SS Cruise Critic Member Review Data v. Other Ultra Premium Lines

We sailed Silversea Spirit and were supremely disappointed.

Posting in a ‘Live From Spirit At Sea’ thread put up by another Spirit cruiser, we could not be SS cheerleaders that others on the thread were.

Rather than dwell on alleged ‘cold soup’ and other subjective observations, we tried in our posts to discuss amenities, services and objective factual points of our disappointment from what SS offered (failed to offer) versus other similarly priced ‘ultra premium’ cruise lines.

We wrote a post SS cruise review with details why we were so disappointed: http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberre...EntryID=523115

Below are the actual Cruise Critic cruiser review data for SS, Azamara, Crystal, Regent & Seabourn; cruise line versus cruise line, for all their ships, as of the posting of this. We chose those lines for comparison based on our small ship cruising experiences, for their similar pricing and for what are generally considered premium small ship cruise lines.

The data seems to confirm what we found:

- Silverseas scored the LOWEST satisfaction ("Loved It" ratings) among these small ship, ultra premium cruise lines.

- Silversea had the LOWEST percentage of "Excellent" reviews and the HIGHEST percentage of "Terrible" reviews.

This is CruiseCritics posted data, not mine. I just compiled the data for comparative purposes to see if our bad experience on SS was an anomaly.

Azamara: 85% Loved It, 4 Stars Overall and 4 Stars Value

Crystal: 84% Loved It, 4 Stars Overall and 3 Stars Value

Seabourn: 83% Loved It, 4 Stars Overall and 4 Stars Value

Regent: 71% Loved It, 4 Stars Overall and 4 Stars Value

Silversea: 66% Loved It, 3 Stars Overall and 3 Stars Value

The data:*

Silversea Cruise Reviews - 472 Reviews/Cruiser ratings:

Excellent 230 = 49%

Very Good 79 = 17%

Average 77 = 16%

Poor 41 = 9%

Terrible 34 = 8%

Azamara Cruise Reviews - 860 Reviews/Cruiser rating:

Excellent 591 = 69%

Very Good 132 = 15%

Average 86 = 10%

Poor 30 = 3%

Terrible 12 = 1%

Crystal Cruise Reviews - 291 Reviews/Cruiser ratings:

Excellent 178 = 61%

Very Good 57 = 20%

Average 20 = 7%

Poor 17 = 6%

Terrible 9 = 3%

Regent Cruise Reviews - 550 Reviews/Cruiser ratings:

Excellent 289 = 53%

Very Good 83 = 15%

Average 72 = 13%

Poor 56 = 10%

Terrible 22 = 4%

Seabourn Cruise Reviews - 472 Reviews/Cruiser rating:

Excellent 189 = 40%

Very Good 33 = 7%

Average 24 = 5%

Poor 14 = 3%

Terrible 3 = 1%

* Note: Cruise Critic total member cruise line ship review totals don't comport exactly with the number of rated review data ("Excellent to Terrible") and thus the slight discrepancies in percentage data. All data Cruise Critic reports is seemingly for ships currently in service.

Adjusting the discrepancy of Cruise Critics total number of reviews reported not comporting with the total of "Excellent to Terrible" reviews reported, below are the percentages re-calculated within each group "Excellent to Terrible" (and one typo for posted Seabourn data corrected).

The data does not change the outcome in my OP that SS has the Lowest 'Loved It' percentage satisfaction, the Highest percentage of "Terrible" reviews and Lowest percentage of 'Excellent' reviews:

Silversea Cruise Reviews - 461 Total Reviews Below:

Excellent 230 = 50%

Very Good 79 = 17%

Average 77 = 17%

Poor 41 = 9%

Terrible 34 = 7%

Azamara Cruise Reviews – 851 Total Reviews Below:

Excellent 591 = 69%

Very Good 132 = 16%

Average 86 = 10%

Poor 30 = 4%

Terrible 12 = 1%

Crystal Cruise Reviews - 281 Total Reviews Below:

Excellent 178 = 63%

Very Good 57 = 20%

Average 20 = 7%

Poor 17 = 6%

Terrible 9 = 3%

Regent Cruise Reviews - 522 Total Reviews Below:

