Is 6 stars all that good?

[ricktalcott]

This feels like a funny sort of question to me. We just got off our first cruise on a 6 star ship (Mariner from Auckland to LA), and were regularly bumping into Radisson's rebranding as Regent and Regent's decision to become all-inclusive.

 

I'm left a bit puzzled and, frankly, a bit let-down by the whole experience. Mind you, the reality was that the cruise was one of the two best we have ever been on, and I have no complaints other than the nit-picking little ones. To me, that makes it all the more strange that I'm left wondering about the whole 6 star thing.

 

As far as I can tell, the conflict seems to be in my imagination of what a 6 star cruise is like vs. what we actually experienced. Maybe I should be asking you, what your definition of a 6 star cruise is.

 

My short definition is that 6 stars doesn't have to be exquisite-best-in-the world, but it does have to be solidly major league.

 

On Mariner, we received wonderful service and prompt and effective resolution of the usual sort of cruise glitches. Something has gone wrong on every cruise we've ever been on from Princess to Oceania. I don't expect or want perfection -- that's too sterile. What I do want is the problem to be dealt with. On Mariner, we went on a snorkeling excursion where the tour company didn't bring any fins or masks. That was taken care of by the Mariner folks.

 

I would define 6 stars as having meals worth paying for on land. There Mariner succeeded in the specialty restaurants and did less well in the main restaurant and buffet line. Maybe I am too picky, but I just don't see how any restaurant can claim to be 6 stars and serve corned beef hash out of a can. Heck, the Casino Fandango in Carson City, Nevada has real corned beef and potatoes. The Ritz Carlton has a signature blueberry muffin. Not the Mariner. It just isn't 6 stars if the bread is no better than what you can buy in Safeway.

 

To me, it isn't 6 stars to have a guitar player with prerecorded accompaniment. I missed the chamber music quartet. Likewise, it isn't 6 stars to let people smoke near the eating areas on either the buffet deck or near the pool. Smoke anywhere you like, but separately, please.

 

I just go the feeling that the people on the Mariner never looked at what they were doing and asked themselves, "What could we do better?" If the home office marketing folks want to go upscale, it'll never work unless the crew on board feel the same way.

 

Rick

 

 

 

[Iamboatman]

Very well said!

 

I have been of the same opinion. I think the problem is the product has not caught up with the marketing...and I don't know if it will or if it is intended to.

 

After having some frustrations of my own (again, not expecting perfection, but delivery of the promised product), I have decided the better approach is not to be disappointed when Regent doesn't rise to 6 star (remember when 5 star was the best?!), but to expect 4+ to 5 star and not bother with the marketing hype.

 

There are other lines which do many little things better and provide a higher level of service. They are also, generally, a bit more expensive (though not always) and generally have smaller ships. I would expect that Regent, if a true "6 star" line, would provide those touches - be they caviar, designer soaps, drawn aromatherapy baths, true off-the-menu dining, polished waitstaff, etc. This is not a criticism of Regent, but rather acknowledgment of the false expectation its marketing department has created.

 

(BTW, it may not be the staff doesn't want to do better, but that it has to work within the constraints given to them.)

[sundial]

I agree, I think Regent overmarkets the quality of their product and sometimes raises passenger expectations to an unrealistic level. In truth though it is a wonderful cruise line for the money with some of the best cabins on any ship afloat with overall very good food and service. We were on the Mariner in October and had a wonderful cruise, but I wouldn't really rate it as six star. I am looking forward to trying the Voyager later this spring and being able to take advantage of the new all inclusive policy. We are not big drinkers, but I'd rather have a drink in the bar before dinner instead of in our room.

[Host Dan]

I agree, I think Regent overmarkets the quality of their product and sometimes raises passenger expectations to an unrealistic level.

I agree with the above statement. This happened on the QM2 when it first came out. I applaud the marketing dept., but not the line for not living up to the "hype".

 

Host Dan

[wripro]

Cunard was guilty of the same overmarketing when the QM2 was introduced. Remember the women doing housework in their ball gowns with the caption...."Can you wait?" The expectation was that these crossings would resemble First Class in liners' heydey with glamour and "White Star" service everywhere. Of course, once on board people discovered a mass market ship with 2600 passengers and 1300 in crew. This did not live up to what was marketed.

 

I have personally never sailed Regent so cannot comment on their service but I suspect that if one does not have unrealisitc expectations, the experience is very good. So far in all my cruises I have been let down by Silversea once (out of six), but never by Seabourn. Actually, I find an extra glass of champagne solves most any problem that arises!

