Paul Gaugin VS Pacific Princess

[emilee]

Hello, We are trying to decide between the 10 day Paul Gaugin and the 10 day Pacific Princess in October. Balcony stateroom with Regent and mini suite with Princess. Price is $14,628 (CDN) for Regent and $11,790 (CDN) for Princess. Do you think the Paul Gaugin is worth an extra $3,000? We appreciate any input that you may have for us. Thanks, Emilee

[Island Cruiser]

Remember, the PG is all-inclusive. I believe the PP isn't. Big difference. We are aggressive drinkers when we travel (pop as well as booze). So we estimate all-inclusive saves us $100pp per day. Then, remember the PG specializes in FP and has been doing it very well for many years. The PP sails there regularly but not exclusively. I would recommend you book the PG. Pat

[Travelcat2]

In addition to being all-inclusive, the Paul Gauguin has been including air

fare on many cruises for 2009 and 2010 -- not sure if the pricing you quoted includes airfare. The Paul Gauguin is half the size and has larger suites than Princess. For instance, the smallest stateroom on Princess is 146 sq. ft. compared to the PG's smallest which is 200 sq. ft.

 

I agree with the last poster -- there really is no comparison -- the PG is the way to go.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

The second time that I was on the Paul Gauguin, one of the Princesses came by. It was one of the larger ones, perhaps the Dawn. We happened to meet a couple who were on their first RSSC cruise, but had been on many Princess cruises. They said there was no comparison, they were blown away by the PG, but said they would continue to cruise Princess when they could not afford Regent (then Radisson.)

[JMARINER]

Here is a prior thread that might help:

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=455523

 

J

[Travelcat2]

JMARINER, the thread you posted leads to posts that are over 3 years old. As you know, there have been many changes on the PG -- the most recent being this year. The PG was just went through a multi-million dollar upgrade. Most people seem to share the opinion that the PG is much more of a value than Princess.

[Jancruz]

Hello, We are trying to decide between the 10 day Paul Gaugin and the 10 day Pacific Princess in October. Balcony stateroom with Regent and mini suite with Princess. Price is $14,628 (CDN) for Regent and $11,790 (CDN) for Princess. Do you think the Paul Gaugin is worth an extra $3,000? We appreciate any input that you may have for us. Thanks, Emilee

 

PG,PG, PG..You must go on the PG the differance is gigantic!

Jancruz1

[JMARINER]

JMARINER, the thread you posted leads to posts that are over 3 years old......... ..

 

Three years old or not, that discussion is relevant and provides useful information about the ships and activities.

 

Most people seem to share the opinion that the PG is much more of a value than Princess

 

Maybe, but some do not. Shouldn't they be entitled to their opinions also? See:http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=50672

 

j

[canadagal]

I suggest that you total up what your extra, non inclusive costs might come to on Princess and then see how much the difference is between Regent and Princess. If you've never cruised on another Regent ship before then I'm sure you'd have a good time on the PG. However, there is no comparison at all between the PG and the other Regent ships and there is no way I would classify the PG as a 5 star experience and if you have experienced other luxury ships including the other ships in Regent's fleet you might be a little disappointed in the PG ship itself. French Polynesia is magical and beautiful and tends to make one more forgiving as you enter into island mode and become very laid back. I loved our PG cruise but that was our first experience with Regent back when it was Radisson and I'd never experienced a lux line or lux ships before. Now after several years of cruising I guess we have become spoiled and are used to certain standards and after touring the PG again last month both hubby and I agreed we could never cruise on her again. Even after her recent drydock she still looked tired to us and in no way compared at all to any luxury ship we've ever been on.

Pat.

[Island Cruiser]

Pat, while I haven't seen the PG since 2005, I think your comparative analysis of her is spot on. We have friends who won't consider booking any Regent ship because they were so disappointed in the PG as a so-called "luxury" liner. Most unfortunate but they will not be persuaded. Pat

[Bearnaise]

JMARINER, the thread you posted leads to posts that are over 3 years old. As you know, there have been many changes on the PG -- the most recent being this year. The PG was just went through a multi-million dollar upgrade. Most people seem to share the opinion that the PG is much more of a value than Princess.