Excellent 289 = 55%

Very Good 83 = 16%

Average 72 = 14%

Poor 56 = 11%

Terrible 22 = 4%

Seabourn Cruise Reviews – 263 Total Reviews Below:

Excellent 189 = 72%%

Very Good 33 = 13%

Average 24 = 9%

Poor 14 = 5%

Terrible 3 = 1%

I am confused as to why you included Azamara? All others you included are in the Luxury category. Azamara is in the Premium Plus or Luxury Lite category and does not belong here. The same with Oceania which is also Luxury Lite which you did not include.

I am looking forward to my first SS cruise and have found most of the discussion on this board appealing. Sorry it did not work out for you. Possibly Azamara suits you better based on your data. I have cruised with them 2 times, and they are definitely not for me, even based on your data.

I am confused as to why you included Azamara? All others you included are in the Luxury category. Azamara is in the Premium Plus or Luxury Lite category and does not belong here. The same with Oceania which is also Luxury Lite which you did not include.

As I stated in my OP: "We chose those lines for comparison based on our small ship cruising experiences, for their similar pricing and for what are generally considered premium small ship cruise lines."

As for 'Luxury" label versus "Premium Plus" or "Luxury Lite"...where are cruise lines rated by these titles?

SS on their website calls themselves an "Ultra Premium Cruise Line." That's their verbiage.

SS is comparably priced with Regent, Seabourn, Azamara and Crystial and all are 'small ship cruise lines.' There are other lines. Do you think they'd rate better or worse than SS which is at the bottom of Cruise Critics member ratings among the cruise lines I cited?

Take Azamara out of this data comparison...SS still is at the bottom.

This thread was to show what and how Cruise Critic members have rated these cruise lines. Our dissatisfaction seems to be confirmed by that data.

The statistics or interpretation of them, is not in dispute. The data indisputably shows among small ship cruise lines I cited:

(I'm outta here.)

I agree that the statistics are not in dispute. Your interpretation of the statistics is in dispute.

 

(I'm outta here.)

Then why don't you dispute them with an intelligent rebuttal?

I'm open to read, consider and discuss what you say is in dispute.

What I'm not going to do; is resort to making personal insults as you have and then, bug out.

As an occasional Silversea cruiser (for personal reasons I have a different favorite line) I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. If Silversea is not for you, just look elsewhere. Your opinion of SS is made clear in your review.

I never feel a need to defend my choices of cruise line or to criticize another's preference. What could possibly be accomplished? Seems much like tilting at windmills.

Then why don't you dispute them with an intelligent rebuttal?

Shorex;

I posted live from Spirit on the 'Live' thread by Keith.

As I was not a cheerleader for SS and posted what we thought were mostly objective observations (we were critical there and posted some kudos too), we were ridiculed and told to start our own thread and stay off Keith's thread.

I've done that here.

Other cruisers observations, opinions and insight into various cruise lines are one reason Cruise Critic is here...so we may make better informed decisions about various cruise lines, to know what to expect (or not), what cruise lines offer that may or may not appeal to us personally and, to connect with other cruisers.

I would very much like threads like this, examining post cruise reviews based on Cruise Critic's data for all cruise lines. I'd like to see Cruise Critic compile their own data so that posters like me don't have to take the wrath of cheerleaders for various cruise lines who take offense when Cruise Critic's own data is shown about their favored cruise line that may be contrary to their own opinion.

So Shorex, if you don't care for this 'windmill,' why would you post to it?

I do not dispute your experience and your comments definitely reflect the numbers that Cruise Critic has collected. It is important to realize, however, that the number of reviews on Cruise Critic is very small. It is said that Cruise Critic members make up approximately 5% of cruisers and, IMO, it is important to take that into consideration.

I have been posting on Cruise Critic for about 10 years but gave up formal "Reviews" (meaning in the "Review" Section of CC), a few years ago. Had I posted a review, I could have added three positive reviews for SS and many more for Regent. While I still prefer Regent to Silversea, our cruises on Silversea were quite good (except on the Spirit -- the only ship that we have been on that I don't care for).