[Iamboatman]

I agree with the above statement. This happened on the QM2 when it first came out. I applaud the marketing dept., but not the line for not living up to the "hype".

 

Host Dan

 

I am going to be on the QM2 in Princess Grill soon, as it fit my schedule. I have lowered my expectations from the marketing, but must admit that I am hopeful that some glimmers of what is being sold shine through. At least I won't be disappointed as an unaware Cunard newbie. I am sure, therefore, that I will enjoy my cruise much more.

 

Live and learn. Better yet: Cruise and learn!:D

[Cerinda]

Interesting thread here. Expectations really matter, don't they?

 

Our first two cruises were both RSSC, so that's what conditioned our expectations. Then we took our children on a 1600 passenger HAL ship, and it was pretty much what we expected, a few pleasant surprises. We took Silver Shadow to Barbados in October, and I didn't find the cruise significantly different than our cruises on the Navigator and the Paul Gaugin (better art and more dance music, yes; main dining room and excursions, definitely not 5*). Maybe I fell for Silverseas' hype? Probably.

 

[sailmeaway]

Having just completed a "back-to-back" 7-day and 11-day on the Regent Navigator, I must respond to this question. My husband and I had never done the six-star thing previously, although had cruised most of the major lines. We were looking forward to this cruise more than any other and I think our expectations far outweighed the reality. The service was beyond excellent, couldn't have asked for better. The food, however, was a letdown, not in presentation (more like artwork), but in the quality. We expected a steak at least the equal of the Sterling Steakhouses on Princess, but were very disappointed. Also, the dining room was the only option for dinner, other than the reservations-only Portofino or room service. Sometimes, in a very port-intensive itinerary like this one, it would be nice to just be able to grab something quick at a buffet. The all-inclusive feature is nice, but not really a deciding factor for us since we drink very little. The suites are without doubt the biggest and nicest at sea, much like a high-end hotel, no complaints there. The entertainment was not the best, with the exception of the house duo in the Galileo lounge and the house entertainer in the Portofino. No production shows, just little known singers and comedians - you could see better on television or in small clubs. All in all, a good cruise, but disappointing in these areas - is it because we expected more from six-star, or is it really less than? We are not picky people, just like to get what is hyped.

[AtA]

sailmeaway, next time try something on the voyager. I was on navigator last year and had a wonderful time. I agree about your assessment about the entertainment on the navigator and the food. It was good, just nothing special.

 

Compare that to our voyager new years cruise this year. Entertainment was excellent. In fact we're trying to see if one of the acts can book at our local venue.

 

The food: I'm a NY'er and I'd have to say the food this time was comparable to many of the NY restaurants we like to frequent. And where the desserts on Navigator seemed to be brought up from cold storage and reheated, on voyager they were fresh and definitely worth leaving room for each night.

[JDRMYS]

Unfortunately, the food on any cruise ship is no longer of the quality that it was a generation ago. Until the 80's, all of the best ships (such as the France, my favorite, the Cunard Queens and the Swedish American ships) had a cohesive, full time staff that stayed on board, in shifts. The entire crew and staff and several generations of their families lived in the same towns (Le Havre for French Line, Southampton for Cunard, etc) and had known each other and each other's families all of their lives. Many of these people held the same jobs that had been held by their parents and grandparents and they were all fiercely proud of their product. If crew members messed up on the job, the whole town knew it and their families were ashamed. The result was spectacularly consistent food and service.

 

In terms of the quality of the food, as well as the rest of the service on board, this system produced spectacular and extremely consistent results. The current system of kitchen staff (including the chefs) that is on board for relatively short contracts can't produce the same consistent results.

 

The Regent ships are our favorites, and in our 105 days on board them we have sometimes had spectacular food in the Compass Rose and sometimes had mediocre food. We have also had the same experience on other "top" cruise lines such as Silversea, Seabourn and Crystal.

 

On Regent, the only consistenly excellent food that we have had is in Signatures, which serves only a small number of people each night, has a small staff and has a menu that does not change for at least a week at a time. I can't comment on Latitudes since I am allergic to fish and to several Asian spices and therefore can't have any of their menus.

[Pam]

Maybe the reason I like RSSC is that I honestly prefer something slightly less than 6*. Hubs and I didn't eat in Signatures at all on our last cruise, which was 11 nights; we prefer Compass Rose or whatever La Veranda is at night. Where it is important for us, RSSC fits like a comfortable shoe.