Actually, that thread was helpful. Lots of people chimed in. A detailed comparison of the ships' specs. And besides JMARINER, it seemed the thread was overwhelmingly pro-PG :D

 

I'll see for myself soon. I haven't done a Princess cruise to compare, but I have been on one mass-market ship and that might have been my first and last cruise had Regent not "saved" me. I'm not expecting as much "luxury" as the Mariner, but as long as it doesn't have the mass-market crowds and the necessity to sign something every time I get thirsty, I'm sure we'll be pleased.

[Travelcat2]

Three years old or not, that discussion is relevant and provides useful information about the ships and activities.

 

 

 

Maybe, but some do not. Shouldn't they be entitled to their opinions also? See:http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=50672

 

j

 

Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions. My point simply was that the PG was recently refurbished. Reviews of ships (IMHO) do not have a long shelf life. Many positive (or negative) changes can occur in three years.

 

Comparing a mainstream cruise line with a luxury/premium all-inclusive cruise line is very difficult. It is also not surprising that most people would prefer the PG -- this is a Regent board. Perhaps the Op should post the same question on the Princess board.

 

I agree with Pat's sentiments.

[Jim B]

We have commented before that trying to compare these two ships is apples and oranges.

You really can not do it.

Everyone expects different things from their cruise. You really need to do some sort of chart

with +/_ on it and list your personal needs and what you expect.

In the back of your mind always remember that you pretty much pay up front on the Paul Gauguin and on the Princess cruise you pay as you go.

Lots of people find the bottom line seems to equal out, or at least is close, after doing this.

[egret]

Like the saying goes, everyone has an opinion. I sailed the Mariner to Alaska after three PG cruises and I was disappointed. The food was no better, the atmosphere stiff, and there was nothing extra, ie Les Gaugines, Motu Mahana, the dive staff, etc.

I measure every potential vacation against a return to the PG in French Polynesia. I guess I am truly addicted and am too biased to provide an objective opinion but I have not even considered the Tahitian Princess since our first cruise on the PG in 2001.

I talked to some folks on the TP when we snorkeled together on Raitea. They had no complaints but they didn't rave about it either.

Just one man's point of view.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Egret, I'm with you. Although I have grown to love Voyager, and that ship is now my favourite, when we took our third (first non-PG) cruise on Diamond in 2004, that's exactly what we thought--that the atmosphere was stiff and formal, and that wonderful (excited but relaxed) ambience was missing. And no port-specific entertainment or food. I still love the PG, and will as long as she stays in FP.

[tinylittlecruiser]

I took these pictures from a helicopter while in French Polynesia.

 

The first picture is of the Paul Gauguin and Princess' Tahitian Princess; the second is of the PG, which I sailed.

 

(Yes, the water is that blue!) :):p

[poolechick]

Like the saying goes, everyone has an opinion. I sailed the Mariner to Alaska after three PG cruises and I was disappointed. The food was no better, the atmosphere stiff, and there was nothing extra, ie Les Gaugines, Motu Mahana, the dive staff, etc.

I measure every potential vacation against a return to the PG in French Polynesia. I guess I am truly addicted and am too biased to provide an objective opinion but I have not even considered the Tahitian Princess since our first cruise on the PG in 2001.

I talked to some folks on the TP when we snorkeled together on Raitea. They had no complaints but they didn't rave about it either.

Just one man's point of view.

I couldn't agree more! :)

[AlFrank]

We were on the PG 9/2007. That was my husbands 1st and my 11th cruise. IMHO if you are cruising the South Pacific, the only way to go is PG. After adding up all the extras we would have had to pay for, the Princess would have been more money. It was wonderful just to relax and not have to be nickled and dimed to death. No surprise bill at the end. Also, we each received a bottle of liquor at the start of the cruise, our choice of what kind, which we never opened. When it was time to pack, the room steward left us a box to pack them in so we could take them home if we want without our even asking. There are a lot of deals out there if you search. I'm betting you can find a much better deal than what you quoted. We paid a lot less and it included air fare from LA, a few days before and a few after at a resort in Tahiti.