It is difficult for me to accept the numbers - not only because they represent such a tiny percentage of passengers but also because some reviews date back to 1999.

Even if the ratings on this website were from an unbiased selection of cruisers from each of the cruise lines, the comparison you made would still be useless. This is so because the comparison you made must also assume that the values and expectations of each of the reviewers were the same across all cruise lines. This is unlikely to be the case. As the cruise lines market differently and to different geographical markets, it is likely that the cruisers are different.

 

There is also the phenomenon of confirmation bias in providing reviews, where a consumer highly rates a product he has chosen to buy. Or the phenomenon of only writing a review when one has a complaint. It is not possible to evaluate how these phenomena affect the reviews on this website.

I believe a SS, Crystal, Seabourn or Regent cruiser is more a similar population than dissimilar.

I believe SS, Crystal, Seabourn or Regent are competing largely for the same/similar cruiser/dollars.

I believe SS, Crystal, Seabourn or Regent are watching one another for similar features, amenities, ship design, target marketing, pricing and strategy...thus being more parallel product akin to say, Mercedes/Lexus is.

I therefore believe there is value and validity in the reviews of cruisers on these lines. And any alleged bias would be consistent across the board for each line, thus negating claims the data interpretation is flawed.

While I still prefer Regent to Silversea, our cruises on Silversea were quite good (except on the Spirit -- the only ship that we have been on that I don't care for).

Interesting.

Now whilst you're just one anecdotal observation of Spirit from a huge pool of cruisers, your opinion comports with ours and, with the data of Cruise Critic's other members who bothered to post reviews.

I must say that after ninety plus cruises I take no notice whatsoever of other people's cruise experience or reviews.

One can have a poor trip on a luxury line then the very next trip on the same line and ship can be fantastic.

All that matters is what you yourself experience when all is said and done.

I have tried most lines over the years and gravitate towards Seabourn because they are the best fit for me.

I can't stand beetroot or celery but know that others love both.

Life's good.

Very well said John.

I must say that after ninety plus cruises I take no notice whatsoever of other people's cruise experience or reviews.

One can have a poor trip on a luxury line then the very next trip on the same line and ship can be fantastic.

All that matters is what you yourself experience when all is said and done.

I have tried most lines over the years and gravitate towards Seabourn because they are the best fit for me.

I can't stand beetroot or celery but know that others love both.

Life's good.

Yep.....

and that's why other than posting about the experience on the boards because it can give current cruisers a view of what is happening now, I no longer write reviews. Not to mention the fact that IME many cruisers on SS are repeat clients. Repeat clients are less likely to write reviews (have a look at the poster history in SS, most are 1 review, in comparison to say Celebrity which has posters with multiple reviews)

I love beetroot, don't mind celery BUT SS never has either on the breakfast buffet ;)

Kilroy, you can add 2 more excellent reviews to the SS numbers.. you can add 1 to SB as well. I did review my 2013 SB...

I must say that after ninety plus cruises I take no notice whatsoever of other people's cruise experience or reviews.

One can have a poor trip on a luxury line then the very next trip on the same line and ship can be fantastic.

All that matters is what you yourself experience when all is said and done.

I have tried most lines over the years and gravitate towards Seabourn because they are the best fit for me.

I can't stand beetroot or celery but know that others love both.

Life's good.

Thought about you Today as I read the latest edition of Food and Wine. There is an article about the Limewood. Many years ago when I was departing on a Silverseas cruise out of Southhampton you informed me that there were no suitable hotels there. You advised us to try the Limewood and it was magical.Next year we are doing Crystal put of Melbourne. Suggestions are most welcome.

Leaving on the Anthem of th Seas Monday. It certainly will not be Seabourn or Crystal, but then I do not have to fly and there is something to be said for that.

Glad you enjoyed Limewood,it's still very good.

I am afraid that I do not know enough about Melbourne hotels but do enjoy your Crystal trip.

Anthem of the seas does sound like one of those block of apartment ships that can take half the day to get off especially if you are tendering.[emoji33]

Have fun.

