various lines i had looked forward too sailing w SS  - but then they were bought ...most companies are watered down to pay for the purchase...

I'm afraid the purchase has diminished my desire to sail w SS.,

[Gourmet Gal]

Seems like most of the lines are somewhat “watered down” post-mergers and post-Covid.  That still leaves SS and SB at or near the top of the heap in terms of luxury.  AK1004 places much emphasis on value do that’s a somewhat different discussion.  
 

Would be interested to hear how SS compares to Ritz Carlton - somewhat different animals but both in the lux space.  Not sure RC has found their footing yet. The upcoming Four Seasons ship looks amazing as well but starting at $5000 per day is in another league.

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Gourmet Gal said:

Thanks for the detail on your comparison.  Other than the bedding, how would you compare the style of the furnishings and decor.  Does the SS decor at least appear to be more high-end or are they also comparable?

 

To be honest, I don't pay much attention to decor and furnishings, but they look comparable to me.

 

One big difference worth mentioning is that on SS ships all public areas are on the aft, while the cabins are on forward and mid ship. This is very different from O (and most other lines) where public areas are spread between aft and forward (the theater for example is almost always forward while the dining room is aft). personally I don't really care. Those are small ship and fairly easy to navigate, no matter the design.

[Gourmet Gal]

Well, there is the Observation Lounge forward which is my favorite early morning spot when coming into port.

[ak1004]

7 minutes ago, Gourmet Gal said:

Well, there is the Observation Lounge forward which is my favorite early morning spot when coming into port.

 

That's true, also one of our favorite spots. 

[Mahogany]

47 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

To be honest, I don't pay much attention to decor and furnishings, but they look comparable to me.

 

One big difference worth mentioning is that on SS ships all public areas are on the aft, while the cabins are on forward and mid ship. This is very different from O (and most other lines) where public areas are spread between aft and forward (the theater for example is almost always forward while the dining room is aft). personally I don't really care. Those are small ship and fairly easy to navigate, no matter the design.

Not all SS ships. The Nova and Ray have decks dedicated to suites, fore, mid and aft, and public spaces above and below suites.

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Mahogany said:

Not all SS ships. The Nova and Ray have decks dedicated to suites, fore, mid and aft, and public spaces above and below suites.

 

Yes, thank you for the correction.

[tulok]

RSSC hasn’t been mentioned and after

having two cruises with them, (I know not a lot for comparison), I am looking forward to compare with my upcoming SS cruise. I enjoyed the all-inclusive and it is the only reason I went back to ocean cruises from river cruising (still my favorite). I hate the big ships with 1000’s of people. RSSC did have its flaws.

[FlyerTalker]

On 12/27/2023 at 11:26 AM, ak1004 said:

And I'm aware that comparing a 240 sqft on O with 300+ sqft on SS is not exactly apples to apples, but this is what we book, so this is the price point comparison for us.

 

And there you have it.  Start with a false premise and of course you will get the pre-ordained result.

 

 

[ak1004]

10 minutes ago, FlyerTalker said:

 

And there you have it.  Start with a false premise and of course you will get the pre-ordained result.

 

 

 

It's not a false premise because this is what we book. Entry level balcony cabins on both ships are good enough for us, so for us it's not a false premise. This is exactly why I mentioned that all comparisons in any area are very personal and depend on what's important to you.

 

That said, how would you suggest comparing the pricing?

 

O has cabins of 240 sqft, 350 sqft (PH) and then it jumps to 800-900 sqft. SS has basic cabins of 300 sqft, then it jumps to 700 sqft for Silver suite. No comparison would be apples to apples.

[FlyerTalker]

9 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

That said, how would you suggest comparing the pricing?

 

One way could be on a price per sq ft comparison.  Or one could just say that there are significant differences in many factors, so a direct price comparison is difficult at best.

 

Trying to make a direct price comparison leaves out so many things.  For example, the quality of the included spirits on SS is significantly higher than what you would get on O.  As well as the range of product.  Now, if you just drink Johnnie Walker Red or Famous Grouse, you wouldn't care if Bowmore, Macallan or Kilchoman are included on SS.  But that's the difference between pouring from a $20 bottle of booze vs a $50 bottle.

 

At the luxury level, those differences matter.  And each individual needs to make their own evaluation.

 

I like Oceania....for what it is.  And I like SS for what it is.  But there are so many subtle, and also significant, differences.

 

I always like the John Ruskin quote:  "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey."

 

 

[ak1004]

14 minutes ago, FlyerTalker said:

 

One way could be on a price per sq ft comparison.  Or one could just say that there are significant differences in many factors, so a direct price comparison is difficult at best.

 

Trying to make a direct price comparison leaves out so many things.  For example, the quality of the included spirits on SS is significantly higher than what you would get on O.  As well as the range of product.  Now, if you just drink Johnnie Walker Red or Famous Grouse, you wouldn't care if Bowmore, Macallan or Kilchoman are included on SS.  But that's the difference between pouring from a $20 bottle of booze vs a $50 bottle.

 

At the luxury level, those differences matter.  And each individual needs to make their own evaluation.

 

I like Oceania....for what it is.  And I like SS for what it is.  But there are so many subtle, and also significant, differences.

 

I always like the John Ruskin quote:  "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey."

 

 

 

Comparisons are always difficult, and they are highly subjective and personal, this is why I mentioned the size difference and gave a clear win to SS in the cabins category. Even when comparing pricing on lines like Oceania and Azamara, how would you do apples to apples comparison between Azamara and Oceania newer ships? Most people consider their pricing comparable, but A entry level cabins are 170 sqft while O newer ships are 240 sqft. Definitely not apples to apples comparison.

 

Your example of drinks is relevant to people who drink.. we don't.. this is why in my comparison I didn't even mention drinks.

 

On the other hand, one parameter that does matter is service, especially at dining venues. Here is one example: when we come to breakfast buffet, I order sparkling water and cappuccino, then go to bring my food. By the time I'm back to my table, on O the cappuccino was already waiting for me 90% of the time. On SS? Almost never. Sometimes it took a good 10 minutes. Asked for ice and lemon on SS because their water is served almost room temperature. Many times it took ages to bring it, and in some cases they just forgot and I had to remind them. Small things, I know, but as you mentioned, at the luxury level, those differences matter.

 

So yes, we look at pricing, but we also look at the whole package. And in a whole package, some things are more important to you than to me. Things that are important to me are overall comparable on both lines. I would pay more for SS if I was convinced that in the areas that are important to me, it delivers a significantly better experience. 

 

btw, we spoke with many people on board that agreed with us. Some didn't. This is why we are all different.

[Host Jazzbeau]

3 hours ago, ak1004 said:

when we come to breakfast buffet

But I don't do buffets, so on your terms this is meaningless to me.  As is much else in your comparison (I do drink).  No matter how much more detail you add, your comparison is not going to ring true to most people – because you are only rating the things you care about and we only want to know about the things we care about.  I'm not attacking your analysis (which is correct – for you and you only), just your premise that this is somehow helpful to others.

[FlyerTalker]

3 hours ago, ak1004 said:

Your example of drinks is relevant to people who drink.. we don't.. this is why in my comparison I didn't even mention drinks.

 

And lobster on the buffet is irrelevant to those allergic to shellfish.