BU,

If you want any help regarding Melbourne there a re a few Aussies on the board who may help.

Let us know exactly what you want eg small boutique, convenience, funky.

As a start have a look at the Art Series. The others I like are the Langham and Grand Hyatt (it's good for shopping and has some wonderful restaurant behind but is a bit same old)

IME the Australia destination threads don't quite have an understanding of what is offered at certain levels of hotel. You tend to get the generics.

...I take no notice whatsoever of other people's cruise experience or reviews...

 

I have tried most lines over the years and gravitate towards Seabourn because they are the best fit for me.

 

I can't stand beetroot or celery but know that others love both.

Life's good.

Your preference towards Seabourn seems confirmed by the Cruise Critic review data with other cruisers giving it higher marks than SS:

Seabourn: 83% Loved It, 4 Stars Overall and 4 Stars Value

v.

Silversea: 66% Loved It, 3 Stars Overall and 3 Stars Value

Perhaps there's value indeed taking note in those cruiser revues for some.

I can't stand canned fruits on a luxury cruise line breakfast buffet in lieu of abundant fresh fruit. But SS Spirit served bowls of canned Mandarin oranges, canned peaches and canned figs every day.

Other reviews and posts currently herein about the Spirit reveal that kind of information (canned fruits for instance and the lack of fresh berries other than strawberry's) that some would find valuable trying a cruise line they've heretofore not been on.

Is anyone else sensing that the OP isn't totally satisfied with the SS experience?

I know it's a subtle undercurrent but I think I can detect it.

I just wish they'd be a bit more blatant rather than sitting on the fence.

I think the OP (Kilroy) has highlighted an interesting point. I wouldn't use these scales but .....

Even if SS had cut out all the advertising hype and simply said instead "Book a Silversea Cruise because we not that much better than the rest but are simply better than average" instead of all the hype, then even with the bar of expectatons set that low a third of CC Silversea reviewer customers who were so positively disposed to Silversea that they paid out their cash bought a cruise don't agree that they are better than average. These were customers positive to SS because they purchased!

Whatever else others say to justify such a result to me that seems interesting in a puzzling way. I think it should be possible to reflect on that result without attacking him or her simply because the results for others are good for whatvthose customers expected but for SS it really shouldn't be that way.

Jeff.

I think the OP (Kilroy) has highlighted an interesting point. I wouldn't use these scales but .....

 

Even if SS had cut out all the hype and simply said instead "Book a Silversea Cruise because we not better than the rest but are simply better than average" instead of all the hype, then even with the bar of expectatons set that low a third of CC Silversea reviewer customers who were so positively disposed to Silversea that they bought a cruise don't agree that they are better than average.

 

Whatever else others say to justify such a result to me that seems interesting in a puzzling way. I think it should be possible to reflect on that result without attacking him or her simply because the results for others are good for whatvthose customers expected but for SS it really shouldn't be that way.

 

 

Jeff.

Jeff;

I've tried to be objective in the 'Live Thread' and Keith's post cruise thread by stating objective, measurable deficiencies on SS that we experienced. I got flamed and heard a lot of people make objections to my posts without much substance or rebuttal to actual deficiencies.

SS charges similar per night fare as the other premium cruise lines I compared cruiser data from. I believe among Regent, Seabourn, Crystal and SS, you've parallel product competing for the same cruisers.

Herein this thread, I've used the data from some 2,000 Cruise Critic cruiser reviews and compared them small ship cruise line to small ship cruise line.

Few if any posters have stayed on thread with the data or discussed it. And that data indisputably says, from those who responded with cruise line reviews, SS scored the lowest percentage of 'Loved It' satisfaction ratings, highest percentate of "Terrible" reviews and lowest percentage of "Excellent" reviews among these premium small ship cruise lines.

There is no mistake nor misinterpretation of that data, unless one is unwilling to give it objective consideration.

It makes one wonder how some are so closed minded to discuss that data and why they are predisposed to see value and quality and amenities that aren't there, where a majority of others from this site who responded with reviews don't?

The personal attacks aimed at me herein are part of forums like this. The best part of those posts, aside from they discrediting themselves being unable to post an intelligent rebuttal, is that they keep bumping up my thread on the SS front page.

K,

As someone who has an interest in satisfaction measurement there is no avoiding that the data compares feedback of a significant number of actual customers who have had a set of expectations created by factors which signifcantly includes those promised by the lines and taken the jump to put their money where the claims mouth is and trust and spend. This scale effectively does - albeit clumsily - ask the question "What do you feel about what you got compared with what you were expecting". It measures therefore dissapointment and unfuliflled promises and the level of delight where expectations were exceeded. My advice fwiw was always accept around a maximum of 5% of customer dissatisfied. Some of the other lines achieve this.

It is therefore perfectly viable to compare lines on this feedback because it isn't comparing lines in isolation but comparing how was the delivery compared to expectations - and then comparing that amongst lines. You could do this throuout all sectors of the market because it effectively measures who delivers honesty ie price versus promises.

There is also the justifiable warning made by some that there is an element of "self-selection" and therefore a risk of there being bias towards those that were dissatisfied. That is potentially true. I'd offer two comments. That would be true for all at the same time and therefore the putting them in order of lines is still viable. Secondly compared with other internet forums the wheight here of loyal cheerleaders for each line is higher that for other types of product griping forums. All in all, it is my instinct that the effect is probably neutral or if anything biased to positive.

With respect to your last point, you can only engage with those that are respectful and choose to engage with you and you are being picked on because you choose to raise negative points about SS and some just wish to shut you up. Nevertheless I found the comparisons you highlighted interesting and I'm sorry you feel "got at". There is room for people who love the product to bits to engage with those that are or were dissapointed.

:)

Jeff

Kilroyshere, this is so funny.

Since I am the one who started the live thread and did the most posts I'm thinking you now think of me as a Silversea Cheerleader.

And that is amazing since I've only sailed Silversea two times and the first one was in 2009 over six years ago. :)

And since that time I have sailed on say 45 cruises mainly on one other line and didn't return to Silvesea until just this year for one 8 day cruise when I normally sail many more days at a time. :)

Now, I have been accused of being a cheerleader on the Crystal board since I love Crystal and have almost 80 sailings with Crystal and have spent the equivalent of 1,000 so says sailing Crystal, including five months last year. :cool:

It is fine to have different points of view and I certainly respect that.

But just because someone had a good experience why call them a cheerleader. Isn't it OK in life to enjoy something? I certainly would not call someone who didn't like the cruise line or cruise a name such as a "grumpy".

Well at least you made my day since now I am considered a cheerleader for multiple lines just because I had a good time. I also enjoyed my Seabourn cruises. So, that means I cheer for multiple lines. :confused:

There are certainly many who enjoy each and every cruise line. Isn't that nice that happens? And there are others who don't care for certain cruise lines? Why, because we all have different tastes and preferences. If we didn't life would be boring. In the end the most important opinion is our very own and in the end I hope that each person figures out what they like and pursue that. I am fortunate that out of 100+ cruises I have only had one bad experience on a line I sailed for the first time. There are others who like that line. I respect that too and just chalk it up that it didn't work for us and there were some things that went wrong that I think were likely unique to our sailing (a perfect storm) but that is one line that I won't give a second chance to. That doesn't make those who like the line cheerleaders and that doesn't mean that they are wrong to like the line. Nor does it make me wrong because I didn't like the line. For us, we just moved on. Life is short.

Keith

Keith,

with respect I think you have taken Kilroy's generalised comments which to me seem true - as being directed at you personally. I didn't read the comments that way. I found your feedback to be balanced. You are amongst the two-thirds who have had their expectations either met or exceeded. He is (imho) simply saying that there seems to be a third who are dissapointed. He is it seems to me to be just understandably a touch wounded by the number of disenaged comments that have been made.

I read your experience as being entriely compatible with the points he is making.

Personally I find the rants of no use. But where there are specificis like "we had canned fruit every morning" that to me seems potentially factually informative and potentially a window onwhat things "might be like".

Please don't take his comments as being personal. He is simply highlighting the perplexing number of pople who were dissapointed and not decrying those that were not.

:)

Jeff